Phuket Nightlife

chengshh · #1 03-02-2005, 15:47

i love bj. is that, bj without condom, safe in phuket?

Captain · #2 03-02-2005, 16:08

That depends. Seeing your other topic "Did you ever try a LB": do you want to give or get a BJ?

chengshh · #3 03-02-2005, 17:32

i am just curious. in fact, i love girl. hehe

magnusvv · #4 03-02-2005, 21:06

Its all relative, many may think the risk vs. reward is reasonable enough to not worry much about it, however you can catch an STD through oral sex. The transmission rate is quite low. Some girls will not give a bbbj for fear of catching something, so if this is your cup of tea you may want to make that clear.

Dazzlethai · #5 03-02-2005, 22:49

A study of gay men in London and San Fransisco puts the rate of oral sex transmission at around 7%. It should be noted that this study has been disputed. However there is a theoretical risk of transmission. Just remember that the girls in Patong are sleeping with hundreds of guys a year, and there is HIV knocking around. Girls with the virus are likely to have a high viral load, increasing the minute chance of tranmission. You are more likely to catch other STDs such as Chlamydya.
On my last visit i had many bj's without condoms and my tests where all clear, however when i return i will be a little more cautious as i am now aware of the risk, albeit a small one.

Tyfon · #6 03-02-2005, 23:20

The risk is increased if there are any open sores or cuts/wounds on you or in the girl's mouth - this can be taken to include those inflicted whenever teeth are brushed. If you are the girl's umpteenth BBBJ of the day (MP girls especially) and she's been brushing after each one...

K.

LivinLOS · #7 03-02-2005, 23:22

could you quote that study ???

As the rate of vaginal sex transmission can be down as low as 0.02 % and oral sex is considered much safer it seems unusual..

Also being a pitcher or a catcher would have a big impact.. I dont intend on giving any BBBJ's !!!

magnusvv · #8 03-02-2005, 23:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dazzlethai

A study of gay men in London and San Fransisco puts the rate of oral sex transmission at around 7%. It should be noted that this study has been disputed.

A recent study of gay men practicing only oral sex revealed a seven percent transmission rate over a several year period. An earlier study in San Francisco revealed a transmission rate of less than one percent per year in gay men practicing only oral sex.

I think that might clear up why it was so high.

rdt · #9 04-02-2005, 07:04

watch out for the teeth.

tintin · #10 04-02-2005, 16:01

Any % has nothing to do with it!

Nothing is worth the risk! Period!

Hookey · #11 04-02-2005, 16:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by tintin

Any % has nothing to do with it!

Nothing is worth the risk! Period!

What a ridiculous thing to say. ANYTHING you do in life has a 'percentage' risk. Are you saying you never drive a car? Take a plane? Everything you do in life is just playing the odds. In fact here in the UK as a white hetrosexual male in my thirties, I have a far higher probability of getting killed or seriously injured in my car than I have of being infected by HIV. (There are about 3000 HIV infections a year here, but half are gay men and a third are Africans arriving through immigration - whereas there are 3300 road deaths and about 10 times that number of injuries).

The point I'm making is that everything you do involves an element of risk, but just like driving a car you can do things to minimise that risk, but that doesn't mean never going for a drive!

Coolhand · #12 04-02-2005, 16:31

I think Tintin's point is that even if the risk is 1 in a million, he doesn't think its worth the risk. That's his personal opinion. If we are talking about reducing risk to a level thats as low as reasonably possible, then surely wearing a condom makes sense, rather than playing the odds!

Hookey · #13 04-02-2005, 16:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coolhand

I think Tintin's point is that even if the risk is 1 in a million, he doesn't think its worth the risk. That's his personal opinion. If we are talking about reducing risk to a level thats as low as reasonably possible, then surely wearing a condom makes sense, rather than playing the odds!

'As low as possible' is not doing it all! That's my point, his statement is silly because there's always an element of risk in anything you do.

LivinLOS · #14 04-02-2005, 17:27

Life is risk.. What you gonna do, wrap yourself in cotton wool and stay living in agrophobia..

For the less paranoid out there ******* constitute a risk so minor that you can let a crack ***** blow you with relative safety..

