POZ Community Forums
HIV Prevention and Testing => Do I Have HIV? => Topic started by: Possible? on April 18, 2010, 08:44:08 pm
-
Would like to thank all of you for taking the time to listen and respond.
Need some comfort in regards to my “risk”. I am female. Few weeks ago I was with a male of an unknown status. I shaved earlier that day (8 hours prior to incident). We we were together three times total that night. Condom used and blown up to check after each incident. My concern is that he was using spit as a lubricant down when he was fingering me. If he was infected and his saliva entered inside me through open cuts or just through the act could I be at risk? Second question. I performed oral sex on him and when I brushed that night a spit out a little blood. I didn't know of any open wounds in my mouth prior to me brushing?
Any helpful advice is greatly appreciated.
Thanks
-
#1, saliva is not infectious. Period.
#2 Although from time to time we hear of someone claiming to have become infected through giving oral sex, under careful scrutiny those claims just don't hold up. Your saliva has over a dozen elements and proteins which very effectively prevent the transmission of viable HIV.
Secondly are the results from longterm studies of HIV-discordant couples. They have lots of mutual unprotected oral sex and only protected vaginal and anal intercourse. The results have been that thus far not a single sero-negative partner has become infected.
I don't see any need for worrying or testing on your part. Just make sure that everytime you have vaginal or anal intercourse your partner is always wearing a condom. Then you will be well protected.
-
I wouldn't go out and say saliva is not a source for transmitting HIV. There's a good chance I got infected from saliva. If so, the transmission occurred when it was rubbed on an open wound. I won't go into anymore details than that, but the chances are high this is how I got infected.
But I agree, two people making out, its probably very low transmission can occur. I've likely made out with, gave oral and swallowed lol many pos guys in the last 10 years and even with mildly bleeding gums from gingervitis, never got infected. Just be careful of open wounds elsewhere and what you go and use as lube!
-
I wouldn't go out and say saliva is not a source for transmitting HIV. There's a good chance I got infected from saliva. If so, the transmission occurred when it was rubbed on an open wound. I won't go into anymore details than that, but the chances are high this is how I got infected.
But I agree, two people making out, its probably very low transmission can occur. I've likely made out with, gave oral and swallowed lol many pos guys in the last 10 years and even with mildly bleeding gums from gingervitis, never got infected. Just be careful of open wounds elsewhere and what you go and use as lube!
If so, then yours is the first case that has ever been documented. I assume you have been documented?
Saliva contains over a dozen enzymes and proteins that inhibit HIV production. Nowhere in recorded case history has HIV been recorded as a transmission vector.
Not in petri dish science, simian science, or human vector science.
Sorry, but I am not only calling you on not having the authority to post here in AM I INFECTED (where the science of HIV is called upon far more stringently than in the other, more compassionate forums) but I am calling you out on your mode of infection.
You could NOT have been infected through saliva.
And if you WERE, then HIV is NOT INFECTIOUS. It is CONTAGIOUS. And those suffering from it (like yourself) should be protected from the general public through quarantine. Are you really going to go there? Against all scientific and epidemiologic evidence?
Because I would love to match science with science on this case.
-
I wouldn't go out and say saliva is not a source for transmitting HIV. There's a good chance I got infected from saliva. If so, the transmission occurred when it was rubbed on an open wound. I won't go into anymore details than that, but the chances are high this is how I got infected.
But I agree, two people making out, its probably very low transmission can occur. I've likely made out with, gave oral and swallowed lol many pos guys in the last 10 years and even with mildly bleeding gums from gingervitis, never got infected. Just be careful of open wounds elsewhere and what you go and use as lube!
Kissing is not a risk for HIV transmission. And I don't believe you were infected from saliva.
Phoenius, it's nice that you want to help out here in Am I Infected but answering questions in this forum is restricted to AM Moderators and a handful of authorised members. Please don't post in this forum again.
Please take the time to read our Welcome Thread (http://forums.poz.com/index.php?topic=220.0) and review the posting guidelines for Am I Infected.
MtD
-
Phoenius, as JK and Matty have already told you, the site has a rule that only those who are authorized to do so may reply to entries in the AM I INFECTED Forum. You are not so authorized.
You may believe you were infected through saliva, but as has also been pointed out, there has never been single confirmed case of transmission in that manner. However, I don't want to discuss that with you and further hijack this thread from its original purpose. So let's just be clear that you are not to write here again. Thanks for your cooperation.
As for the original questioner, my initial response still stands. You were not at risk and there is no need for testing.
