How early can an hiv infecter person infect anothe person?

I was tested December 13, 2010.  Then again February 2, 2011.   Both those tests where negative, throughout the holidays I did not have sex.  On January 5, 2011 I had unsafe sex with a guy.   On January 12, 2011 I had unsafe sex with another guy.  That's it in the past 6 months.  The January 12 guy tested positive.  I got a text from him telling me.  The Jan 5 guy says he's negative, although I don't quite believe him.  The only way I could get it was if I got it from the Jan 5 guy then gave it to the Jan 12 guy.  Both times I was only the top.  I did not even suck them.  I just topped.  The guys are 7 days apart.  Is it possible to get infected and then infect someone 7 days later?  Is it likely, highly unlike or just possible?  Also, say I was infectious at day 7.  Wouldn't that mean it was moving along fast and I'd develop antibodies fast?  Meaning, that I'd likely test positive at day 29?  The average person will test positive around day 30, some as early as two weeks.  Since I tested negative at day 29, will I likely test negative again next week when I get tested?  I just want your opinion.  Facts are:

-both times I topped
-is it likely that a guy can infect another guy at day 7?  I was told by my doctor friend that at 7 days a viral load would be very low and that infecting someone would be highly unlikely.  What do you think?
-if I was infection at day 7, wouldn't the HIV be moving along fast and have antibodies fast, meaning a positive test at day 29 was likely?

I know the risk is high, but since I have such exact numbers, and I was tested all around the time I was at risk, I'm wondering if you can give me an estimate of how likely I am to test positive.

And if I test negative next week, I won't have unsafe sex with ANYONE. I'm scared to death right now.

[Teak]

Why would you be putting yourself and other people at risk? Doesn't make sense.

[JustinT1]

No, it would just make me worry less if the chances of testing positive are in the highly unlikely range.  Since I'm getting tested next week.

My doctor friend, although he's not an hiv expert, said that the odd are on my side since at day 7 a high viral load that's big enough to infect someone is highly unlikely.

Also, that say it was moving along that fast, that I'd likely test positive at day 29.  But, he's not an expert.  I'd like a more expert opinion.

I'm worried to death right now.  I'd feel better if I was at least in the likely negative risk zone.

And no, after this, I'm scared to death.  Its safe sex with everyone if I test negative.

[Teak]

Odds? Odds are played in gambling not with yours or anyone else's health. Bud you are not even close the the negative zone area.

[JustinT1]

Ok, but do you know how likely it is for a person to infect another person 7 days after being infected?

I was told that at day 7 its unlikely the viral load would be high enough to infect another person, and that if it was that high, that it would be moving along faster than usual, which means I'd have antibodies fast.  Meaning, I likely would have tested positive at day 29.  True?

[Teak]

You can infect another person within 24 hours of being exposed.

[JustinT1]

I have heard people can infect someone early on, and that its possible to infect someone early on.  But, I was also told that at day 7 its highly unlike the viral load would be high enough to infect someone.  That it was possible, but highly unlikely. True?

I read on aids.org that people are most infectious 2-3 months after testing positive.  That to them could be seen as early on, since hiv is for a lifetime.

[Hope242]

You read that wrong...most infectious early and still infectious for life!

[JustinT1]

Why i didn't use a condom?  I believed the guy.  He told he hadn't had sex in 6 months, that he was neg and had been tested in December.  He still claims he's negative by the way.

At this point, if I test negative, I'm not believing anyone when it comes to testing and being neg.

[JustinT1]

@hope242 you said "most infectious early"  I know that.  I'm trying to wind it down to a more exact answer.  I know its possible.  But there's a difference between possible and highly unlikely.  My doctor friend, although not an hiv expert, said that building up a viral load at day 7 that was high enough to infect a person was highly unlikely. Possible, but unlikely.  I was wondering if I could get a more informed answer on that.

I know an hiv+ person is infectious for life.  My question is on how likely it is to have a viral load at day 7 that is high enough to infect another person.  I know its possible.  But, is it possible, likely or highly unlikely?

[Hope242]

Did you ask the Jan12th the same question? Maybe just maybe he could of contracted HIV after your exposure?

[Teak]

Serum viral load is not the same as the semen viral load.

[JustinT1]

The Jan12 guy could have gotten it from another guy.  I'm not his only option.  But I was on his list of people he possibly could have either infected or gotten it from.  He did not say he's sure he got it from me, because he was with other guys.

[Teak]

You do know if your partner becomes infected you can be criminally charged. You can't use the I didn't know from having a previous test before and you are well aware how HIV is transmitted. Start using your head.

[JustinT1]

@ Teak, can you explain the difference between serun viral load and semen viral load?

