|
|
5 or 6 weeks negative. How much difference?
#119015 - 12/03/04 12:06 AM
|
Reply
|
Quote
|
|
|
I have read that "The standared HIV test, the HIV antibody test would be positive within 3-4 weeks of exposure." I'm kind of confused here since if they say the standard antibody test (I assume they mean ELISA) would be positive with 3-4 weeks, then why is it that many use 6 weeks as the best standard. Shouldn't it be 5 weeks? (I know about 12 weeks to be 100% sure, but 97% is good enough for me right now) I know they may just be more conservative and add another week, but realistically what would the difference be between 5 and 6 weeks? Say if 6 weeks negative is 95%, then how much would 5 weeks differ? It was hard digging up the courage to get tested after 5 weeks, but now it seems that it may have not have meant much at all.
Post Extras:
|
|
|
|
its more like 90% at 6 weeks
Post Extras:
|
|
|
|
Around 99 at 6 weeks, Neil Constatine says window period is around 3 -5 weeks so is very good a negative at 5 weeks, you will need a conclusive at 12 weeks of course, take a breath.Good luck
Post Extras:
|
|
|
|
many different and equally respected AIDS orgs advocate different window periods. The CDC (USA) reccomends 13 weeks which is the most conseravtive window in the world. The UK reccomends a similiary conseravtive 12 week window.
Studies reveal that the new 3rd generation assays (like Oraquick) can detect HIV in the blood at over 98% accuracy by the 6th week (day 42). Some doctors, in massachussets and Spain, for example, conclude that a 3rd generation test taken 6 weeks after the point of infection is conclusive.
3 weeks = 50%
4 weeks = 95%
6 weeks = 98.5%
8 weeks = 99.5%
12 weeks = 100 - 000000.1%
Post Extras:
|
|
|
|
[quote]many different and equally respected AIDS orgs advocate different window periods. The CDC (USA) reccomends 13 weeks which is the most conseravtive window in the world. The UK reccomends a similiary conseravtive 12 week window.
Studies reveal that the new 3rd generation assays (like Oraquick) can detect HIV in the blood at over 98% accuracy by the 6th week (day 42). Some doctors, in massachussets and Spain, for example, conclude that a 3rd generation test taken 6 weeks after the point of exposure is conclusive.
3 weeks = 50%
4 weeks = 95%
6 weeks = 98.5%
8 weeks = 99.5%
12 weeks = 100 - 000000.1% [/quote]
Post Extras:
|
|
|
|
because doctors want to be conservative to look out for the best interests of their patients. 5 weeks is a great indicator, 6 weeks even better. 12 weeks is gold.
if I were worried about infection I would test out to 8 weeks (2 months/56 days) and call it a day.
Post Extras:
|
|
|
|
France were saying that most infected will test positive by 8 weeks...12 weeks is the conclusive point in france..I am not sure whether CDC did say 13 weeks for 3 months...I've read their guidelines and it says 6 weeks,12 weeks and 6 months for occupational exposures...I will assume that CDC calculate 12 weeks as 3 months and not 13...I haven heard any scientist saying 13 weeks as 3 months...all of them were saying 12 weeks...Oraquick and other newer rapid test like abbott determine HIV 1/2, Unigold are all new technology based on immunochromatographic...they uses recombinant protein and syntectic peptides as antigens...They are comparible to lab EIA but I not not sure whether they are using the 3rd generation sandwich antigen technology..
Post Extras:
|
Previous
Index
Next
Flat
Threaded