-
Ok, I am a little confused. I am not concerned over a kissing incident. I am concerned about saliva directly entering open cuts or the vagina. Like, if is someone spit on there hand and then rubbed inside me. What about giving oral and maybe my mouth had an open cut and his semen went into it... I know one is involving saliva and the other is semen. Is saliva portion no chance of infection? And the oral LOW?
Thanks.
-
Saliva is not infectious. As a matter of fact, saliva contains over a dozen elements that render HIV inactive.
-
I just want to echo the accuracy of what JK has said to you. Saliva absolutely is not a risk for HIV transmission. Period.
-
Thank you for clarifying the saliva issue. If I had a small cut or bleeding gums while giving oral should I be concerned?
Thanks
-
There is a theoretical risk is you are performing fellatio. However, both long term epidemiological studies and laboratory tests have been unable to reliably duplicate anecdotal patient study.
-
So even though my mouth was bleeding a little ( it always does when I brush) it's low low risk?
-
I see no reason I can't post here and warn others of my experiences and opinions based on how I think I got infected. That's what this forum is for, to share information and let everyone form their own conclusions.
Now that that is out of the way, I never said I was without a doubt infected by saliva. Why people are arguing with me saying I said that, I have no idea. I didn't mean to rattle anyone's cage. I just wanted to let people know my opinion of how I think I got infected. I just can't rule it out yet, as much as I want to. Also, I said it was saliva on an open wound, not kissing.. two very different things. Who says blood wasn't in the saliva?
And for the record, any doctor would say it is theoretically possible someone could get infected by placing body fluids from an HIV infected individual on the open wound of another, no matter what studies say. Just think, if you were neg, would you allow yourself to be a test subject to disprove this theory? I think not. HIV is in saliva and yes, proteins and enzyme may make it very unlikely to spread this way, but it's never been proven without a doubt it could not. If these saliva studies were done with everyone having bleeding gums licking an open wound, I bet the results would be dramatically different. And how can someone know if another has bleeding gums or not? It's not like we inspect mouths before we kiss.
It's easy for anyone write off cases where saliva could have been the medium when it is so unlikely, just by saying "oh this guy is unreliable", "he was with someone else a few months before so who says that wasn't the cause?", etc. But the fact remains, it has never been proven HIV cannot be spread through saliva, just that it isn't very likely. And I've been unable to prove to myself yet that it wasn't the medium in my case.
Do you know that right now hiv+ people are still being convicted and sentenced to 20+ years prison terms for simply spitting at a police officer? Now why would this be so if it was already proven IMPOSSIBLE to get infected this way? Now I highly disagree with those verdicts of course, but it just proves what I am saying and how its unfair for others to be arguing with me over it.
So why can't I post my opinions and give the opposing viewpoint? Do we want a forum that is censored by the moderators leaving only posts that they agree with? Is there anything that I stated above that is wrong? People need to hear both sides to form their own conclusions, no matter how much we all want one side to be right.
-
Exactly.
-
I see no reason I can't post here and warn others of my experiences and opinions based on how I think I got infected. That's what this forum is for, to share information and let everyone form their own conclusions.
Now that that is out of the way, I never said I was without a doubt infected by saliva. Why people are arguing with me saying I said that, I have no idea. I didn't mean to rattle anyone's cage. I just wanted to let people know my opinion of how I think I got infected. I just can't rule it out yet, as much as I want to. Also, I said it was saliva on an open wound, not kissing.. two very different things. Who says blood wasn't in the saliva?
And for the record, any doctor would say it is theoretically possible someone could get infected by placing body fluids from an HIV infected individual on the open wound of another, no matter what studies say. Just think, if you were neg, would you allow yourself to be a test subject to disprove this theory? I think not. HIV is in saliva and yes, proteins and enzyme may make it very unlikely to spread this way, but it's never been proven without a doubt it could not. If these saliva studies were done with everyone having bleeding gums licking an open wound, I bet the results would be dramatically different. And how can someone know if another has bleeding gums or not? It's not like we inspect mouths before we kiss.
It's easy for anyone write off cases where saliva could have been the medium when it is so unlikely, just by saying "oh this guy is unreliable", "he was with someone else a few months before so who says that wasn't the cause?", etc. But the fact remains, it has never been proven HIV cannot be spread through saliva, just that it isn't very likely. And I've been unable to prove to myself yet that it wasn't the medium in my case.
Do you know that right now hiv+ people are still being convicted and sentenced to 20+ years prison terms for simply spitting at a police officer? Now why would this be so if it was already proven IMPOSSIBLE to get infected this way? Now I highly disagree with those verdicts of course, but it just proves what I am saying and how its unfair for others to be arguing with me over it.
So why can't I post my opinions and give the opposing viewpoint? Do we want a forum that is censored by the moderators leaving only posts that they agree with? Is there anything that I stated above that is wrong? People need to hear both sides to form their own conclusions, no matter how much we all want one side to be right.
