HIV window period 2 to 4 weeks max

[mrsCALoki]

"I live in San Francisco and the San Francisco City Clinic and Magnet state that the conclusive window period for RNA/NAAT is 2 weeks and not to take past 4 weeks. Seattle/King County also say the same thing...Seems more and more public health services are starting to offer this test to shorten the window?"

http://www.thebody.com/Forums/AIDS/SafeSex/Q198120.html

Are you an idiot? San Francisco is NOT the entire US. Not is is even all of California. It is a high HIV area so it will indeed have top end testing.

Can you not get in through your head that it is not universal in all the states? My god you keep finding an acorn and declare the world to be an oak forest.

 

[mrsCALoki]

If i want a p24 antigen test in BC,../QUOTE]

You do know you are posting in the Toronto Escort Review Board don't you?

I am very sorry but I keep repeating, the Window that has to go past before HIV testing is valid depends on the test being used. The test being used depends on where you are.

I am sorry I tried to ensure your silliness did not put others at risk. You are just fixated.

lenny you are a cool-aid sales man.

 

[lenny2]

Are you an idiot? San Francisco is NOT the entire US. Not is is even all of California. It is a high HIV area so it will indeed have top end testing.

Can you not get in through your head that it is not universal in all the states? My god you keep finding an acorn and declare the world to be an oak forest.

LOL. No one said otherwise. Have you ever heard of strawman and ad hominen arguments?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem#Abusive

You do know you are posting in the Toronto Escort Review Board don't you?

I am very sorry but I keep repeating, the Window that has to go past before HIV testing is valid depends on the test being used. The test being used depends on where you are.

I am sorry I tried to ensure your silliness did not put others at risk. You are just fixated.

lenny you are a cool-aid sales man.

You can "keep repeating" it until you die of exhaustion. No one said otherwise.

http://www.c2.com/cgi/wiki?StrawMan


------------------------------------------------------------------------


Thank God It's Not Christmas
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ho_WsJK_MTg&feature=related

 

[lenny2]

From 5 years ago:

Looking at things for as long as I have been, I get a feeling that doctors in the U.S. for some reason are hesitant to give a go ahead to DNA PCR test for people with exposures. But, come to Europe and Asia, go to any HIV specialist, he is going to recommend either a DNA or RNA PCR. Moreover, the pathology labs who carry out these tests go a step further in saying that no further test is even needed after the PCR's. Moreover, the path labs even in the USA recommend DNA PCR.

http://www.medhelp.org/posts/HIV-Prevention/DNA-TESTING-Teak-or-knowledgable-person/show/292801

"PCR tests can tell you if your body is infected as early as 72 hrs after the exposure."

 

[lenny2]

Gee sounds like what I said. 4 weeks = 28 days by the way.

Are you confusing tests? That comment was re antibody tests. What you said re 4 weeks was this:

"IF you have an all clear at 4 weeks with the RNA quantitative test and no immune suppression issues you are virtually guaranteed to be ok."

My goodness, who could have guessed? The HIV testing window is dependant on where you are. Wow.

Yes, in the sense that different areas have different tests which don't have the same window period. No, in the sense that if the same test is given it will not vary in its maximum limit of the window period.

 

[mrsCALoki]

Scientificly speaking, the window period is what it is, and doesn't vary from state to state or country to country, so it doesn't matter where i live in that regard.

Practicly speaking, i find that many people on forums such as this are misinformed, thinking they have to wait 3, 6, 12 months or longer before they can be sure they are HIV negative. A hell of a lot of anxiety is often experienced during those months, anxiety which leads to illnesses & other problems that could have been avoided.

The applications of a much shorter window period include, for examples, cases of SP's & clients who've had "condom failures", couples wanting to know their partner is STI free before engaging in sex, those who wish to forgoe condom use more safely, etc

I don't know about Ontario, but in Vancouver & Bangkok both NAT & antigen HIV tests are available. BC Medical even covers the cost of the latter.

no hun. The "window" concept is based on the test being used, as well as the individual being tested. In the US different states use different tests. When I left Canada in Ontario at least the RNA test was not the norm., Siemens ADVIA Centaur HIV-1/O/2 EIA was the screening test used. BioRad Genetic Systems HIV-1 Western Blot was the gold standard. The window is governed by the test used. You need to ask the Doctor giving you the test what the window is for that test.

