Got First Numbers Not sure What to Think

[Lobster1]

Ok went to Wash. U. today, and docs told me my VL was 67, and CD4 was i think 401.   They said it's unusal b/c usually the VL is much higher.  Anyone ever seen this kind of results.  Have to get a little mroe blood work done for cholesteral and thyroid, then probably starting meds.  So any hope someone can give me would be great.  Also they asked if i want to try trial meds.  Thanks.

[john33]

Hi Lobster,

Sorry to hear your CD4 are 401, i'm far from knowing on this as all new too, but i'd suggest going with what your doc says.

Unless i'm making a mistake it's good that your vl is low though.

John

[Matty the Damned]

It's all about trends over time.

One VL result doesn't really mean much. Your CD4 result is respectable, it'd be interesting to see what your CD4 % is.

MtD

[Miss Philicia]

I don't know why anyone would say "sorry to hear" about a cd4 of 401.  That's not a bad number particularly and you may cause this person extra worry saying that.

[john33]

I don't know why anyone would say "sorry to hear" about a cd4 of 401.  That's not a bad number particularly and you may cause this person extra worry saying that.

well i said i'm new to all this, so i'm no judge

[Rev. Moon]

401 is not a bad number, Lobster.  A VL of only 67 sounds excellent for someone who is not on meds (or did you mean 67K?).  Do you have any idea of when/how long ago you might have been infected (I saw that in your first post you mentioned that it may have happened at work).

Like MtD said, you'll just need to wait and see trends in time.  At the moment you don't need to rush (again, especially with a VL that's fairly close to undetectable).  

Good health and luck to you.

[Ann]

well i said i'm new to all this, so i'm no judge

Well, maybe you should refrain from giving advice until you understand more about hiv?

Lobster, your numbers are excellent, particularly if your VL is only 67. As Mr Moon asked, did you mean 67,000? Either way, you still have excellent numbers for someone who is not on meds. If you want to go on a med trial, kudos to you, but with those numbers you don't NEED meds yet. I've been poz since '97 and I'm still not on meds. My numbers are in my profile.

And yes, it's all about the trends. One or two or even three results do not a trend make.

Ann

[Lobster1]

Hey guys it was just 67 not 67000.  even the docters said 67 was low, and sorry screw up on cd4 of 401.  it was closer to 370.  Sorry abou that screwup, 401 was different number of something.  Docs said when people get to 350 on cd4 they want to put people on meds.  Sorry i don thave exact numbers dont have paper right in front of me.  Just talked to doc today, and I asked about my numbers again. 

I guess the big question is when i was exposed.  I would of figured probably this year, but with the cd4 so low i dont know.  Been with the same girl for just over 3yrs now, and been faithful.  So, I hope i didnt not have it before her.  Did see several women before meeting her.  Well take care everyone.

[Matty the Damned]

Lobster,

Even 370 isn't that low, though as you note it is getting close to the limit where doctors will recommend you commence treatment. The minimum number before commencing treatment used to be around 200, so don't fret about it too much.

A VL of 67 is quite low too, but as we say, you'll need a series of VL tests taken at regular intervals (monthly even) before a clear pattern of what the virus is doing inside you emerges.

Has your partner been tested for HIV?

MtD

[Lobster1]

She was tested originally when i found out.  The 3 month wait for 2nd test is coming in Feb.  So, hopefully stays neg.  Thanks for help everyone.  I think anyone who goes through this knows the effect it has on you.  Mental and physical.

[CallMeSid]

Hi, Lobster.

Like you, my VL was very low (<50) when I first tested HIV+ about 2.5 years ago.  It's remained very low, though generally detectable since.  (My numbers are in my signature footer.)  When I was diagnosed, it was a fairly recent infection as I had tested negative about a year prior.  Also, when I tested positive, not all of the bands on the Western blot were reactive.  (A follow-up WB about 8 months later revealed that all bands are now reactive.)  So, yeah, a very low VL at the time of diagnosis is possible and it's usually a good thing.

As others have mentioned, it's only after you get a few sets of numbers that a more informed assessment of your condition can be made.

Hang in there and be well.

~Sid