POZ Community Forums
HIV Prevention and Testing => Do I Have HIV? => Topic started by: GTB on March 07, 2007, 03:45:04 pm
-
Hello there,
Firstly, let me start off by saying i am extreemly happy that i have found such a great website full of wonderful people. I am a hetrosexual male and have always practiced safe sex. A few months ago i had an incident with a hetrosexual female whiched involved recieving oral and fignering. I am fully aware that recieving oral is a theoretical risk only and i am not worried about this. However, i am worried about the fingering epeisode as the girl was on her period and i was not aware at the time because the lights were off. The fingering went on for a good 10 minutes and was very deep. When we turned the lights on there was blood all over the bed and my fingures were covered in it. I have read that fingering is no risk but would the precence of blood slightly increase the risk especially if the skin around my fingernails was bleeding or very torn down as i constantly bite the skin around the nails. My doctor has told me that this is not how hiv is transmitted. He told me that i do not need to test unless it gave me the peice of mind. Your views would be grately appreciated.
cheers,
-
Your doctor gave you the real deal. Even IF the woman you were with is HIV+, (IF!), the risk from fingering even when blood is involved is strictly theoretical. There's never been a case of transmission in this manner and it's safe to say you aren't going to make history by becoming the first to be infected this way.
HIV is a fragile virus and not easily transmitted. Please read the Transmission lesson on this site. There's a link to it in the Welcome thread which opens this section. You'll get all the basics there that you need to know.
There's no cause for testing nor for further concern this time.
Cheers,
-
Thank you for your reply Andy.
I have read the transmission lesson on a number of occasions.
My doctor has five patients who are HIV+ and he has told me pretty much the same as you about how HIV is transmitted. But he also said that even tho vaginal sex is a clear way of transmission anal sex is what is usually necessary to transmit the virus. He added that HIV requires some kind of "friction" as he put it to transmit which is why anal sex is usually the case. However, saying this he told me that he would advise anyone of his patients to take an HIV test if they have had vaginal or anal sex. In all his years he has never seen a man contract HIV off a women through vaginal sex. Can you comment on this?
Cheers,
-
sorry i must ad..i do realise that neither vaginal or anal sex applies to me from this senario it would just seem if this is the case that would make transmiting hiv from fingering would be to save an argument impossible?
Cheers,
-
There are literally millions of HIV+ people worldwide who have contracted HIV through vaginal intercourse. Women are particularly vulnerable because their vaginal structure creates a very receptive environment for the virus.
Transmission to men is considerably more difficult since it has to be through the urethra or in the case of those who are uncircumcised through the inner part of the foreskin. While the risk for transmission vaginally for men is significantly less likely, it is by no means rare. In more cases than I would like to count guys have become infected vaginally because they mistakenly thought that as the insertive partner they were not at risk. WRONG!
Low risk is not the same as no risk.
-
Thank you for your reply.
So what did my doctor mean with the whole friction thing? He told me he mainly sees younger people contracting hiv because they are less aware and don't think to use protection and they also tend to have more vigorous sex.
My last question is what is the scientific reason why HIV is not transmitted through fingering. I am aware that the cells needed to infect are found in the penis and the vagina. But people who prick themselves with needles in the healthcare setting often become infected everyday! Why is it possible to become infected like this but it is not possible to become infected from getting blood on a cut in a warm environment such as the vagina. I appreciate that there has been no documented cases of this happening but that could also be for the simple reason that often people engage in more than one sexual activity. I greatly appreciate your time in helping me get through this difficult time.
Cheers,
-
<< people who prick themselves with needles in the healthcare setting often become infected everyday>>
Less than 100 documented instances of healthcare-related infections in the HISTORY of the pandemic is "everyday?" This, coupled with the estimated 600,000 to 800,000 needlestick injuries per year shows you just how rare this vector for infection is. More to the point, those infected were almost all injected with HIV-positive blood from hollow-bore needles.
You simply do not get HIV from fingering. It's just not going to happen. The science and the epidemiology simply forbid it.
-
Im sorry i just had the idea that it was quite a common thing that happens..
Am i right in saying that only an open cut poses a theortical risk and no open cut means NO RISK? Lets say the skin around my fingernail was bleeding at the time (as it does on a daily basis) does that really pose no risk? I am simply confused about how putting your penis into a vagina poses a high risk and putting your fingure into the vagina while the girl in menastrating is no risk?
Cheers,
-
Also im sorry for double posting but i just have one more thing to ad,
The girl has informed me that she has never had un-protected sex so she cannot have HIV. However, since she was 4 days old she was adopted. she is now in her late teens years. She was adopted because of her father being a drug addict etc. What if the virus was passed to her during birth..would she no about it all these years later?
