Let’s be honest, your questions are not about "the human body", they are about your potential exposure and risk of infection. I will answer that question first. You did not get HIV. A negative test at 8 weeks in someone who has not taken anti-HIV medicine provides conclusive evidence that they do not have HIV. Thus your 15 and 23 week tests are conclusive. Forget about this risk.
As for your other questions:
1. Antibody production does not turn on like a switch but varied and is influenced by many things. Antibodies to HIV can be seen in many infected persons as soon as 2 weeks following exposure. As I said above, after 8 weeks virtually all persons who are going to develop HIV antibodies following exposure will have done so.
2. Antigen is virus. When people have HIV infection from the time the virus is first detectable onward, all persons with infection who are not on treatment will have detectable virus. The Duo tests detect both antigen AND antibody, this is why they are called duo tests.
3. The data from the 80s is out of date due to the evolution an improvement of testing.
4. Yes, this is a consensus statement among many experts. Did you think we just made that up?
Your odds of having HIV from an exposure over 23 weeks ago to someone who had sex with someone who has HIV but was not known to be infected are about as high as getting hit by a meteorite. This is not something to worry about. EWH
When you mentioned "virtually all person" by 8wks, who would you relate these to?
A did want to know about the body because I have read information that shows health care workers going beyond 8wk and some past a year to show HIV antibodies. What I wanted to know: If 4th gen tests had been used in the 80's would the window have been shortend to 8 weeks?. I have read your Meteorite comment somewhere else which is reassuring. As mentioned above I have children and I wanted to be sure that it is impossible for me to have HIV or in the future. Could you give me your toughts. Thanking you
I made a mistake with my information. I should have said 90s NOT 80s.
You are worrying too much. As a generalization for both you and other readers, you must realize that we VERY frequently get questions asking if different types of exposures or prevention measures are 100% effective. The answer to that is that this is scientifically impossible. For a variety of complex mathematical reasons far too complex to go into here, all one can do with well conducted scientific studies is estimate probabilities. By definition, any estimate, cannot be 100% certain. On the other hand, when Dr. Handsfield or I make a statement regarding "virtually all persons" this is as close as sciend can get to "all". Similarlyu, wehen we say that something is "very close" to no risk or of minimal risk, or use any other term to indicate a very small risk, that means "close to zero" in a world where zero cannot be attained.
Obviously, if modern, impproved tests were use in the 80s the "window" period would be shorter.
At this time it is time to end this thread,. You need to move on and if you cannot, I urge you to seek help in dealing with anxieties far out of proportion with what is called for. EWH
Yes it is anxiety related. Please answer this: Is there a slim chance that I may have HIV from this in the future/can my body Now produce HIV? Thank you and thats final from me.
This question was answered in the last two sentences of my original answer. End of discussion. EWH
Not a joke. What are the odds?
Dr. Could you pls answer my last question.