You are not permitted to post in AMI because it's contrary to the rules for this forum as outlined in the Welcome Thread (http://forums.poz.com/index.php?topic=220.0).
AMI is not a forum for debate or discusssion of these issues. If you would like to have a discussion about your erroneous views concerning HIV transmission and saliva please take it to the Living With HIV forum.
Do not post in AMI again.
MtD
-
I not only concur with Matty, but extend his invitation to debate HIV science in the appropriate forums.
-
Well, I am very confused now and starting to stress more.
My two concerns and issues were Saliva ( I guess with or without blood) entering the vagina or open cuts. And oral with potentially slightly bleeding gums. I am a female who was with a male.
-
Possible,
Please disregard Phoenius' ill-considered and inaccurate posts. He should not be posting in your thread at all. I have referred his posts to the Moderators for review.
Saliva is not considered infectious. It doesn't matter if it has blood in it or not. You cannot contract HIV from a man performing oral sex on you or generally getting saliva inside your vagina.
MtD
-
Phoenius, I'll tell you exactly why you can't post your comments in this section. It is a rule of the site that only those who have been authorized to respond in this particular Forum are allowed to do so.
As I told you previously you are not allowed to respond in here. You don't have to like that rule but you do have to follow it.
If you do it again you are risking a Time Out or being banned from the site permanently.
Consider yourself warned.
-
Possible, I regret that you have been confused by Phoenius' incorrect and unsubstantiated remarks.
Matty has given you correct information. Saliva is absolutely not infectious. Nothing you did put you at risk for HIV transmission and there is no need for testing.
Cheers.
-
Even if there was blood in his mouth when he spite on his hand to use it as a lube on the condom going in me? I know that not likely anyways but now the thought is in my head. Does HIV "die" when exposed to air? Even in the form or blood? Any there is no need to test from my oral incident? Hopefully this will be my last post. Thanks for all your support.
-
HIV is a fragile virus. In relation to sexual activities, it requires the kind of receptive setting which happen during unprotected vaginal and anal intercourse.
Fears and doubts are not facts. There is nothing in HIV-science to support your concerns. There is no need for testing unless you finally can't let go of your worrying. You can waste resources if you want to and get tested to collect the inevitable negative result. Testing is unnecessary but that decision is up to you.
-
In regards to oral, if there any difference between pre ejaculation and ejaculation? Does one pose more of a risk than the other? Example, no ejaculation in mouth?
-
As regards oral, no laboratory experimentation where HIv infected fluid is swabbed into a simian mouth to facilitate HIV infection has ever been duplicated in first tier, peer-reviewed epidemiological studies (that do not rely on inaccurate patient report).
No incident HIV infections among MSM who practice exclusively oral sex.
Int Conf AIDS 2004 Jul 11-16; 15:(abstract no. WePpC2072)??Balls JE, Evans JL, Dilley J, Osmond D, Shiboski S, Shiboski C, Klausner J, McFarland W, Greenspan D, Page-Shafer K?University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
Oral transmission of HIV, reality or fiction? An update
J Campo1, MA Perea1, J del Romero2, J Cano1, V Hernando2, A Bascones1
Oral Diseases (2006) 12, 219–228
AIDS: Volume 16(17) 22 November 2002 pp 2350-2352
Risk of HIV infection attributable to oral sex among men who have sex with men and in the population of men who have sex with men
Page-Shafer, Kimberlya,b; Shiboski, Caroline Hb; Osmond, Dennis Hc; Dilley, Jamesd; McFarland, Willie; Shiboski, Steve Cc; Klausner, Jeffrey De; Balls, Joycea; Greenspan, Deborahb; Greenspan
Page-Shafer K, Veugelers PJ, Moss AR, Strathdee S, Kaldor JM, van Griensven GJ. Sexual risk behavior and risk factors for HIV-1 seroconversion in homosexual men participating in the Tricontinental Seroconverter Study, 1982-1994 [published erratum appears in Am J Epidemiol 1997 15 Dec; 146(12):1076]. Am J Epidemiol 1997, 146:531-542.
Studies which show the fallacy of relying on anecdotal evidence as opposed to carefully controlled study insofar as HIV transmission risk is concerned:
Jenicek M. "Clinical Case Reporting" in Evidence-Based Medicine. Oxford: Butterworth–Heinemann; 1999:117
Saltzman SP, Stoddard AM, McCusker J, Moon MW, Mayer KH. Reliability of self-reported sexual behavior risk factors for HIV infection in homosexual men. Public Health Rep. 1987 102(6):692–697.Nov–Dec;
Catania JA, Gibson DR, Chitwood DD, Coates TJ. Methodological problems in AIDS behavioral research: influences on measurement error and participation bias in studies of sexual behavior. Psychol Bull. 1990 Nov;108(3):339–362.
