De ce, pentru HIV, riscurile sexului oral tind aspimtotic catre 0

lex404, on 15 decembrie 2014 - 14:58, said:

Unde o sa ti se spuna ca trebuie sa astepti 3 luni sa faci analizele si apoi inca 3 ca sa fii sigur. Adica peste 6 luni o sa stii sigur pentru hiv. In timpul asta trebuie sa scapi cum poti de sarpele indoielii.
De asta m-am referit la consiliere pre si post-testare.

In fine, ar fi bine sa existe si in Romania ca in State profilaxie post -expunere in 72 de ore. Se poate intampla sa iti faca oral neprotejat una dubioasa sau sa se rupa prezervativul la normal.
Medicamentele astea ar trebui sa fie in farmacii.

Edited by alinulu, 16 December 2014 - 11:13.

undercoverbrother, on 12 mai 2013 - 14:31, said:

1. Mai stii si altfel de tigani?
2. De ce o zici ca o chestie negativa?

Adevarul despre raspandirea BTS:

Risk per unprotected sexual act with an infected person
Receiving oral sex—man
Known risks                                                                                Possible
Chlamydia                                                                                  HPV
Gonorrhea
Herpes
Syphilis (1%)
http://en.wikipedia....smitted_disease

Ca sa nu mai vorbesc ca la:

Vaginal sex—man    HIV (0.05%)

Ce ziceti de asta?

Hiv nici macar nu e trecut la sex oral.

Edited by alinulu, 09 January 2015 - 18:46.

Buna ziua in urma cu 14 zile am avut un contact oral neprotejat si unul normal protejat cu o doamna de moravuri usoara, la cateva ore dupa am observat pe penis o zgaraietura care cred ca provenea de la faptul ca in urma cu doua zile m-am ras in acea zona, am mers la un medic demarolog si ifectionist la 5 zile de la contact acesta mi-a recomandat sa fac o serie de analize ca sa stau linistit printre care :Ag HBs - 0.16 NEGATIV, Anti HCV 0.06 Negativ, Testare Hiv1,2 - Ag/Ac - 0.12 Negativ, Rpt - NRGATIV, TPHA - NEGATIV. Per total Negativ , citind pe net mi-am dat seama ca poate a fost prea devreme testul efectuat intre timp am inceput sa am simptome ca de gripa dar care corespund si cu ce am citit pe net despre HIV : dureri de cap , oboseala ,dureri in gat si chiar si o stare de greata voma, si un ganglion la gat in dreapt usor vizibil dar care in urma unui consult ORL am fost asigurat ca e in dimensiuni normale si nu da nimic de banuit, speriat de toate simptomele si de ce am mai citit pe net azi mi-am facut testut HIV 1 ARN Calitativ (la 14 zile) si as vrea sa stiu daca dupa acest test pot sa stiu sigur daca este sau nu. Sau as mai putea face si alte teste ?

Nu poți ști, inca.
2-3 luni, poate chiar mai multe. Totul depinde de sistemul tău imunitar.
sau, Western Blot. Dar WB se face pentru confirmare în urma a 2 Elisa pozitive Și este foarte costisitor.

Cat despre simptome, în perioada asta virozele respiratorii, bronșitele și alte afecțiuni ale tractului respirator sunt la "moda"

Testul WB este mai costisitor decat HIV 1 ARN CALITATIV ? WB la vitor babes este 180 lei pecand HIV 1 ARN CALITATIV este 480 lei la SYNEVO pe mine ma intereseaza mai exact care dintre ele este mai precis in depistarea timpurie pana intr-o luna , simtomele de raceala au cam trecut dupa 3 zile de coldrex de 2 ori pe zi , dar citind atatea pe net nu stiu ce sa mai cred, ba ca sansele de contactare in urma sexului oral sunt infime si ca saliva neutralizeaza totul ba ca orice taietura pe penis e o poarta de intrare, nimic nu ma panicheaza mai mult decat ideea de contactare HIV,internetul poate fi de mare folos pentru informare dar si pentru a sadii indoiala si panica chiar, am vb si cu tipa respectiva mai pe ocolite ma asigurat ca ea nu are nimic dar .....

