|Hoping for good news
Jun 18, 2009
Hello, I am very nervous and concerned about a possible exposure. I had oral sex with a guy where I was the receiver. Since then I have had several unexplainable symptoms such as genital bumps, discharge, grumbling throughout the body, tingling in my hands and feet,coated tongue and weight loss. I tested negative for all std's.I am most concerned that 1. I have a genital piercing that is not very new. Does this increase my risk much? 2. I was told that he would have had to be bleeding profusely from the mouth and I feel that I would have noticed it. Is this true? 3. I have tested three times with the Oraquick Advance oral swab. I tested at 6, 8, and almost 12 weeks(80 days). Is this test reliable?? 4. Do I really need to test again in 4 days would it make much a difference. 5. Is it significant for people to test all the way out to 6 months when 22 days is the average time for seroconversion? When is this really necessary? I have been told by several hotlines and hiv counselors that I can move on I'm not sure though. I would truly appreciate your responses. This is a wonderful website and you are so great for helping so many people! Thank you
| Response from Dr. Frascino
"Grumbling throughout the body"???? Hmm . . . OK, if you say so.
1. A well-healed genital piercing would not significantly increase HIV-transmission risk.
2. Profuse bleeding certainly would increase HIV-transmission risk, assuming your partner was HIV infected.
3. Yes, OraQuick tests are reliable.
4. The guidelines state HIV-antibody tests taken prior to three months are not considered to be conclusive. I can't change the guidelines for you! If I said your 80-day test was conclusive, someone would inevitably immediately write in asking about their 79-day test was definitive and then a question about a 78.5-day test would soon follow, etc. Consequently, the guidelines are the guidelines and they indicate HIV antibody tests taken prior to the 3 month mark are not conclusive.
5. Even if the average time to seroconversion is 22 days and even if the vast majority of HIV-infected folks test HIV-antibody positive four to six weeks after becoming infected, this is still not adequate (not definitive enough), considering the catastrophic consequences of missing an infection. For instance, if for example 90% of HIV-infected people were expected to test positive at six weeks, that would still leave 1 out of every 10 HIV-infected people who would test negative, despite being infected. See my point?
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.