Testing

[AloneInhere]

Which method is more accurate? and if other....

So I have multiple exposure...
in the past 2 years the one before my last one was like in June 12...
Then I have one cunnilingus (bare) and CBJ, Csex in Aug 8
Right after the last one, I started feeling guilty...and started to read alot about HIV (probably my mistake)
So I decided to get tested for at least the exposure on June 12..
I have an elisa test that is yes till coming next week and a half...
Then I kind of nervous about the whole thing and want to know the result immediately.
So I went to the clinic to get an oraquick advance (HIV1/2) and the result was negative...
However it is not conclusion yet as the one for the aug 8 is only 8 days after exposure...
I know it is meaningless to have 8 days exposured test... So I still have several weeks to wait...
So any of you know which method is better or more accurate... I am kind of not wanting to know the result from elisa test anymore since I have it done through the oraquick....

[AloneInhere]

yeah...
I went to the Dr for my std test.
He sort of laugh at me and said he does not think I have any STD, and since I got a neg 1 week result, he recommend to have another one in 6 months.
He also mention it is my anxiety and told me to relax :).
I guess I am gonna do that now...

[longone]

I know a RNA isn't a stand alone test and yes it can be used any time, however it is most realiable the first two weeks if being used for EARLY detection. Please ,I also know that's not the intent of the test but people do use it for that. As I said, a DNA/PCR is better and more reliable for early detection after a couple of weeks even with its flaws. It's all about $$$. none of this matters though with the newer antibody tests most can wait out the 6 weeks, for as you know, in the "real world" thats all it takes for a realiable result.

Enjoy the rain

[AloneInhere]

isn't PCR is not approved yet? too many false positive?

[meworried]

Thanks for correcting me. You are the knowledgeable here on this forum.

Regards

[Teak]

That is incorrect information about the PCR/RNA test. A PCR/RNA test is good to monitor patients viral load at any time. It is not a stand alone test.

[AloneInhere]

I have many people say that (no risk) even though I brush my tooth possibly before and after (not immediately) the activity...
I probably wait till 6 weeks or more to get tested.

[longone]

A  RNA /PCR is only good for the first two weeks. After that get a DNA/PCR that is as good as it get regurdless of what anybody says. Of course you don't need any of them because you don't have HIV but hey, its your money and your life.

[Teak]

Just because someone would have an undetectable VL does NOT mean they are not infected. "Elite" persons with HIV usually have no VL but they are infected. Just because someone has undetectable serum levels of HIV does not mean that they have undetectable fluids in their sperm or in their prostrate.  

[meworried]

You look too anxious and probably find it difficult to wait until the specified window period is over. May I suggest you to ask your doctor to order high sensitivity PCR viral load test for you. This test, though quite expensive compared to ELISA, and usually not recommended for primary screening, but can be adopted in special situation like yours.

In my opinion, an "undetectable" or <50 copies reported in a person within his seroconcersion window period and not taking any ARV drugs, is virtually infection free and does not have HIV1. Encouraging results might give you peace of mind. This is the right time for you to go for this test since viral load in a truly infected person is highest within 25-28 days when antibodies are not yet formed to fight the invading virus.

This is for comments from knowledgeables like Teak, Peek and Regular.

[AloneInhere]

Jeez.... calm down...
I pay taxes too... I was just saying to do all 3 tests... but I probably won't go that often...
prolly just 6 weeks and 12 weeks

[peekawho]

If you go to a clinic, it most certainly is NOT free.  Do you think Oraquick tests grow on trees, or are found by the dozens on the street?

Unecessary testing is paid for by the government.  And ultimately by the rest of our society.  Have one test at the appropriate time, and stop wasting money on what is YOUR anxiety, not rational and sane thought.  

If you pay for it yourself, test every day.  No one will care.  But don't go to a free clinic and waste their limited budget and resources.  

[AloneInhere]

well if I take it in the clinic oraquick is free though... they said it is reliable too about the same as the elisa one

[regularjoey]

It's your money - one test is all you need.

[AloneInhere]

so I am gonna do 6 weeks, 9 weeks and 12 weeks then...

[regularjoey]

It is, but the CDC still recommends 3 months, so just wait it out.

[AloneInhere]

is 6 or 7 weeks test after the exposure good enough?

[regularjoey]

Still - no risk.  Look if the test will make you feel better, do it, 3 months after the exposure that worries you.  But you will be wasting your money - your test already shows that you're negative.

[AloneInhere]

yeah but could not let it go until I get tested.... since I brushed my tooth like 10-15 mins after the oral

[regularjoey]

Your test is very accurate for the first exposure - 9 weeks is it?  That's more than ample time.  And your second exposure was no risk, so you're negative, I suggest you stop the worrying.