Cheers,
-
I am not going to keep on posting because i understand that the answer from you will not change. I would just appreciate it if you could answer my questions from the pervious posts. Many thanks for your time.
-
GT, even IF the young woman whom you were fingering is HIV+, you still would not have been at risk from that activity.
It is also extremely unlikely that she wouldn't have been given an HIV test before being adopted.
But that is less important at this point than the fact that the fingering incident simply would not have put you at risk. Period.
Give it up and get on with your life.
Really.
-
Thank you Andy, you have really helped me a lot i appreciate it. Take care.
-
Hello everyone,
I find it very hard to believe that the adoption laws especcialy in the uk don't include HIV testing as standard. This could mean that a person could live for 10 or 15 years and not even be aware that they are HIV+. Does anyone no anything else about this that i may be missing?
Cheers,
-
It is also extremely unlikely that she wouldn't have been given an HIV test before being adopted.
GTB,
If you read what Andy wrote carefully, you'll see that he said she probably WAS tested. I would imagine that she may have been, but only if her mother was hiv positive. Just because the father was a drug user doesn't mean he was positive nor does it mean the mother was positive. The mother would have been tested as part of her routine antenatal care.
At the end of the day, none of this matters where you are concerned because whether or not your friend is hiv positive, you had no risk. Neither fingering nor getting a blowjob are risks for hiv infection.
Ann
-
Thank you for your reply.
Ann, may i ask why fingering is not a risk. What is actually stoping vaginal fluids or blood from entering your body through a tiny cut or sore on the fingure? Could it be to do with blood pressure? I have recieved far too many blow jobs to be worried about this specific one..i understand you will not be infected by getting a blow job! Its just the fact that there was so much blood present that it really scared me. Just to think that my fingures were deeply inside her vagina for quite a long while with blood constantly being pressed against little sores cand cuts around my fingure nails. I am just really having trouble understanding that this was not a risk.
If you could explain to me the scientific reason why fingering with blood is not risky that would be much appreicated.
Cheers,
-
I would be very grateful for an answer. I have read the welcome threat and understand how HIV is transmitted through vaginal and anal sex. But why does that mean it cannot happen through fingering?
cheers,
-
GTB,
The following is an answer Jonathan (jkinalt2) gave ages ago to the same question:
HIV is not alive. It cannot reproduce on it's own. It requires a very specific type of white blood cell to infect with it's genetic material and essentially turn into an HIV producing factory. These receptive cells are commonly found in the urethra, in the dendritic cells under an uncircumcised foreskin, in the anus, and in the vagina. To a far lessor degree, there are some in the tonsil area as well.
So we have established that even if infectious fluids got into a cut in your finger, they would have to travel through your bloodstream and encounter one of these receptive cells. Not as likely event, at all. To the point where forcing it to happen in a lab using monkeys/primates and SHIV is largely unsuccessful. In a petri dish? Perhaps. In a bipedal organism? Difficult, if not impossible to achieve.
Now, about those infectious fluids. You realize that HIV mutates constantly, correct? Part of it's difficulty as regards a cure or vaccine is this constant mutation. Not the sort of mutation that makes a blood-borne pathogen airborne, but one which, in the long run, helps it to survive. HIV wears down an immune system by stimulating an immune response once the host is infected. And the host then produces antibodies, which destroy the viral particles and infected cells that are recognized.
Almost all the HIV is gone from the blood. However, reservoirs in the brain, organs, and lymphatic system are still there, and they mutate just enough so that the body must re-recognize them and mount another immune defense. This goes on for years and years in most cases, until the ability of the body to mount further defenses is compromised to the point where the immune system basically collapses. During this time, the host is left more and more defenseless against common pathogens, until finally it succumbs, either to an external pathogen or an internal function that an intact immune system would otherwise regulate.
You did ask for the long version.
Knowing this, and keeping in mind that the virus constantly mutates, it is not a particularly efficient virus. Most of the mutations are worthless, lacking one protein or another which makes it basically inactive, unviable. It is Darwinism at a microscopic scale, and greatly advanced.
See, the perfect HIV, the "goal," if you will, of HIV is to infect a host and reproduce and spread without killing the host. Not due to any altruism on it's part, but a dead host can't infect others. This is why outbreaks of Ebola and Marberg viruses are almost always brief and contained. it would take much engineering to reproduce a species-killer like "The Stand." It would involve a virus behaving in a totally different fashion than any other.
So the odds of an active, VIABLE viral particle finding it's way INTO your bloodstream, finding a receptive white blood cell (dendritic and T cells) and then successfully injecting it with it's genetic material - through a cut in the FINGER which almost instantly seals itself from external danger, and which bombards the area with elements specifically designed to protect and heal the skin - is purely in the realm of the theoretical. Why is there so little research? because it can't be forced to happen with any regularity in a lab, in a primate, in a monkey.
