Vmalik,

I can appreciate your frank response. However you’re a shoe in for  why Darwinism  works. Usually I am very demure and reasonable in my posts. Today will not be one of those days.

What’s wrong with the CDC website, you used it yourself. It is one of the most highly respected disease research sites in the WORLD. I think that if they can store small pox and Ebola, they can handle print media. Don’t be a jerk, your pointing this guy in the wrong direction just to support your subconscious reasoning to justify why you engage in BBBJ. What you do, and what I do are personal choices that we hope are founded on good advice and empirical data. You are offering neither.

You can go to the FDA website and it says the same thing. The Lancet, one of the most respected journals in the world has multiple articles on this.

Here are a few excerpts from other well respected journals and health center sites.

At the 4th International Oral AIDS Conference held in South Africa, the risk of transmission through oral sex was estimated to be approximately 0.04 per cent per contact.4 This percentage figure is a lot lower than the two American figures, because this figure is a risk per contact percentage, whereas the other figures are percentage risks over much longer time periods. Oral sex is still regarded as a low-risk sexual activity in terms of HIV transmission, but only when more work is done will we be clearer as to the risks of oral sex. While it is very difficult to ever know how HIV transmission occurred, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there have been a few documented cases of HIV transmission during oral sex.5  ** Note this is the lowest figure I could find, There are higher figures.

From SFAF.org:   Getting HIV from oral sex is possible, but quite rare.

From Afterelton.com : not a scientific research or mass media outlet for AIDS/HIV but has a nice argument as to why the risk exists even though its so small...Regarding oral sex, there’s no clear-cut answer here either – no “official” position, despite the fact that it’s been extensively studied. Unfortunately, it’s also an extremely difficult thing to study because it’s very difficult to isolate the precise sex act that infected someone with HIV, since very few people practice only one sex act.

Here’s what we know: HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, is present in both sperm and precum. We know the risk of transmission in oral sex is much, much lower than for anal sex. And we know that the risk, however small, is much bigger for the guy giving the blowjob than for the guy getting it.

What’s the exact risk? Well, one study of gay and bi men estimated the chance of infection for the receiving partner at about one in two thousand blowjobs (assuming ejaculation). Another estimate, based on different studies, says the risk is about one in ten thousand blowjobs – and that’s assuming the guy getting the blow job is always HIV-positive.

Basically, oral sex without a condom is probably safer even than anal sex with a condom (which can leak or break). Oral sex without ejaculation is even safer. Everyone seems to agree that if gay and bi men only practiced oral sex, new HIV infections would almost completely stop. And if you only practice oral sex, your personal chance of infection is very low.

Is that “no” risk? A lot of people say it is. Statistically speaking, they’re close to right. But trying telling that to the guy who became HIV positive through oral sex (I’ve met one, and he was very bitter about all the “oral sex is completely safe!” talk).

Sure, the risk is extremely low for any one blowjob. But how many blowjobs will you give over the course of a life? More than one, probably. A few thousand? Assuming that only, say, one in five of your partners is HIV-positive (which is the approximate infection rate in any given U.S. gay bar), that still means your lifetime risk of HIV infection from just unprotected oral sex could be … well, less than ten percent, but also more than zero percent.

And keep in mind that, yes, the infection rate also depends on the “viral load” of a HIV-positive guy (which is the amount of virus in his body). And unfortunately, a guy’s viral load is often very high right after infection, but before he shows up as HIV-positive in blood tests.

I could go on but really all you have to do is Google the subject. Lancet has multiple articles just pay the fee to see them.