If the patient has a compromised immune response it will drastically change the window. If the patient has the money to receive a prophylactic treatment from a suspected exposure the window can approach a year regardless of the test. YOU NEED TO ASK YOUR DOCTOR. That is also why there are concerns about "clinics" and "home tests". Without your history the tests may or may not have the window that others have.

In Canada the bioLytical INSTITM HIV-1 Antibody Test Kit is the only licensed point of care test in Canada. Indow is about a week longer than the 3rd Generation EIA test. And it only tests for HIV-1.

I guess I will just repeat my statement about this since it was first brought up months ago. Go see a doctor that takes a full history and have them tell you what is going on with your tests and how long it will take to be "safe".

Oh and for the record, yes IF you have an all clear at 4 weeks with the RNA quantitative test and no immune suppression issues you are virtually guaranteed to be ok.

I am aware of that. You are the one who referred to "how long the window is in some US states", so i assumed in my reply that you were referring to the original subject of this thread, namely the maximum period required between a HIV infection and a NAT test detecting it. As i said, this will not vary from state to state or between countries. Like you say here:

Dahhhhhh no I am referring to the simple fact that many states do not use RNA specific as a primary test. Most medical jurisdiction set their own standards. Even more so when it is in a publicly funded test. You get tested using the tests that a state uses. Simple. The window depends on where you are being tested. So does the accuracy. Many jurisdictions do not even do a full range of HIV tests and only do the HIV-1 strains. And of course HIV-2 's window is different as well.

Individuals who had transplants also have radically different windows than most people.

Most people are too misinformed to even know which test they are receiving, let alone what the implications of that test are. People should talk to their Doctor not rely on the interpretation of self appointed experts who just do not have the training to understand what they read in the popular press

By the way, you keep talking about Vancouver, are you there or in Ontario?

I talked to one of my doctors in a walk in clinic in Vancouver, asking for a p24 antigen test for HIV. He didn't even know what it is, let alone that it is covered by BC medical. BTW, do you happen to know if it is covered by Ontario medical or in other provinces?

I think the STI expert in the OP should stand in contrast to "the popular press". To quote another expert:




http://www.medhelp.org/posts/HIV---...28-days/show/1364872?personal_page_id=1721688

However if you prefer the opinion of mere doctors over experts:

"My doctor confirmed that I DO NOT have HIV and no more tests are needed, because above mentioned tests at 4 weeks are confirmatory."

http://www.medhelp.org/posts/HIV---...28-days/show/1364872?personal_page_id=1721688

"FYI, I consulted at least 5 doctors and all said RNA PCR and antibody at 4 weeks is confirmative."

http://www.medhelp.org/posts/HIV-Prevention/PCR-test-negative-after-4-Weeks/show/1355725

Let me try one more time. Doctors follow protocols created by local agencies. They use tests as defined by the protocols. The window is dependant on the protocols used. Got that? MOST STATES ARE NOT USING STATE OF THE ART RNA TESTING AS A FIRST SCREENING TOOL YET !

As far as I know pool RNA tests in BC are still being evaluated and mostly limited to mixed blood at blood banks and gay clinic samples.

And really, does it matter?

You have to abstain from all risk behaviour from the beginning of the window period till you get the results for them to confirm you are negative. And unless you ask your doctor how long to wait after the last risk exposure, how will the average person know how long to wait. They will not even know what test is being used.

You keep talking about quick tests in other parts of the world. YOU MIGHT WANT TO CHECK WHAT THEY ACTUALLY ARE USING. Point of use tests are mostly limited to HIV-1. Not to useful in large parts of the world where other strains are catching up.

One more time: the types of test used are set by local authorities. There is no standard protocols between countries, or even states. I suspect the same applies to provinces. The "window" time (the time from infection to being able to take a sample and have detection at a specific confidence level) is based on the protocol used to test you. It is not a fixed number of days. Your statements are sort of true but do not allow for local reality and what protocols are being used.

