Welcome to the Forum. I'll be glad to help. Even though you did not know the girl well, the fact is that few (less than 1 in 10,000 American women) have HIV. Further the odds of infection following an single (or even two) sexual encounters are very low. thus, even before testing the odds that were not infected were quite good.
With testing you have eliminated the possibility that you might have been infected from the encounter that you describe. You are correct that at 51 days a very small proportion of persons might still have negative test results but that number is quite low. Even more conclusive however are your multiple OraQuick test results which have now proven that you were not infected. While we worry about these tests being completely sensitive before 8 weeks, before then they are accurate and thus your repeated negative tests more than 8 weeks after your exposure prove that you were not infected and that there is no reason to worry.
There is no reason for further testing and no reason for further concern. EWH
Thank you so much. You do believe the in home test at 10 to 11 weeks if someone WAS infected it would have picked it up? The test seems so simple its hard to trust. The hep b vaccine would have no effect on an hiv test? Or do vaccines ever have a role in hiv tests? Thank you Dr. Your wisdom will finially let me sleep tonight
yes, your test at 10-11 weeks is reliable and no, receipt of the hepatitis, or any other vaccine, would not effect the development of antibodies. Take care.EWH
I just got my 84 day EIA blood test back. negative> Actually it says... in range NON -REACTIVE . Out of range blank (don't know what that means)
Reference Range NON -REACTIVE. Dr Hook and medhelp were right. I thought for SURE I was infected. Hopefully 84 days is conclusive and I wasnt supposed to wait 90 days.
84 days is conclusive. Please don't worry further. No need for additonal testing. EWH