Taking off on the previous post I have one more question for which I'm hoping LG or someone else has an informed and objective answer. Specifically, how prevalent are STDs such as herpes amongst both Providers and Hobbyists? I saw someone post somewhere that 75% of hobbyists have herpes which would lead me to believe that at least the same percentage of GFE-type providers have it too. Are there any studies on this or any informal or formal polls?

Lastly, how easy is it to contract (for either the provider or the hobbyist) something like herpes in a GFE-type encounter? For instance are there significant differences in transmission rates between LFK versus DFK or DATY versus uncovered French?

I remember somebody making a post about HSVII - and as I recall that person was highly uninformed.  I don't think those rates are accurate.

I don't think you're going to find statistics specific to the hobby.  IMHO, I think you have to look at your liasons critically.  For example, we all know the admonishments about seeing providers who are well reviewed - to avoid LE.  On the otherhand - a VERY VERY well reviewed provider - one who has 10+ pages of 10 reviews/page is HIGHLY likely to have HPV - much more so than somembody who "flys below the radar".  Furthermore, while I personally prefer UBJCIM, for example, if the provider sees several clients a day, the likelihood there's going to be something floating in the spoo is highly likely.  Even greater, IMHO, are those providers who rim - if you have never had a course in microbiology consider reading up on enteric organisms - and their associated pathology.  The problem is no so much episodic, but more the fact that if a provider does such things, their oral cavity is highly likely to be colonized with the same critters, which are then transmitted to others who you may stick your tongue into.

Just food for thought, so to speak.

Lastly, there was an article in JAMA about 3-4 months ago about HPV in women.  In the age range of 20-28 (don't quote me) a study found almost 50% of women were seropositive for HPV.

Something to consider.

BS

A well reviewed provider who performs frequent UBJ is statistically more likely to have their oral cavity infected with HSVII - and possibly HPV - than one who only performs CBJ.  Providers who perform UBJCIM are more likely to be colonized by those prions noted above but also some of the more nasty microbes like syphilis, gonorrhea, and chlamydia.  Rimming will only add more variety to the "flora" by including enterics.

This does not include the risk of HSVI, which almost EVERYBODY has due to exposure as a child and infection as the classic "chickenpox".  And while HSVI and II can be translocated to either the oral cavity or genitalia, this adds the the mix also.

So, suffice it to say, you're best "covered" by CBJ and covered intercourse.  Covered intercourse will not prevent secretions from inoculating areas below the collar of a condom with resultant infection with HSVI or II, but it's probably your best approach nevertheless if you are going to hobby.

BS

though not peer reviewed, I can vouch for these statistics.

I have had two STD's (three if you include crabs).

I received them from two different civies that I dated way back in my 20's, out of maybe eight civies with who I had relations back then prior to getting married.

Since then I have had sex with no few than 160 providers over a thirty five year period.
Not once have I had a scintilla of a symptom of a STD.

Now that tells me a lot.

What does it tell you?

Thanks both, BigSplooge and mrfisher. Quick question on the 160 providers over a thirty five year period - did this include BBBJ, DFK and DATY? Also, were/are you really choosy about the kind of provider that you will see from a health perspective? If so choosy how?

Here is the link to the SF Free Clinic....

Dear Pogo71,

It is truly impossible to offer you any reliable stats on what you are asking, simply because there are "hobbyists" and "hobbyists." If you mean those who frequent TER providers, then no. If you want to know the stats among commercial sex workers on the street, it depends on which research study and in what city.

There are simply too many variables and circumstances to include in a definite answer. Definitions such as "GFE-providers" are not included in any federally/state funded studies and most such health research is conducted on very official levels.

You'll just have to use your own head. What's GFE for one person may not mean the same thing to another. If you want general stats and tips on how to protect yourself, please go to the CDC's (Center for Disease Control) website and peruse.

In general, STD studies receive funding from epidemiological grants. No one really cares about
"GFE" people. It's all about how to protect the general population from vast outbreaks, e.g. the syphilis epidemic gripping the gay male population in major metropolitan cities.

Assess your own risk and follow your own advice, please,
the Love Goddess

...keep in mind I am a neophyte to the hobby in comparison to the veterans Mr Fisher, LG  and others.  But my "civie" day job is as a health care provider of a certain flavor.

If I could pick my perfect provider, it would be one that "flew below the radar".  That is, somebody who is not known to the masses but who discretely and selectively sees clients - and not necessarily as a full time occupation.  Somebody who sees clients either 1) because they like to or 2)  to supplement their income.  I have run into several providers recently who fit this profile - so they are, in fact, out there.

Secondly, I would look for somebody who is very concerned about hygiene - not to the point of mania, but somebody who is guardedly cautious but who will concede less guard with greater familiarity.