[JustinT1]

I don't have a partner, if I did, I wouldn't have had sex with those guys.  Also, I never lied.  The guy I think lied was the Jan 5 guy, he still claims he's negative.  If he's saying the truth, then I'm likely neg.

[Teak]

Serum viral load is the viral load of the blood. Semen viral load is the viral load of your semen. I have an undetectable serum viral load but I have a semen viral load of 4800.

[Teak]

You didn't have a partner, did you have sex with yourself? Your sex partner was the other person.

[JustinT1]

How is that significant?  Does one build up faster than the other?  I'm worried about how fast they can build up, most importantly, if any of those viral loads are typically high by day 7.

Also, if the viral loads where higher than usually early on (day 7), would that also cause antibodies to build up earlier than usual?

[JustinT1]

@Teak, I thought that by partner you meant boyfriend.  As in that I was with those guys and then later on infected my boyfriend.  I don't have any other guys I was with during that time.  Its just those two guys.

[Teak]

No not necessarily.

[Hope242]

The answer to your Doctor friend about unlikely

The initial infection with HIV generally occurs after transfer of body fluids from an infected person to an uninfected one. The first stage of infection, the primary, or acute infection, is a period of rapid viral replication that immediately follows the individual's exposure to HIV leading to an abundance of virus in the peripheral blood with levels of HIV commonly approaching several million viruses per mL.

[JustinT1]

What I've found is that my question is one that only a doctor could answer.  Online I could only find generalized answers.  Like "its possible to infect someone early on, early on people are most infectious."  Its also possible for everyone that has unsafe sex to become positive.  "Possible" is not really helping.  Also, by "most infectious early on" do they mean weeks? months?  days?  I heard it was 2-3 months when someone is most infectious.  That to them could be early on.  Its possible to infect someone at day 7.  But is it possible or highly unlikely?  My main concern is that how likely it is for a viral load to be high enough to infect someone at day 7.

[JustinT1]

@hope242  Thanks for you reply.  you mention a "period of rapid viral replication"  is this period within days?   How fast does this happen?  Since they say to get tested every 6 months.  A few weeks, in comparison to 6 months, is a "rapid spread."

[Hope242]

People are known to test positive as early as two weeks, so is it possible to infect 7 days after your possible exposure...yes

[nursegirl6572]

All you are doing is guessing and assuming, which does none of you any good.  All of you need to be tested at appropriate times, and it goes without saying that you need to refrain from sex until this is sorted out as to not put ANYONE else at risk.

Until you're all tested, it is going to be hard to figure out who was the person who transmitted the initial infection, and being that both encounters were so close togther, that info may never be too clear...again you would likely be guessing.  At this point, it's not that important...what's of utmost importance is making sure everyone is 100% clear on their status and notifies any other potential partners at risk.

IF you avoid infection this time, I strongly advise you to rethink your sexual practices and outright carelessless with regards to protecting yourself and not putting others at risk.  If you continue down this path, you can bet you'll end up being HIV+ and probably infecting others along the way.  Seems a few moments of pleasure sure isn't worth a lifetime of having a chornic illness, and having to know you infected others as well.  Seriously, you have a LOT to think about.

[JustinT1]

@nursegirl  I agree, everyone is being tested.  My problem was believing guys.  The Jan5 guy told me he was negative, that he was tested in December and that he hadn't had sex in over 6 months.  Looking back, it almost was too good.  He likely said that to get me to have sex with him.  6 months, plus a recent test clears him of all risk.  If he was being 100% honest.  Now looking back I think it was just him trying to say anything I wanted to hear to get me to **** him bb.  He still insists he'd negative.  I asked him to get retested, and he said he did.  He says he's negative.  But, if he lied initially he can easily lie again.

Jan 12 guy.  He's the honest one.  He was tested last week and tested positive.  He then texted everyone he felt was at risk (or that he could have gotten it from).  I was on his list.  Now that we've talked more, I noticed he was the type that thought the risk was low as long as the guy didn't cum in him.  He was in the very high risk category, since guys where ******* him bareback.  Looking back at all I know from both guys, I'm thinking the Jan 12 guy was likely pos before we had sex, meaning, regardless I've been at risk.  The difference being that if the Jan 5 gave it to me and I infected Jan 12 guy, then I'm likely pos.  If the Jan 5 guy is being honest and the Jan 12 guy was already pos, then the risk of me being pos is much lower.  Both time I was only the top.

It would make me sleep better if I felt I was at lower risk of testing pos.  I'd like to think positive and think that the Jan 5 guy is not lying and that he really is negative.  But, I don't know him good.  He could be lying.  Its just a waiting game till we all get tested.  Since I was tested Feb 2, I was told to wait till April, that way I'll know for sure.  A test now could give me false hope.

