If you believe you have been exposed to HIV and want help to judge your risk, would like advice about HIV testing, or have questions about the effectiveness of condoms or risks associated with specific sexual practices, this is the site for you.
Just want to share with you guys my results 5.5 weeks after my extremely high Risk incident in Thailand.
Syphillis (syphilis) Gonnorea
I know I'm not scott free yet, but I understand that testing at 5.5 weeks is a rather good indication of my true status. I will get retested in at 12 weeks.
I tell you what, the mind plays some really nasty stuff when you are under stress and anxiety. Cause mysteriously 2 weeks after exposure, I developed a cough. I wasn't sleeping right, which made me feel flustered, thinking I was having a fever for days on end. Obviously I had severe lack of energy. And the stress made me get pimples around my chin area (which I swear I thought my lymph nodes were flaring up). I was experiencing neck and back pain at these times too from bad sleeping.
Receiving the results was so hard, I felt my heart had stopped while I was in the waiting room. But luckily it was ok.
I am feeling better already!
So yeah, in most cases, if you are suffering from what you think is ARS symptoms, most of the time stress and anxiety induced, cause the symptoms are generic.
I'm still slightly worried because it could be a latre seroconversion, but for the most part, I'm releived.
The high risk exposure I had was breif unprotected vaginal penetration with a sexworker after the condom had failed.
I know the chances are 1/2000,
but there were quite a few factors that made me stress out immensely.
- After sex, my penis was somewhat raw, and looked a bit red. But no obvious cuts. I wasn't too sure if it was blood or not.
- I assumed the SW was HIV+ because she looked real promiscious (she had quite a few tats, and smoked). Also, she had a couple of sores on her legs (which I didn't noticed till daylight), this might suggest latter stage HIV infection. Her reaction when I asked about her status was somewhat defensive.
- And lastly, but not least, is the fact that Subtype E was the most dominant subtype in Thailand. This subtype is *supposedly* 50 times more contagious than subtype B, and heterosexual transmission is very efficient. That is why 80% of ppl in thailand living with HIV acquired it throuhg heterosexual contact. But this is only *supposed*, as there has not been enough research into this area to definitely prove this.
But yeah, my optimism is still strong.
Really Scared Guy.
You are contradicting yourself. Sure, anal is a high risk activity, vaginal is much much lower. So since gay men have anal sex then they are much higher risk right Teak? As the numbers imply throughout North America. All stats for states, cities, countries are freely available on the net....they are all relatively the same..... the "MSM" category always has the highest numbers...why is that "teak"?
If you dispute these statements then prove me wrong.
Sure, mostly in women and mostly because of either their partners/husbands having sex with other men then going home to have sex with their unsuspecting wives. Or as I said, a woman who is the regular partner of an infected man.
True hetero infection to a male is extremely rare. If people like you would stop pretending and deflecting the realities of this disease, were not so selfish and actually thought of the well being of others you would not live the lifestyle you do. If all anal sex ceased, and risky patterns of behavior in gay males and iv drug users ceased, the disease would disappear.
The original poster's exposure was in Thailand and not in the US. The US based hetero and homo based transmission facts and statistics simply do not apply for a Thai encounter. If you are going to call a hetero encounter outside developed world as the same risk as U.S, it will be comparing oranges and apples. Other subtypes might have a role to play in this and that is why I started the thread about clades. Even Dr. H's responses are more suited to U.S exposures and may not apply worldwide.
Please correct me if you think I am wrong but are you sure that the subtype has no bearing on window period as well.
The link I am posting below has me confused and it is coming from a very renowned HIV doctor. Basically, it is pointing
different window periods for different subtypes. I will really appericiate if you could share your thoughts about this:
Most HIV transmissions around the world occur through vaginal intercourse between a hetero man and a hetero woman. The previous poster's comment is relevant. In Thailand Dr. H's views of the disease do not apply. I also don't think Dr. H's views are entirely applicable in the United States, where only about 48% of HIV cases result from male-to-male sex and a growing number of women have caught HIV from heterosexual men.
Remember that Dr. H is only one of thousands of different STD researchers. His rhetoric is the most antigay because unlike others, he constantly tells people on this website that straight people aren't at risk for HIV. The statistics by which he infers this have less to do with his expertise on microbiology, and everything to do with his way of calculating odds and his own arbitrary logic.
Yet odds and logic can be determined by anybody with a decent grasp of math and a modicum of common sense, and just because a doctor is good at biology doesn't mean he's always great at playing with numbers. Though I'm not a doctor, I know enough about math and probabilities to say that Dr. H's formulae for determining the odds that gay vs. straight people can be infected don't entirely make sense. The fact that he knows about cellular biology and clinical treatment for STD seems to be a distraction, which gets a lot of people on this forum to take his mathemtical models seriously when that's not something that he's an expert in.