It has never been documented to happen. In the real world, the one we live in, it does not happen. It is hell on wheels to even make something like that occur in a carefully monitored laboratory. Even a petri dish is no friend to HIV.
Why do some doctors and scientists still caution? Because people mired in academia are rarely in touch with the actual, quantifiable world. The notion of "theoretical risk" and 'actual risk" are merged into a single hysterical message. There is a theoretical risk that a planet-destroying asteroid will smash the earth. There is a theoretical risk that our sun will explode. I think you get my intent here.
Let me recap:
Vaginal secretions: extremely unlikely to infect even if exposed to dendritic cells. Thus, cunnilingus is not considered a viable HIV risk.
Fingers: self sealing, and not containing receptive cells which HIV needs in order to infect.
Brothel: in western and industrialized nations, sex workers have a relatively low HIV rate compared to sex workers in Africa and other industrialized nations. However, even an HIV positive female is not going to have enough active viral particles in her vaginal secretions to present a risk to a finger or a tongue.
I hope this made sense. If you wish, I can expound and expand.
Fingering is not a risk for HIV, and PEP/testing is not warranted for such an activity.
That's not me talking, it's the science and the epidemiology talking.
Ann
(with thanks to Jonathan)
-
Thank you Ann and Jonathan for such a detailed answer. You have made me feel so much better, i now feel i can confidently get on with my life without worrying about this incident. Many thanks. This is such an amazing website..especially because of all the rubbish that i have been reading on the net. I feel like this is the only place that i can trust for the truth. Take care everyone you are doing a really amazing thing here!
Cheers,
-
Hello again,
Its funny because this is the only website as far as i can tell on the whole internet that actually tells it how it is. My doctor seems to have exactly the same views as you which is why i trust you guys. I no you do not discuss symptoms on this website but the reason why i was worrying about this fingering with blood incident is because 2 months later i developed a very strange sore throat. Everytime i mention symptoms to my doctor he laughs and just says it was a simple viral infection but how can he be so sure this is what i dont understand. As far as i no a sore throat unless it is strep lasts for a few days right? My sore throat lasted at least 2 weeks and it wasn't strep the doctor said it was just a bit read and swollen. No pain when swallowing or eating or anything like that..just an irritation in my throat. Does this sound like anything to worry about and do people who do experience ARS symptoms have a sore throat like this. During the day my throat was fine but during the night is when it was hurting and especially when i smoked. About a month before then i had a nasty chest infection for a month and i asked him if it could be connected to that and he said its possible. I'm just really freaked out because i have never had a sore throat like that. I look forward to your replies,
Cheers,
-
Hi,
I would really appreicate an answer, also i am experiencing bad indigestion when i drink cold drinks i have never had this before..it feels like a burning sensation and then i burp for a while and then it goess..could this be related to stress? And the sore throat is really freaking me out now! Please someone answer, i dont no what to do..really
Cheers,
-
GTB,
If you cannot let this go, test, collect your negative result and move on. You didn't have a risk for hiv infection and if seeing that negative result is the only way for you to come to terms with that fact, then by all means, test. Just don't let the negative result surprise you.
And yes, stress can cause indigestion. If it worries you, see your doctor.
Ann
-
Ann,
I have spoken to my doctor and in his words " i am an idiot" lol and "go and get your negative result" ..like you said! If its possible i just need to ask a few more questions..Mouth ulcers..can they be due to stress and also putting fingures in my mouth because that is what i have been doin and suprise suprise i have a couple of ulcers.
Cheers,
-
GTB,
All sorts of things can cause mouth ulcers, including stress. If they continue to bother you, show them to your doctor or dentist.
Ann
-
On a survey done on the internet the second most popular symptoms was mouth sores..this really freaks me out. My doctor says mouth sores are a symptoms of late stage of aids and they come up like balls. Why is there so much rubbish on the internet..do people actually gett a thrill out of giving false information to people like myself who are very worried?
Cheers,
-
This just seems like a never ending circle. I am trying so hard to forget this and that receiving oral sex is not a risk and neither is fingering with blood. But in the back of my mind i no that no sexual activity is 100% safe..everything has a risk even if it is theoretical. And that is what i am having trouble getting out of my head. I can admit that i have a problem with anxiety..the first thing i thought when i saw the blood on my hand was HIV. The next day i forgot about it and then 2 months before i even knew about acute hiv i developed a sore throat for weeks and a swollen gland on the back of my head. They were the only symptoms. Then when i discovered what the symptoms were i started getting ulcers, indigestion, skin rashes, headaches, fever..all the symptoms you can imagine. So i can accept that anxiety and stress has a huge part to play in this and i no that it does for many people on this website. Here is my final question and i hope you will answer then i can get my test tomorrow and hopefully get on with my life. If HIV has no specific symptoms then why on every single website do they say: sore throat, mouth sores, swollen glands, fever, muscle aches etc etc are the symptoms of acute hiv..is every website wrong? And then my doctor tells me that there is no such thing and that i wouldn't experience symptoms for at least a year. You see it is the confusion which is why i cannot get my head around this. I am getting fed different information from different people. It would be great to here back from you. Thank you for reading.