-
In general , is pre ejaculation less of a risk than actual ejaculation?
-
In general , is pre ejaculation less of a risk than actual ejaculation?
Concentrations of HIV are higher in ejaculate than in pre-ejaculate.
MtD
-
In anal sex, not necessarily, as pre-ejaculate can contain high amounts of viral particles even when the ejaculate does not*.
But in regards to oral sex, you are asking for a quantification of an event that has, at best, the very shadiest of documentation. I could not imagine a competent scientist being able to give you an answer to that question, as the very POSSIBILITY of infection via oral sex has yet to be determined to a scientific certainty.
No one would ever say that anything is impossible. But were you to be infected via this route of transmission, you would certainly be worth intensive case study, as you would be a rare specimen indeed, which just might hold the key to HIV prevention and a cure in your unusual framework.
In short, you simply do not get HIV through saliva. Period.
HIv does not remain active in saliva. Nor does HIV remain infectious when exposed to the air, to a latex condom, to a hand. It is transmitted when a viable particle meets a receptive blood or dendritic cell. These cells are concentrated in very few areas of the body, mainly the vagina, head of the penis and urethra, and interior of the anus.
You could not have gotten HIV through the experience you have shared, no matter what further details you give. Or rather, I should say, if you DID, then your experience does not mirror HIV's behaviour in primate or humanoid populations on this planet at this time.
Which is as close to a certainty as you are going to get, from anyone grounded in real science.
*this shedding occurs in a very small number of persons, as per the following source material. These studies also convey a marked difference between semen in HIv infected individuals in later stage HIV progression, or who have gone without medical intervention, and those who are on antiretrovirals.
Influencing HIV infectivity: the effect of antiviral treatment on the shedding of cell-free and cell-associated HIV in semen.
Int Conf AIDS 1998 Jun 28-Jul 3; 12:420 (abstract no. 23392)
Detection and biologic characterization of infectious HIV-1 in semen of seropositive men.
AIDS. 1994 Sep;8(9):1325-9. Unique Identifier : AIDSLINE MED/95101171
Vernazza PL; Eron JJ; Cohen MS; van der Horst CM; Troiani L; Fiscus SA; Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel; Hill.
-
The saliva issue is clear! I"m no longer concerned over the saliva ( although now worried about blood in it) but my oral incident is no call for concern either even though after i performed oral I brushed my teeth and I was bleeding a little ( just from brushing)? Second question(just curious) When HIV blood is exposed to air it can no longer be infectious? After semen is exposed to air can it be infectious?
-
No one has been identified as infected with HIV due to contact with an environmental surface. Additionally, HIV is unable to reproduce outside its living host (unlike many bacteria or fungi, which may do so under suitable conditions), except under laboratory conditions, therefore, it does not spread or maintain infectiousness outside its host.
http://www.aegis.com/news/pr/1998/pr980105.html (http://www.aegis.com/news/pr/1998/pr980105.html)
-
Should I get tested if for maybe 10seconds prior to sex and putting the condom on he was rubbing the outside and area around of my vagina with his penis?
-
Rubbing (frottage) is not a risk. Unprotected penetrative intercourse, both anal and vaginal, are the risks. It's really pretty simple.
-
Ok thanks. I was just worried because it seems like a risk because he would have some semen on his penis and it is technically touching my vagina opening just not "penetrative"
Thanks everyone for your support.
-
You're welcome.
And now you need to let go of this and get on with your life.
-
I'm sorry. I am need a little more reassurance. Two weeks after the night I was writing about I got really sick. It seems different then when I normally get sick. My back muscles were really sore ( for no reason) and I had an unusual sore throat. It was really low in my throat ( near thyroid gland). It lasted for what seemed like forever about a week and a half and then as soon as the pain went away it was replaced by pain under my chin because every gland in this area was swollen and sensitive. It even hurt to turn my head and swallow. This lasted for 4 days but didn't happen till my throat felt better. So now I am really scared. I am finally back to normal but I have never had that type of pain from so many glands being swollen and never felt sick for suck a long time...... If anyone wouldn't mind reviewing my incident, I would really appreciate it.
Thanks
-
Anyone who continues to post excessively, questioning a conclusive negative result or no-risk situation, will be subject to a four week Time Out (a temporary ban from the Forums). If you continue to post excessively after one Time Out, you may be given a second Time Out which will last eight weeks. There is no third Time Out - it is a permanent ban. The purpose of a Time Out is to encourage you to seek the face-to-face help we cannot provide on this forum.