Atunci ai făcut PCR.
PCR e foarte sensibil, cretin de sensibil. Nu poate da fals negativ decât în cazul în care e contaminata proba. Poate însă sa dea fals pozitiv degeaba dar nu e cazul.

WB e diferit. Merge de la 2-3 saptamani.

Este în momentul de fata cel mai sigur.


Stai linistit. Dacă simptomele nu treceau te puteai ingrijora. În infecția cu hiv simptomele durează câteva săptămâni și se opresc brusc.

ok merci frumos, o sa merg sa fac si WB saptamana urmatoare si apoi sa compar rezultatele. daca la wb rezultatul la 2-3 saptamani e negativ mai are rost sa fac si elisa la 4saptamani? aici nu eram eu foarte dumirit despre calitatea testelor si despre perioada in care pot fi facute pentru cele mai bune rezultate lasand costurile separat, da simtomele au cam disparut chiar si acel mic ganglion de la gat sa restras dar stresul psihic intr-o astfel de situatie tinde sa te doboare , vezi in orice lucru simtome .

WB nu știu unde o sa iei facă fără pozitiv elisa.

Elisa e cel mai neperformant...

Salut am revenit cu rezultatul analizelor Hiv 1 Arn Pcr Cantitativ de la sinevo facute la 14 zile de la contact, rezultatul este " nedetectabil" adica negativ din cate am inteles , intrebarea este dak pot sta linistit sau nu... ?