-
GTB,
The thing with symptoms is this: Look at that list. There are many, even hundreds, of different illnesses that could cause one or all of those symptoms. Some people experience one of them (pick one, any one...) during the time when their body is producing antibodies to hiv. Some people experience all of them and more. And very importantly, some people experience NO SYMPTOMS at all while their body is producing hiv antibodies. This is why symptoms or even the lack of symptoms mean nothing when it comes to hiv infection. Hiv infection CANNOT be diagnosed by symptoms, it can ONLY be diagnosed by antibody testing.
We refuse to concentrate or even discuss in any detail the symptoms that may or MAY NOT accompany the seroconversion process. If we did, not only would many people who haven't been infected think they were, but more importantly, people who have actually been at risk, (UNLIKE YOURSELF) but haven't had any symptoms, might decide they didn't need to test and possibly go for years before finding out they were actually infected.
Symptoms mean diddly-squat. Risk factors are important and so are test results. But symptoms? No.
Ann
-
Thank you Ann, i knew you coudlnt diagnose HIV by symptoms but i had no idea they were that meaningless.
I am going to test for peace of mind..i will let you no how it goes even tho everyone seems confident it will be negative..either way i will let you no!
I would like to thank yourself and everyone else here you have really helped me A LOT you have no idea. This is such an amazing website and you really do, do an incerdible job here. I will be in touch shortly!
Cheers,
-
i'm in the same boat. same type of incident. neg 6 wk elisa but have every symptom in the ars book. freaking out! how can people be so certain?
-
Shiblee, keep all your posts and concerns in your own thread. Do not post in other's threads.
-
Hello all,
Well i received my result yesterday and it was negative. I felt better until a few hours ago when i discovered that antibodies can take up to 6 months to become detectable. All my happiness has disappeared and i now believe that i must take another test. I took the test 5 months to the day after the incident. I had an appointment with my doctor about an hour ago and he gave me the real deal. He told me i didn't need to test in the first place so that fact that it was negative is no suprise. I asked him for a very honest opinion about the window period and he told me this. In the healthcare industry if someone pricks themselves with a needle they test them at the time, 3 months after, and then at 6 months. Also people who have been significantly exposed to the virus i.e. unprotected anal sex with someone known to be HIV+ then they may test them at 6 months. He said statistically about 95% of the people who have been infected will be positive by 3 months. I don't no if this makes a difference but i also took a p24..My doctor is a very good one and has 5 patients who are HIV+ 1 of which is a close friend of mine and he told me he doesn't no what he would do if this doctor wasn't in his life. So i have no reason to doubt him. He said he would give me another test and gave me the form. I dont no what to do i just feel stuck..any advice?
Cheers,
-
Seek the help of a mental health professional and listen to your Doctor. You didnt need to test in the first place. LISTEN TO HIM.
-
Why do they still test out to 6 months in the healthcare industry?
-
IF you listen to your doctor AND to us it wouldnt matter now would it?
You didnt have a risk.
-
i realise that my situatuion to everyone else seems pathetic that i am still going on about it but in my own mind i just need that confirmation that i am in fact negative..which is why i asked about the 6 month thing.
-
I understand where you are coming from. We see it alot on here. You have been told numerous times you didnt have a risk and didnt need to test, by your Dr. and by us. You also have been told by us that the 3 month mark is conclusive. You tested at 5 months. This is also a conclusive result.
How many more conclusive results over a non-risk factor will it take for you to realize you are negative? If the answer is more than 2- then keep testing till your heart and mind are at ease. It's your dime.
-
The answer to your question is i really dont no. Everytime i try and forget it one of the symptoms pops back into my mind and then it starts all over again. I will probably test again in a month of so and then hopefully i can see this issue i have ending. I do have a question tho not regardging this specific matter. I have read the welcome thread and also have spoke to my doctor about transmission. In the welcome thread it says transmission through vaginal and anal sex from a women to man is through the urethra..this may sound a bit silly but i take it that is the tip of the penis right? Well my doctor said that it also tends to be throught cuts and abrasions that form on the penis especially through anal sex which is why that is the higher risk. Just a bit confused...thanks
-
someone please?
-
You are correct about the urethra.
-
Im sorry is there anyone who can give me a proper answer?
Cheers.
-
Your doctor is incorrect. Anal sex, may cause infection via the urethra.