-
There's nothing more to add. Whether you choose to accept it or not you did not have a risk. You have no scientifically-based reason to be concerned about HIV.
Your symptoms are not HIV-specific and are something you should discuss with your doctor. If you come back here again about the same concern you are going to get a 28 day Time Out. It's not our job to accompany you everytime you have another burst of anxiety.
We've given you the real deal. You didn't have a risk. Period.
Cut out the drama and get on with your life. Consider yourself warned.
-
Can you get HIV from a male rubbing the tip of his penis all around the female genitals?
Thanks
-
Please keep all your thoughts questions and comments in your original thread. (http://forums.poz.com/index.php?topic=32273.0) This helps us follow your story and give you the most accurate advice.
If you cannot find your original thread, please click the red link I have posted above. Alternatively you can use the "Show own posts" link which appears in the uppermost left hand column on any forum page.
Your questions will not be answered unless you return to your original thread
Please take the time to read our Welcome Thread (http://forums.poz.com/index.php?topic=220.0) and familiarise yourself with the posting guidelines.
MtD
-
I've merged your threads here. Please follow our rule and keep all of your entries in this same thread.
No, you won't get HIV from rubbing your penis around the female genitals.
As you have been told before, the only confirmed risks for the transmission sexually of HIV are unprotected vaginal and anal intercourse. Everything else is only theoretically risky.
Other STDs are much easier to acquire so if you are sexually active we do recommend that having a full STD panel done at least once a year is a good idea.
-
I am a very paranoid person and I'm sure my questions are odd, but wanted to know if someone who is HIV Positive could test HIV negative on rapid HIV test. I am from Canada (Ontario) where me and a partner went together to get the finger prick HIV tests done. It was administered at a health Unit. I was concerned because this person is/was always going to the doctors and getting elaborate testing of some sort done. If someone is on medication for HIV would they test negative on finger tip rapid blood test? If they had just received certain vaccinations would they test negative even though positive? Would is be possible in any way ? Like is there anything someone can take who is HIV positive to made them test HIV negative?
Second question,
I read the forum on how HIV was transmitted but I was at a presentation being given from a local health unit to teenagers where they told them that condoms are not even a "sure thing" even if they don't break. That through the act of sex the sweat bring absorbed in the groin areas is also a risk of HIV/All STD's? That condoms are not as effective and safe as people think?
Thanks guys and gals for taking the time to help people like me out.
-
You have been asked before this to follow our rule and keep all of your entries in this same thread. I've merged your current question with the previous thread. This is the only thread you should be using.
If someone who is positive is on medications, they will still test positive. None of the other concerns you are voicing would affect the accuracy of an HIV test. If someone is positive they are always going to test positive even if their viral load is "undetectable."
Sweat is not a risk for HIV transmission. A condom properly worn will provide very effective protection against HIV transmission. In this world nothing is 100% safe sexually other than using your own hand on yourself.
You need to know we are not going to go on another round of what ifs with you. You have not had a risk for HIV, there is no need for testing. By now you ought to be well aware that the only risks for the sexual transmission of HIV are unprotected vaginal and anal intercourse. If you continue to return here with more what ifs you are going to find yourself getting a Time Out. Consider yourself warned.
-
Sorry about the not posting correctly, I thought if it was a new topic then to start a new topic.
Is there anything that would/could affect the accuracy of an HIV test in terms of someone who is positive, testing negative.
I am trying to protect myself, thats all. I'm not looking to go for another round of what if's , I just want to know if someone who is positive could do/take something to produce a negative test result.
Thanks
-
No.
-
A few weeks ago, I noticed I had a couple sores down there. I went to a health clinic to get it looked at and swabbed. Because the results take so long to come back (10days) I searched online to see if rapid herpes tests were available. I found a place that told them online. The place was located in Toronto, Ontario so I called to see if I could purchase one from there building location instead of having it mailed. I also asked if I would be able to take the test there so that I could have assistance with the process to make sure I did it correct. They said they typically didn't do that, but If I was concerned they would. I went in. The person gave me a needle and and told me to prick my sores with it and then swab the area. I wanted to repeat the test to make sure everything was good and he gave me a different looking needle to use, one that was already out instead of the one that you press a button which shoots out a needle. I was kinda creeped out but used the needle anyway. I am worried that it wasn't clean, or that it had something on it or something. This place seemed to be like a lab type weird place. I was worried the place tested their products there (they also had rapid saliva tests for HIV) and I am now worried that I pricked myself multiple times on sores down there with a dirty or infected needle.......
-
Please keep all your thoughts questions and comments in your original thread. (http://forums.poz.com/index.php?topic=32273.0) This helps us follow your story and give you the most accurate advice.
