hiv testing at 8 weeks conclusive??

in june i had several minutes of unprotected sex with male of unknown status...there was no ejaculation but i was possibly exposed to a drop or two of pre-ejaculate fluid, i have no way of knowing. exactly 8 weeks afterward i tested negative with an antibody test (blood prick in the finger) at planned parenthood. i'm not sure if this was a 3rd or 4th generation test. are my results conclusive or should i test again at 3 months and afterwards?? i keep reading different things on the internet about the antibody window period and am very confused. are the CDC guidelines of 3-6 months accurate or overly conservative?? what is the likelihood i could have hiv from this one-time exposure?? i am a young healthy female with strong immune system don't use drugs or needles or anything. would i have developed antibodies by now that would be detected?? please please help.

[Edward W Hook, MD]

Welcome to our Forum. I'll be glad to help.  I understand that there is a lot of apparently contradictory information "out there".  At this time however, your results are conclusive and you did not get HIV from this exposure.  Few heterosexual men have HIV, your exposure was brief, and even if your partner had HIV, your risk from a single exposure is on 1 infection in 1000 exposures. Finally and perhaps most concretely, 8 week test results for antibodies are conclusive evidence that you do not have HIV.  You're in the clear.  

We get many questions about the meaning of HIV test results at different time points.  This is now confused by the availability of a variety of different types of tests.  The traditional and most widely used tests for HIV are tests for antibodies to HIV which are available both as so-called "rapid" or point of care tests which can be done in the clinic and laboratory based antibody tests. For all practical purposes both of these types of test perform comparably and provide accurate information on the presence or absence of HIV infection in virtually everyone at 8 weeks following exposure.  The recommendations for testing at 3 and even 6 months are the result of two factors- data from older tests no longer used (you really do not need to worry about which generation of tests you were tested with, at this time virtually all tests are far more sensitive that they were even 2-3 years ago when the 3 month recommendation was made) and secondly, the fact that some, mostly governmental agencies which have to provide recommendations for virtually everyone without the sort of interactions such as those you get with your doctor or on personalized sites such as this one, feel they cannot "afford" to be wrong and therefore make recommendations and guidelines which leave most people unnecessarily nervous for 4-6 weeks longer than the 6-8 weeks it takes virtually everyone to develop HIV antibodies.  

I hope this information is helpful. You do not need additional testing related to the exposure you describe. EWH

[seh71]

i should also mention that i've had no symptoms related to hiv in the past two months, just general anxiety and stress stuff.

[seh71]

Thanks Doctor, appreciate your information!! So, this rapid hiv test, regardless of what level generation it was and whether it was the most modern version or not, can be considered totally conclusive??