HIV test

[concerned1]

The test check not for the virus itself, but for the antibodies. Yet, after an antibody test is positive, they send you for viral load tests (which in guessing means they check for the actual virus itself). So if they can check for HIV itself in virus load tests...why not just check for presence of the virus in the initial test, too (instead of antibodies)? Something smells very fishy about that...

[Guest descartes70817]

The antibody test is cheap and reliable, but measuring viral load count is more costly. It also involves identifying your virus type and any adaptations it has which might be drug resistant.

Edited November 22, 2018 by descartes70817

[wood]

On 11/22/2018 at 2:03 PM, descartes70817 said:

The antibody test is cheap and reliable, but measuring viral load count is more costly. It also involves identifying your virus type and any adaptations it has which might be drug resistant.

Exactly. The viral load test involves lab work, antibody tests are a finger prick or gum swab, and waiting a few mins. They can be done anywhere. 

Hell this past summer they had them at a pride fest I went to. For shits and giggles. I went with a fuck bud of mine who’s poz undetectable, and I’m neg on prep, then had them test us and give us a “couples diagnosis”  We both acted shocked for a minute then admitted we were just playing around. ?