Can you insist on a specific test? Depends on the doctor you are talking to, some will, most follow the local protocols. ASK THE DOCTOR what the window will be. You do know that even after the first set of tests the protocols do require follow up more accurate tests before treatment begins? So the window is only a part of the delay between the decision to have a test and starting treatment?


Can I tell you what is paid for in Ontario? If you follow the protocols, pretty much all the tests available. BUT in most cases they have to be taken as specified in the protocols and in the order specified.

I give up on you lenny, you are convinced you can discover 'truth' on the internet and have all the skills and education to interpret what you are reading. If you care that much go to school and get an education in the field so you can understand the fundamentals. I am tired of trying to explain fundamentals to you.

"I live in San Francisco and the San Francisco City Clinic and Magnet state that the conclusive window period for RNA/NAAT is 2 weeks and not to take past 4 weeks. Seattle/King County also say the same thing...Seems more and more public health services are starting to offer this test to shorten the window?"

http://www.thebody.com/Forums/AIDS/SafeSex/Q198120.html

If i want a p24 antigen test in BC, i can go to my doctor or any walk in clinic and tell them that i had a recent "condom failure" & would like that test as well as the antibody test for HIV. That is what i did, though the doctor didn't know what the test was, but after learning what it was with my help, he sent me to get it done.

If i want a NAT HIV test i could go to any place for blood donations that gives said test. Or to a clinic that offers it. Even if it caters to gays they have no way of knowing what my lifestyle is.

In Bangkok there was a clinic offering the NAT for free. World class Bumrungrad hospital also has the NAT test at a cost of about 2500 baht with results in 3 days. Or two hour results with duo p24 antigen/antibody (AG/AN) for around 700 baht. I assume other hospitals & clinics there also have these tests.

Closer to home for a Canadian would be clinics in Seattle, San Fransisco, New York, etc. Though i don't know if there would be any point in going there just for the test when one can easily get the testing done here. Maybe if a guy was having sex while in the USA on business, holiday, or for the Canadian winter he might want to use the American services.

From 5 years ago:

"PCR tests can tell you if your body is infected as early as 72 hrs after the exposure."

I am sorry I had the distinct impression you came onto this board and decided to tell people people could be tested after 4 weeks and get accurate results. I did not realise you meant they could go to a handful of places in North America and pay to be tested after 4 weeks instead of using the standard protocols used in Ontario . and get 95 percent accuracy after a few more weeks and 100% after 3 months

People have a terrible habit of interpreting things the way they like instead of using evidence based treatments. I spent a few hours talking to someone who worked in a hospital in Thailand in 2010. She tells me that the HIV rate for sex workers was a little over 2%. She also tells me that Thailand had the highest HIV rate in Asia. Also at her hospital they only tested for HIV-1. She seems a little prejudiced about Africans and people having sex with them, so no one could have HIV-2 there lol.


So OK. People from Terb can fly off to get HIV tests with a window well under 4 weeks. All they have to do is abstain from risky behaviour for a few weeks, find a place offering the tests, go there, and pay for the tests. Apparently Perb types can find it locally I am surprised the RNA test is provided though.

I wonder how many thought your information applied to their lives in good old Toronto. Or know that at one of the tests you are talking about becomes almost useless if you were infected a few months before the test.

by the way, re straw man, I wonder what the term is for making broad sweeping statements then adding all the conditional "if you go get the tests" type explanations only when challenged would be called?

 

[lenny2]

I am sorry I had the distinct impression you came onto this board and decided to tell people people could be tested after 4 weeks and get accurate results.

Are you refering to the STI expert opinion of the OP:

"I called the University of Alabama at Birmingham today and they said they do an early detection test called NAT. Which from what I have read is the same as the PCR the Jefferson County STD clinic offers just with a faster turn around time. I am assuming they do the NAT along with the standard antibody test."

