[QUOTE=SalamanderFour;7170966]Statistics for the general population don't apply to this hobby. Too many of the providers use injectable drugs and share gear. Factors that increase the risk; anal, bareback, and numerous partners.
So the risk is not insignificant.[/QUOTE]I have to agree with SalamanderFour on this one. The study was very limited in that it examined 500 couples who were presumably in a monogamous (or mostly monogamous) relationship. "Among 500 couples. . . With a maximum of 1. 2% (95% CI: 0. 2%2. 2%) of infections potentially attributable to sexual contact. " Since it was studying person-to-person sexual contact, the study was obviously looking at situations where one partner was infected (the goal was to assess the rate of infection from one partner to his or her partner).
Granted, in most situations, female-to-male transmission is lower than male-to-female, but what about the provider with a drug problem who has an open cut in her mouth? Or who has seen several clients that day and whose vaginal tissues may be thin from repeated penetration? Or the provider whose teeth scratch your unit while performing oral? Or who's wearing a ring that cuts your unit while she's pumping it prior to penetration? Over several years the risk may be 1. 2% assuming occasional partner sex, whatever that means (six times a week if you're lucky, LOL). If conservatively the risk is 1% per encounter with a provider, that means a 99% chance of no infection. . . But after you've visited 20 providers, the odds that you haven't been infected is about 80%, which means that the odds of infection is 20%, or 1 out of 5. (Google the "birthday paradox" to understand the math.) That's a signficant risk, even if you can afford the $10 grand treatments.