-
Rod is correct. I was answering this question which is the only one I saw.
this may sound a bit silly but i take it that is the tip of the penis right?
In that regards you were correct it is at the tip.
Either way you are in the clear. You tested negative over a non risk incident. Do try and move on now.
-
Hello all,
I realise you may not be able to answer this question but are you able to comment on "the body"". They seem to provide different information to what you provide here. I have read through a lot of the answers from "Dr Bob" on the forums and it is quite disturbing. I was starting to feel better from what youselves and my doctor have told me until i thought i would have a look on "the body".
My second and final question is. Does HIV effect one gland, i.e. a swollen gland on the back of the head..or if it was to cause swollen glands would it cause the glands on either side to swell?
Cheers,
-
GTB,
You can do one of two things. One, you can stop looking at The Body. Two, you can ask THEM why they give the advice they do. I can't read Dr Bob's mind - and neither would I want to.
Hiv is a virus that affects the immune system of the entire body, not just one gland. Keep your hands off your glands. Touching them all the time to see if they're swollen will actually irritate them, make them swell and keep them swollen. If you're worried about your glands, stop touching them and go show them to a doctor.
Whatever is going on with you has nothing to do with hiv. You have ruled hiv out of the picture, conclusively. You didn't have a risk in the first place, so that negative result is hardly surprising.
You are hiv negative and it's high time you moved on with your life. If you cannot let this go, please ask your doctor for a referral to a mental health care professional. We cannot help you any further.
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). The purpose of a Time Out is to encourage you to seek the face-to-face help we cannot provide on this forum.
Please consider yourself warned.
Ann
-
Thanks for your quick reply Ann.
I will stop posting now i guess it was just a shock when i was starting to realise that i am actually negative and then went onto the body. I am aware that pushing and prodding the glands will irritate them as i found out with my neck glands. However this was a while ago now before i was even aware of ARS so it coudlnt of been to do with touching that..anyway i guess it doesnt matter now!
Just out of interest, can anyone tell me the HIV statistics for hetrosexuals in the UK..i no it is quite low but just wondering if anyone has any figures?
Cheers,
-
GT,
Those kind of stats are essentially meaningless when applied to individual cases. As long as you make sure you are using condoms for anal or vaginal intercourse, you don't need to worry about who has hiv and who does not. Condoms have been proven to prevent hiv infection - so use them each and every time until such time as you are in a securely monogamous relationship and have tested negative together.
Ann
-
Hello all,
I just have one question,
On my last visit to my doctor he told me my 5 month, 3 week test is more than conclusive..he said it is 110% and not to return to him with anything to do with this incident again. He also said that a good friend of his is in charge of the lab where the tests are sent to. He told him that virtually everyone will show positive by 8 weeks. My question is not out of worry just curiosity..why is the window period still at 3 months?
Thank you for reading.
-
Most of those who seroconvert do so within 6 weeks. The three month mark is there to catch the stragglers. (Which there are VERY few!) You're not one of them, by the way. Usually previously immunosupressed individuals , heavy IV drug users or if you've had an organ transplant can delay the seroconversion.
We use it because it has been PROVEN to work.
-
Thanks for your reply,
So whats this business about late secroverison..another HIV myth or just a couple of doccumented cases in the past?
Cheers,
-
Andy or someone there could you please just inform me about late secroversion..is it something that just doesnt happen or have there been a few cases?
Cheers,
-
Late seroconversion was reported in the late 80s and 90s, among people with cripplingly impaired immune systems. People who took anti-rejection drugs for organ transplants, people on certain types of chemotherapy, people with such horrific immunological conditions that their bodies refused to respond to HIV - or other pathogens with antibodies.
Some evidence suggests that chronic, long term IV drug users are often so immunosuppressed that they may take longer to convert. However, I suspect that in those cases, it's probably more likely that they had a risk beyond the "target" date on which the window was presumed, either unprotected sex or needle sharing. Patient report is notoriously unreliable in these cases.
Beyond that, I have heard nothing from the scientific community about late seroconversion since the turn of the 21st century. Given the advances in testing technology (balancing sensitivity with tolerance) I submit that late seroconversion in 2007 is so unlikely as to be considered theoretical at this juncture.
-
Hi guys,
Well i am no longer worried about having HIV from this encounter. I had a no risk and conclusively tested negative.
I tested at basikly 6 months so the 3/6 month window period isn't even an issue for me. I have been relaxed since my doctor confirmed that an 8 weeks negative test will catch 99% of all infections..so 6 months is an overkill!!
But why do some doctors and HIV specialists still say to test at 6 months? I am only asking this from what i have read in other peoples threads. It seems strange to me that these people specialise in HIV and are still saying this. Why do you think this is..possibly because they are not aware of a 3 month window period and still think that 6 months apply? Thanks for reading, your responses will be appreciated.
