OK. WHO AGREES THAT 9 WEEK RAPID TEST (-VE) IS GOOD? AND THE ODDS?

[davidblaine]

I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHO AGREES THAT 9 WEEK RAPID TEST (-VE) IS GOOD AND WHAT THE % details are. please

thanks

blaine

[peekawho]

Who agrees that the 9 week rapid test is good?
--Virtually everyone

Odds?
--Probably 99+%

NO, YOU ARE NOT IN THE EXCEPTION.

[strata]

Most people on here will concur that your 9-week NEGATIVE test can be considered conclusive.

But most (if not all of us) are lay people (non-MDs), and there are probably ZERO HIV specialists here.

Here's the opinion of Dr HHH, the epidemiologist who monitors the HIV prevention forum:

http://www.medhelp.org/forums/STD/messages/708.html

PER DR HHH:

Here are some topics that are at high risk of being deleted without response:

- STD/HIV from oral exposure to female genitals (cunnlingus): extremely low, almost never worth anxiety or worry, unless exposed to a particular infection

- STD/HIV risk after a single condom-protected exposure, especially when the partner isn't known to have any STD problem

- STD/HIV risk from manual (hand to genital) contact (zero)

- Time to positive HIV test: sometimes positive as soon as 10 days, usually positive by 3 weeks, and virtually always positive by 6 weeks, despite official advice that it is best to wait 3 months to be sure. If your HIV test is negative 6 weeks after exposure (and especially after 12 weeks), you don't have HIV, period.

Thank you for your support of the STD Forum.

HHH, MD

[Xhost]

While there has been recent disagreement among some forum participants about the validity of a 9 week test, I would agree with Strata, and, by extension, the Dr. H. Sure, I'm not a doctor, and certainly not an expert on the subject: but he is. So, I trust what he says. In the end, have to do what makes you feel comfortable.