hiv testing window

[seriousasaheartattack]

Here goes. I have seen it posted here that the CDC says 3 months for an hiv antibody test conclusiveness. The manufacturers of the tests also make this claim according to posts here. I cannot corroborate these claims anywhere. Very frustrated and trying to get answers or links to source materials for these claims. Thanks.

[seriousasaheartattack]

You did. Thanks for the well wishes and giving your time...:)

[rocket27rocket]

Congratulations! We did say :)

Your result is not going to change, thanks for sharing but time to move on now and forget about it :)

Best Wishes

James

[seriousasaheartattack]

My 89 day rapid antibody test was negative. Counsellor said I am all clear.

[123495summer]

well if you had read so much online u must know that there is nothing 100% in this world , the house u are living have 0.0000001 % that its make fall down , similar chances that u make get heart attack or hit by a car on road ... similar the test result are 99.9999999% accrued.....  

[HowardH]

Scanning this thread, the core problem appears to be your uncertainty about the time required for definitive HIV test results. The bottom lines are 1) the DUO (4th generation) test is conclusive any time 4 or more weeks after the last exposure, and that's now the CDC's recommendation for test of choice and for conclusive results. And 2) that for the antibody only tests, official advice remains 3 months, athough in fact the latests (3rd generation) tests in fact are virtually 100% reliable after 6-8 weeks.

Here's a thread from the HIV expert forum that summarizes all this in a great detail:

http://www.medhelp.org/posts/HIV---Prevention/Testing-Confusion/show/2174457

[seriousasaheartattack]

Going to get my second antibody test at 88 days and just hope I can drive on from there. Most likely will seek counseling for my anxiety in regards to this if I am unable. I do appreciate the comments from everyone here. I wish everyone well and hope anyone struggling with a similar situation can find peace of mind.

[seriousasaheartattack]

Hey Morgan.
I discovered the following on the CDC's website for Hiv testing. I think the tab was "What does my negative result mean?" Or something like that. "For antibody tests, if you get a negative result within 3 months of your most recent possible exposure, you need to get tested again at the 3-month mark." On the same page under another tab it does give the 97% will test positive if infected if tested at 3 months after exposure with some people very rarely taking 6 months to test positive if infected. Guess we just have to decide what to do with the info.

[morgan896]

Hi Nursegirl,

I know that the overwhelming majority of medical experts agree that a 4th generation test is highly accurate at 4 weeks, with many saying it is conclusive. I know that UK and US guidelines for re-testing at 3 months to definitively exclude infection is regarded as ultraconservative and almost a needless over precaution by many in the field.

You have mentioned that the CDC has recently updated its guidelines to say the 4th generation test is conclusive at 4 weeks. I have studied the guidelines in the link you posted - http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/pdf/HIVtestingAlgorithmRecommendation-Final.pdf

I cannot find anywhere where it states this, in fact I can't even find information in these giudelines on window periods at all, even for 3 months.

[rocket27rocket]

Mate..

You have had EXCPETIONAL advice above.  Nursegirl summarised perfectly the situation with testing.

Put it this way, if a benchmark for a test is 12 weeks, it does not mean that at 11wks 6 days someone would be Negative only to turn positive the day after.

The new 4th generation Duo tests look for the antibody (our bodies reaction to an infection) and also a key component of the virus, namely the Antigen.

There is no way in a month of Sunday's your test will turn positive, I would put my house on it.

It's now time to move on and forget all about this, always use a condom for vaginal / anal sex and you will not have a worry from a sexual point if view of catching HIV.

Best Wishes

James

[seriousasaheartattack]

A duo test is a fourth generation test as far as I can tell from what I have read.

[seriousasaheartattack]

Thanks for the encouragement Vance.

[Vance2335]

Your test will not turn positive

[seriousasaheartattack]

Btw, my 10.5 week rapid antibody bloodtest was negative. So far so good.

[seriousasaheartattack]

See where a person could get frustrated trying to sort all of this out? 6 weeks, 12 weeks, 6 months. No risk, slight risk, higher risk than vaginal. Never happened that we know of to a doctor treating hiv at a busy clinic saying he has probably seen it. All of it seems speculation. Just trying to make the most informed decisions.

[seriousasaheartattack]

My exposure was semen directly into my eye. A risk with a possible chance of exposure of anywhere from .09% to, according to EWH of not as high as unprotected anal but probably higher than unprotected vaginal if the partner is known positive. I have seen it stated as merely a theoretical risk, with no known transmissions via this route to Dr Sean Cummings from Freedomhealth saying he has had a few patients suspected to have contracted HIV via this route.

[Jcc1970]

I have to ask again.  What was your exposure you are worried about?  You never have told anyone.

[seriousasaheartattack]

That link is to an updated testing algorithm for use by lab personnel and medical folks when using and interpreting the newer tests. There is nothing there that indicates a reduced testing window recommendation. The negative result indicated would mean that the tests did not detect antibodies, not that no further testing is necessary to rule out an individual within the dreaded window period. This does not indicate a change in the CDC's stance on when hiv testing can be considered definitive.

[seriousasaheartattack]

I apologize if it seemed as if I was saying anyone here is being irresponsible in the advice that they give. Was not what I intended to imply. The statement I was making, which I think may have been misinterpreted, was that I need to be 100% sure. The 1% mess up would be mine, not any of the folks kind enough to take their time to answer questions. I know nothing is 100% in medical testing. Just trying to wrap my head around all of this.

[Vance2335]

Start your own thread

[Yunyou]

What is DUO?Does the 4 gen testing method belong to DUO?

[nursegirl6572]

Please start your own thread, do not hijack someone else's.

Thank you.

[Filipmercov]

It's been 68 days ( 9 weeks) for me and the rapid rest showed negative. However that I still feel sick makes me scared and I can't wait for 90 days.
You think rapid test as confirmatory is ok or I should make a full one when they send blood to the lab.

[nursegirl6572]

Forgot to post the link to the new CDC testing guideline chart:

http://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/newsroom/docs/2014/HIV-testing-Labs-Flowchart.pdf

[nursegirl6572]

The CDC has updated its guidelines.  Basically, if you test negative on a  DUO (not a rapid test), at 4 weeks post exposure, then no further follow up testing is required.  That's considered conclusive.

The rest of the tests (antibody, etc) are conclusive at THREE months, not SIX.  Six is outdated info, and remember that the people who man the phone at the CDC are reading from a script they're given, as to how to answer questions.

With the newer sensitive tests, no one needs to test past 3 months...even those with severely compromised immune systems (as listed above).  Three months is MORE than enough time for anyone to produce detectable antibodies.

Not sure what you mean by a "confirmatory" test.  The only time that's necessary is if you test positive.  

Lastly, to comment on this statement of yours...

"Not trying to argue, just trying to verify the source of assurance that so many here use to advise with such confidence. I understand odds and percentages, but really like to be sure in life and death matters, which despite what we believe about conclusive testing windows, hiv most certainly is. U mess up 1% you can really screw someone up."

We are not responsible for a person's health, or their decisions.  The advice given here is for informational purposes, and it should never be used as a substitution for IN PERSON health care.  If a person is using ANY kind of info they found on the internet as their source of health care, that's on them.

Again, 6 months is very much outdated.  You don't need to test beyond three months, but you do as you please.  Most likely, you didn't have a risk to begin with....most people don't.