Advertisement
The Body: The Complete HIV/AIDS Resource
Follow Us Follow Us on Facebook Follow Us on Twitter Download Our App
Professionals >> Visit The Body PROThe Body en Espanol

HIV Transmission and Education >> Am I Infected?

Pages: 1
Jimbo
Unregistered

symptoms vs. antibodies
      #14862 - 01/20/01 01:04 PM

If one has symptoms shortly after exposure, and it is indeed HIV, would antibodies then show up on a test even if it hasn't beed very long? Or will it take antibodies a while to show up even weeks after the related symptoms?



Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Anonymous
Unregistered

Re: symptoms vs. antibodies new
      #14866 - 01/20/01 04:13 PM

this is a good question. Anyone have any ideas? I had what I thought was ars. Asked the girl if she was +/- and she said neg. I tested at 4 and 9 weeks and both were neg. answers would be great.



Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ex_Male_Slut
Fanatic

Reged: 11/02/00
Posts: 57
Re: symptoms vs. antibodies new
      #14867 - 01/20/01 06:03 PM

When you get symptoms - muscle & joint ache, node swelling, fever, rashes etc; your body is fighting a viral infection and the symptoms are evidence of the immune system at work. This is true for all viral conditions irrespective of whether it is glandular fever, influenza, HIV, etc.

Antibodies will be produced in this phase but the quantity and timing of their production will vary from one person to the next. It is possible that some-one could seroconvert within a few days of exposure but to cover most variation in seroconversion time a window of 3 months is used. The currently used 3rd generation Elisa test will detect HIV antibodies within 25 days for 50% of those who are infected.

While the statistics of seroconversion for a typical population may remain fairly constant, the sensitivity of the test used plays a significant part in the time taken to detect antibodies in sufficient quantities.

Hope this helps

Regards
EMS



Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Anonymous
Unregistered

Re: symptoms vs. antibodies new
      #14922 - 01/21/01 05:19 PM

If AIDS is a sexually transmitted disease then why....

Does Texas have fifteen times MORE aids mortalities than California?
California includes San Francisco, West Hollywood and 90% of the US porn industry. Clean cut Texas now accounts for a stunning 41.6953% of ALL U.S. 'AIDS' deaths.

Does Alaska with the highest per capita population of prostitutes (who come to the State from all over America) have NO 'AIDS' deaths? Mortalities in Alaska have been zero for two years running.

Does Nevada with it's legal prostitution have such low AIDS figures that it does not even both to compile detailed statistics?

Did the U.S. Army study of 1.1 million G.I.'s who were stationed in the Phillipines (over a ten year period) and kept 100,000 prostitutes in business (70% were said to be HIV positive) show only ONE was HIV positive (not sick)? This was the only case of mass HIV testing in the World. Condoms in the Phillipines are of such poor quality that only 8% can even hold water.

Why did the CDC study of the sexual transmission of HIV show that it was almost impossible to transmit it sexually" Quote: - "It takes a minimum of five million, unprotected, sexual encounters with an HIV positive person to servo convert (catch AIDS) to HIV positive" - CDC Report.

It is hard to find a single HARD FACT that supports the idea that AIDS is sexually transmitted.

This book puts the case well.

Author Michael Fumento, in his book The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS, offers substantial evidence that white, middle-class, non IV drugabuser heterosexuals are in less danger of contracting AIDS thru non-anal, sexual intercourse than they are of dying from shark attacks, being hit by lightning, or accidentally drowning in the bathtub. The
book is very well referenced and documented.

The book was reviewed by the Journal of the American Medical Assn as "the best single source available to enable heterosexual persons to assess their personal risk."

....and here are the official figures for 1999


Only 23 States in the Union reported AIDS deaths in 1999 but according to the CDC they represent 83% of the entire nation .

Total reported deaths in the entire United States in 1999 were 2,667

41.69% of ALL deaths in the United States of America were in Texas (1112 of a total of 2667)

About 87% were male.
The vast majority were African American or Hispanic or other minorities.
Deaths attributed to heterosexual sex ranged from 1% in Alabama to 16% in Rhode Island
The few figures published for 2000 show deaths are almost zero.
Example: Colorado: 1, New Mexico 1, Washington: 2 (in first two months of 2000).