If 0.02% (1/5000) vaginal transmission is risky and oral is many multiples safer I will take those 1/1,000,000 chances.. When I get to a million (different person) *******s (all from HIV infected persons) let me know..

tintin · #15 05-02-2005, 00:34

Oh I totally agree that I have more change to get killed in a car! Tsunami-victims were on the wrong place at the wrong time!

The difference is that I need the car in this society, public transport su*ks over here.

But if I am doing a bg, the risk is allready higher then with some girls.

If I have almost 0 % by wearing the hat, I prefer to leave it on! I cannot leave out that bad luck can catch on me, but I can leave at least the change out, of getting aids, if I don't want to...

And to pass the dissease to anybody else, if I would have been caught!

In some countries a large sized of the population has been washed away, only because nobody is wearing the hat!

Baz · #16 05-02-2005, 01:57

just enjoy life.
do what you like,lifes to short to worry to much.
Tin Tin why say about aids you have to get HIV before aids anyway.
you can have hiv years before aids.
just look at the government minister who has HIV for 16 years and still no Aids and he looks healthy so less of the doom and gloom.

Baz

Coolhand · #17 05-02-2005, 02:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by tintin

In some countries a large sized of the population has been washed away, only because nobody is wearing the hat!

sorry, but that is just ridiculous! The fact you can compare the tidal wave to not wearing a condom is just crass. I have given you the benefit of the doubt many times but this time you have just gone too far. If you think that 226,000 Indonesians were lilled by the earthquake and tsunami that followed because they weren't wearing condoms, especially as many of them were women and children then you are one sick mutha.
Tarzan has a point YOU atre now on my ignore list!

dawsey · #18 05-02-2005, 03:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coolhand

sorry, but that is just ridiculous! The fact you can compare the tidal wave to not wearing a condom is just crass. I have given you the benefit of the doubt many times but this time you have just gone too far. If you think that 226,000 Indonesians were lilled by the earthquake and tsunami that followed because they weren't wearing condoms, especially as many of them were women and children then you are one sick mutha.
Tarzan has a point YOU atre now on my ignore list!

Coolhand,
I think its tintins poor command of English that is the problem. Giving him the benefit of doubt,I would say he means that many people have died (as in washed away,wiped out) as a result of not wearing a condom (contracted HIV/Aids) Think about it, his English is not too good

Allybabba22 · #19 05-02-2005, 04:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by dawsey

Coolhand,
I think its tintins poor command of English that is the problem. Giving him the benefit of doubt,I would say he means that many people have died (as in washed away,wiped out) as a result of not wearing a condom (contracted HIV/Aids) Think about it, his English is not too good

Yes I agree Dawsey, This time I think he should be giving the benefit of doubt.....

ashley · #20 05-02-2005, 10:27

Tin Tin said.
*In some countries a large sized of the population has been washed away, only because nobody is wearing the hat!

I dont think his English is a problem here at all. It is how you interpret his statement. He said in some countries with no specific reference to Indonesia, Thailand or Sri Lanka. I think the poor English comes from those who misinterpreted it.

Your chance of catching an STD from a blow job as minimal as they might be are still a risk. The only bad thing about wearing a hat while getting a blow job is that it takes away from the money shot.

May all your blow job end with a pop!

LivinLOS · #21 05-02-2005, 12:20

Studies have shown that recieveing a ******* has risks so negligable as to be considered 'safe'.. Giving one however has some (small) risk..

I am guessing as there are no facts anf figures or studies quoted from above but the % of gay men catching HIV from oral only were probably the 'catchers' in the arrangement..

I wear rubbers for sex.. I dont have a blase attitude to catching HIV but nothing I have seen or read has shown any evidence that you are likely to contract HIV from recieving a *******.

LivinLOS · #22 05-02-2005, 12:45

Quote:

The risk of HIV transmission from an infected partner through oral sex is much smaller than the risk of HIV transmission from **** or vaginal sex. Because of this, measuring the exact risk of HIV transmission as a result of oral sex is very difficult. In addition, since most sexually active individuals practice oral sex in addition to other forms of sex, such as vaginal and/or **** sex, when transmission occurs, it is difficult to determine whether or not it occurred as a result of oral sex or other more risky sexual activities. Finally, several co-factors can increase the risk of HIV transmission through oral sex, including: oral ulcers, bleeding gums, genital sores, and the presence of other STDs.

