This will be my last answer.
The recommendation for 12 weeks is an overly conservative recommendation regarding tests for HIV antibodies not comined antigen/anitbody tests such as the DUO assays. 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 the 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.
Believe your test results. You do not have HIV and to have further testing is a waste of time and money. EWH
Good news doctor. I had a negative DUO antibody and p24 test at four weeks. So, that means...
Negative DUO at 6 days post exposure
Negative DUO at 12 days post exposure
Negative DUO at 28 days post exposure
Negative RAPID Antibody test 35 days
According to your email the 4 week result is conclusive. I'm just confused as to why other expert moderators on MedHelp say that you have to test at 13 weeks for a conclusive result. Not to mention names, but these are well respected experts on this site. Why the discrepancy?
Please re-read my answer. At 4 weeks a negative DUO test is definitive . Antibody tests alone are not definitive until 8 weeks following exposure, not 6. EWH
Thank you. So you are saying that if I receive a negative DUO test at four weeks that this is conclusive? What if I received a negative antibody only test at 6 weeks, would that be conclusive. I ask because getting the antibody test here is much easier than the DUO test. Thanks again.
Welcome to our Forum. I'll go straight to your questions:
1. No, I would not consider these activities to put you at risk for HIV. Masturbation (such as insertion of her finger into your anus) and condom protected sex are safe sex and are not associated with HIV transmission. The quoted figure for HIV risk, if one has oral sex with an infected partner is less than 1 in 10,000 and, in my estimation that is too high. Some experts state there is no risk at all from oral sex. Neither of us on this site have ever seen or reading the medical literature of a convincing instance in which HIV was passed by oral sex.
2. These tests, while supportive of the fact that you did not get HIV are not definitive. A DUO test such as you had is definitive at 4 weeks following exposure. While I am confident you did not get HIV from this exposure, if you need to prove it to yourself I suggest you repeat the test.
3. At 5 weeks and antibody test would detect between 90 and 95% of infections. In your case, given the low risk to begin with, this should be sufficient to prove that you did not get HIV even though, technically, it is not definitive.
4. HIV is not spread through hand to genital (or anal) contact.
I hope these answers help you. You really have no reason for concern. EWH