We know that female-to-male transmission of HIV is possible and widespread around the world. Therefore if you are straight and you had sex with a woman without knowing her status, there is a risk. Trying to calculate it downward until you hear that it's something infinitesimal like 1 in 85 billion is not really sensible; the bottom line is that there is a risk and if you get infected that one time, your risk was 100%. You just have to get tested and treat it with the same caution as male-male sex.
Also, I should note that I've been on this website long enough to see several cases of straight people with HIV post messages. When straight men have posted saying that they got infected from women, posters attack them and drive them off the site; Dr. H, rather than being a good schoolmaster, has often encouraged this ganging up. So obviously nobody who has gotten infected from vaginal sex wants to post on this website. This causes a circular logic and self-fulfilling prophecy, whereby everyone on the site begins with the belief that men don't get HIV from women, and then force the evidence to fit their belief by doubting or attacking people who present other information.
There have been countless gay and bi men on here who have also posted after an HIV scare and ended up negative.
But if you go and look up the CDC figures for any given year, there are plentiful cases of men who got infected with HIV from women, even in the US. Maybe not 10s of thousands a year, but a fair amount.
o_g, please reread what the doctor said in the link again.
Response from Dr. Conway
It turns out that the rate of acquisition of anti-HIV antibodies may vary from one HIV subtype to the other, and may be slower with Subtype E (common in Thailand) vs. Subtype B (the most common Subtype in North America). The over 150 days of a window period are a bit on the long side and are meant to depict the time from exposure to a full antibody response, not to the earliest time that one can detect any antibodies after infection. Also, if one is particularly concerned, it is always possible to do a direct viral test and this will be positive within hours to days of exposure, regardless of the subtype.
I had information that antibody response could be compared to a bell curve. So, I guess that at 150 days post exposure, the antibody response would be at its maximum but a person should have antibodies in enough quantities to be detected by 3 months.
But, at the same time, Dr. Conway is agreeing that antibody response is subtype dependent and is saying that subtype E antibody formations looks to be slower as compared to subtype B. Now, is the average period of antibody production which is repeatedly stated by experts all over WWW to be 21 days keeping in mind subtype B or all subtypes?
What would be the case with subtype A,C and F with respect to their window periods? Are the antibody formation for them also slower than subtype B antibody formation? If yes, then how much slower?
It sucks that the link the guy posted in his question to Dr. Conway is not accessible anymore otherwise we could have had a good graph to depict window periods for each subtype. I just hope that by 3 months antibody response to all subtypes should have enough antibody formation to be detected.
Too much confusion and no answers about these very valid questions available on the web. And moreover, even ID docs do not know much about it all. I hope you agree that these points do make very interesting and valid questions for a HIV forum.
[however, they are fuelled by my paranoia]
But when testing is done at six weeks min., then antibodies would have already have establish enough to get a reaction no matter what the strain or subtype are. The only ones to test longer would be your Chemo, IV drug users, persons on anti-rejection drugs for transplants and some immune suppressed.
WOW. That is the most arrogant, misleading, and insulting post I have ever seen. Essentially, you have called the Dr. a liar and fraud and behind his back as he does not read here (I don't think). I don't even know how to repsond to outright lies like this and I won't as there is no point. You are obviously a coward for doing this. Why don't you spend $15.00 and post this garbage in the Dr's forum so he has a chance to repsond if he chooses to do so?
One thing to clarify, you say you have seen many posts from "straight" men who have got hiv from "straight" sex.....where are they? I have read almost all posts from the beginning on this forum starting at #1 and have never seen this. Please show me.
Johnny, you are correct in your statement. dumbo like normal sticks his nose into to something he doesn't understand. Heterosexuals get HIV the same way, as do gays and bisexual persons. This **** that it is only a gay disease, is bull.
AMERICAN RED CROSS
The Content on this Site is presented in a summary fashion, and is intended to be used for educational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended to be and should not be interpreted as medical advice or a diagnosis of any health or fitness problem, condition or disease; or a recommendation for a specific test, doctor, care provider, procedure, treatment plan, product, or course of action. Med Help International, Inc. is not a medical or healthcare provider and your use of this Site does not create a doctor / patient relationship. We disclaim all responsibility for the professional qualifications and licensing of, and services provided by, any physician or other health providers posting on or otherwise referred to on this Site and/or any Third Party Site. Never disregard the medical advice of your physician or health professional, or delay in seeking such advice, because of something you read on this Site. We offer this Site AS IS and without any warranties. By using this Site you agree to the following Terms and Conditions. If you think you may have a medical emergency, call your physician or 911 immediately.