Question

[1234anonguy99]

Hi Dr,  I had unprotected sex with a girl about 2 weeks ago (stupid on my part) She was honest enough with me to tell me that she wasnt sure if she has HIV or not because she has never been tested.  I've read enough on here to make me aware that my risk if she is positive is 1 in 2000. I have no open cuts on my genitals, with that said, how hard is it for the virus to make its way down the urethra if she was positive? Has that been researched?

I know symptoms are never a good indicator from what ive read on this forum, but ive noticed many people complaining of myalgia and muscle/joint aches and pains... Because that's pretty much the only symptoms ive had and I know that specific symptom can relate to 1000 other illnesses, but its suspect because ive been feeling muscle soreness and joint pains ever since that day. But can you pretty much confidentally tell me there is no correlation with that symptom and being positive?

Finally, I know 3 month is conclusive for testing, however, so I can somewhat enjoy my holiday can you give me conservative % of accuaracy on the following: 3, 4,and 5 week Oraquick advance testing?
Thats it. Thank you!

[1234anonguy99]

Thank you Dr. I hope to report negative results in 4 weeks and then in 8.

[Edward W Hook, MD]

I think your first question indicates a misunderstanding of the data on risk. Without a sore or cut on your penis, if your partner has HIV, your risk of HIV is 1 in 1000.  Discussion about the virus working itself into the urethra is misplaced.  

Your risk is low. Try not to worry. EWH

[1234anonguy99]

Thanks for the response!

To clarify my first question, from what I understand there are basically two ways for an HIV+ female to give an - male HIV during unprotected intercourse. One is vaginal fluid/blood getting into an open cut on the penis. The 2nd being vaginal fluid entering the urethra of the penis. Im pretty sure I had no cuts so I dont think I need to worry about that, so regarding the other way, how common or easy is it for the virus to enter in through the urethra of the penis, or rather is it pretty hard for it to, especially after ejaculating.

Sounds like 3 weeks is not worth going for, so ill probably wait for 4 or 5. Not for nothing though, with all of our medical advances, how is there not a next day or next week test out there already wtih 99% accuracy. I mean I know people make stupid mistakes (like me), but to wait 4-5 weeks and then another 3 months for 100% is pure torture.

[Edward W Hook, MD]

Welcome to the Forum. I have a hard time following your first question.  As you point out, if she had HIV 9and this is unlikely), your risk of HIV is about 1 in 1-2000.  That is how difficult (i.e. the odds of infection) it is.

Less than half of people who acquire HIV get symptoms at the time of their seroconversion and, as you know, less than 1% of persons who are at risk from sexual activity and have symptoms have HIV.  I am confident that using symptoms to try to gauge risk for HIV in your situation is a waste of time.

Testing at 4 weeks would detect about 95% of infections, at 6 weeks it goes up to 95% and at 8 weeks it is about 99%.  3 month results are definitive and for most people so are 8 week results.

finally, if you really want to know about your risk and can do so, see if your partner will get tested.  If her test is negative at this time, your risk is zero.

Hope this helps. EWH