HERE ARE THE STATE BY STATE FIGURES: -

California. 19 (first three months of 1999)
Washington 77
Oregon 8
Arizona 33
Idaho 3
Utah 6
Montana (not published but only 233 deaths since 1983)
Colorado 22 (1 in 2000)
Nebraska 67 (11 in 2000)
Oklahoma 0
Texas 1112
Minnesota 54
Ohio 44
Virginia 18
North Carolina (not available for 1999 but 64 in 1998)
Georgia 75
New York 291
Maryland 429
Maine (not available for 1999 but 16 in 1998)
New Hampshire (not available for 1999 but 2 in 1998)
Connecticut 242
Hawaii 104
Alaska 0 (figure for 1998 also 0)

CHECK FOR YOURSELF AT: - http://www.aids-statistics.com/main.htm














Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Anonymous
Unregistered

Re: symptoms vs. antibodies new
      #14966 - 01/21/01 05:49 PM


"143 Sudden Deaths Did Not Stop Approval"..
(143 deaths represents MORE deaths then the total of 1999 mortalities in Cororado, Oregon, Idaho, Utah, Washington, New Mexico, North and South Dakota, Oklahoma, W. Virgina, NJ, Delaware and Alaska combined)

A damning and horrifying accounts of how the US Food and Drug Administration acts in anything but good faith or the public interest. A blistering seven-page expose that points a finger at AIDS activist efforts to speed up the approval process.

"Once a wary watchdog, the Food and Drug Administration set out to become a 'partner' of the pharmaceutical industry. Today, the public has more remedies, but some are proving lethal."


By DAVID WILLMAN, Times Staff Writer


WASHINGTON--For most of its history, the United Food and Drug Administration approved new prescription medicines at a grudging pace,
daily homage to the physician's creed, "First, do no harm." Then in the early 1990s, the demand for AIDS drugs changed the political climate. Congress told the FDA to
work closely with pharmaceutical firms in getting new medicines to market more swiftly. President Clinton urged FDA leaders to trust industry as "partners, not
adversaries..."

Choice headlines:

"Drug After Drug, Warnings Ignored...danger signs present...even so, top admistrators moved ahead often leaving doctors to assume the risks."

"Warning on Label Omits Deaths...heart problems were mentioned in fine print, not in key dosage data"

"143 Sudden Deaths Did Not Stop Approval...study results kept secret"

"Official Foresaw Deadly Effects..remedy pulled after of death and surgeries"

Find the whole article at

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/reports




Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Anonymous
Unregistered

Re: US GI infection rates new
      #15031 - 01/23/01 04:01 PM

I would like to believe what you say(believe me!!) But, there are many different "clades" or "subtypes" (ie., A, B, E, D, C, etc) that may or may not be more transmissable through heterosexual contact. Africa is a case in point as is India and Thailand, Cambodia, Haiti, Carribean, etc. This topic still has not been studied enough. I also am not sure that the infection rate in the Phillipines is really that high. I saw a world infection chart and the Phillipines were NOT that high. Though in the brothels that number may be so. I PRAY YOU ARE RIGHT THOUGH as I am in the situation of being exposed to an Asian prostitute...an am waiting... thanks



Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jimbo
Unregistered

Re: symptoms vs. antibodies new
      #15127 - 01/26/01 10:34 AM

Turns out I have ALL the symptoms of a flu that is spreading like wildfire through Virginia..it was even on the evening news. After I posted, I started getting some congestion...strange times indeed when one is relieved to fill up with snot and phlegm!

Felt fine for a few days, now feel bad again, but not AS bad, so I hope it's the same thing part II. Similar syptoms this time, except for an achiness on one side of my neck. Weird.

I'm also injecting a new brand of anabolic steroids (no lectures, please!), so I could be having a reaction to that as well. In any case, I will ALSO use a condom from now on, even guys I know well. I am so tired of worrying about this stuff.



Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1


What's New at TheBody.com

Additional Information
1 registered and 3 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  TheBody, bogart, crabman, riverprincess 

Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is enabled
      UBBCode is enabled

Thread views: 3551

 
Jump to

Contact Us | Privacy Statement The Body

*
UBB.threads™ 6.2.3