For reasons different then you would likely presume I had a women come to me to ask about an STD test a man had provided her. His tests show positive for HSV-2 (a 2.15 result where >1.09 is positive). He claimed that it was not genital warts, but instead caused by an 'ear infection'.
Before I gave her the obvious answer I researched HSV some more to be certain I was being fair and accurate. While HSV-2 is generally associated with genital and rectal herpes it can be caught on the face, usually orally for obvious reasons. Thus in theory I believe one could have an HSV-2 that was contracted on or near the ear; though I don't want to think about exactly what process would lead to one contracting it there... I have not found any actual reference to HSV-2 on or around the ears.
Now I don't believe that is what's happened in this case, for plenty of reasons. Beyond the obvious fact that HSV-2 is far more common genital, and that I still wouldn't call it an 'ear infection' if he had HSV-2 around the ears, there are other warning signs and it's just not worth the risk. I've already advised her to walk away quickly.
However, I am curious now. Just for the sake of completeness and my own knowledge (I get asked questions about STDs more then I ever expected, and while I'm not a medical expert but I would like to be informed enough to give accurate answers where I can), I was hoping someone could help confirm just how probable, or improbable, having HSV-2 on the ear really is?