"...NAAT and PCR are the same thing. This test and the p24 antigen test both are ways to test for the presence of HIV in the blood. Of the two tests, PCR/NAAT is the more accurate one; all by itself, a negative result any time more than about 2 weeks after exposure is virtually 100% proof against HIV -- i.e. I agree with Dr. Hook's statement that negative results with both antibody and PCR at 4 weeks would be definitive. (NAAT is the test blood banks use on all donated blood to make sure there is no transfusion related HIV in the US -- and there hasn't been a case of HIV in the US following transfusion for many years.)

http://www.medhelp.org/posts/HIV---Prevention/NAT-Test/show/1606034

Compare that to your own opinion:

"IF you have an all clear at 4 weeks with the RNA quantitative test and no immune suppression issues you are virtually guaranteed to be ok."

I did not realise you meant they could go to a handful of places in North America and pay to be tested after 4 weeks instead of using the standard protocols used in Ontario .

If all the blood donation centres and clinics offering NAT are a "handful", then it is what it is, whether it's free or you have to pay. Do you think you have to pay to donate blood or get a NAT test at an anonymous or free clinic?

Those who are interested in getting the test can put in the effort, & those who are not interested won't. It will depend on various factors, like how anxious they are about a possible exposure to HIV, or if they can handle waiting months to find out if they are infected. Some people, for example, might not want to go without bareback or condom sex for 3 months.

So OK. People from Terb can fly off to get HIV tests with a window well under 4 weeks. All they have to do is abstain from risky behaviour for a few weeks, find a place offering the tests, go there, and pay for the tests. Apparently Perb types can find it locally I am surprised the RNA test is provided though.

People who post on TERB live in various parts of Canada & the world, not just Toronto. Even Torontonians get out of town sometimes, travelling for business or pleasure to various destinations. Though i assume there are a number of blood donor centres in TO if people are interested in a NAT test. Alternately, fourth generation or duo testing (AN/AB) is also available and comparable to NAT testing.

I wonder how many thought your information applied to their lives in good old Toronto.

It does. See above.

 

[lenny2]

From a 2011 post:

"Well, I called today and I got it CONFIRMED. ALL ONTARIO LABRATORIES USE THE DUO ANTIBODY/ANTIGEN (4th generation). I hope this helps everyone in ontario ..."

http://www.medhelp.org/posts/HIV-Prevention/Which-HIV-testing-is-used-in-Canada/show/1619737

What our STI world renowned expert had to say in 2005 about this test at 4 weeks & an antibody test at 6.5 weeks:

"...the 4 week test was highly if not perfectly reliable; and your negative test at 6.5 weeks nails it down with certainty: You do not have HIV."

http://www.medhelp.org/posts/STDs/4th-generation-tests/show/246430

 

[lenny2]

I spent a few hours talking to someone who worked in a hospital in Thailand in 2010. She tells me that the HIV rate for sex workers was a little over 2%.

From studies i've read, that is about right. With FSW in venues it was about 1.8% in 2011. MSW, MSM & IDU was far higher, like in many other parts of the world, and in at least low double figures. Likewise SW SP's in Canada is likely also in the same high range.

She also tells me that Thailand had the highest HIV rate in Asia.

It's about 5X the rate in Canada, both of which are small compared to high risk groups & places like sub-saharan Africa.

Also at her hospital they only tested for HIV-1. She seems a little prejudiced about Africans and people having sex with them, so no one could have HIV-2 there lol.

I wonder what that alleged hospital was. Has there ever been even one reported case of HIV-2 in Thailand?

Following are some comments & opinions on HIV 1 & 2 testing in general and in Thailand:

"The relatively uncommon HIV-2 type is concentrated in West Africa and is rarely found elsewhere.

"...The most-up-to date (fourth generation) EIA tests detect both HIV-1 and HIV-2 infections.37 Although most HIV infections are HIV-1 group M, EIA tests are also able to detect infections with rare groups and subtypes.

"However, as HIV-2 and group O infections are extremely rare in most countries, routine screening programs might not be designed to test for them.38 Anyone who believes they may have contracted HIV-2, HIV-1 group O or one of the rarer subtypes of group M should seek expert advice."

http://www.avert.org/hiv-types.htm

"The lower infectivity of HIV-2 compared to HIV-1 implies that fewer of those exposed to HIV-2 will be infected per exposure. Because of its relatively poor capacity for transmission, HIV-2 is largely confined to West Africa.[9]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HIV

"Further to my thread earlier, I got tested in Thailand at 39 days-negative. I am concerned that they did not check for HIV-2 because my exposure was with an african woman."