Am mai gasit ceva despre mituri si realitati privind acest virus :
"The Myths:
First of all, sadly, there is a very overlinflated view of HIV among a large portion of the general population. I feel this is related to a lot of the “hype” and media around the virus. The FACT is, HIV is a very difficult virus to transmit. Comparable to other viruses (ie influenza), it is a very WEAK and unstable virus that succombs to the environment rapidly. It needs basically a set of near perfect circumstances to allow for infection. Therefore, a person CANNOT get HIV from environmental surfaces, like toilet seats, manicure/barber equipment, shower stalls, drinking glasses, toothbrushes, etc etc. The virus quickly becomes inactive when it is outside of its host (the body). This is why infection from inanimate objects is impossible. This is also why mutual masturbation with exposure to a partner’s gential fluids is also NOT a risk in any way. This also is the case with cuts, abrasions, cracked cuticles, etc. Those things make no difference when it comes to risk, as the virus is outside of its host, rendering it inactive.
“Delayed Seroconversion”. We have all heard horror stories of people who test negative for YEARS, even decades, somehow being infected without having a POS HIV test. This is a bunch of “you know what”. It doesn’t happen, it is an urban myth. If a person has transmitted the virus, they will test pos, actually quite rapidly (usually within 6 weeks of exposure). 3 months will give a person with an exposure a conclusive result. If a person does not test POS for HIV 3 months after an exposure, then they did not contract HIV. The ONLY exception to this is people who have literally NO immune system who may take longer to produce antibodies. This would include an extremely small portion of the population, and would include situations such as….a person taking anti-rejection meds post an organ transplant, a person on aggressive chemotherapy, or a person with terminal, end stage cancer, again…people who have NO immunity. Even this “delayed” seroconversion among this small population is highly debated among medical professionals. Even people in these categories usually test POS within the 3 month window period, but as a precaution, it is recommended that people with severely compromised immune systems test to 6 months post an exposure. NO ONE ELSE NEEDS TO TEST BEYOND 3 MONTHS. If a person was prescribed PEP (“Post Exposure Prophylaxis), then they need to test 3 months after their LAST dose of PEP.
“Autoimmune Disorders”. This is often confused with what I discussed above. Autoimmune disorders (ie rheumatoid arthritis) are completely different from a person with a severely compromised immune system, from chemo, etc. The presence of an autoimmune disorder does NOT change the testing guidelines whatsoever, and it will not affect the test results.
“Blood to Blood Exposures”. We get questions about this all the time. HIV is classified as a “blood borne pathogen”, which is where a lot of this fear comes from. It basically means that the virus has to reach the bloodstream. In sexual exposures, it does this through the mucous membranes of the vagina or anus, which are VERY vascular, with very easy access to the vascular system. In a needle sharing scenario, a person is injecting infected blood DIRECTLY into their bloodstream. These situations are VERY different from a superficial skin “exposure”:
Someone has a cut and was exposed to someone else’s cut. This does not pose a risk for many reasons. First, the skin serves as an EXCELLENT barrier to the virus. The skin is comprised of several layers, and injuries, like paper cuts, etc…begin healing IMMEDIATELY from the inside out. Therefore, even if there IS a superficial abrasion/laceration, it will not allow the virus to penetrate deep enough to reach the bloodstream, which is what has to happen for infection. In a VERY severe scenario, there may be a risk….for example, two people being in a car accident with large major hemorrhaging injuries where there is HUGE exposure to the other person’s blood through a very significant (deep) injury. However, again…being exposed to someone else’s blood in small amounts, even with a small cut, will NOT place you at risk.
The Great ORAL Debate. This is probably our most common question. Unprotected oral sex. Is it a risk? The short answer: NO. The long answer….
There is often a difference in the answers given by the docs in the expert forum vs us. People have to understand that medical professionals and the CDC have a responsibility to be ULTRA conservative when discussing risks. Therefore, there is a MINUTE “theoretical” risk assigned to oral sex. If oral sex was TRULY a “real” risk, there would be new cases all the time of HIV being transmitted in this manner. There absolutely is NOT. And a “theoretical” risk is VERY different from an actual risk. The docs have BOTH said time and time again in the expert forum that neither of them, in their combined DECADES of being specialists dealing with HIV have EVER seen a case of HIV as a result of oral sex, nor have they READ any convincing cases. There is a physiological reason for that. First, the virus isn’t present in the saliva, making infection impossible for the receptive partner (the person receiving oral sex). Secondly, for the person GIVING oral sex, THEIR saliva contains enzymes that inhibit the virus, should they be exposed to infected genital secretions. Secondly, again, the virus has been exposed to the air and elements, rendering it inactive in an oral situation. This debate will continue, but again, for anyone worrying about an oral “exposure”…think of the facts. If it was truly a risk, there would be newly reported cases ALL the time.
