How is this any better than bbfs?

If your allowing semen in your mouth your taking the same risk for a STD as A NURU other than pregnancy. If you are on birth control then the risk is exactly the same. The chance of getting Aids is the same if there is a cut of any kind on either the hobbyist or provider and meets with the semen. Without blood contact the chance of getting aids is very low. Really there is a larger chance of catching some kind of disease (albeit not fatal type) thru kissing than thru the activities we are talking about. This hobby has potential for catching something everytime you meet with someone. We all know that driving is far more dangerous than fucking yet we all start up. I think it just comes down to whatever makes you feel comfortable.

Wrong again. It has been proven and documented that bbbj and bbfs do not carry the same risk, otherwise we would all be doing both of them. If that were really true guys would not daty then cover up for fs, and neither would we. Yes, there is a risk but not as much as with bbfs. Anal sex is also much more dangerous than both oral and vaginal sex because of the tears that occur even without us knowing.

As always Dr London has spoken. Now I was wondering where I mentioned full service. Lets see? I don't think I did. But since I am an idiot as always and you have your PHD in everything known to man I will just cower in the corner and look ignorant.

Dr. London has not spoken without facts. Chill out Burk. Every guy on this board knows bbbj does not carry the same risk as bbfs. That's all I was saying. You said nuru carries the same risk as cim, which it does not. Not if it is done the way the video illustrated it. Take away her rubbing his weenie on her vagina and shooting his cum all over it, then we can talk about risk. It might be less risk on the guy, but not on the woman...period! That's why so many guys are trying to suggest this is not harmful...kind of like with other things they want us to do lol. Cum in your mouth is still less risky than cum in your vagina. Last time I checked I didn't have a cervix in my mouth so HPV is out of that equation altogether, but here are some facts....

The last time major national surveys asked about this practice, in the early 1990s, only 20 percent of men aged 20 to 39 said they'd had anal sex with a woman in the preceding 10 years. Only 26 percent of men aged 18 to 59 said they'd ever done so. In the first survey, the 10-year limit excluded half the sexual career of half the sample, but that isn't enough to explain a doubling in the percentage saying yes. In the second survey, according to the current report, the inclusion of men aged 46 to 59 might have diluted the sample with "cohorts that were less likely to have had anal sex." But that's the point: Newer cohorts are more likely to have tried it.


Why does this matter? Because anal sex is far more dangerous than oral sex. According to data released earlier this year by the Centers for Disease Control, the probability of HIV acquisition by the receptive partner in unprotected oral sex with an HIV carrier is one per 10,000 acts. In vaginal sex, it's 10 per 10,000 acts. In anal sex, it's 50 per 10,000 acts. Do the math. Oral sex is 10 times safer than vaginal sex. Anal sex is five times more dangerous than vaginal sex and 50 times more dangerous than oral sex. Presumably, oral sex is far more frequent than anal sex. But are you confident it's 50 times more frequent?

A CDC fact sheet explains the risks of anal sex. First, "the lining of the rectum is thin and may allow the [HIV] virus to enter the body." Second, "condoms are more likely to break during anal sex than during vaginal sex." These risks don't just apply to HIV. According to the new survey report, the risk of transmission of other sexually transmitted diseases is likewise "higher for anal than for oral sex," and the risk "from oral sex is also believed to be lower than for vaginal intercourse."

OMG Why the name calling and the cattiness??? Burk, Stop. Acp, I still heart you dear

Wounded egos as usual lol. Can't even try to have an adult debate without bs.

So we go from exterior friction to anal sex. Is the chance of pregnancy the same if I cum on your vagina as in your vagina.Is there a chance yes but I believe pregnancy would be much higher if I came inside your vagina so the chance of STD occurrance would be the same as far as the chance of the cum going inside you. You quote instances that are for penetration of the vagina and anus not for exterior friction. Like I said the bottom line is whether your comfortable with or not Dr London

Right, but what I am saying is that if a guy's cum goes inside your vagina you don't need to have bbfs, thus making a nuru massage just as risky. As I said earlier, I would feel safer having a guy screw me with no condom and pull out than not screw me yet his cum gets inside.

I think that's what no one is understanding, and I am not trying to be an idiot...just trying to suggest that you don't need to have bbfs to be infected if the nuru involves semen going inside of a woman. That's like using the same needle as someone, then putting a condom on for sex lol.

Cum inside a vagina may make a baby or... cause an STD or both - whether you got fucked or not. Is that what you're trying to say London?

Gosh darn skippy...thank you!! Add to that HPV! That's what this whole darn thing was about...nuru massage is just like getting fked without the pleasure of it!

Your right Noami it may! But not in the same way as a full blast of it in your vagina or your anus as the report was connected to full on penetration.

Your right Noami it may! But not in the same way as a full blast of it in your vagina or your anus as the report was connected to full on penetration. Originally Posted by burkalini

Burk, dear it's N-a-o-m-i. You've butchered my name like twice today .
Well I think the point it here that cum in vagina can cause more damage than cum in mouth and then let's not talk about skin to skin contact. However, I have already said that providers are opened to that risk anyway. Both of you are correct. I can't really comment on anal sex. That is a no go/exit only zone for me.

HIV is transmitted when infected blood, semen, vaginal fluids, or breast milk enter another person's body. Statistics already show that it is RARE to catch HIV from oral sex. Rare, not impossible. With NURU, there is a chance that semen can get into the vagina and cause damage but I'd like to think that the chances are slim? Remember there is no cure for HIV. That is a big chance to take.

Ok Nayohme. I never said there was no risk but I do believe the quoted stats would be different. Please don't make fun of my dyslexic typing. lol I think the thing that bothered me was the way London just starts out a sentence WRONG AGAIN . Tact is apparently a word she just hasn't got to in the dictionary yet. Did you ever go to a class in college that the same person always raised their hand not to give a correct answer but to give herself pleasure in disclaiming someone else incorrect. Well that's the shoe.

wow you guys are bored...102 posts in this thread. If you no likey no doey. Rather simple.

*edit 103.

Ok Nayohme. I never said there was no risk but I do believe the quoted stats would be different. Please don't make fun of my dyslexic typing. lol I think the thing that bothered me was the way London just starts out a sentence WRONG AGAIN . Tact is apparently a word she just hasn't got to in the dictionary yet. Did you ever go to a class in college that the same person always raised their hand not to give a correct answer but to give herself pleasure in disclaiming someone else incorrect. Well that's the shoe. Originally Posted by burkalini

Could you stop being a baby? That's not what I was trying to do...good lord!

Why don't you come give me a Nuru massage notanewbie lol. The thread was not about whether we should or should not do it. It was asking if nuru was any safer than fs, and I have my answer.