"...Just off the phone with the hospital I got tested in. After a long, long time trying to explain in thai (my thai is abysmal) what I wanted I eventually found out that my test was a 3rd generation rapid test called 'DoubleCheck 2' made by ORGENICS'. It tests for both HIV 1 and HIV 2. link: http://www.orgenics.com/en/page.aspx?section=22

"...Just a point to note for anyone who gets tested in Thailand:

"I got tested in a rural area that is well away from the main tourist spots so this is an indication that thailands testing procedures are probobly up to speed countrywide." (2007)

http://www.medhelp.org/posts/HIV-Prevention/HIV-2-worries/show/18642

"Modern detection tests are able to detect all groups and subtypes of HIV-1 and HIV-2.

"...HIV-2 is also predominantly found in West Africa, but has recently been reported in India and South America. I can assure you that with your negative test results, you are definitely HIV negative without any doubt, provided the tests have been carried out at the correct window periods". (2012)

http://www.medhelp.org/posts/HIV---International/HIV-Types/show/1664106

"I am 24 yrs old from Thailand...I went to Vejathani Hospital. it is a private hospital and hi-tech hospital. The test took 90Mins and doctor said my blood result are nomal , on the result it was shown as follow

Department of HIV
Anti Hiv
Hiv-1/Hiv-2 "Negative"

(2007)


http://www.medhelp.org/posts/HIV---...out-condom-and-the-test--10-weeks/show/303077

"One last question, do u think the test in Thailand is as good as in your country?.... I don't even know what kind of test it is or the generation of the test? just HIV-1 / HIV-2 that I knew...Do I have to call an hospital and ask about it? I am so so worried everytime I have an headache and when a few rash occured to my skin (and gone) .... It all drive me crazy....

"...Thailand is a medically sophisticated country, and I cannot imagine that they use HIV tests with lower standards than in Europe and North America. But I have no direct knowledge." (2007)

Dr. HHH (STI expert)

http://www.medhelp.org/posts/HIV---...out-condom-and-the-test--10-weeks/show/303077

"I don't know the relative prevalence of HIV-2 in Thailand, but you can be sure it is low; the Thai health officials are very sophisticated and you can be sure that if HIV-2 were common there, they would make sure that routine tests covered it." (2007)

Dr. HHH (STI expert)

http://www.medhelp.org/posts/HIV---...t-still-having-a-ton-of-symptomes/show/256528

 

[lenny2]

I thought you lived in Canada .

Why do you care how long the window is in some US states?

Surely you don't think the CDC's window of 9-11 days only applies to the USA.

It won't change to 30 days just because the same test is done elsewhere, like Canada, Europe or Asia.

The 9-11 days remains constant regardless of the state or country the test is done in.

Supposedly the CDC supports this with some scientific evidence or research.

 

[lenny2]

"...An extract from a Dr H post...

" "Last November I attended a large medical meeting in which 300+ HIV/AIDS experts were asked if they had had any patients in the past 5 years who took more than 6-8 weeks to turn positive. Not one person raised his or her hand. Search this forum for "time to positive HIV test" for innumerable discussions.

HHH, MD" "

"Basically, it's not just Dr H that feels 6-8 weeks is long enough. However, if you feel the need to follow the conservative CDC guidelines, then feel free to do so and test again at 13 weeks." (2007)

http://www.medhelp.org/posts/HIV-Prevention/HIV-2/show/19618

That was in 2007, five years ago. HIV testing methods are constantly improving.

 

[mrsCALoki]

Surely you don't think the CDC's window of 9-11 days only applies to the USA.

It won't change to 30 days just because the same test is done elsewhere, like Canada, Europe or Asia.

The 9-11 days remains constant regardless of the state or country the test is done in.

Supposedly the CDC supports this with some scientific evidence or research.

You do go on and on don't you? Unless the test is commonly used in a given state it's window is meaningless, and the window in that state is the window for the test they use.

You are just arguing for the sake of arguing.