HIV is classified as an STD, which means, basically, one has to have SEX to be at risk. This leads me to the primary REAL risks of becoming infected. They are UNPROTECTED VAGINAL OR ANAL SEX, sharing IV drug works, and from mother to infant. Sexually, there are certainly higher risks. Homosexual men having sex with other men still remains a higher risk, with a “bottom” anal sex partner having unprotected sex being about the highest risk factor. HOWEVER…despite this information….HIV is still on the rise among heterosexual partners. While it is less of a risk, it is still a risk! And, despite the “odds” out there, it IS possible to get HIV from only ONE episode of unprotected hetero sex. Who wants to take those kinds of chances? Therefore, remember to protect yourself at all costs. ONE moment of pleasure for a lifetime of dealing with a chronic illness? Seems like one heck of an exchange!
Protection. HIV is a 100% preventable disease. Condoms work. Therefore, condoms used consistently and correctly will almost guarantee a future free of HIV. Whether a person chooses to use condoms for oral sex is a personal decision. It certainly is adviseable to protect against other STD’s, which are far more prevalent, and easier to transmit via oral sex. When engaging in a sexual relationship, follow a few rules. First, have open conversations with a prospective partner about their history, and flat out ask their history, whether they have been tested, etc. ANYone who is evasive about their answer, or refuses to answer….walk away. UNLESS you have been mutually tested with a monogamous partner…unprotected intercourse should NEVER be an option. Men, choose condoms that are the right fit, and use only ONE condom at a time. Some people think that 2 condoms at a time offers double protection. To the contrary, they increase the risk of condom failure. Use plenty of WATER based lubrication, like KY jelly, and if you question the quality of a condom, use another one. Make sure the condoms are not expired, as that also increases the risk of condom breakage. When condoms break, they do so CATASTROPHICALLY. There is no doubt. Therefore, if you use a condom, and it is WHOLE after the act, the condom worked. Always remember to hold onto the condom on withdrawl, this will prevent slippage, which overall isn’t a risk for HIV, but may expose you to other STD’s. The fact that HIV virus can penetrate an intact condom is also an urban myth. The ONLY exception to this is lambskin condoms…they are not efficient against HIV. Use latex or polyurethane condoms only to protect against HIV.
Medical Exposures. You cannot and will not EVER be infected by a medical procedure, like having your blood drawn, or an IV inserted. Medical professionals do NOT re-use needles, period. Mainly because if they did, they would be placing themselves at risk for all kinds of infections, and they simply wouldn’t do that. Secondly, most of the needle products out there today allow for a ONE time use only, and have safeguards in place to prevent re-use. If you are worried about this…put it out of your mind, it is irrational.
Lastly, if you feel you’ve had a risk, then get tested. There is NO reason not to. Anxiety is NO excuse not to get tested. “Not knowing” doesn’t change your test result…it just delays possible life-saving treatment, not to mention, may keep you from the likely relief of a negative result. HIV education is vital….and in this day and age, not ONE more person should be getting infected. It is completely avoidable.
If you have been tested, and your result is NEG at 3 months, you do NOT have HIV, despite any “symptoms” you are sure you have. One can NEVER EVER gauge a risk by physical symptoms. Newly infected people many times do not experience any ARS symptoms, not to mention that ARS symptoms are also VERY consistent with thousands of other common, non-HIV illnesses, infections. If you have had a NO RISK situation, or have tested NEGATIVE at 3 months, or both…and you simply CANNOT move on, cannot convince yourself that you do not have HIV, then it is time to seek professional help for yourself. HIV phobias/anxiety is sadly pretty common. One can see that by reading either of the HIV forums here on MH. Continuing to search the internet is the absolute WORST thing you could do in that situation. That would be synonomous with a person with a severe snake phobia throwing themselves into a snake pit day after day.. Doesn’t make much sense, does it?
The “HIV Prevention” forum here at MH is to help people assess a risk. The forum has rules in place because of the nature of the high levels of anxiety related to the subject. People get a little upset with us when we tell posters to “move on”, but it is absolutely a necessity. We HAVE to maintain order in the forum, and once we have advised a poster that they have not had a risk, or they are conclusively negative, there isn’t much more we can tell them. There are hundreds, thousands of posts to search. We cannot provide constant emotional support, that just isn’t whay the forum is there. Of course we recognize that people coming to us are highly anxious and of course we are compassionate, but there comes a time when enough is enough. No one else would get their ?’s answered if we allowed every person to continue on and on, asking the same question in a different way. Therefore, it deserves mention…if YOU are one of these people, be courteous to the other posters in the forum, and please follow the rules. Again, the search option is available to you, you can review MANY threads discussing the same topic."