My thought process is purely mathematical.  The risk of a provider contracting an STD, either from oral or vaginal contact is DIRECTLY related to the frequency of exposure and variation in client encounter.  The more frequent the exposure, the more likely a provider may be colonized.  It's that simple.

So one way a hobbyist can cut down on risk of an STD is to weed out the "high risk provider".  Who does this exclude?  Traveling Eros providers held up in hotels seeing clients every hour would be my primary criteria.  If she will perform BBBJCIM with you, there's a very good chance she would have done the same with the guy 30 minutes before - high risk, IMHO.  In this situation, consider countering with CBJ - certainly not as much fun, but definitely safer.

There is some suggestion that HPVI and HPVII can be translocated to oral or genital sites.  The only way you could be certain of this is to perform an exam - not very practical.  Hopefully, hobbyists and providers with active lesions would abstain from contact at this time.  However, this may not always be the case.  This is where your risk factor comes into play - for everybody involved.  

Suffice it to say, HSVII prefers the epithelial surface of the genital region to the oral region.  Visa versa for HSVI.  That is what we all count on - is is largely the case.  But there is cross-over.  That is the wild card.

Transmission of HIV from BBBJ is rare provided there are no breaks in the epithelial surface on either of the parties.

I mentioned a previous JAMA article which gave epidemiology on the incidence of *genital* human papilloma virus (HPV) in women.  Not too surprisingly the age of greatest exposure is the 23-28 year old age group - almost 50%.  I am not up on the transmissability of genital HPV to the oral cavity (as in DATY) or visa versa.  But my suspicion is it could indeed happen.

If the general demographic of the male hobbyist is 1) heterosexual 2) age 40-60 3) married  4) not IV drug abusers, then the "average" risk of transmissibility on the part of the hobbyist would me minimal.  But remember, with statistics, you're dealing with a bell shaped curve, so there are always "out-lyers".  The provider will reflect the sum of all her client interactions - and would be spread logarithmically by her clients.  Thus is how disease is spread.

CIM is probably more risky for the provider.  That there seems to be infrequent infection may have to do with the demographic noted above.  For the provider syphilis, gonorrhea, and chlamydia are the risks.

I have not pat solutions to the risks.  I do think, however, you can minimize your risk by selecting carefully your provider interactions - as noted above.

My final thought is there is one thing everybody could do to cut down on the risk of oral transmission of pathogenic microbes (not viruses) - and that is for the providers to rinse their mouths with Peridex (chlorhexidine gluconate 0.12%) swish 30 sec and spit after every client exposure.  Hobbyists could rinse twice daily for 2-3 days to achieve the same result.  This *might* reduce the incidence of strep throat and just overall keep the oro-pharyngeal flora more within a normal range.  You can get this from your physician or your dentist simply by asking.  Most will be happy to prescribe.  Just tell them you're concerned about gingivitis.

Don't mean to steal LG's fire, but I've given this a lot of thought and wanted to share.

Still blinded by science and quantitative sploogology,

BS

-- Modified on 8/3/2007 6:49:00 PM

-- Modified on 8/4/2007 7:56:09 AM

that if used daily - and definitely more than once daily - is that it can permanently stain and discolor your teeth. This is common knowledge among cosmetic dentists and they do inform their patients of this fact - since Peridex, medical strength, is available from dentists or by prescription only.

The problem with all this is that there are absolutely no guarantees. Who would have thunk that someone like Magic Johnson would contract HIV? When his buddy W Chamberlain boasted of having had an equal amount to, or even more [heterosexual] liaisons than Magic ever had?

If you decide to play around in the sexual arena, whether with providers or civilians, you run risks. Remember all the "nice, upscale" people in major metropolitan areas who were infected with genital herpes in the 80s? Granted, we know more about the disease now than we did then, but social status was still not a protective asset.

Not to rain on anyone's love/sex parade, but this hobby is not without risks. If you really want to play it safe, stay covered at all times or just don't do it at all.

So boring, so true,
the Love Goddess

All is takes is meeting that one person who HAS an STD. How do you find out if she/he has it? Just keep meeting up with people, and you may just find out.

If you don't want to take your chances, I would suggest retiring from the hobby all together. Remember, each time that you become involved with the opposite sex (or same sex for some lol), your chances increases.

There are so many myths out there, and the one that irks me the most, is the one with all you have to do is gargle with listerine, and voila everything is cleared! Wow, who was the stupid idiot that came up with that solution??? lol

Listen folks, again~ remember your chances increases with catching something, the more you stay involved with the field. If you don't want to catch anything, just get out while you can.

Enough said.

...the staining from Peridex is more commonly seen with prolonged use.  Therefore, if hobbyists were to use, they might need to see their dental professional every 6 mo for cleaning and providers, if using more frequently, might need it every 3-4 mo.