If I test positive, my flaw was trusting guys.  I don't drink.  I don't use drugs.  I don't even like drinking soda often.  Yet, I believed a guy when he told me he was neg and recently tested.  In the gay world its best to not trust anyone when it comes to that.  You never know who will lie.  Hopefully I test negative, if I do, in the future I won't trust what guys say when it comes to sex.

Believe me, I've been thinking about this a lot.  I regret trusting people.  There's really no way to safely bareback.  Guys in relationships often cheat.  Guys that are exclusive often are with other guys.  The only way to be sure you're safe is to always have safe sex with everyone.  The Jan 5 seemed as safe is they got.  He said he hasn't had sex in over 6 months, that he was neg and tested in December (we had sex Jan 5), and if I do test positive. Its because of him.  To this day, he still insists he's neg and even told me he was retested.  If I test positive, this is truly an example that you can't trust anyone.  Anyone can be lying.

[argentineguy760]

bareback is a suicide practise ,, you do know and not only regarding hiv
no matter your test final results you ALLLLLLLways have to use condom
hugs

[JustinT1]

yeah, what I used to think was that it was relatively safe if the guy was recently tested and hadn't had unsafe sex in months.  That's true, what's not factored in is that guys lie a lot.

I know its illegal to lie about being hiv+, but since its difficult to prove and no one has been prosecuted for that.  Guys continue to lie about it and not care.  When I asked the Jan 5 guy about it, he kept telling me he was neg and "do you know how rare it is for a top to get it.  I'm neg, and you have nothing to worry about with me."

[Teak]

Whoa, don't put all the blame on him it takes two.

[argentineguy760]

whatever your point of view ,,, SAFE SEX MEANS PROTECTED INTERCOURSE
men women trans aliens speach do not HAVE to change behavior

[JustinT1]

I'm not putting blame.  I did make the mistake of believing him.  Plus, maybe he was saying the truth and he really is neg and I am also.  But, if I do test positive.  We both made mistakes.  They are different though.

Him:  He lied, told me he hadn't had sex in over 6 months, had been tested in December and was negative.

Me: I made the mistake of believing him.

Making up such a detailed lie to get me to have sex with him is much worse than the mistake I made which was believing him.  But yes, we both made mistakes.

[Teak]

Mistakes happen when condoms fail. Not using one is not a mistake, that is just a poor judgement on your part.

[JustinT1]

True, but if he would have told me the truth.  (again, assuming he really is hiv+)  Then I would not have even had sex with him.   I did not lie, my flaw was poor judgment.  I shouldn't have believe him.  I just can't believe so many guys will flat out lie like that about having something as serious as hiv+.  It wasn't even a small lie, but a long detailed lie to get me to do him bb.

After this, it really comes down to not being able to trust anyone for unsafe is.  Its always use a condom, or you'll likely end up with hiv+.  Too many guys out there that are hiv+ lie about it, then you need to factor in the hiv+ guys that are hiv+ but don't know it.  Nowadays, it truly is impossible to feel safe having unsafe sex with anyone.

[Teak]

Welcome to the real world.

[JustinT1]

I'd say 98% of guys do selectively bareback.  Either with their bf's, a guy they are exclusive with or a guy they feel they can trust.  Most will eventually end up in the same situation I'm in, wondering if they are at risk and hiv+.  

I wonder how many of those guys would turn down an attractive young guy that says he's hiv negative, tested a few weeks ago and that he hasn't had sex in over 6 months.  Unfortunately, most guys would say yes to him.  Its why hiv is so high.  Guys don't see that in the gay world its DTA (Don't Trust Anyone) or you'll end up one day at risk of getting hiv.

[JustinT1]

Regardless, this experience changed me.

If I test positive, the change is obvious.

If I test negative, it will forever change the way I view gay sex.

[NickOne7]

Gay sex, Straight sex makes NO difference! Use condoms!

[JustinT1]

Your profile says you're 55.  When did you test positive?

If someone tests positive, on average, how long will they live if they are taking the medication that is currently available. I'm 27, so how long would I expect to live?  Till I'm 60? 70? 80?

[joggen]

Just do yourself a favor and get yourself tested first thing tomorrow morning. If you do dodge a bullet then hopefully this is a lesson learned for you.

[JustinT1]

I was tested December 13, 2010 & February 2, 2011.  I was told to wait till April.  A test tomorrow could give me false hope.  In April I'd receive a reliable result.

[JustinT1]

...or maybe I can request a more reliable test?  Because I don't think I can go in every week to get a new antibody test done.

[Teak]

April 1984.