If you cannot find your original thread, please click the red link I have posted above. Alternatively you can use the "Show own posts" link which appears in the uppermost left hand column on any forum page.
Your questions will not be answered unless you return to your original thread
Please take the time to read our Welcome Thread (http://forums.poz.com/index.php?topic=220.0) and familiarise yourself with the posting guidelines.
MtD
Once again I have merged your threads and I am going to remind you again that you need to follow our rule and keep all of our entries in this same thread.
As for your latest concern it is just another example of your marked tendency to create drama about HIV when it is completely unnecessary to do so. HIV is not passed in the manner about which you are worried. You have no basis in fact to think that HIV infected needle(s) was being passed along to you.
As for herpes, you should be discussing that issue with your doctor. We deal only with HIV here.
And once again yours is not an HIV situation. If you attempt to pursue this further here you are going to get a Time Out from the site.
-
I am losing my mind. I know i struggle with these type of issues and I'm sorry. I recently was diagnosed with herpes. It came out a few days after i was with my partner where we did not use condoms and had sex multiple times over the weekend. Prior to this, my partner was out of town on at a bachelor party where he says for sure nothing happened, clearly i have trust issues now. He knows i worry lots about this stuff, and he did go get an HIV test down after I asked him to once i found out about the herpes. he tested negative. After about 3 days of being off the herpes medication, i started getting intense pain in one side of my head, and a CT scan revealed that I have encephalitis. My understanding is that this is a very RARE condition, generally found in infants and elderly and people with compromised immune systems. Herpes is a cause of it, but not normally unless there is something more...... Now i am horrified that i got HIV the same weekend as herpes.....
I tested 24 days after the last time i was with my partner, and it was negative. I just am so scared now.. I know i put myself at risk...and i will continue to test... would getting herpes make my body take longer to develop/test positive to hiv? Does negative at 24 days after exposure give any comfort.... so stressed....
-
to add to my last post, I have also had severe diarrhea for 2 days now and nausea for 4 days now. No fever..37.5 is the highest my temperature has been. It has now been 27 days since my incident.
-
Possible,
Herpes will not have any effect on your hiv testing.
Any negative result is a good one, but yours is not conclusive. You should test again at six weeks past your last incident of unprotected intercourse.
The vast majority of people who have actually been infected will seroconvert and test positive by six weeks, with the average time to seroconversion being only 22 days. A six week negative must be confirmed at the three month point, but is highly unlikely to change.
If you have trust issues with your partner, perhaps you should be insisting on condoms every time you have intercourse.
Ann
-
Thanks Ann,
Are my symptoms pretty certain that I have it? encephalitis? vomiting, steady nausea, etc?
-
An
other question,
" the average time to seroconversion being only 22" does this mean they would test positive at this time too? I am going to get tested no matter what, I'm just wondering?
-
Yes, you could test positive at 22 days. However, assuming you test negative for a conclusive negative result you need to test at 3 months after the most recent unprotected intercourse.
There is nothing HIV specific about the symptoms you are reporting.
Good luck with you test(s).
-
Today I tested and it's been 31 days since my incident. I did the rapid antigen test in Ontario, Canada. The nurse that did it, said there would be no way that this test would detect after 4.5 weeks. She also performed the entire test in front of me and after she poured the solution on the window screen thingy, she didn't even wait 5seconds prior to tossing it in the deposable box saying it was negative. Based on pervious tests and my understandings, I thought she would let it sit for a few seconds, or a minute, and make sure a partial second dot didn't appear or a faint dot. She didn't even look close at it, saw one dot literally within 2seconds and tossed it. I was very upset, because I drove an hour to get the test. I honestly felt she provided me with false information. She said she didn't want to even do the test because she said the test is so sensitive that it could test positive because of my herpes and not because of hiv. I'm now more upset than I was...... any opinions? Would the rapid test work within 3 seconds? I'm not exaggerating at all, she poured the solution on, the one blue dot appeared and she said, one dot, it's negative and tossed it....
-
Possible,
You are over-testing. Stop it. As I told you before, the earliest you should test is at six weeks.
If you continue to ignore our advice and come back with more questions and fretting because you ignored that advice, I'm going to give you a time out. I have a feeling the nurse is just as frustrated with you as we are.
I cannot possibly comment on the procedures the nurse used because 1. I wasn't there 2. I don't know which test was used so I do not know that test's procedure and 3. in your agitated state, I'm not sure I can trust your judgement on how much time actually elapsed.
Stop testing ever few days and wait for your six week test. If that is also negative - and I suspect it will be - then you are highly unlikely to go on to test positive when you confirm at three months.
Ann
-
I realize i'm a disaster, i'm sorry.