Edited by username00Alex, 31 March 2015 - 19:10.

Paranoia aia cum ca iei sau dai hiv prin sex oral o sa ramana tot timpul un mit, nu exista niciun caz documentat in adevaratul sens al cuvantului si nu exista niciun caz in randul prostituatelor (din motive de ordin practic), de altfel asta e una, nu singura, dintre prezumtiile initiale legate de hiv care nu s-a concretizat, ca in cativa ani toate persoanele care practica prostitutia vor fi infectate, in sensul ca aproape fara exceptie prostituatele seropozitive au si un istoric de droguri injectabile. Sunt mai multe studii pe tema asta peste tot in lume, concluziile n-au fost deloc pe placul "establishment-ului" hiv / sida, asa ca nu s-a facut mare tam-tam despre ele in presa.

Inainte sa ne panicam inutil dupa ce-am vizitat o doamna de moravuri usoare, as trebui sa ne informam corect, din cat mai multe surse, pe aceasta tema. Adevarul e ca, dupa mai bine de 30 de ani de cand virusul hiv a fost prezentat publicului, aproape niciuna dintre predictiile facute atunci nu s-a confirmat - nu e nicio epidemie / pandemie de hiv nicaieri pe planeta (si daca o sa ziceti de Africa, acolo oamenii mor de secole de acelasi boli nenorocite cauzate de saracie, chiar daca guvernelor respective le place sa le numeasca acum sida), oamenii au continuat sa faca sex neprotejat si sa procreeze (se vede asta in cresterea generala a populatiei, inclusiv in Africa, despre care se spune ca e devastata de sida), in timp ce infectiile au ramas blocate in aceleasi grupuri de risc (gay, consumatori de droguri injectabile, hemofiliaci etc.) in timp ce majoritatea populatiei, heterosexuala, n-a fost niciodata expusa riscului de a contacta virusul si / sau bolile de sub umbrela sida. de altfel exista un document oficial din partea diferitelor organisme internationale care admite ca "epidemia hiv sida pentru populatia heterosexuala s-a incheiat".

Si daca luam exemplul Romaniei, ca doar aici traim, despre cati pacienti vorbim? despre vreo 10-12 mii in viata, si de vreo 18 mii in total, si asta dupa ce s-au implinit deja 30 de ani de la prima infectie documentata din tara noastra, la o populatie totala de cca 20 de milioane. am vazut recent un reportaj pe digi care vorbea despre ultima mostenire a lui Ceausescu, generatia hiv, si cum ca pana la urma Romania e un model de succes chiar si in conditiile in care la final de ani 80, inceput de ani 90, au fost centralizate cca 13 mii de persoane seropozitive, in numar covarsitor copiii infectati in spitalele din Romania, de s-au bulversat toti strainii si-am ajuns in presa de peste tot cu faza asta. Cica Romania e un model de succes pentru ca un numar mare de pacienti din "cohorta" infectata initial au supravietuit si acum au la randul lor copii, surpriza, sanatosi. Mai mult de atat, Romania se mandreste cu un procent extrem de ridicat de pacienti pe tratament ARV si se justifica in felul asta numarul mare de supravietuitori. Dar pana la urma vorbim de 12 mii de pacienti, nu de milioane, in timp ce sumele solicitate si in general aprobate de la bugetul statului sunt colosale. Fara sa renunt la empatia pentru cei care sufera de bolile asociate sida, consider ca 450 de milioane de euro pentru 4 ani de program anti-sida nu se pot justifica in niciun fel, decat daca exista un interes serios in a face niste comisioane grase din vanzarea de medicamente asociate sindromului si din pacate asta e directia in Romania, ca si in majoritatea celorlale tari est-europene, africane, asiatice etc. unde sida vine la pachet cu o portie consistenta de coruptie. In Romania n-a fost nimeni demis niciodata pe tema asta, doar Daniel Barbu a fost nevoit sa isi dea demisia dupa ce l-a mancat in dos sa se mire de jumatatea asta de miliard de euro si nu stiu cate festivaluri de literatura s-ar putea face cu banii astia... Moise Guran zice mai bine decat mine despre asta: [ https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/-l71XoA4Oc4?feature=oembed - Pentru incarcare in pagina (embed) Click aici ]

Asa ca, daca te-ai bucurat de-un sex oral cu o doamna de moravuri usoare sau de la prima intalnire cu una pe care oricum n-o sa o iei de nevasta, nu te panica, ca inainte sa mori de sida o sa mori de inima rea!

ps. e primul meu post pe forum, sper sa putem conversa civilizat si constructiv, toate cele bune!

Am primit si rezultatul testului Hiv 1 PCR Arn cantitataiv si ELSA  facut la 30 de zile de la contact si acesta este NEDETECTABIL (negativ din cate stiu), Acum sper sa pot pune capul pe perna linistit durerile in gat au disparut dar au ramas ganglioni cevicali inflamati inca (dar am inteles ca asta poate fi si din situati mai "normale") . Este reziltatul celor 2 concludent ? Din ce am citit pe net Pcr este concludent si  dupa 7 zile de la contact.