But I would say, "pick your poison", so to speak.  I would much rather have to get my teeth cleaned more frequently and have the peace of mind that bugs I might pick up have been vaporized by chlorhexidine, than the alternative.

BS

I have familiarity with the value of prophylactic antimicrobial coverage.  The thought occurs that just perhaps prophylactic antiviral coverage for HSV might be valuable.

I just performed a medline search and came up with the following citation:

Sex Transm Dis. 2007 Mar;34(3):123-31.  Suppressive valacyclovir therapy: impact on the population spread of HSV-2 infection.
Williams JR, Jordan JC, Davis EA, Garnett GP.

Division of Epidemiology, Public Health and Primary Care, Imperial College London, St. Mary's Campus, Norfolk Place, London, UK. [email protected]

For the sake of brevity in the results section of the citation:  "Starting (sic antiviral) suppression closer to the time of infection also reduces the incidence of new cases."

The point?  Hobbyists might consider a blast of valacyclovir before and after an encounter to further reduce the possibility of acquiring HSVII (or genital HSV I for that matter).  I cannot comment on the dose or duration but I would think possibly a 2x increase in dosage (you want high levels at time of encounter) with a follow-up dose for a day or two.

I think this does make sence, and is something I will incorporate into my own "routine".

Just wanted to share.  Nothing scientific about this, but again, it may be of help to somebody.

BS

Dear BigSplooge,
Your advice is very interesting in theory, however, please remember that valacyclovir is available by prescription only, and that very few physicians would offer prophylactic doses for the purpose at hand.

The majority of individuals out there don't have unlimited or free access to antivirals. A responsible physician would undoubtedly quiz his/her patient as to the reason for such a request - not to mention the hiding of meds in front of the S.O. I doubt that a wife or significant other would take seeing antivirals in the medicine cabinet lightly. And of course, some people have severe side effects when administered antivirals. Not something to toy with, for sure.

So here goes again: no experimenting with meds, please,
the Love Goddess

I have to agree with you again, LG.

the herpes talk, what sort of risk is there of transmission from oral if no sores are visible?
Also, what are the different types of herpes again?

As for their health, I insisted that they have a heart beat.

Seriously, no, I didn't have them take any physical and don't recall ever seeing anyone whose outward appearances put me off in any way.  If I had some reason to question their health (track marks on their arms, for example) I probably would have asked to leave rather than engage in anything.

that by switching from polygamous to monogamous hobbying, the chances of catching it are reduced?......

Short of that, WarrenBT, I think the worst thing you'll catch is a case of the polygamitis, i.e. a not-so-mysterious fatigue of being with the same person over and over again.

As to reduction? The only absolute in terms of reducing one's risk is abstention, unless you've got it in writing that the other party is strictly monogamously providing as well.

Sounds like a marriage to me,
the Love Goddess

Having settled on an ATF and sticking only with her - Isn't that still hobbying? and isn't it less risky than visiting tens of different providers?

She can be your ATF, but she is also someone elses. Don't be fooled that you are her only one, either Been there and done that.. just being honest.

I so agree with LG!

Taking valacyclovir as a prophylactic is done in the sport of wrestling (see www.nih.go.jp/JJID/59/6.pdf); thus it would probably help reduce risk in this hobby.  Now just think of a reason to tell your physician why as a middle aged male you wrestle as a hobby. (but could probably be ordered online by posing as a high scool/college wrestler).

Hmm, this whole topic is really interesting. Thanks everyone. I'm also new. Right now I'm
just reading the board trying to learn. I was
Referred by my boss. But back to the subject.
Some good information to know. Thanks...

Dosen't surprise me one little bit.

Chemoprophylaxis, for whatever reason, has, and will continue to be controversial.  In terms of it's use by hobbyists, it would be equally controversial.

However, it's use *may* have merits.

I think LG needs to tote the party line here a bit and thus the reason for her above noted reply.  However, drugs are very often times used for "unlabeled" purposes.  One of the primary indications (reasons) for prophylaxis is "potential high risk for infection".  The big problem here is there are no studies to support it's use.  Most of the HSV antiviral studies look at the risk of the "infected" transmitting to the "uninfected" - with the primary focus on diminishing the transmissibility of the "infected".  Prophylaxis would look at cutting down the risk of transmitting to the "uninfected", which has not really been looked at, I believe.

So, that's the war and peace rendition on this topic.  As regards a reasonable justification for asking your local doc for a Rx - if it were me I'd just say "I go out in the sun alot and I tend to get recurrent herpes infections on my (oral) lips and cheeks".  This actually happens to me if I'm not careful with sun exposure.  If your local doc is a reasonable sort, he/she'll probably Rx.

BS

160 contacts & NO disease episodes? Remember, no one here is under oath & bragadocia exists.  I've been with 10-15 women in my life & have had one STD. 160? Probably a selection from those 300 (hairy) virgins some people are promised.