I am going out of town for just over a few weeks and I need to test before I leave town so that i can try and relax on my trip. At that point, I will be three days short of the 6 week mark...does anyone know how accurate the test is at that point? Plus, I just got herpes so would this change the accuracy of a 6 week test anyways? I know it would't change the accuracy of a 12 week test, just wondering about the 6. This will be my last questions. Thank you so much, you all really make a difference and have helped me immensely.
-
Possible,
We've already told you that having a new herpes infection would not make any difference to your test results.
A nearly six week negative would not be likely to change when you confirm at the three month point.
Ann
-
Would dye from an MRI influence test results if done right after?
The fact that I have herpes and encephalitis is scaring me beyond anything... I feel like their is no way I don't have HIV.
I'm so scared.
-
No, they would not skewer result. Fortunately fears and doubts aren't facts. With your previous negative result we expect you will continue to test negative.
-
I was told the rapid test is 95% at 5 weeks, is this true? What would be the reason someone would take longer than the 6 week mark to test positive? If someone still had symptoms at 5 weeks, would it indicate they wouldn't test positive yet due to the body not having control over the virus yet?
As always, thank you for helping me through this difficult time.
-
Possible,
The people who might take a little longer to seroconvert and test positive are those who are on chemotherapy for cancer, on anti-rejection drugs following organ transplant, or people who have been injecting street drugs, every day, for years.
Although most people will test positive by six weeks, the window period remains at three months to catch the relatively rare person who takes slightly longer than six weeks. I fully expect the window period to become six weeks sometime in the next few years.
It already IS six weeks in some places like Massachusetts where only fourth generation duo tests are permitted to be used. However, even the older generation tests will normally detect antibodies by six weeks. As far as I'm aware, generations one and two are no longer manufactured and are therefore no longer in use.
The illness that some people experience is not a reaction to the virus itself. It's a reaction to the process the body goes through while producing antibodies. People will normally test positive within a few - say around four or five - days of becoming ill, if the illness is indeed seroconversion illness.
We really, really, REALLY do not expect your nearly six week test result to change when you confirm at three months. So chill out.
Ann
-
Today I tested negative. I was 3 days shy of the six week mark for my unprotected sex and I was only at 5 weeks since I poked myself with the needles. The guy administering the tests said that at the 5 week mark, they would most likely (95%) see some type of a reaction on the rapid blood test. I've been feeling better for just over a week and my temperature is back to what it normally is and has been for about 6 days now.Hopefully if I was sick from being infected, it would have shown up. I"m really hoping I can relax on my trip and forget about it for now. Thanks to everyone for the continuos support.
-
Given your inclination to worry, you should re-test at 13 weeks for the inevitable negative result. And yes, I do expect you to continue to test negative.
Have a good trip.
-
I can't sleep, and I am super upset again....
A few days into my trip, my glands behind my ears started to really hurt, and were big. After a day or so I got a really sore throat. The glands by my ears feel better but I also have a sore lump in my neck but at the back. I didn't even know there were glands there, but it feels just like a sore sensitive round gland. Its not at the front, under my cheek bone, but close to the back of my neck (looking at me from behind). I'm all freaked again because my test was only 5 weeks from the potential dirty needles.... Other than the sore throat and weird mild mild pain from the glands hurting, I feel fine. I am just shocked by the odd round gland in my neck which I have never had before. Normally when my glands are sore, its the ones around my cheek line.... Needless to say, i'm horrified again.
-
A better way to describe the swollen gland is that it is located close to the base of my skull.
-
Possible,
What you're describing sounds more like a knotted muscle than a gland. Stress, tension and worry can do that to you - I often get painful lumps like that myself when I'm uptight about something or sometimes when I've slept with my head in an awkward position. Given your freaked out state, it wouldn't surprise me in the least that this is what you're dealing with.
Knock it off about "dirty" needles. No testing center is going to be re-using needles. You don't need to test over this - it's nothing more than your imagination running wild.
The only thing you need to test over is the unprotected intercourse. You tested negative for that at nearly six weeks and I do not expect that result to change when you confirm at three months.
We're not here to hold your hand every time you feel a new twinge, headache, sore throat or bump. You WILL end up with that Time Out I've already warned you about if you don't refrain from this constant posting about symptoms.
Ann
-
I really am so sorry that I struggle so much with this, and I am seeing someone to help me figure out my mental madness...
I need to clarify that even if someone contacted multiple std's within a weekend.... and you're body was exposed to all of them at the same time, HIV would still most likely show up by 6 week mark, even with it trying to handle other infections? No matter what I am getting tested at the end of the window period but I would like to know if this could be a plausible situation when someone may take longer than the 6 weeks to test pos...