Cheers,
-
any views anyone?
-
GTB, we've answered your concerns repeatedly. It's time to call a halt here. You're just trying to find other ways of rephrasing the same doubt-filled questions.
You are HIV negative. Period. End of story.
Get on with your life. If you can't do that then go to see a counselor or other mental health professional to deal with the emotional aspects of this issue.
This is NOT an HIV situation. Really.
-
Andy,
I realise deep in my mind that i do not have HIV. But what you must understand is these last 6 months have been a hell of a ride. I really did believe i had HIV, not one doubt in my mind. Finally, i think i am coming to that end of the worry. I think of a lot of people like myself, when the fear of contracting HIV in put in their mind it is very hard to get out even with testing. You see, all this time it hasn't actually been the symptoms of HIV or AIDS that has worried me. It is the thought of not knowing. So i decided once and for all i want to no for sure so i can out this behind me. So i do believe you guys when you say a 3 month test is conclusive but my question is why is almost every other website out there saying 6 months and also why are there people coming on this forum saying that there doctor told them to test at 6 months? Its just conflicting information that i am reading every day to the point where i just cant handle it anymore. At the end of the day, you guys, my doctor, and all my friends (including the girl) have told me i don't have HIV. I keep on asking myself why do i still have the doubt in my mind..is it the symptoms, is it the fear of HIV? I just don't no. I no symptoms mean nothing, but it went from being very scared on the night of the possible exposure to then forgeting it completely for 2 months and then suddenly developing a very bad sore throat for 2 weeks..obviously not going to go into the symptoms. This is why i keep coming back here because i just keep coming up with thoughts. I'm sorry for waisting your time, i shall not do it any more i really really wont..I'm hoping if you reply you can try and give me some sort of reassurance if not, i will not post again, i promise..Thank you very much for reading, hope to here back.
Cheers,
-
If you would follow the CDC guidelines like we do on testing, it states 3 months.
-
that is what i have been doing and it says it can take up to 6 months..if you go onto the website you will see. Its says 97% by 3 months.
-
You don't fall in the guidelines for 6 month testing. You didn't have a transplant and on antirejection drugs, your not a chronic IV drug abuser. You are not on chemo or have a depressed immune system. So you would not fall in the 6 month testing guidelines. 3 months is conclusive.
-
I know it's not kosher to post in others threads but didn't want to start a new one. Why does Massachusetts recommend a 6 week ELISA as conclusive regardless of risk while this site's moderators recommend a 13 week test as conclusive if there was moderate to high risk (which I assume fingering with blood is?) Can you clarify the discrepancy? Does it refer to different generation of tests? I won't post again in this thread.
-
To answer the above question, i spoke to a top HIV specialist today who runs a lab. He told me with modern day testing 6 weeks is conclusive..so that would explain why they say 6 weeks.
Does everyone here agree that i cannot possibly have HIV from the incident i describe?
-
Hello all,
Well, these weired things keep on happening to me and i dont no whats going on..like il be thinking of something, say a number and next thing that number will appear on the tv or someone will say it..that kind of stuff and i keep on relating back to HIV and it is really, really scaring me. I have my first meeting with my counsiller on monday and im very anxious to see what she will say. In you expereience have people who have been scared of contracting HIV reported these kind of things happening? This is a really important question i would really, really appreciate your answer because i think it will really calm me down untill tommorow.
Thanks for reading.
-
That is not usual. You need to seek the help of a mental health professional.
-
In one of Ann's posts she states that there is a very low risk of getting other STD's through fingering. May i ask how this is possible? Thanks.
-
Other STDs are more viable then HIV, outside the body.
-
So i take it you are talking about the person who is receiving right?
-
It depends on who has the STD.
-
I am not questioning your knowledge one bit but i would like to no how between yourself, Ann and Andy etc you are able to give information on this forum. There seems to be new people giving advise every day how can people trust that they are being given accurate information. In other words how are you all able to give information on this forum?
I could come on this forum and say i am HIV+..would i then be able to give advise? You see what i am saying?
Cheers,
-
I've been living with HIV for 23 years of which two have been with AIDS. I've been a Paramedic for 34 years and worked in a Trama 1 hospital for 5 years. I'm not asking you to believe what we've told you. If you don't like the facts given here, you can move on and seek answers to your questions else where. It's as simple as that.
-
Ann, Andy, Rapid and other people that have contributed in these forums for many years will always verify the facts given by other contributors. I am HIV+ and tried to contribute in here too, but realized fast enough with their help that I was way not educated enough nor experienced enough to respond to people in this forum. I'm reading it every day and learn a lot from the questions and answers. I do contribute sometimes, but when this is not a direct response to HIV infection question.
