I whis i was in Antartica
Apr 16, 2009
Hello Dr, You are doing really perfect job here.My idea,You are the best.
I asked questions before but you didnt answer.I hope this time i deserve an answer.
1-I tested 12 times 4th gen. (ag+ab)blood test for hiv in 160 days, all negative. Last test was 160 days,0.11 of less than 180 days.Can virus calculate it ? (i could wait 20 days more ) after possible risk. Now i am at 9.5 months, must i have take another test again ?(I think i will do ) 2-However, there are no guarantees as to when an individual will produce enough antibodies to be detected by an HIV test. If you have any unexplained symptoms, talk with your health care provider and consider re-testing for HIV.
Whats up with this ??? Who has written this, test kit producers ? 3-CSW told me she makes regularly hiv test and negative. Then 3 months. If she said i am positive... Then 6 months.
Does a CSW change science's decision for 3 months ???
4-If i was living in Antartica would i test every day? You know one day is 6 months at there :))
Thank you for response(s),God Bless You.
Response from Dr. Frascino
1. Generally speaking I tend to skip questions that start out with statements like "I have tested 12 times using a 4th-generation assay out to 160 days; all negative. Do I need another test?"!!! Exactly which part of HIV negative are you having difficulty understanding??? You've now tested repeatedly negative out to 9.5 months! You just can't get any more negative than that. HIV is not your problem. No way. No how. No additional HIV tests are warranted. In fact, you've had way too many already!
2. I'm not exactly sure what you are asking in this question. I'm assuming you read the statement in question somewhere. Perhaps on a test kit insert or lab test result sheet. There is nothing untrue about this statement. HIV is not a stopwatch or calendar. For instance it cannot distinguish between exactly three months versus three months plus (or minus) two days. The guidelines for testing are based on very large population studies conducted over the past quarter century that HIV-antibody tests has been in use. What we know is that most HIVers will have detectable levels of HIV antibody in their blood within four to six weeks. However, a small minority may take a bit longer to produce detectable levels of specific anti-HIV antibodies. Consequently the guideline was set at three months for a definitive result, unless there are extenuating circumstances. Because a missed HIV diagnosis could have disastrous consequences and the variability of an individual's specific immune response, the CDC recommends a repeat test at six months for significant occupational exposures and also for non-occupational exposures in which there was significant exposure to someone confirmed to be HIV positive. Science does not change based on level of risk. The guidelines are based on a statistical analysis of the probability of HIV transmission. Nothing more. By the way, "science" is also quite clear that 12 HIV tests over a 9.5-month period are unwarranted and highly excessive.
4. As for Antarctica, if you were living there you probably wouldn't have to worry much about HIV testing, as it would be a challenge just to find a CSW to have unsafe sex with!
One final comment about testing and all the folks who remain so confused and worried about three months versus six months, a simple piece of latex used consistently and properly would eliminate all your testing conundrums!
Be safe. Be well.
Get Email Notifications When This Forum Updates or Subscribe With RSS
This forum is designed for educational purposes only, and experts are not rendering medical, mental health, legal or other professional advice or services. If you have or suspect you may have a medical, mental health, legal or other problem that requires advice, consult your own caregiver, attorney or other qualified professional.
Experts appearing on this page are independent and are solely responsible for editing and fact-checking their material. Neither TheBody.com nor any advertiser is the publisher or speaker of posted visitors' questions or the experts' material.