Depending on the particular test, or combination of tests, 100% reliable HIV results are available at 4-8 weeks after the last possible exposure. However, I have a bit less conficence in the rapid oral fluids test, which might sometimes requires as much as 3 months for definitive results. The rapid blood tests, however, are fine.
Most people in your situation accept reasoned, science-based reassurance without difficulty and don't worry so much about it. I don't have any special advice for the minority who react otherwise, except to discuss their fears with their personal physician.
Thank you for your responses so far. I really appreciate them. I promise this will be my last question to you -- I went to the doctor today and they also said there was no need for testing. The issue is, I am having a hard time taking that as reassurance and not worrying.
(1) How many weeks after exposure are HIV tests reliable? My area also offers the rapid HIV testing, is that test more reliable sooner?
(2) In your experience, how do patients cope with not being able to take the tests for a few weeks?
Thank you so much.
From your description, it sounds like your semen might be blood tinged or inflamed (infected?). But even if somehow it were the stripper's blood, there still is no significant risk. Given the billions of contacts liks this, and that we never see patients with STDs for whom such events were the only possible exposure, it is plain that the risk is zero for all practical purposes. So don't overthink it. Just accept the science-based reassuraince I have tried to give and move on with your life.
If you see continuing evidence your semen may be discolored, see a doctor to get it checked out. Probably nothing important, though.
Sorry to belabor the point, but I noticed the shirt on which I ejaculated and the stain isn't completely clear, slightly yellow/brown tinge. That's what really got it in my head that she may have had blood in her spit. I think she may have rubbed her hand on my shirt hence the slight discoloration in the stain. Clearly there wasn't a lot of blood to be noticeable/definitive. So in that scenario, if we do assume there was some small amount of blood - does that make a difference.
I realize people ask these questions a lot and I apologize if this seems silly. I just wanted to give as much info as possible to ease the worry.
Does this info make a difference?
Noted. It makes no significant difference in your risk.
Welcome to the forum. I'm glad to help ease your concerns. You are not at risk for HIV or any other STD, for several reasons.
First, I don't agree with your assumptions. In most of the US, under 1% of commercial sex workers and strippers have HIV, and the chance is probably more like 1 in 1,000. Second, I see no reason that "she most likely had blood in her spit". Why would you assume it?
Most important, saliva rarely if ever transmits STDs. For sure it doesn't transmit HIV; in fact, saliva kills HIV; even kissing transmit HIV rarely or not at all. Also, blood or other body fluids on intact skin -- of the penis or anywhere else -- doesn't transmit STDs.
From the standpoint of risk assessment, you don't need testing for anything. But if these words don't completely erase your fears and you would gain more reassurance from negative test results, feel free to do it. But if I were in your situation, I wouldn't be tested for anything and would continue unprotected sex with my wife, knowing I could not infect her on account of this event.
Best wishes-- HHH, MD
I forgot to mention, I am uncircumcised.