They know when someone is capable of taking into account all the considerations that are in a question. I'll learn that and when ready then I will help them too.
Milker.
-
GTB,
I warned you on March 15th that if you kept posting about your no risk incident, for which you tested negative at five months, then I would be giving you a time out. I meant what I said.
I'm giving you a four week time out. Do not create a new account to get around your time out because I will know and you will be permanently banned. The purpose of your time out is to encourage you to seek the help of a mental health care professional in order to learn to deal with your anxieties. We cannot do that for you here.
Ann
-
Hello all again.
I no you don't like talking about symptoms on this website but there is just one thing i would like to ask. As you can see from my other posts when i started stressing about about contracting HIV i started getting these mouth ulcers. One on the inner lip, one on the floor of my mouth and on at the back of my mouth which was really painful and near my tonsil.
My question is..are mouth ulcers really due to stress..wheres the proof? I have had mouth ulcers in the past but since i had them at this specific time i have had not one ulcer! It is the only thing that is holding me back from moving on with my life. Also, how common are mouth ulcers in acute hiv. I have read that they are extremely common? Am i right in saying that the ulcers experienced in acute hiv come up swollen and large? My ulcers were aphthous, i dint no if this makes a difference but they were more like tiny holes in the skin.
Finally, i have been thinking of posting for a while since Ann gave me my time out. I don't want you to get mad it's just a couple of general questions that i no people living with HIV can answer for me. One thing i have realised is that anything can happen to anyone at any time which is why it is important to get on with life no matter what has happened or what might happen. These ulcers are what is stuck in my mind tho so would really appreciate some feedback. Many thanks for taking the time to read this..sorry it was a bit long! Cheers.
-
I would really apprecate a reply. I never thought i could think about mouth ulcers so much. Why did i have them now and why have i not have one single ulcer since then. This is the only reason i am posting...
http://patients.uptodate.com/topic.asp?file=hiv_aids/4460
http://patients.uptodate.com/topic.asp?file=hiv_aids/4460
I no symptoms are NEVER a reliable indicator and it is so easy to put these aphthous ulcers down to stress. But how sure can one be? Thanks.
-
Every one of our replies still pertains to your situation. Re-read them. Move on.
You are negative. Nothing since your negative result has changed. Which means your negative.
We cant do anything else for you. You REALLY need to seek the help of a mental health professional. REALLY!
http://www.medic8.com/healthguide/articles/mouthulcers.html PROOF. A link just like you provided. You can link everything you like to HIV if you want, but your negative test trumps everything!
Factors that appear to provoke mouth ulcers include stress, fatigue, illness, injury from accidental biting, hormonal changes, menstruation, sudden weight loss, food allergies and deficiencies in vitamin B12, iron and folic acid.
-
Thanks for your reply.
I can accept that mouth ulcers are bought on by stress. I mean, it seems a bit of a coincidence that the stress came on all of a sudden and i had a constant dry mouth and two days later i broke out it these ulcers.
But just one more question i have to ask. Are these mouth ulcers a common finding in acute HIV and is there a difference between viral sores and mouth ulcers. Only because i read in the "i just tested poz" forum that this guy had viral sores in the back of his mouth.
Cheers,
-
Why do you keep asking? You tested negative. You ARE negative.
Acute HIV? I think you may be talking about ARS and NO they are NOT common. AND symptoms mean nothing. AND you are NEGATIVE!
Seriously man. What do you expect from us on here? How many different ways do we need to tell you the SAME EXACT INFORMATION before it sinks in?
You REALLY REALLY need to seek the help of a mental health professional. This thread has gone on FAR TOO LONG. I suggest you print this out and take it to your first therapy session.
-
The only reason i was asking was because my symptoms however meanginless they may be came on 8 weeks after the incident. Therefore there is a chance that the ELISA would not have picked up the antibodies. I will do you a favour and not post anymore..i was just curious about the ulcers, thats all.
I appreaciate the information you have provided me with.
Thanks for your time.
-
You tested 5 months after a no risk activity. Your result is conclusive.
I hope you don't feel the need to come back and you can move on with your life. But please, do get some help.
-
Hi
I think there is something i have been overlooking here, please correct me if I'm wrong. If we could just forget that i had a "no risk" situation for a second. 5 months and 3 weeks after the incident i tested negative using the DUO test. The p24 test is used for someone who has recently been infected. It does not show positive after 3 weeks. The reason for this is because the body starts to produce antibodies. When the p24 is negative they turn to the ELISA. If for some strange reason i was infected and i was experiencing late seroconversion and i had not produced antibodies the p24 would of been positive right?
Thanks for reading.
-
I will do you a favour and not post anymore..i was just curious about the ulcers, thats all.
I appreaciate the information you have provided me with.
Thanks for your time.