When scientists describe the risk of transmitting an infectious disease, like HIV, the term "theoretical risk" is often used. Very simply, "theoretical risk" means that passing an infection from one person to another is possible, even though there may not yet be any actual documented cases. "Theoretical risk" is not the same as likelihood. In other words, stating that HIV infection is "theoretically possible" does not necessarily mean it is likely to happen-only that it might. Documented risk, on the other hand, is used to describe transmission that has actually occurred, been investigated, and documented in the scientific literature.

Various scientific studies have been performed around the world to try and document and study instances of HIV transmission through oral sex. A programme in San Francisco studied 198 people, nearly all gay or bisexual men. The subjects stated that they had only had oral sex for a year, from six months preceding the six-month study to its end. 20 per cent of the study participants, 39 people, reported performing oral sex on partners they knew to be HIV positive. 35 of those did not use a condom and 16 reported swallowing ***. No-one became HIV positive during the study. Due to the low number of unprotected serodiscordant pairings, all that can be said is that there was a less than 2.8 per cent chance of infection through oral sex over a year.

In June 2002, a study conducted amongst 135 HIV-negative Spanish heterosexuals, who were in a sexual relationship with a person who was HIV-positive, reported that over 19,000 instances of unprotected oral sex had not lead to any cases of HIV transmission. The study also looked at contributing factors that could effect the potential transmission of HIV through oral sex. They monitored viral load and asked questions such as whether ejaculation in the mouth occurred and how good oral health was. Amongst HIV-positive men, 34 per cent had ejaculated into the mouths of their partners. Viral load levels were available for 60 people in the study, 10 per cent of whom had levels over 10,000 copies. Nearly 16 per cent of the HIV-positive people had CD4 counts below 200. The study, conducted over a ten year period between 1990 and 2000, adds to the growing number of studies which suggest varying levels of risk of HIV transmission from oral sex when compared to **** or vaginal intercourse.

Remember all these are actually including the 'giver' of the *******.. There may be an arguement that there is a small risk for the giver.. I have never heard of a difintive documented case of reciever contracting the virus. There are many pieces of information hedging on the side of safety stating the 'possibility' etc but no hard evidence that I have ever found from true study.

LivinLOS · #23 05-02-2005, 13:01

http://www.thebody.com/Forums/AIDS/S...x/Q143132.html

Quote:

There is no evidence that HIV is transmitted to a person receiving oral sex (the insertive partner, or the person who is having their genitals being sucked). There is one unconfirmed case that may have involved blood in the person's mouth. We're not talking about small or trace amounts of blood as posing a real risk.

tintin · #24 05-02-2005, 18:34

First at all fellows cool down a bit.
.....

I can't believe how you can interpretate that the tsunami-victims had anything to do with wearing a hat or not!

1. You don't have to catch aids to die, I agree totaly with that! The tsunami-victims were at the wrong place, wrong time! If your car got hit by a drunk man, same-same!

2. If I do wear a hat, normally aids is no concern having se*! I fi don't it is a stupid death, just have the disease becaus I thought my odds would be good!

3. Because many people imo are stupid or ignorant, the are dying of aids.

In Africa entire populations are "washed away" by aids! Maybe "washed away" is a bad expression", make you think about the tsunami, it has nothing to do with it! Just meant are "taken out" , are dissapearing of this horible disease!

Where I did made a mistake, and I agree, is that I focused more on the wearing of the condom, then the bj!!! That is my mistake! I read to fast and thought he meant doing it with a bG!

I think you should never ever make the deed without! But indeed a BJ, should not be a very high risk! Had quite some one myself

. I did become more carefull of lic*ing puss*s. First they not smell all that good, and there is a little higher risk that I want to avoid!

I am getting a bit tired of the mentally of some BM's seriously. I always try to give some positive feedback here, share storys, help people preparing their trip to los!

Because I am honnest, admit some stupid things of myself, sometimes so others would not do so, I get attacked all the time!

I hardly cry over it and take it with good humour,especially as my health is way better WITHOUT pills!

But I am sure that some bm's are frowned upon if people around them know that they are seeing Thai prostitutes, so i wonder why these guys frown on other bm's who are a bit different then themself!