First of all i wanted to thank you guys for the service you have been doing.
My question is i know that transmission through cuts,sores and rash is negligible.how deep should the cut be for the transmission to happen. I heard from many medical professional that the cut should be deep enough and should need stitches and should be actively bleeding. is that true?
I have a rash in my outer arm ,if some drops of blood touched and i immediately rubbed it , then what is my risk?
I read in this site that rash doesnt establish any blood connection with blood vessel...even the oozing rash? i didn have any oozhing rash but a normal ring type..
Thanks a lot .
The medical professionals you have been in contact with are correct, cuts need to be fresh, deep and heavily bleeding in order for there to be a risk of HIV transmission. For example, one reported case of HIV transmission between cuts occurred between individuals involved in a knife fight who both had serious wounds.
Having a rash that is exposed to blood is not a risk for the transmission of HIV. You are correct in that your rash does not establish direct access to your blood stream, so this means there is negligible risk to you. Even an oozing rash would not be a significant risk.
In health, Erin