How long for your HIV to progress?

[WillingRawVerse]

I was diagnosed with AIDS back in 2011, but my doctor estimated that I was infected 9-11 years before that. Never got the fuck flu, but if I did, symptoms were very minor.

[TaKinGDeePanal]

On 11/21/2023 at 12:46 PM, Loveitraw said:

In modern terms, I fucked around and found out. The thing is when I was fucking around I was untested which is why things ran the course they did and that put others at risk that I was oblivious to. TBH whoever infected me was probably unaware too. That's a guess of course because I'll never know.

Fantasy is great.

Fetishisation can be fun.

Reality hits hard.

Wiser words were never said - and hugs to you!

I would certainly hope to hell that whoever infected you wasn't aware of their status. If they were, that would be truly reprehensible.

[Loveitraw]

26 minutes ago, TaKinGDeePanal said:

Wiser words were never said - and hugs to you!

I would certainly hope to hell that whoever infected you wasn't aware of their status. If they were, that would be truly reprehensible.

Thanks for the hugs they're always nice though I'm pretty sure there are plenty wiser than me around.

I am pragmatic about things, you learn to be otherwise things drown you.

Here I can discuss things frankly. I am HIV positive. Just those four words can change how everyone in a room responds to you, forever. One of the biggest obstacles to removing the stigma of HIV infection is this response. People have been conditioned by decades of misinformation and misunderstanding. They look at you, and treat you, because of something you did. Not because of something that happened to you.

Don't get me wrong, I have embraced and indulged in the fetish side of things. I genuinely think that side has been a big help in me accepting my status. It is just really important to see that separation between some temporary enjoyment and harsh light reality.

I don't want to curb anyone's fun. I just want to help open some eyes along the way.

[barebackernrw]

It took me one and a half year to develop full blown aids. I didn't know that I was infected before I was brought to hospital, but as I didn't have any unsafe sex but once in the years behind, I know for sure when and from whom I was infected. He later also came out as poz. My CD-4 count was as low as 0,005 and VL 3 000 000. After 5 weeks at the hospital it had climbed to 200. Now I am around 1500 - 1800 - beleive it or not, and VL undetectable. 

[ffWhole]

On 11/18/2023 at 8:11 PM, Incognito91 said:

Are you a long term non-progresser/elite controller? I am always curious about others. 

My ex who was diagnosed HIV+ in the late 80s (whom I lost touch with around 2014) never took meds, but he never progressed to AIDs. He wasn't undetectable, but always retained quite good levels of CD4 the entire time we were in touch. But his then partner in the late 80s, who was diagnosed the same time as him, passed away from AIDs related diseases. My ex's doctor kept telling him to get on meds and that it was unusual for it not to progress - so I believe this is quite uncommon.

My husband is HIV+ but remains undetectable without medication since his diagnosis more than 20 years ago. He often gets asked to donate blood for studies cuz of how unusual it is - so I believe this is extremely rare.

I don't understand... how can you be diagnosed with HIV as a positive if he is always undetectable.
Aren't you basically an HIV- person if you are undetectable or rather if you have never been diagnosed HIV+ you are HIV- 

What I am trying to say:
I have been fucked bare so much and irregulare tested. My last test was last year and I have remained negative.
I did contract several other STD's and often had flu like sympthoms after a sauna visit which I always thought were caused by maybe flu virusses in the air of bad steamrooms and jacuzzis or taking a load by someone with the flu.
So if I did became HIV+ but tested negative, I could be positive. Since you are writing:

Quote

My husband is HIV+ but remains undetectable without medication

 

Edited February 21 by ffWhole

[Incognito91]

7 hours ago, ffWhole said:

I don't understand... how can you be diagnosed with HIV as a positive if he is always undetectable.

You misunderstand. There are two people referred to in my post.

My ex was a long term non-progressor. He went without taking meds for close to 20 years when I first knew him, his CD4 remained stable but his viral load was not undetectable. I've since lost touch with him around 10 years after I knew him. As at when I lost touch with him, he still had not started on meds, but and I cannot tell you if it has remained that way. It was through him that I got infected.

My husband is the one who is an elite controller - i.e. he tests positive for HIV. However, even  without medication, his viral load is undetectable - and remained that way for the last 24 years. That said, in the last few of years, his CD4 is slightly lower than average and his dr suggested he start on meds about a year ago, and it seemed to have bump the CD4 up. 

Trust me, it was a bit of a mind-fuck for me that the first 2 HIV+ people I knew had such an unusual presentation of HIV.

So, if you test negative, it just means you have not been infected by HIV, it does not mean you're a long term non-progressor or an elite controller as both will test HIV+. I think I have read about people who are HIV resistant - which is what I think you are referring to (i.e. do not become positive despite repeated exposure to HIV), but honestly, I imagine there would be very very very little data out there should they exist

Edited February 21 by Incognito91

[BootmanLA]

11 hours ago, ffWhole said:

I don't understand... how can you be diagnosed with HIV as a positive if he is always undetectable.
Aren't you basically an HIV- person if you are undetectable or rather if you have never been diagnosed HIV+ you are HIV- 

If someone is undetectable, that is NOT the same thing as HIV-negative, not "basically" or factually.

"Undetectable" is a threshold number for counting virus particles in a given amount of blood (one milliliter). When testing for viral load became possible, a viral count of less than 200 was considered "undetectable" because testing couldn't accurately measure less than that. But the person was still HIV-positive, because the tests that detect HIV antibodies confirmed it (and later, actual tests that detect that virus is present, regardless of the amount).

 Over time, as tests have become more sophisticated, labs can now accurately test as few as 20 viral particles per milliliter. That's kind of the "new" definition of undetectable - again, the tests still show that the person has HIV, it just can't be measured at that small a level.

And no - just because someone has never been "diagnosed" as HIV+ does not mean he *IS* factually HIV-. HIV status is a binary, factual determination, whether or not you're aware of what your actual status is. As a kind of simile: if a person is a thief, he is a thief, regardless of whether a court has convicted him of theft. In both cases, the person's actual status (as positive or as a thief) is a fact, regardless of who knows what about it.

[ffWhole]

Well I would love to be HIV resistant...
I did take Prep for a while but only just before I would have unprotected sex until a few days after and then stop. The reason was that it was extremely hard for me to obtain Prep as a nomad traveler.
Sometimes when I would run out, I would just take the risk.
So far I have been lucky I guess.

[Poz2play]

It took me 6 years to get to that point