Take your own advice. You are VERY close if not WAY overdue for a timeout.
No risk is NO RISK. Move on.
-
Hi,
Just a couple of questions.
Is it actually scientifically proven that saliva is not infectious. I mean if you injected HIV saliva into your veins could that transmit the virus or is it just 100% not capable of infecting someone?
My second question is does anyone have a link that states that the CDC did infact change the window period to 3 months in 2001? I fully believe it is true but would be nice to see it in writing.
Ann is defiantly right when she said that in her experience GP's are not always accurate with providing HIV information. My doctor is a very good one and has 5 HIV patients. He was honest with me and told me in the healthcare industry they do test out to 6 months and told me 3 months is 95% accurate even tho he told me i did not need to test. After speaking to one of his colleagues who runs a lab he told him that anytime after 8 weeks is reliable result. So apparently even a 3 months test isn't needed these days?
Cheers,
-
GTB, do some work for yourself. Go to the CDC website and look. Your doctor may have 5 HIV patients but that doesn't make him up to date on the guidelines.
-
Wow. You just ingnore everything dont you.
Who the HELL injects saliva into their own bloodstream? NO ONE! Deal in reality, we do.
-
OK, it's time to draw a line here, GTB.
You seem to be just passing idle time here with what ifs. Your original concern has been amply addressed. You are HIV negative.
It's time for you to move on with your life. As others have suggested, if you have some specific HIV interests and want to learn more about HIV, then do some research. We're not here to spend time answering anything your mind may come up with.
You're on the verge of being given a time out here.
-
I do listen and appreciate all your comments. However, on this website you tell me the CDC changed the window period to 13 weeks. On the website it still says 6 months. On most websites it still says 6 months. My doctor told me 6 months and many people come on here saying there doctors told them 6 months. When i asked someone if they could provide me with a link that would state that the CDC did indeed change the window period i was told by Rod to find it myself. Believe me, i have searched long and hard and have found nothing from the CDC that states this.
I have suffered from mouth ulcers in the past. Growing up i had them quite frequently then they seemed to go and i hadn't had one in years. Then all of a sudden after what i THOUGHT was a risky event i had a load of them in my mouth. One of them was even right by my tonsils. Being able to accept that this just happened along with the list of other symptoms i had is just almost impossible considering that mouth ulcers are the third most common symptoms for those who do experience them. Everyone says stress is the cause of them but it just doesn't seem right. Ever since that week of ulcers i have not had one single ulcer. Very strange and very hard to accept as I'm sure you can understand. No sexual activity is 100% safe, NOTHING as you already no. So that is what is sticking in my mind. Maybe one more test would end this worry i have?
I'm not asking you to comment on any other symptoms i have had..just the ulcers. Do you have any information regarding mouth ulcers and ARS or just any information on mouth ulcers period, and also the CDC window period?
Believe me i DO NOT want to waist your time. Believe it or not i lead a busy life and have a stressful job but as you can see this has taken over my mind.
Thanks for reading.
-
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/testing/resources/journal_article/pdf/rapid_review.pdf (http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/testing/resources/journal_article/pdf/rapid_review.pdf)
Page 128.
-
Thanks rod i feel a LOT better i just dont understand why the CDC dont state on there website that 3 months is conlcusive apart from the obvious factors ( IV drug users etc.) Very strange! Another thing that i was just thinking aobut. If the average time from seroconversion is 22 days how can ARS be occuring 2-4 weeks after exposure? Am i right in saying that ELISA tests are so sensitve that they can detect antibodies even while someone has just started seroconverting? Well it must be that..ARS 2-4 weeks...seroconverison 22 days...?
Thanks.
-
The average is 22 days. As it said, it can time person up to 3 months to have enough antibodies for the test to detect. People that test during that time will usually get a negative result on their test, due to the body not having built up enough antibodies for the test to detect. You sir did not have a risk.
-
I am very sorry if it seems as if i am coming across arrogant by posting all these questions. These mouth ulcers are what is holding me back. Saying that i am honest enough to say that if it wasn't the mouth ulcers it WOULD be something else, therefore i realise i need help. This is the way my mind is working at the moment:
Sight of blood all over my hands and worry of hiv
8 weeks later - sore throat, rash and mouth ulcers.
I am putting 2 and 2 together and not accepting my negative result. I realise i need help. I hope that in the long - run this is a positive thing that happened. I was never cautious of HIV in the past and knew nothing about it. I always thought that because the heterosexual transmission rate in the UK is so low that it is something not to worry about. After this incident i will ALWAYS use condoms no matter how well i think i no the person. I just hope i can get through this hard time. This forum has helped me hugely, so just wanted to say thanks!
As for the mouth ulcers i really dont no what i can do apart from put it down to a HUGE co-incedent.