Please respond

6 weeks after possible exposure I recieved a negative result from a rapid result blood test.  I am wondering if I can consider this conclusive, or if the "kind" or "generation" of test will warrant a 3 month test.

[Joan123]

What was you exposure?

[akanxiety]

is was unprotected vaginal with partner of unknown status

[akanxiety]

and it was actually 7 weeks

[Joan123]

All I can tell you without knowing the kind of exposure you had is that a 6 week negative result is very solid. Generation of tests don't matter once beyond 4-6 weeks. For most people here, who usually had a low risk exposure a 6-8 weeks test is sufficient. If you still remain worried about it, have a final test at 12 weeks for peace of mind.

[Joan123]

The risk of getting HIV from unprotected vaginal sex averages around 1 in 2,000 if your partner was infected. A single episode of vaginal intercourse always has a low risk of HIV transmission, even if the woman is infected. You had a 6 week negative result, which is very, very reassuring, since nearly 100% of infected people would have a positive result by then. If you remain nervous have another test at 8 weeks or 12 just for peace of mind. In the mean time, know that the odds are strongly in your favor.

[mike_no]

okay, now understand this, the test that you had is indeed at the right time

1. A test taken on the 6-8 week would always give you a reliable result

2. Since average would seroconvert within 14 to 22 days after the exposure and few go up to 4 to 6 week - 6 months(people with shattered immune system, iv drug user etc.)

4. Detectable amount of antibodies would always be shown in the test result after two weeks preceding seroconversion

5. Having said that all by 6 week a person should get an indicative result when tested by any generation of the test

6. In your case if you had the virus in your body, antibodies would have been detected so far since you tested at the 7th week

Move on, HIV can't be your problem here !

Mike

[sad82]

But his is a rapid blood test, is it still as accurate, regarding the 6 weeks mark?

[sad82]

Can i ask why direct peneration into the viginal without condom, as the bros suggestion here is only 1/2000 chances of getting HIV provided that the girl is HIV positive? Is it becos thats no direct contact with blood ( the Penis had no open wounds)??

[sad82]

no one reply?