Thanks.
-
You continue to make this way more complicated than it needs to be. Even if you had acquired other STDs, they would not affect HIV transmission showing up within 4-6 weeks after an exposure as happens with the overwhelming majority.
-
And no medial drugs or pain killers or prescriptions/treatment would interfere with the rapid tests? Is it possible that someone wouldn't react to the rapid test and require a western blot test in order to determine their status. I've only used rapid tests. I am trying so hard to hold it together. My throat has been killing me for 2.5 weeks now, and I can't stop thinking it's connected....
-
In Ontario, we are using the third generation tests.
-
See your doctor about your sore throat. It has nothing to do with HIV.
At 13 weeks all generations of tests will be reliable.
No, any medications you maybe taking would not skewer the accuracy of your HIV test.
You are on the verge of getting a Time Out here. Your worrying is so far over the line and unnecessary. We continue to expect a negative for you at 13 weeks.
-
k i'll calm it down....
a six week test on a third generation test still 95% chance it would show up?
Thanks so much to everyone. I'm clearly nuts, and I am seeking psychological help and everyone on here has saved me....
You have no idea.
-
Thanks Ann,
Are my symptoms pretty certain that I have it? encephalitis? vomiting, steady nausea, etc?
Those absolutely are not in anyway HIV specifc symptoms.
-
k i'll calm it down....
a six week test on a third generation test still 95% chance it would show up?
Thanks so much to everyone. I'm clearly nuts, and I am seeking psychological help and everyone on here has saved me....
You have no idea.
It would be very unlikely for you to test positive after receiving a 3rd generation test negative at 6 weeks.
You do need to get a grip. We are not going to indulge you indefinitely in these anxious back and forths. I certainly expect you to test negative again at 13 weeks.
Corrected. Sorry for that error.
-
When I did the blood test for herpes, it came back negative, even though the doc said I most likely would test positive because the symptoms were present.
When I went to a doctor today about my sore throat pain, I didn't mention anything to do with HIV and she said it shouldn't be lasting this long if it is viral and told me to try allergy medication and if still present in a week to come back and will investigate further. I asked, what does that mean...she casually replied, saying "then we would do blood work, checking for mono, hiv. I didn't say anything, but it's causing me a great deal of stress, given that I tested neg for herpes when i should have tested positive. So in my crazy mind, I'm thinking it's happening all over again...and that I will be one of the rare ones to test pos after 6 weeks. I just feel like herpes hit my body hard, and I was sick with that, and now that my body dealt with that, I'm going through it all over again with hiv.....
I'm trying to explain my logic, even though i know it seems stupid. Please don't band me. I don't have anyone to talk to about this.
-
I also get confused with the fact that when people take PEP they take longer to test positive. I took 10 days of herpes medication because it was my first outbreak and worry its delaying my positive results past the 6 week mark.
-
Possible,
Herpes medication (acyclovir) is not PEP and will have no effect on hiv or your test results.
I'm giving you that time out you have been repeatedly warned about. Do not attempt to create a new account to get around your time out because if you do, you will be permanently banned.
Ann
-
It has been 12 weeks, and I tested HIV negative today!! I found out I did have/have mono. Having mono won't influence my HIV test results, correct?
Thanks to everyone for all the support, it has been a challenging journey for me.
-
That's happy news about your negative result.
And no, having mono would not affect the accuracy of your test result.
Get on with your life.
-
I am learning about herpes because it seems to be really influencing my health since I got it. I constantly have symptoms throughout my entire body ( butt,legs,groin,glands) I read that people with a compromised immune systems may experience full body effects from herpes. I'm so scared that I contracted both HIV and herpes at the same time, but my body is only trying to handle the herpes which it isn't able to do perhaps because of hiv. Basically, I'm worried that my three month 13 week test result isn't accurate and that because of my circumstances I should re test at 6months?
thanks
-
■Anyone who continues to post excessively, questioning a conclusive negative result or no-risk situation, will be subject to a four week Time Out (a temporary ban from the Forums). If you continue to post excessively after one Time Out, you may be given a second Time Out which will last eight weeks. There is no third Time Out - it is a permanent ban. The purpose of a Time Out is to encourage you to seek the face-to-face help we cannot provide on this forum.
-
Discuss your herpes issues with your doctor. They have nothing to do with HIV. You are HIV negative. Period. End of that story.
We are not going to indulge you in another round of exchanges here about HIV. I am giving you a 56 day Time Out. HIV is not your problem. Stop the drama and get on with your life. If you can't do that then get some professional help about your HIV issues. We can't help you with that in this setting. Don't make the mistake of trying to get around the ban by creating a new name. We will spot that right off and it will get you banned permanently from this site.