I thought 6 to 8 weeks was good.

Doctor, the CDC website said that the Oraquick has a sensitivity of  99.3% and a specificity of 99.8%. How does the 85% equate from those two numbers? I know me and a lot of other people were sitting well and moving past our anxiety until we saw this 85%. Like me i got a negative at 8 and 10 weeks by way of Oraquick. When on multiple posts you guys have said that is difinitive. Now to hear that 85% thing its kind of discouraging.


This discussion is related to Accuracy of rapid tests?.

[Teak]

All tests are conclusive at 3 months post exposure.

Are all negatives true negatives?
A Non-Reactive (negative) test means that anti-HIV antibodies were not detected in the specimen. This test result is interpreted as Negative.

It is possible to get a negative screening test if the infection is very recent. This may be because there is a window period of several weeks when a person may be infected but antibodies to the virus have not reached a concentration that is visible. Therefore, if a person has certain risk factors, or thinks they may have been exposed to HIV, they should be retested in three months to be certain of a negative result.

http://www.orasure.com/products-infectious/products-infectious-oraquick.asp#faq5

[worried_for_months]

ya, I've pretty much completely lost it over this.. why give a test if it doesn't work? Why allow us to think we are HIV- when we could then be putting others at risk? I could handle a positive result, but to know that I gave HIV to the one person I love would kill me. I wouldn't be able to handle that...nope, not at all.

[Teak]

You never read anywhere on this forum that your test would be conclusive earlier than 3 months.

[worried_for_months]

Dr HHH: "However, even for established infection, the rapid tests miss a few infections that are detected by the lab-based (ELISA) tests."

I'm assuming established infection refers to outside of the window period, which is why I'm upset.

But like the doctor said, if we can't rest easy with out result, get an ELISA, it's our problem, not the test's problem. I'm just scared I've put someone else at risk, which is causing me extreme anxiety and depression, as well as a fear to test.

[Teak]

Rapid tests are ELISA tests. Putting this aside, did you have an exposure?

[worried_for_months]

Yes, possibly. I was with someone who cheated on me for three years with no telling how many people. My risk is high, I know that. Which was why I got tested. I was clueless about testing, I went to an AIDS task force and trusted them to give me a reliable test. I had never even heard of an oral fluid test, but they assured me it was completely reliable. So I believed them and went on with my life. I was tested three years after possible exposure.

I wouldn't even know any of this about the oral test except I started having symptoms and looked them up on the internet, which of course led me to HIV, and then I learn that the oral tests are being studied and giving false negatives... It sent me into a tailspin. I'm with someone now I love very much and the thought that I could have passed this on... it's the most frightening thing I've ever experienced. If it was just me I was worried about, it would be easier to handle. I made my own mistakes, I have to live with that, but I can't live with the thought that now someone else will have to pay for them.

[reeseym]

why not just take another test?

[Teak]

Did you test 3 months post your last unprotected sex? Did you and your new partner test together before having unprotected sex?

[worried_for_months]

I'm scared to take another test, but yes, it's coming to that, I will have to do it. There's no other alternative.

I tested three years after I split with the cheater, and no me and my new partner did not test together before having unprotected sex.

The more we discuss this the more frightened I am. I can get another rapid oral test today, but not sure if that would ease my mind at all considering that test is the reason I'm in this predicament. I keep going to the orasure website and reading the part that states 99% accuracy and praying my test was a true negative... gawd this is terrible.

[Teak]

Now you put yourself back into the same situation you were in.

[chrisjudd]

All tests are conclusive at 3 months post exposure.

Are all negatives true negatives?
A Non-Reactive (negative) test means that anti-HIV antibodies were not detected in the specimen. This test result is interpreted as Negative.

It is possible to get a negative screening test if the infection is very recent. This may be because there is a window period of several weeks when a person may be infected but antibodies to the virus have not reached a concentration that is visible. Therefore, if a person has certain risk factors, or thinks they may have been exposed to HIV, they should be retested in three months to be certain of a negative result.

http://www.orasure.com/products-infectious/products-infectious-oraquick.asp#faq5

HOW COME FOR MY 9 WEEK HIV NEGATIVE TEST IN WHICH IT CAME BACK NEGATIVE YOU SAID IT WAS CONCLUSIVE IN WHICH MY EXPOSURE WAS RECEIVING UNPROTECTED ORAL SEX

[reeseym]

Well Teak has a good point. You both should go down and get a tested.  Most people on this form wish they could test at 3 years (where there would be no wait) instead of having to wait.  for 3 months.  I took the same test you did the Oraquick antibody 1/2 hiv test Oral. When the test is done right.  I think it is a 99%.  Ask your x-girl to take the test with you.  If you want you can even try to pay her to take it with you. Be with her when she do.  Most of the people with the oraquick were worried about false positives rather than false negatives.  I can't tell you anything that will stop you from being worried.  Just take the test and get your new girl tested also.

[reeseym]

I was just wondering have you tested positive? how long has it been since your exposure?  If it been 3 months why not test again just to calm your anxiety?

[Teak]

Because you never had a risk and didn't need to test in the first place for HIV.

[chrisjudd]

no i tested at 9 weeks negative and that was my last exposure going to get my results next week which will be 13 week post exposure.im just pointing out that teak and the doctors on medhelp have double standard on testing times in regards to risk.like for example 8 week is conclusive for oral risk,and 12 week is conclusive for anal sex , you see where im getting at.

