A question about Testing

[brokenarcs]

Dear doc,

I thank you for your patience and expertise all the way through to help me out!

I had a low risk exposure (oral sex on a man for less than 15 seconds) 12 weeks ago. I was quite anxious and was tested at 4, 5, and 6 weeks for HIV in New York STD clinic\. Three times were rapid blood test and were NEGATIVE. At 5 weeks, the counsellor also gave me a "virus test", which I assume was a P-Naat test. It was also NEGATIVE.

Now comes the 12 weeks mark. This time, I decide to do a standard, ELISA test, which was 4th generation (the best lab in my own country). I drew the blood today and the result will come out tomorrow.

My question:
Based on my exposure and testing history, what are the chances of my still being infected?

Thank you very much!!

[Edward W Hook, MD]

Absolutely. Take this as definitive evidence that you do not have HIV.  EWH

[brokenarcs]

Yes, Doctor. I just got my test result, Elisa NEGATIVE at 12 weeks.

So I guess I can put an end to the long time of anxiety. Am I right?

Thank you very much!

[Edward W Hook, MD]

Sure. we'll be pleased to hear confirmation that it is negative.  EWH

[brokenarcs]

Thank you doctor! Your answer will give me a night of peaceful sleep!

Can I come back and report my result tomorrow?

[Edward W Hook, MD]

Welcome to the Forum.  I am confident that the test result you get tomorrow will, like your earlier tests be negative. At that time, your results will be definitive, as they probably were at the time of your 6 week test.  My reasons for saying this are multiple. They include:

1.  Your partner was probably not HIV infected.  Most people are not.
2. There is no credible evidence that HIV is transmitted through oral sex.
3.  You have a negative antibody test obtained 6 weeks following exposure at a time when over 95% of persons with HV will have developed positive tests.
4.  If you had a PCR/NAAT test for HIV and it was negative. This adds further confidence that you did not get HIV. While the amount of additional confidence that this adds is unknown because studies have not yet accurately quantified the sensitivity of NAAT testing for HIV, they certainly do increase sensitivity of testing, adding to the cumulative confidence that you do not have HIV.

Thus, not on the basis of any one fact but on the combination of your test results and the nature of your exposure, you can be confident at this time that you do not not have HIV. I am confident that the result you receive tomorrow will also be negative and urge you to stop worrying and stop testing at that time. EWH