A WB is much slower than the ELISA. Some doctors order WB even though it is not a proper initial test to order. Not every MD is very knowledgeable when it comes to HIV and HIV testing.
You are HIV-negative, regardless.
Is the WB quicker than the ELISA? I'm wondering if this is why my doctor ordered the WB in lieu of the ELISA. On all the paperwork that the drs office sent me, along with all STD testing, nothing refrences ELISA, just WB. I was very anxious, upset and beating myself up over having the unprotected sex. She called the next day with the negative results. This was at 4 months post possible exposure. I don't know the status of my partner. So, I'm wondering if WB comes back quicker and that was her reasoning? Maybe a better question for her.
One last question, then I'll take my anxious, beating myself up self away and thank my lucky stars and be more careful in the future. Previous to this incident in July, I had unprotected sex in early 2004. Certainly this would show on any test? Correct?
If you have tested using this FDA approved test, and your sexual risk was 5.5 months ago, you are negative.
Your WB may have been confirmed, based on a possibility of a remote false positive that may have been given on the ELISA test. Since you have tested well beyond the window period of infection, and the test result was negative, no further testing is warranted. Even IF the ELISA was positive (and you do not know that it was), the WB is very specific in determing your HIV status. Matched with the Home Access kit , you are negative.
A WB should not be used to diagnose HIV it is a confirmative test. Your 5.5 month test is an FDA approved test and your negative test result is conclusive. You're negative.