[JustinT1]

If someone tests positive, on average, how long will they live if they are taking the medication that is currently available. I'm 27, so how long would I expect to live?  Till I'm 60? 70? 80? 90?

[Teak]

A normal life span if you take care of yourself. No one knows when there time is up but you don't have to rush it.

[joggen]

If Jan 12 was your last exposure that means a test tomorrow would be 7-8 weeks after exposure. Antibody tests are extremely accurate at that time. It wouldn't be false hope because it would be very rare for a negative result to change at the 3 month mark, if it does turn out negative. You would still need to test in April but you could walk in feeling confident of another negative result. It's a much better option than posting on forums over the next few weeks speculating about things, because that will get you nowhere.

[JustinT1]

You've lasted 27 years then on medication.  Are you still healthy?  How long do your doctors think you'll have to live?  If I'm being intrusive, you don't need to answer.  I'm looking at this now from both sides.  I hope I test negative, but I also need to look at the possibility of testing positive.  What worries me most is how long I'm expected to live if I test positive.

[Teak]

I went on medication in April 2005.

[Teak]

Do your tests as you have planned. A negative test result will be conclusive at that time.

[JustinT1]

So, you survived from April 1984 till April 2005 without taking medication!  I had heard hiv+ people only lasted on average 7 years without medication.  How's your prognosis?  How much longer you expected to live?   Again, if I'm being intrusive, don't answer.

[JustinT1]

I was told to get tested in April, but I'll go next week.  I had planned Wednesday :-X

My high risk would be the Jan 5 risk (the guy I think lied to me).  I was tested Feb 5.  So, that's something.  It was a day 29 test.  4 1/2 weeks.  Hopefully it means something...

People test positive on average between 4-6 weeks and most people will test positive around day 30.  So, my neg result is something... not much though since it was so early.

[JustinT1]

Its actually a day longer.  We had sex on the night of Jan 4, technically Jan 5, since it was at 1am.  The test was done February 2 at 8:09 pm.  That would make it day 30/31... still not much difference.... closer to 5 weeks though.  5 weeks would be day 35.

[joggen]

Your Jan 12 partner tested positive so that would be your highest risk. Wed is fine. Let us know how it turns out.

[JustinT1]

Just thinking of the Jan 5 risk.  Do you think the Day 30/31 test of Feb 2 has any significance?  Or was it just too early.

[Teak]

There are no tests marketed or sold to give a conclusive negative test earlier than 3 months.

[joggen]

It would be encouraging if that was your only risk, but it wasn't. That's why I suggested that you just get a test tomorrow. Otherwise I'm concerned that you're going to keep going in circles speculating on things for the next 3 days.

[JustinT1]

I know its not conclusive, its why i was told to wait till April.  Since I had tested neg on Feb 2 (day 30/31), they felt it was best to wait till April or I'd risk false hope.

But, is that Feb 2 test in any way comforting? at least slightly?

[JustinT1]

I plant to get tested one day next week.

[Teak]

Any time you receive a negative result is comforting, it's that conclusive test result is what you seek.

[Teak]

MOVE ON and have a good day.

[JustinT1]

I had a lab test done.  I should have the results early next week.

I talked to a friend of mine that's a doctor.  He emailed me an article on early hiv infection.  At day 7, I would not be very infectious.  The likely-hood I got it on Jan 5 then gave it to the Jan 12 guy are unlikely, but possible.  Those two are 7 days apart.  The infectious rate skyrockets at around day 15-25.  That's when a person is very infectious.  That's what articles mean when they say people are highly infectious early on.  But, its important to keep in mind that its still possible to infect someone at day 7, just unlikely.

Well, I'll know soon.

[JustinT1]

I called to get my lab results today, they where not ready yet.  I was so ready to know that I decided to look around for a place that had the rapid hiv test that was open today.  I went.  I tested negative!  I know its too early to be sure, but one more negative test is comforting.  I know for sure in April!  

Today was Day 69!  So, I was tested negative on day 69.  The lab test will be a day 65 test, once I get those results.

Hopefully I test negative in April.  Or, when you guys recommend I get tested again?

[joggen]

Congratulations- you should expect the lab test to also be negative. A final antibody test on April 12 will put this to bed for you- the result will not change.

[JustinT1]

Thanks :)

When should I get tested again?  Early April?  Mid April?  Early May?

[JustinT1]

The place I normally go to is only open on Wednesdays, so I was thinking April 13?

[joggen]

Your last unsafe exposure was January 12, so any test in mid-April will be conclusive.

[joggen]

April 13 would be conclusive, yes.

[JustinT1]

I got my lab results today, I was negative.  It's now pretty certain I'll test negative in April.  I'll likely not post again on here, since I don't want to clutter up the forum.

Thanks everyone for your help :)