Is the risk of transmission from a detectable top breeding a neg bottom really only 1%?

[NJGB]

As title says, I heard that the chances of a detectable top breeding a neg bottom not on prep, assuming that lube is used for the fuck is about 1.42%.

I have to assume thats taking into account the chances that the poz guy is detectable vs undetectable, or is it literally as it says in that if a detectable top breeds a neg bottom its really only 1.42%, assuming you use lube, and no shenanigans like a PA, a cruel condom, or a toothbrush.

 

Do larger cocks have a significantly higher risk of transmission? Is there any more in depth literature on this?

[Iker80]

I've seen the number too. I think the big thing is it's for each time you have sex with a detectable guy and he tops and cums inside. It's an average so some stuff will make it more likely to transmit. I bet longer time fucking has an effect. But even going with a flat 1.4% that's low, but not super low. You might find a guy online who's at a hotel and do it one evening, stay the night and get fucked again in the morning. If he's detectable that gives about 3% chance, and if he was great in bed and you get in one more fuck before he goes home you're closer to 5% now.

[danolivaw]

6 hours ago, Iker80 said:

I've seen the number too. I think the big thing is it's for each time you have sex with a detectable guy and he tops and cums inside. It's an average so some stuff will make it more likely to transmit. I bet longer time fucking has an effect. But even going with a flat 1.4% that's low, but not super low. You might find a guy online who's at a hotel and do it one evening, stay the night and get fucked again in the morning. If he's detectable that gives about 3% chance, and if he was great in bed and you get in one more fuck before he goes home you're closer to 5% now.

I would call this both intellectually and sexually stimulating at the same time. 

[drscorpio]

https://www.poz.com/pdfs/P04-14p53.risk_transmission.pdf

That's the figure quoted here (really close to it anyway). 
Anything that might lead to tears in your rectum will increase the risk. 

[Marlin]

So many factors may affect transmission. The use of lube, the size of the dick, the amount of time fucking.  
A gentle quick fuck by a a detectable man with small dick using lots of lube will probably be less likely to infect than a man with a very large dick just using spit and fucking for an hour. 
In the end it's whether the HIV virus enters the recipients blood stream.  A well abraded anal or rectal lining is the perfect place for HIV to enter. 

[smallcocksissyboi]

I’ve seen this before and it always makes me feel more reassured. BUT, I bleed almost every time from anal so know that figure probably dramatically increases. I’ve not been able to find what the stats are if you get fucked by a detectable guy and your ass is bleeding, or clearly abraded 

[satyricon1]

It also would depend, I should think, on what "detectable" means.  Is it barely detectable (just slight higher than "undetectable"?  "Detectable" could mean everything from "just barely detectable" (i.e., low viral load, but detectable) to "high viral load" (easily detectable).  

[PG1961Canada]

This is a UK based organization that published some recent detailed information as well in Fall 2023.  It provides some great 'scenario' type questions and explains things in simple terms (with medical terms as well).   Some great definitions around the 'numbers' and ranges and what they mean.

[think before following links] https://www.aidsmap.com/about-hiv/undetectable-viral-load-and-hiv-transmission

Within this article, there is a link (close to the bottom) that takes you to the World Health Organization study from mid-2023.

I found both a good read.