Window period of RNA HIV test

[ben9999imsc]

What is the window period of the RNA HIV test right now?

Some websites say 1-2 weeks but some researchers say it would take 5 weeks (but the research is posted nearly ten years ago)

I have unprotected sex with a prostitute on 17th July, i plan to have a RNA test on 1st August.

[worried831]

I had a possible exposure with a sex worker 4 weeks ago - protected but condom slipped while pulling out. I did HIV RNA PCR quantitative after 7 days got the result as indeterminate 5 days after. what does that mean? I had mild solid stool diarrhea and throat infection now? I am worried and want to know if the result is indicative of my status?

[Teak]

Your test is conclusive and you do not need further testing.

[bluemoon1]

I had all classical ARS starters week 2 its rash, joint pain, tounsils, stuffy neck, itchy body, burning sensation, floatring, oral thrush, night sweets, weight loss, but tested negative for HIV after 16 weeks, can I be 100 % sure I am HIV free? But my symptoms still not let me believe on my results do I need PCR test to put every thing behind? Or I am fine 100% and can have unprotected sex with my girl friend b coz she want to have a baby now?
Plz help I will appreciate your help.

[Teak]

Doesn't matter who you ask, that has nothing to do with it. PCR-RNA test are not standalone tests and cannot give a diagnostic by itself.

[RainLover71]

It depends who you ask,some HIV specialists will tell you that the HIV RNA by PCR is an excellent test for EARLY detection,However,we all know that a test at 12 weeks is final and conclusive.

[Healthlogic]

PCR RNA explained by a lab technician

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kN3sPuv2J6c&feature=youtube_gdata_player

[Teak]

Wrong.

[blessed1111]

However, if your exposure occurred within the last few weeks, the level of antibody may not be high enough to be detected. It is in this “window period” of more recent exposure that the virus may be detectable with an HIV RNA test (viral load) to determine your HIV status.

FDA website. This is not what the test is used for no. But for early detection you can use it.

[LIZZIE LOU]

CONDOM PROTECTED sex is not a risk for contracting hiv.

your antibody test at 14 weeks is RELIABLE and CONCLUSIVE.  

[sonemed]

the RNA is monitoring test, must be followed up with an antibody test. !!!!!!!!

[789khaier416]

had vaginal sex with a prostitute with a condom. 80 days after my  exposure I took an HIV PCR RNA test was negative.then i took another antibody  test @ WEEK 14 ALSO WAS Negative. so my question is should i move on ?i need some advise iam so worry please.

[Teak]

http://www.metrokc.gov/health/APU/rna-testing/
RNA testing is not a substitute for antibody testing. It’s a good additional test for those who may have had a recent risk (within the past 1 - 4 weeks) for HIV.

http://www.medhelp.org/posts/show/580324
PCR or RNA tests. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests involve evaluating a blood sample for genetic material — RNA or DNA — produced by the HIV virus infection. These tests measure the amount of virus present in your blood (viral load) and are most useful for monitoring your condition after you've already been diagnosed with HIV. The tests may return a false-negative result if infection with HIV occurred too recently, such as fewer than five days ago.

http://www.fda.gov/Cber/PMAlabel/P9500054LB.pdf
The AMPLICOR HIV-1 MONITOR Test is not intended to be used as a screening test for HIV or as a diagnostic test to confirm the presence of HIV infection.

[Teak]

Jerk go to the FDA website and if you find where the FDA states that it is approved for diagnosing HIV infection other than what we have told you. you post it. This forum deals with facts not YOUR opinions. Now go search the FDA approvals on PCR-RNA tests.

[ben9999imsc]

You know, most reliable websites say RNA test is very accurate. I think people would like to trust the websites more than your personal opinions. Just google RNA test, there is a lot of results against to your speech. I am not a professional, all my speech is just refer to websites' information. Seems that most your opinoins are opposite than the websites such as the window period of RNA. If you are not a professional, please use reference to support your speech. I'm done wasting my time with you on this conversation.

ref.

http://www.ehow.com/how_2088620_read-rna-hiv-test-results.html
http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/hiv-testing/ID00050
http://www.metrokc.gov/health/APU/rna-testing/

[Teak]

The only time an RNA test is approved as a confirmative test is when the Western Blot and IRF tests are inconclusive. They cannot confirm a positive result by itself. What part is it that you don't understand? An RNA test is not approved to give a conclusive result in early HIV infection. I'm done wasting my time with you on this conversation.

[ben9999imsc]

I think the RNA test can confirm one person is negative but can not determine one person is 100% infected. According to several websites, seems that RNA have not given false-negative result after 7 days of possible exposure.

If it is true, that's enough for most people.

[alienshadow]

MOVE ON  and stop TROLLING the froum with all your nonsense and yeah I have reported you

[Teak]

There is no tests to tell you how many antibodies one has. You can get a CD4 count and a VL count. VL counts are used to monitor ones progression.

[ben9999imsc]

you said your viral load test is less than 50 copies but the antibody test is positive? If so, how many antibody you have?

[Teak]

PCR-RNA are not stand alone tests even in Austria. All PCR-RNA tests must be followed up with an antibody test.

[trekstar]

This is what I mean:

A false-positive result (that is, a detectable, low viral load in a blood sample from a person that is not infected), when it does happen, will easily be recognised as a false-positive, because, if taken during the first weeks since possible infection, the viral load would be expected to be much higher. Also, when this sample is re-run, it will indeed be undetectable.

[Teak]

King County Public Health, the Dr. HHH is a member.

The FDA has not approved these PCR tests as ways to identify new HIV infections. The regular antibody test continues to be the most accurate and reliable way for people to know if they are infected with HIV.

[Teak]

I did not read your post to hastily. What I quoted is what you posted. A viral load of <2500 does not mean a person is not positive at all. Not all people have ARS.

[trekstar]

I guess you read that one through too hastily, Teak. What you describe is a false NEGATIVE, now a false positive. A false negative result at three weeks would be extremely unlikely, although I'm sure they do happen... there are at least four studies on primary infection that show that viral-load test was able to pick up ALL of the real positive subjects suffering from ARS.