Aa
test results
Hi
I have done a hiv test at 12 weeks and it came back positive I'm confused coz I posted on this forum about my exposure and I was told that I never had an exposure and don't have a reason for testing so how could I have contracted hiv?and is it possible for a rapid test to show positive 2 times and have a lab test be negative 2 weeks after the rapid test and then get a positive at the lab at 12 weeks?cause I can't be taking faulty tests all the time cause I was told that the rapid test I took could of being faulty but what are the chances of 2 rapid tests being faulty?any feed back will be appreciated.
I have done a hiv test at 12 weeks and it came back positive I'm confused coz I posted on this forum about my exposure and I was told that I never had an exposure and don't have a reason for testing so how could I have contracted hiv?and is it possible for a rapid test to show positive 2 times and have a lab test be negative 2 weeks after the rapid test and then get a positive at the lab at 12 weeks?cause I can't be taking faulty tests all the time cause I was told that the rapid test I took could of being faulty but what are the chances of 2 rapid tests being faulty?any feed back will be appreciated.
Lizzie ok, I didnt mean to irritate anyone. Have a look at my question I posted - "Discordant ex wife remains negative". Then you might see where I'm coming from.
FOR WHATEVER REASON...YOU SEEM TO WANT TO ARGUE ON THIS FORUM. WANT GET IT FROM ME. DONT NEED A COPY AND PASTE OF WHAT I SAID...I SAID IT...CAME FROM MY MOUTH...THINK I CAN REMEMBER IT...BUT THANKS ANYWAY.
I USED THE RAPID TEST AS AN EXAMPLE OF HOW TESTS CAN THROW OUT FALSE POSITIVES "BECAUSE" THE RAPID TEST IS WHAT WAS BEING DISCUSSED. CORRECT? IS THE RAPID TEST WHAT THE POSTER TOOK? JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE, THAT IN YOUR DESIRE TO SPLIT HAIRS, THAT YOU DIDNT MISS THAT.
HERE...LET ME COPY AND PASTE THAT FOR YOU:
"is it possible for a rapid test to show positive 2 times and have a lab test be negative 2 weeks after the rapid test and then get a positive at the lab at 12 weeks?"
I USED THE RAPID TEST AS AN EXAMPLE OF HOW TESTS CAN THROW OUT FALSE POSITIVES "BECAUSE" THE RAPID TEST IS WHAT WAS BEING DISCUSSED. CORRECT? IS THE RAPID TEST WHAT THE POSTER TOOK? JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE, THAT IN YOUR DESIRE TO SPLIT HAIRS, THAT YOU DIDNT MISS THAT.
HERE...LET ME COPY AND PASTE THAT FOR YOU:
"is it possible for a rapid test to show positive 2 times and have a lab test be negative 2 weeks after the rapid test and then get a positive at the lab at 12 weeks?"
Sorry you are right. I do need to ask a question though and will post it. This exposure thing before testing is a new concept to me. Here in SA you get tested for insurence whether you have been in a risky situation or not. Im just wondering how many people are being traumatised for absolutely nothing.
If you had an exposure post your question in your own thread and don't be hijacking another person's thread.
Ok I get it now. A person who has been exposed but who is actually negative should rather go through the anxiety of thinking he is positive because of a false positive rapid test result than for a person who has never had exposure and who is actually negative but who got a positive result on a rapid test that is actually false. Yeah, makes sense!
That is not what she said at all. All tests can give a false positive result. When giving assessments, to never tell anyone that has never had an exposure to test. False positives increases anxiety levels for no reason.
About This Forum
If you believe you have been exposed to HIV and want help to judge your risk, would like advice about HIV testing, or have questions about the effectiveness of condoms or risks associated with specific sexual practices, this is the site for you.
About This Forum
If you believe you have been exposed to HIV and want help to judge your risk, would like advice about HIV testing, or have questions about the effectiveness of condoms or risks associated with specific sexual practices, this is the site for you.
Hi Lizzie, I've copied and pasted your comment to remind you:
"it is not uncommon for someone to get a false positive on a rapid test."
Here it is again :
even though you never had an exposure...you tested.
THIS IS A FINE EXAMPLE OF "WHY" WE TELL PPL...WHO HAD NO RISK...NOT TO TEST.
it is not uncommon for someone to get a false positive on a rapid test. SO NOW LOOK WHAT YOU'VE PUT YOURSELF THROUGH, FOR NOT LISTENING TO US ! ! !
What you are saying dear, and Im sure I speak the same language as you, is that a rapid test cannot be trusted. I used the word junk. How else am I supposed to understand what you are telling Rodney?
"it is not uncommon for someone to get a false positive on a rapid test."
Here it is again :
even though you never had an exposure...you tested.
THIS IS A FINE EXAMPLE OF "WHY" WE TELL PPL...WHO HAD NO RISK...NOT TO TEST.
it is not uncommon for someone to get a false positive on a rapid test. SO NOW LOOK WHAT YOU'VE PUT YOURSELF THROUGH, FOR NOT LISTENING TO US ! ! !
What you are saying dear, and Im sure I speak the same language as you, is that a rapid test cannot be trusted. I used the word junk. How else am I supposed to understand what you are telling Rodney?
