To Teak

[Worried 9999]

Given the differing views about the length of the window period for a conclusive antibody result, I was just wondering if you could tell me why you back the 13 week period.  What agency or group of agencies can you cite to back up your position?

I'm not challenging you.  I'm just wondering why you stick by the 13 weeks.  I'm just trying to learn as much as possible here, and I would like to read some authority on the matter.

Thanks in advance,

Ryan

[scareshitless]

The CDC suggest 3 month to be conclusive. Most people seroconvert between 6-12 weeks. A test at 6 weeks is encouraging according to the people on this forum, I somewhat agree but for me a 2 month test is conclusive. and definitive.This site from the CDC should answer ur question

http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/testing/resources/qa/be_tested.htm#wait

[Teak]

Besides the CDC guidelines, their are no companies that mfgs. any HIV test such as the ELISA, Western Blot,  or Rapid tests that says that there tests are valid < 3 months. PCR-RNA/DNA can be taken early but also says needs to be backed up by an antibody test. You can go to any of their sites and read, the packaging inserts. Until that time, I don't see how anyone could advise to take a test early when the mfg. states 3 months on any newly infected. As you are well aware some say take the test at 6 weeks and then get your conclusive test at 13 weeks. The 6 weeks is suppose to help relieve anxiety, but in most cases it doesn't. I'm sure you're read plenty of posts that the poster wonders at 13 weeks if their test is correct because they still have symptoms. You can talk to these people till you are blue in the face trying to get them to accept their results and move on with their lives.

Here is the link for Orasure Quick Advance Rapid HIV 1/2 Antibody test.
http://www.orasure.com/uploaded/398.pdf go to page 8
Read: Limitations of the test, line 8.

Here is OraSure HIV 1 test
http://www.orasure.com/uploaded/238.pdf?133&sec=2&subsec=2
Read: HIV & AIDS section

http://www.fda.gov/cber/faq/oraqckfaq.htm
FAQs OraQuck
Delayed detection of exposure -- this test will not detect HIV-1 infection in people who were exposed within about three months prior to taking the test (since it can take that long for detectable antibodies to HIV-1 to appear in the blood).

This is what kind of information that you will find on all tests. This is the information that I go by.

[Worried 9999]

Yes but the same link also says "Ninety seven percent will develop antibodies in the first 3 months following the time of their infection."  97% isn't conclusive to me.  So in reality, the CDC does NOT say that 3 months is conclusive.

I know that everybody and their brother says that the CDC is overly conservative and that the other 3% are people with suppressed immune systems, etc.

However, I just would like to know what agencies stand by a 13 week test.

[Worried 9999]

Thanks for the info Teak.

[Teak]

I hope it gives you the information that you were looking for.

[Worried 9999]

Well, the OraQuick info (Page 8 Line 8) simply states that it can take several months to develop detectable levels of antibodies.

The OraSure info says that it can take up to 6 months.

I still don't see anything that says 3 months is confirmatory.

Now I realize no test is 100%.  There is going to be the one in a million that takes longer than 3 months.  However, I still haven't found any hard info that backs a 3 month test.

Clearly I have seen a few experts that support the 3 month mark, Dr. Bob at the Body.com, everybody over at Aidsmeds.com, and even Dr. HHH (sort of).  However, I can't seem to find an official agency that backs the three month mark.

Again, I don't doubt the three month mark for a second.  I would just like to see it set out in hard agency policy somewhere.

[Worried 9999]

...and even the FDA info fudges the 3 month test by saying "about 3 months."

[Worried 9999]

I guess NY State steps up to the plate here.

They say 3 months, black and white.

http://www.health.state.ny.us/diseases/aids/facts/questions/testing.htm

Scroll down to "How soon after exposure can HIV infection be detected?"

[Worried 9999]

Mass says six weeks as definitive!  Seemingly for everyone.  

http://www.mass.gov/Eeohhs2/docs/dph/aids/guide_counsel_test.pdf

[Teak]

No where do you find it saying that any antibody test will be correct at 4,6 or 8 weeks now do you?

[Worried 9999]

New York is the only state agency that I have seen say that 3 months is definitive.

Massachusetts says 6 weeks is definitive.  They are obviously an odd ball in their view.

Again, I'm not doubting the 3 month window.  I just find it strange that I can't find any first hand authority to back it up.  That is to say, there aren't many policy setting agencies that say 3 months is definitive.

[Teak]

If you call Mass, their D of H will tell you, that they recommend anyone that has had unprotected vaginal or anal sex, or IV drug users to test at three months. I called them and had a 28 minute conversation about it. The ones that are 6 weeks and that's it ,are your; I got exposed to blood via a cut, I got exposed through having unprotected oral those types of issues.  

[Xhost]

For the simple fact that testing is an inexact science. You are never going to get a definitive answer such as: "Yes, 100% of people will seroconvert by the Xth week." The reason that you are not going to get such an answer is due to the level of variability in the data. In other words, there have never been, and never will be, controlled studies in humans to determine the exact length of the window period. Those studies would be illegal and unethical.

What you will have are testing policies that are based on the best data available. The CDC right now says that the 3 month test is conclusive. This is based on the data that they have available. Other agencies and individual doctors are in front of the CDC in saying that there is a 6 week window period based on modern testing protocols - again, based on the best data they have available. What you are seeing in this forum is, in my view, the confusion inherent in any shifting paradigm. My belief is that the CDC will eventually standardize the 6 week window period, but that is only my belief. In the meantime, the doctor here, and some state agencies will advocate a 6 week, the CDC will advocate a 3 month, and a heck of a lot of people will wander around, confused about what to do.

This is no way to run HIV testing, but that's where we, apparently, are with it. In the end, it is up to every individual person to decide their own level of comfort, based on their own research. You can read what the Doc has to say about it in the moderated forum. Opinions differ in this forum, and opinions differ out on the Internet as well. So, read what you can, try to assimilate the information you have read and then make the best decision you are able to make based on your research. And also, just in case you fall into the category that many who post to this forum fall into: try to gain some understanding of your real level of "risk". Did you really have a risk, or is your being here a part of an emotional reaction to the events that led you here? That's the hardest part, really - much harder than determining with some satisfaction what the "real" window period may be.

[Teak]

Good post.

[mike_no]

Most people seroconvert between 6-12 weeks.....That's wrong !!!

FYI :

Most people would seroconvert after 14 - 22 days, few go up to 4 to 6 weeks and the rest any where between 3 - 6 months (people seroconverting late 4 -6 weeks would be due to compromised immune system, IV drug abusers and the ones who sero convert the latest is due to completely screwed up immune system, practically in the last stage of cancer)

[mike_no]

Hey Ryan,

I think you should let this go now...6 week DNA PCR backed by 10 week antibody test is definitely conclusive...HIV can't be your problem any more :)