Please somebody! Explain this to me!

Why do the doctors keep on advising people just to test out to 6-8 weeks despite the official and well known official recommendation of the 3 months mark? Please! Somebody! That I cannot understand.

[Teak]

Because the doctors that state it don't know what they are talking about when it comes to testing. As long as you know that 3 months is conclusive then you have nothing to worry about.

[todd860]

Because CDC is government, Gov always gives himself more confidence. and reduce any possible trouble.

[nonbeliever]

its called cya. when it comes to hiv wouldnt you rather be on the conservative side of testing.3 months is conclusive

[Teak]

The CDC has nothing to do with it. If you would read the test approvals they are all approved for 3 months. That is what the manufacture puts on their tests. It has nothing to do with the CDC.

[concerned4all]

It worries me because I keep reading back and forth between the HIV Prevention Expert's forum and this one! They are telling people to test out to 6-8 weeks while over here everyone seems to agree on a 3 months mark! Gosh! They are doctors which are supposed to be fine doctors and you guys (specially Teak) know a lot about the subject too. Who to believe? I had a 11 weeks neg test so I don't even know if testing again or not! I read the doctors' posts to go back to my comfort zone but then I read yours and my anxiety comes back on! Who to believe?

[Xhost]

I would say if you had to make a choice, go with what the doctor's are telling you. I do not know what the particulars are of your situation, which may be why the doctor's on the moderated forum are telling you that 6 to 8 weeks is good enough for you.

[concerned4all]

I haven't posted in the expert's forum (yet) because I wanted to do some research before bothering the doctors and having the chance to have my question deleted.

In similar cases they have told the people to test out to 6-8 weeks when they assure the test will be 90-99% reliable. I had sex with an unkown woman (we hooked up at a party) of unkown HIV status and my condom broke during the second episode of vaginal sex. If the condom wouldn't have failed I wouldn't be worried at all, but it just ripped from top to bottom and I didn't notice exactly when that happened until we both felt something weird which was what was left of the condom. Teak? Xhost? Any other doctor?

[concerned4all]

No symptoms, no nothing. I forgot to mention that although I know from reading this website and others that they are not a good indicative for new infections. I've made my homework but I just keep hesitating whether my test was reliable or not. The doctors on the expert's forum would tell me I am good to go but then the 3 months mark comes back into my head. I also don't want to bring this up to them as they could find it as a questioning of their knowledge. Again, they seem to be fine doctors but what about the 3 months mark? Would I need to get tested again?

[Teak]

There is not one test that is used in the US that is approved to give you a conclusive negative result less than 3 months. Not one test and it doesn't matter what any doctor says they are not the ones that got the approvals granted through the FDA. Nor are they approved to make other authorization than what has been stated on the test and the FDA approval.  

[concerned4all]

Thank you Teak. In my case would you recommend testing again now at 12 weeks? Have you seen anyone testing negative at 11 weeks and then turn positive?

[Teak]

I've seen negative tests test positive a lot longer than 11 weeks but it was known to happen. With you, can you live with your 11 week results if so then I would suggest you move on then.

[cecil50]

hi , wot do u you mean by known to happen ?

[Teak]

Those that are on chemo, and those that take antirejection drugs.

[concerned4all]

Are you asking me or telling me to live and move on with my result? Thanks again.

[concerned4all]

Uh, ok! That doesn't include me so good to go! I ain't on chemo or on antirejection drugs! Thank you so much for your help. Just a last question, does the condom brand matter? I had never tried this brand before but it was all that was handy at the moment.

[Teak]

Just as long as it was a latex or a polypropylene condom.

[ManinThai]

But does EVERYONE test either negative or positive within 12 weeks max if they are not on chemo, rejection drugs or PEP?

And isn't it just 5% or thereabouts that test positive after 4 or 6 weeks??? I thought that was what the DUO was all about....the fact that MOST (95%) of peeps if they are infected will show up on DUO by 4 weeks. Of course then you have to consider whether you are happy with that result and are not one of the 5% i suppose.

[cecil50]

only 2 things are  gaurenteed in life, 1- your born  2- one day you will die.

from what research iv done if a person is positive about 96% or thereabouts will show up by 6-7 weeks.

[kimyon]

I agree as well, I was in fro my 4 week test yesterday and the specialist was training a nurse. He said that the testing guidlines are still based on teh 80's but cant see anyone changing them to protect there own ***. It is confirmed that most people will test positive by six weeks but like everyone else says, I would feel better knowing that I only have a 5% chance left. Teak, I always see that you say 3 month is conclusive but I dont think the doctors will tell ******** when they say that 95% of people will be positive by six. How come you do not buy into these numbers?

[snippets69]

It's not that people don't buy into them.  It's just that it's not 100% conclusive.  The numbers are real.  And it's not "10% chance left", you have to figure risk also.  Assume a man has 1 time unprotected sex with a woman who's for sure HIV positive.That's 1 in 2000 chance you'd get it.  If you had a ELISA come back negative at 4 weeks, that's 90% conclusive. (.0005 x .1) = 1 in 20,000. And that's IF the person was positive.

[snippets69]

slight correction to the last sentence...That's IF the person you had sex with was positive.

[Teak]

Here some math for you snippets69, YOU CAN get infected on the first time that you have unprotected sex with someone that is HIV positive.

[snippets69]

No doubt.  But if you've had a single low-risk exposure and have a negative test at 4 weeks, and the person was HIV positive, the chances of that being true would be 1 in 20,000

[Teak]

That's not true either. Four weeks is not even out of the window period.

[ManinThai]

which window period is that?

[Teak]

You should refrain from answering questions on this forum if you don't know what the window period is.

[ManinThai]

i guess the 1 in 2000 comes from the ratio of the  number of people who are infected and the number of people who are at. How else would they come up with that figure? But thats wrong what he said, if it is negative at 4 weeks, it still means it is 95% accurate and he has a 5% chance left that he actually caught it off the definitely hiv positive person. Coz, if at 12 weeks it is still positive, he didnt catch it.

[ManinThai]

sorry i meant if at 12 weeks it is still NEGATIVE, he didnt catch it.

[ManinThai]

I know what THE window period is....ie 12 weeks, but I thought you might be on about a different one.

[Teak]

A 12/13 week test is conclusive not a 4 week or 6 week or an 8 week test.

[todd860]

if you are not chmeo, drug IV, 8 weeks is yuor conclusive, I  trust these doctors.

[snippets69]

ManinThai...You're brain is not in the right place.  It's not a 5% chance you have HIV if you had sex with someone with HIV, and the test comes back negative at 6 weeks.  You need to multiply the 5% by the risk factor.

No one's disputing Teak saying 12/13 week test is conclusive. No test is 100% reliable no longer how long you wait to get it taken.

There are plenty of threads in the Dr's forums that go into test reliability at 4 weeks / 6 weeks etc... and it is as I stated.

[ManinThai]

yes sorry about that...I did actually mean that in 5% of cases, it would change, but for a specific act, you are right that you need to multiply by the risk factor (which gives a possibility of much less that 5% of changing although depending on who and how etc, this will be different, but still less.

[snippets69]

But it DOESN'T mean that in 5% of cases it would change.  It just means that at 6 weeks 95% of the people who would test positive will have tested positive by that time.  So you're left with 5% unknown (.05) x risk (1 in 2000 or .0005 if it was a single act of unprotected vaginal sex with a female who's for sure HIV positive).  .05 x .0005 = .000025 which is somewhere in the range of 1 in 50,000 IF the person was HIV positive and you had a negative test at 6 weeks.

All that being said.  You still could be that one.  People win the lotto everyday.  But it's more than highly unlikely.