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
beingborn
Newbie

Reged: 01/12/13
Posts: 3
Negative oraquick, definitely positive though. *DELETED*
      #270112 - 01/12/13 01:05 PM

Post deleted by beingborn

Edited by beingborn (01/12/13 01:13 PM)

Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
saul100
Member

Reged: 10/22/12
Posts: 22
Re: Negative oraquick, definitely positive though. new
      #270116 - 01/12/13 02:20 PM

I cant answer your question but in fact am here to ask for more details. I tested negative by oral swab at 3 months past my exposure. Now reading this my anxiety has returned to unbelievable extremes. Can you give me more detail on when you tested positive by elisa and WB, what week after exposure. When did you test with oral swab. I know I may be asking for alot. But please understand that I am worried out of my mind now,

Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ashler1977
Guardian

Reged: 05/18/12
Posts: 568
Loc: Europe
Re: Negative oraquick, definitely positive though. new
      #270117 - 01/12/13 02:41 PM

you're not the first person who I came across with a false negative by oraquick. that's why I personally always recommend to anyone to test with a classic blood draw. after all, if we're going to test for HIV, why no test with the most accurate test available?

we can not know 2) unless you tested with this before starting medication. i think your HIV Doctor would be interested to know why you keep getting a false negative result despite your confirmed positive status.

best wishes

--------------------
Oral Sex: What's the Real Risk for HIV?
http://www.thebody.com/content/art58210.html

Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
beingborn
Newbie

Reged: 01/12/13
Posts: 3
Re: Negative oraquick, definitely positive though. new
      #270118 - 01/12/13 03:21 PM


Edit - Solved. Original question was, why I would repeatedly test negative via oraquick:

"Researchers found that 92% of people who are HIV positive received a positive test result. This is called the "sensitivity" of the test. They also found that 99.98% of the people who were HIV negative received a negative test result, this is called the "specificity" of the test."

I think "sensitivity" means 8 in 100 positive people will receive a false negative, and that this is actually normal. Since the question's already been "answered" extensively -- and i just didnt know what the heck all that meant, i deleted my post so as to not alarm anyone unnecessarily.

Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
beingborn
Newbie

Reged: 01/12/13
Posts: 3
Re: Negative oraquick, definitely positive though. new
      #270119 - 01/12/13 03:29 PM

Sorry, I've kinda worked through to where this isn't all that frightening anymore. It didn't occur to me that this would be alarming to some.

I replied to Ashler with the technical info (sensitivity/specificity) that answered my question and explained that this could happen.

I think that's what I hadn't managed to grasp until now. It seems that the most correct answer would be to get bloodwork if I were really in doubt about my results, and based on my bloodwork there isn't any question at all.

Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
crabmanModerator
Moderator

Reged: 03/10/11
Posts: 1053
Re: Negative oraquick, definitely positive though. new
      #270120 - 01/12/13 06:49 PM

Running into people that say they got a false negative and thus deciding the test is invalid is hardly a scientific measure. What is scientific are the studies that have been done to back up the CDC's position that the Oral Swab Tests are 99.3% accurate. You won't get much more out of a blood draw since no test is 100%.

We used them exclusively for testing done the ASO I volunteered with for requested tests and programs used to raise awareness of a people's status. Most ASO's use these tests.



Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
crabmanModerator
Moderator

Reged: 03/10/11
Posts: 1053
Re: Negative oraquick, definitely positive though. new
      #270121 - 01/12/13 06:57 PM

Cite you studies. Otherwise it's just internet garbage. The CDC places the accuracy of the Ora-Quick at 99.3%. Being responsible for the public health I doubt they would say that if legitimate, recent studies proved otherwise.

I also wonder why you, a s a newly positive person is more concerned about testing accuracy than the fact your world has now been turned upside down and has been irrevocably changed forever. That you now must deal with an illness that remains chronic only as long as you can buy the medication you need and that said medication doesn't fail you. Your questions could easily have been answered at your first ID appointment. I'm impressed that you handle this so well that your only concern is the fact you didn't find out earlier.

Deleting your first post because you don't want to scare anyone just seems a hit and run tactic. Stir up trouble then delete the evidence.

Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
kicker
Moderator

Reged: 10/25/10
Posts: 1130
Loc: GA, USA
Re: Negative oraquick, definitely positive though. new
      #270122 - 01/12/13 08:26 PM

Might I add also that treatment failure with complera is in fact proven to happen with anyone above 100,000 vl. So either your dr didn't start you on complera until your levels came down a whole hell of a lot. OR both of you need to have a serious conversation as to where he got his Dr title from.


Exert from a PDF taken from glead's website here:

http://www.gilead.com/pdf/complera_pi.pdf

More rilpivirine-treated subjects with HIV-1 RNA greater than 100,000 copies/mL at the start of therapy experienced virologic failure compared to subjects with HIV-1 RNA less than 100,000 copies/mL at the start of therapy.

So like crab man says sounds really fishy at best terribly negligent in your own well being at worse.

Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jamesmore32
Regular

Reged: 11/17/12
Posts: 60
Re: Negative oraquick, definitely positive though. new
      #270123 - 01/12/13 10:52 PM

Great to know My negative test may not be negative

Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jamesmore32
Regular

Reged: 11/17/12
Posts: 60
Re: Negative oraquick, definitely positive though. new
      #270125 - 01/12/13 11:08 PM

So all the info I have read on oraquick.being accurate is all wrong?

Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ashler1977
Guardian

Reged: 05/18/12
Posts: 568
Loc: Europe
Re: Negative oraquick, definitely positive though. new
      #270127 - 01/13/13 12:12 AM

Quote:

"Researchers found that 92% of people who are HIV positive received a positive test result. This is called the "sensitivity" of the test. They also found that 99.98% of the people who were HIV negative received a negative test result, this is called the "specificity" of the test."




If certain test has 92% sensitive then it would be banned from the market. WHO guidelines suggest at least 99% of sensitive for HIV tests.

4th generation tests (blood draw) have a sensitive of over 99,8%

http://www.nat.org.uk/media/Files/Policy/2011/Oct-2011-Facts-Types-of-HIV-test.pdf

--------------------
Oral Sex: What's the Real Risk for HIV?
http://www.thebody.com/content/art58210.html

Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
crabmanModerator
Moderator

Reged: 03/10/11
Posts: 1053
Re: Negative oraquick, definitely positive though. new
      #270131 - 01/13/13 07:30 AM

James.

The info you read was correct. I have serious doubts about the validity of this poster. I have yet to personally met anyone that has tested positive that the first thing they want to do is get into a discussion about testing...unless it's to try to disprove a POSITIVE result.

You have some unknown person that has never posted on this board before choosing to post in the Am I Infected forum instead of the I Just Tested Positive or the Living with HIV sections. No questions or comment about a first ID appointment or viral load, CD4 results or medications.

Trust your result and what you have read. Let posts that try to stir up trouble roll off your back.

Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1


What's New at TheBody.com

Additional Information
0 registered and 2 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: 16515

 
Jump to

Contact Us | Privacy Statement The Body

*
UBB.threads™ 6.2.3