[worried_for_months]

I looked my ex up on facebook and thought about sending a message asking about status, but I don't think I would get the truth, or maybe the jerk has never even tested.

My current partner was tested before we got together, so no worries on that, what I'm worried about is that my test was wrong and that I've now passed it on.

My worry stems from the fact that the oral swab test is missing established infections, I'm not sure the percentage on that, but just to know that it's possible is enough to drive me mad.

I did wait three years to test, stupid but true. I know the test was administered correctly, he was very knowledgable, has performed the test quite often for many years. I actually called him the other day and we talked for a very long time. He tried to reassure me and offered to test me again if it would put my mind at ease. But I don't think I can trust that test, although one of the doctors on this forum stated that if you test negative twice on the Oraquick Oral that it's likely 100% accurate.

I might get up the nerve to go test this afternoon at the task force again. Unfortunately they don't do the rapid blood test. I'm praying the result will be negative, of course, and if it is, mabye I can trust it enough to put this behind me. I can't go on like this for much longer, either way, I will have to do something.

[Teak]

If you test as you said your test was conclusive negative but you put yourself into another situation without knowning his status.

[reeseym]

I think i get what your saying.  What they are doing is looking and evaluating the risk you took when you had sex.  I thank both the FORM PEOPLE and the DR.!  But you got to remember they are people just like me and you.  In other words just be real.  Say when you go in for your 13 weeks post exposure and it say negative.  
Would you take another test?  Although after 3 months is suppose to be for a "Normal Case"?  Most people would because of the WHAT IF. I did not have enough antibodies, If they did not do the test right or if I did not do it right, What if they got the test mixed up with someone else.

They can only tell you what they saw or read.  That is better than what most people would tell you including your local doctors.  (who prob. saw fewer hiv cases than the dr. on the form.)

The cdc does the same as the doc.  They give you sististics.  I HEARD it use to be a year of waiting then 6 MONTHS THEN 3 on advantage.
1. The dr. has never seen an hiv test go from a negative to a positive after 3 months. (normal case)
2. The people in the forms go by what the cdc said.  I never read where TEAK said anyone was conclusive before 3 months. unless it was oral. I have search this form A LOT!!! I have seen him tell people THE CDC DOES NOT SAY BEFORE.
3. CDC are probably conservative.  They are not going to tell you to test where there even might be a hit of a fine line on a neg or a positive.
4. everyone is different. and symptoms mean nothing.  I have symptoms. I have more than one swollen lymph on my neck on the right side in the collar bone I even THINK i felt some under my arm. but you have to look at your test results. NEGATIVE.

[worried_for_months]

Could my test really be considered conclusive in light of the recent study showing only 85% accuracy? That was my concern. Yes, I tested many years after possible exposure and I always read that a negative result trumps symptoms every time, but if I'm having symptoms and I tested with an unreliable test, then you can see why I'm beginning to doubt my results.

My current partner was tested prior to us getting together, received negative result. If my stupidity results in my partner being positive, then I'm the worst kind of person and could never forgive myself.

Anyway, I appreciate you having this conversation with me. I'm still scared but I'm calming down.

[yungndum]

So what youre saying is my oral test at 8 & 10 weeks mean nothing.  And when I go take my 12 week its still only 85% accurate?

[Teak]

What I said is it is not conclusive. You cannot receive a conclusive negative test result earlier than 3 months post exposure if you have had a REAL RISK.

[yungndum]

So my 12 week test is conclusive no matter what test I take?

[Teak]

All tests no matter what generation they are, are conclusive at 3 months.

[Teak]

For those that want to be political correct that was a response to antibody testing.

[rubberball314]

4th Gen  Antibody + Antigen test are accurate and the need for 3 month tests is out dated . As you are well aware this is a legal and license issue that your country places on the world due the litigation joke you live with day to day.

As a professional in the technical lab field there is no factual need or evidence to suggest that 3 months conclusive results testing is required in 4 th gen testing cases.

The other reason for the CDC cuation is that people testing may not tell the clinics or healthcare professionals the truth or not actually know the right dates.

But as I said factual a true 28 day negative test on 4th gen will be conclusive at 99.98%

Please provide any evidence to this forum to the contary.

[biggamejames]

What is your experience with the accuracy of 3rd generation antibody only tests?

[Teak]

Page 27
Current methods for the detection of HIV may not detect all infected individuals. An ARCHITECT HIV Ag/Ab Combo test result that is nonreactive does not exclude the possibility of exposure to or infection with HIV-1 and/or HIV-2. Nonreactive results in this assay for individuals with prior exposure to HIV-1 and/or HIV-2 may be due to antigen and antibody levels below the limit of detection of this assay.


UK testing guidelines.
Post-test discussion

The need for a repeat HIV test if still within the window period after a specific exposure should be discussed. Although fourth generation tests shorten the time from exposure to seroconversion a repeat test at three months is still recommended to definitively exclude HIV infection.

http://www.bhiva.org/documents/Guidelines/Testing/GlinesHIVTest08.pdf

[biggamejames]

Teak, based on your experience and what you have seen, have you ever come across anyone who tested negative via an antibody only test between 6-8 weeks come back positive at three months?

[chrisjudd]

my 14 week test came back negative i dont think ill go for another test

[kaplaz]

get a life!!!