 

[FatOne]

You do go on and on don't you? ....
You are just arguing for the sake of arguing.

A bit like me calling someone a fatass isn't it.

 

[lenny2]

You do go on and on don't you? Unless the test is commonly used in a given state it's window is meaningless, and the window in that state is the window for the test they use.

You are just arguing for the sake of arguing.

Well, no, i am just explaining my position, which evidently you didn't understand from the "get-go", although you acted like you did, when you really didn't, hence your strawman & ad hominen attacks. Hopefully you "get it" now, finally, young lady, half my age.


-----------------------


Don't Let Me Be Misunderstood
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVoF1rKLIFo&feature=related

 

[GPIDEAL]

Scientificly speaking, the window period is what it is, and doesn't vary from state to state or country to country, so it doesn't matter where i live in that regard.

Practicly speaking, i find that many people on forums such as this are misinformed, thinking they have to wait 3, 6, 12 months or longer before they can be sure they are HIV negative. A hell of a lot of anxiety is often experienced during those months, anxiety which leads to illnesses & other problems that could have been avoided.

The applications of a much shorter window period include, for examples, cases of SP's & clients who've had "condom failures", couples wanting to know their partner is STI free before engaging in sex, those who wish to forgoe condom use more safely, etc

I don't know about Ontario, but in Vancouver & Bangkok both NAT & antigen HIV tests are available. BC Medical even covers the cost of the latter.


--------------------------------------


Something For The Girl With Everything
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnM3Iq977JU

My doctor said 3 months I think from the time of suspected exposure for the antibodies to be present/detected.

 

[lenny2]

My doctor said 3 months I think from the time of suspected exposure for the antibodies to be present/detected.

What province or country, and test, was this referring to?

One of my doctors in Vancouver, Canada, didn't even know what a p24 antigen HIV test is!

Another doctor in BC told me only a few people of African origin have immunity to HIV!

WTF?

I'd suggest listening to HIV experts, rather than mere "doctors".

 

[mrsCALoki]

Well, no, i am just explaining my position, which evidently you didn't understand from the "get-go", although you acted like you did, when you really didn't, hence your strawman & ad hominen attacks. Hopefully you "get it" now, finally.

And I hope you get my position. In medicine as in many other things it all depends where you are, who you are, and how much money you have. It is not YMMV. it is Your Mileage Will Very. And if there was oil under Toronto, people in Toronto could drill wells n their back yards and all be rich.

 

[GPIDEAL]

What province or country, and test, was this referring to?

One of my doctors in Vancouver, Canada, didn't even know what a p24 antigen HIV test is!

Another doctor in BC told me only a few people of African origin have immunity to HIV!

WTF?

I'd suggest listening to HIV experts, rather than mere "doctors".

This was not recent. It's what he told me maybe two years ago under normal testing procedures available in Toronto. I think he meant that for a standard HIV test, a blood test won't detect the specific antibodies until 3 months after exposure IIRC.

 

[mrsCALoki]

One of my doctors in Vancouver, Canada, didn't even know what a p24 antigen HIV test is!
I'd suggest listening to HIV experts, rather than mere "doctors".

Do you know why most Doctors do not consider p24 test very useful and so many protocols do NOT recommend or even mention it?

You go on and on about it but you do not even mention that it gives false negatives if the infection is more than 5 or 6 weeks old. In most public health situations it is of very limited use. So why would a mere "doctor" care about a test that has such a serious limitation?

 

[lenny2]

Do you know why most Doctors do not consider p24 test very useful and so many protocols do NOT recommend or even mention it?

You go on and on about it but you do not even mention that it gives false negatives if the infection is more than 5 or 6 weeks old. In most public health situations it is of very limited use. So why would a mere "doctor" care about a test that has such a serious limitation?

This thread has been mostly "on & on about" NAT HIV testing, actually, but if you had been paying attention, the subject of p24 antigen HIV testing has already been addressed. See posts 1, 18, 27 and 28 re p24 antigen testing.

BTW, if doctors are so bright, then why were the ones i spoke to so clueless & idiotic? I see that you never comment upon this, although i keep referring to it. Do you think people should blindly believe any religious person, er, doctor, they talk to?