I have just come here and I dont know the protocol but let me get this out of the way quick and fast. Not because some authority says something do I accept it willy nilly. The FDA is not MY religion and they have been wrong before. But whatever, the point I am making is that whether one has been exposed or not, that if one has an Hiv test, the result should be accurate. Lizzie is saying that a person who has not had exposure should not have a test in case the result is positive in which case they may go through psychological trauma all for nothing. If that thinking is congruent with science then from my perspective the validity of the test is brought into question.
But Im not here to enter a debate. I just found this spot and would like to learn and share at the same time.
But Im not here to enter a debate. I just found this spot and would like to learn and share at the same time.
"So what Lizzie is really saying is that the rapid test is junk, and that it should be disregarded as such!"
i said no such thing ! ! !
i said no such thing ! ! !
Here in S.A where I tested they don't want to here about your exposure they look at the results and by the restults I had they asked me to test again and when the test give mixed results they don't have any answers they just say its very rare and if they where so educated I wouldn't be asking questions on this forum.
If they are competent then y would they tell me that I had an exposure and I should get tested at 3 months when this forum tell me that I did not have a risk at all.if they knew what they where doing I wouldn't be in the sittuation know maybe the people that helped u are competent but not the 1,s that helped me if I had a good experience what them I will say it but if I didn't I'm not going to ly.
Hi I have just found this site. I am from South Africa, Im Hiv positive and have never been on meds. It will be 13 years this year.
First of all Rodney dont give SA a bad name. We have very competent health profesionals here.
Secondly, I have been into a lot of the denialist/dissident stuff, and its comments like Lizzie Lou's that make me believe what they are saying. If the tets are accurate to start out, then whether a person has had exposure or not, the result should still be accurate. If you are saying that it is not accurate then why believe them in the first place?
So what Lizzie is really saying is that the rapid test is junk, and that it should be disregarded as such!
First of all Rodney dont give SA a bad name. We have very competent health profesionals here.
Secondly, I have been into a lot of the denialist/dissident stuff, and its comments like Lizzie Lou's that make me believe what they are saying. If the tets are accurate to start out, then whether a person has had exposure or not, the result should still be accurate. If you are saying that it is not accurate then why believe them in the first place?
So what Lizzie is really saying is that the rapid test is junk, and that it should be disregarded as such!
* Anyone who continues to post excessively, questioning a conclusively negative result or no-risk situation, will be subject to action by MedHelp. Conclusively negative results or a no-risk situation will be based upon the criteria established by MedHelp’s doctors. Action will be taken as follows:
* After excessive posting, a warning will be issued by MedHelp
* Continuing to post regarding the negative result / no risk situation will result in a 3 day suspension
* Continuing to post upon your return will result in a permanent ban.
* After excessive posting, a warning will be issued by MedHelp
* Continuing to post regarding the negative result / no risk situation will result in a 3 day suspension
* Continuing to post upon your return will result in a permanent ban.
Looks like they not educated cause I would not have tested if they had told me what yourll have told me to them its it like I'm infected and only time will tell that y they told me to test after 3 months.
Ok thanks guys its just what I get told to do here in south africa I do cause that's what they have to tell the people that get tested and they say I could of contracted hiv from what I explained to them it looks like they don't no what they doing here in S.A.thanks for all the help guys
even though you never had an exposure...you tested.
THIS IS A FINE EXAMPLE OF "WHY" WE TELL PPL...WHO HAD NO RISK...NOT TO TEST.
it is not uncommon for someone to get a false positive on a rapid test. SO NOW LOOK WHAT YOU'VE PUT YOURSELF THROUGH, FOR NOT LISTENING TO US ! ! !
you also stated in another post that you had a duo test at 6 weeks that was negative. for someone who had a risk...an antibody test at 6 weeks is HIGHLY UNLIKELY to change.
so what did you do? followed up with YET ANOTHER RAPID TEST.
THE FACT THAT YOU NEVER HAD A RISK...coupled with your duo at 6 weeks...PROVES that you DONT HAVE HIV ! ! ! ! ! ! !
THIS IS A FINE EXAMPLE OF "WHY" WE TELL PPL...WHO HAD NO RISK...NOT TO TEST.
it is not uncommon for someone to get a false positive on a rapid test. SO NOW LOOK WHAT YOU'VE PUT YOURSELF THROUGH, FOR NOT LISTENING TO US ! ! !
you also stated in another post that you had a duo test at 6 weeks that was negative. for someone who had a risk...an antibody test at 6 weeks is HIGHLY UNLIKELY to change.
so what did you do? followed up with YET ANOTHER RAPID TEST.
THE FACT THAT YOU NEVER HAD A RISK...coupled with your duo at 6 weeks...PROVES that you DONT HAVE HIV ! ! ! ! ! ! !
Do u think I could of contracted it while removing the condom?the viginal fluids that where on the condom I could of touched it?
Have an Answer?
You are reading content posted in the HIV Prevention Community
Condoms are the most effective way to prevent HIV and STDs.
PrEP is used by people with high risk to prevent HIV infection.
Can I get HIV from surfaces, like toilet seats?
Can you get HIV from casual contact, like hugging?
Frequency of HIV testing depends on your risk.
Post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) may help prevent HIV infection.
