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 | 2 | (show all)
Anonymous
Unregistered

Window period fake?
      #203839 - 08/17/06 12:34 PM

Serious doubt about this so called window period. More concerned about those who says that 3 months is conclusive when studies clearly show that its not. See the attachments. My doctor told me that it can take years for it to show it. Not because of the test, but biological factors. Even the body had a posting on late seroconverters.
http://www.thebody.com/confs/retro99/52.html
http://www.thebody.com/Forums/AIDS/Starting/Current/Q154591.html
http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/abstract/320/22/1458
http://www.natap.org/2004/newsUpdates/052504_04.htm

Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Anonymous
Unregistered

Re: Window period fake? new
      #203845 - 08/17/06 12:56 PM

Keep looking for exception and you will find it. 3 months 99.99999% will serconvert. The first article dated 8 years ago, second article is debated on even by the expert on the end, third 1989, fourth is a total exception to the rule. Most will contest the 3 month vs 6 week but almost no HIV expert debates longer. FOr people reading this that are concerned dont start to question your results.....3 months is conclusive.

Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Cobal
Master

Reged: 07/23/06
Posts: 136
Re: Window period fake? new
      #203846 - 08/17/06 12:58 PM

This is the type of posting that will confuse most WW. From what you are saying there are alot of people out there testing negative for years even though they are actually positive. Why haven't the CDC addressed this? I heard about the 12 month testing posted in on the body as well as other creditable sites, but this takes the case. I dont know what to think. More so because other site such as Aidsmed and Healing Well indicates that 3-6 months are conclusive. Thanks for the confusion.

Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Anonymous
Unregistered

Re: Window period fake? new
      #203847 - 08/17/06 12:59 PM

Okay freak!! Look at the dates... One is from like 1989, and the others from years ago. If you people insist on wastin your life away worrying about an infection after a conclsuive 3 month test then go a head!! You should however seek the help of a mental professional!!!! Jesus mother of god.....will this EVER END!!!????????

Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Cobal
Master

Reged: 07/23/06
Posts: 136
Re: Window period fake? new
      #203848 - 08/17/06 01:04 PM

But wait a minute. They are not talking about the test. They are talking about one's ability to produce antibodies. I'm going to have to ask Dr. Bob about this one. I pray that the information is outdated and no longer applies. But its hard to overlook some aspects of the links regardless of how long ago they were written. My question now is how do we know.

Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Anonymous
Unregistered

Re: Window period fake? new
      #203852 - 08/17/06 01:12 PM

Cobal you keep looking and digging for it. Maybe one day you will find it. You continually post bullshit information and irrational information. Get on with your life. You are negative and need to let go of the obsession. You and people like you are the reason why AIDS2HIV left. Thanks for that as he was the only one that said it like it was. He was great for this site and all of you blew it. I hope he still reads this and sees that he is loved by all even the ones he berated.
YOU DONT HAVE IT SO STOP IT>

Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Cobal
Master

Reged: 07/23/06
Posts: 136
Re: Window period fake? new
      #203854 - 08/17/06 02:01 PM

ANNON:
I hated to see A2H go myself. As far as irrational information, you read it like I did.

Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Anonymous
Unregistered

Re: Window period fake? new
      #203859 - 08/17/06 03:43 PM

Well first you need to understand that information that is more than just a few years old is considered out of date and in the context of HIV knowledge is not of any use.

That gets rid of links 1, 3 and 4. Number 4 because while copyrighted 2004, the lastest information was from 2001. That article also did not explain how anyone could be sure the women had not had additional risks after her second test in 1997. Her partner was HIV+ but as is the case exposure does not equal infection. There are just too many cases of a partner remaining negative after finding out their partner is positive. There is no quanantee they will REMAIN negative if they don't then start practicing safer sex. So in her case you have to ask....just what risks was she taking and not admitting too for those FOUR years.

As for number 2, while it's from 2004, gettting a bit old, what is important was Dr. Wohl's response. Did you actually bother to read it, or were you too busy creaming in your jeans thinking you had something valid to dispute the window period with?

You doctor is an idoit and I'm extemely thankful he's not my Infectious Disease doctor....OH wait, that's right, you've tested negative, I bet he's just a GP.

People Living with HIV are warned away from GP's for management of their disease. Studies have shown HIV postive people die faster under their care and if they want to live they need to be under the care of a qualified Infectious Disease doctor.

Know why?

Because GP's don't know shit about HIV and that lack of concrete knowledge causes them to perputate myths that are not true.

But you go ahead and believe what you want. You will anyway. Meanwhile the rest of us will be enjoying our lives.

Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
GMan9/23
Unregistered

Re: Window period fake? new
      #203872 - 08/17/06 04:33 PM

Come on now!! In light of much more sofisticated testing where it is clearly evident that most people will show within 3 months. Just read the archives where countless numbers posted that they had an exposure followed by flu like illness from which they recovered and then very shortly after were Pos. on a test. This indicates that the testing has much improved. Health care workers are one of the primary reasons the window is what it is because of the immediate documentation of an exposure followed up by testing till pos. The result indicates that the average time is 25 days which indicates that there must be alot more people testing pos. closer to the 25 day mark than to the 3 months mark. If this is the case then how can you explain that 2 of the 33 men did not convert untill atleast 11 months and then 31 of the 33 did not convert untill atleast 25 months and as far out as 35 months and these times were measured from the time the study took place, so it really could have been longer than that. So 100% will take atleast 11 months. Maybe this WAS true, but not anymore! If this were still true in this day don't you think the CDC, ID Dr's and other health care workers would be advised as such. Don't you think the public would be advised as such! The answer is YES! For what reason would they withhold vital info. like this! Not to mention this would be a political disaster for the CDC if this were still true. After all the entire world is trying to stop this epidemic, withholding this kind of info. would only contradict what is trying to be achieved! The only lengthy time I have read about in recent years is a year or a little more and THAT IS VERY RARE INDEED!!
My ID Dr. suggested to test out to one year for my own peace of mind. Yes he is a specialist in HIV. My last test was Neg. at 11 months including 5 RNA & DNA PCR. with loads of symptoms, most of which resolved!!

Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
coby
Grand Master

Reged: 04/01/06
Posts: 189
Re: Window period fake? new
      #203876 - 08/17/06 05:08 PM

Sure would be nice to hear what Dr. Bob has to say on this issue. I'm really not at all suprized at all that this info is out and may hold truth, I'm just to sick with symptoms that have no other disease it can be related to. What's most sad is when I do test pos I will end up being called a liar anyway. It's already known that HIV is only in a fraction of our blood so with that being said it makes perfect since in my book that if not ebough is running thru your system enough to get the body to respond you will get no antibodies, till it wins the fight of the part of the body it's in and then moves to another. It's also known that HIV can and does go to different ares such as the lymph nodes,nerves,brain,joints etc.. I'm so sick of this shit and it's very sad that we still don't know more then one thing about HIV other then it will get us sooner or later. I hope that someone here ask's Dr. Bob to respond since we lost A2H, and I don't want to hear it was my fault cause I know for certain it was not.

Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Anonymous
Unregistered

Re: Window period fake? new
      #203878 - 08/17/06 05:56 PM

Well we know if Pinkster supports this theory of HIV hiding then it must be valid. After all she is the resident expert on HIV after insisting she has it, despite what the facts say about that and her doctor suggesting therapy.

All hail Pinkster.

With such a learned and scienctifc opinions as hers and the orginial poster I think the CDC should change their recommendations to reflect their opinions immediately. After all they must know more than the hundreds of scienitist and researchers that have conducted countless studies over the past 25 years. Those years and years of hard research just are no match for such esteemed posters as these two.

ROFL......I love a good laugh. After all it IS the best medicine.


Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Anonymous
Unregistered

Re: Window period fake? new
      #203879 - 08/17/06 06:07 PM

Oh and here is something for you two to think about.

Long Term Non-Progressers test postive by an antibody test just like the rest of us.

Now these very rare and lucky people have HIV, they are considered HIV+, but for some reason that is being studied, the virus does not destory the immune system. The virus doesn't attack the CD4 cells. The virus doesn't seem to DO ANYTHING. Just kinda hangs out.

However, because the virus is a alien to the body, even these LTNP will develop antibodies to the virus, just like everyone else.

So much for your theory about the virus hiding out and then attacking. Even when the virus does nothing, the body knows it's there and will mount an attack. If you have HIV in your system you WILL test postive and it won't take forever to do.

You guys must really hate your lives that you think chasing after a disease you don't have is preferable to living your lives. Is it an attention thing?

Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Revann33
Unregistered

Re: Window period fake? new
      #203891 - 08/17/06 07:43 PM

This is my first post here, but I am deeply distrubed by what I have read by uninfected people! I can understand wanting to get info to protect yourself, but you all seem to WANT to be infected! What are you, crazy? You have no frigging idea what it is trully like to be positive! Do you go around your home towns telling people you are infected? You are just looking for attention! You should try to find it somewhere esle and while you are at it, try to make it the good kind of attention!
So you know where I stand...
I tested poz in 1987
I was infected through a rape in 1980 (yes 1980!!) I was 12
I am a long termer with no OI's; and in case you can't count I have been infected for 26 years.
So when I tell you that you have no idea what you are talking about with regards to the window, believe me! You don't know, and if a Dr of any kind told you that line of shit then you need a new dr!

sorry for being blunt, but this topic made my blood boil a bit!


Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Anonymous
Unregistered

Re: Window period fake? new
      #203894 - 08/17/06 07:51 PM

Welcome Revann. It's good to hear a sane voice in the midst of the insanity that is the Am I Infected board.

Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Anonymous
Unregistered

Re: Window period fake?
      #203899 - 08/17/06 08:50 PM

Revann: I have not posted earlier in this thread, but I will comment at least from my perspective. I certainly do not WANT to be infected but I am certainly extremely worried. I was a person with essentially no health issues before a potentially very risky sexual encounter. Two weeks later a feverish malaise set in followed by swollen glands that have persisted these last 6 months. In other words, I caught something sexually, have tested negative for all STDs yet am very worried as you can imagine and as I guess you would be also. Add to that the fact that the most mysterious and elusive of the STDs is HIV. That is why I am worried. No more, no less and certainly I do not want to have HIV.

Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | (show all)


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: 6810

 
Jump to

Contact Us | Privacy Statement The Body

*
UBB.threads™ 6.2.3