Uite ce zice compania care produce kitul de testare despre PCR: "the Amplicor HIV-1 Monitor test is not intended to be used as a screening test for HIV or as a diagnostic test to confirm the presence of HIV infection" (Roche 2003), adica PCR nu este recomandat ca test de screening sau pentru a diagnostica / confirma prezenta HIV. Oricum tu poti sta foarte linistit, n-ai nicio infectie cu vreun virus mortal, traieste-ti viata!

Merci frumos de incurajare desi raspunsul e contradictoriu , acelasi lucru am gasit si eu pe net si vine si intrebarea pt ce mai este facut acest test ? oricum un medic infectionist ma asigurat ca lipsa viremiei , lipsa unui rezultat pozitiv al HIV 1 PCR ARN la 14 si 30 de zile dublat de ELSA la 14 si 30 de zile de generatia a 4-a ma pot face sa dorm linistit. din pacate nu mai pot repeta nici un fel de testare pt o perioada buna de timp 4-6-8 luni. Multe informatii contradictorii se gasesc pe net si care chiar cum zicea si doctorul iti pot crea false simptome de pe urma celor citite si te pot duce catre un stres major generator de alte boli...... de informatia poate avea doua taisuri.

Trebuie sa avem in vedere faptul ca PCR n-a fost inventat ca sa numere virioni hiv in sangele pacientilor, dupa cum a spus in mai multe randuri inventatorul lui si posesor de Nobel, Kary Mullis. De asemenea, dupa cum se poate vedea in textul de mai jos, luat direct de pe site-ul FDA (Food & Drugs Administration,USA), testul are limitele lui in sensul ca, desi persoana e declarata negativa, PCRul tot numara ceva (ar trebui sa numere in cazul nostru virioni hiv, nu?), asa ca exista niste limite stabilite arbitrar pentru ca rezultatul sa fie pozitiv sau negativ, mai exact 400 de unitati pentru testul standard, respectiv 50 de unitati pentru testul ultra-sensibil.

Exista un studiu al unui doctor columbian, cu studii in Statele Unite si Marea Britanie, Roberto Giraldo, care a demonstrat limitele testului cel mai folosit in cazul hiv, adica Elisa. In speta, Giraldo a testat de doua ori aproximativ 100 de probe de sange, primite la laboratorul in care lucra, prima data respectand dilutia serului sangvin de 1 la 400, asa cum recomanda producatorul testului si a doua oara folosind ser nediluat, 1 la 1. Desi toate probele de sange au iesit negative in cadrul primului experiment, cu dilutie de 1 la 400, in cazul serului nediluat toate probele au iesit pozitive, ceea ce ridica doua probleme majore: 1) ori testul nu e specific pentru hiv si raspunde unei palete mult mai largi de anticorpi (de altfel e o lista lunga cu conditii care pot provoca rezultate fals pozitive) ori 2) oricine are de fapt anticorpi pentru hiv, unii mai multi (si atunci rezultatul e pozitiv chiar si in dilutie de 1:400), altii mai putini (si atunci nu se obtine rezultatul pozitiv decat folosindu-se ser nediluat, 1:1).

Dar doctorii ne spun ca anticorpii hiv demonstreaza infectia activa cu virusul, asa ca mergand pe firul logic, cine nu s-a intalnit cu virusul, n-are cum sa prezinte anticorpi specifici si atunci cum dracului avem toata situatia asta de mai sus? Si mai mult de atat, cum dracului e asta singurul virus care are nevoie de 2 teste Elisa, 1 Western Blot si, in cazul unui rezultat pozitiv, si de PCR, dar si de chestionarul care cuantifica daca persoana in cauza poate fi incadrata intr-una dintre grupele de risc?

Cred ca medicina si cercetarea stiintifica in legatura cu hiv e inca foarte departe de adevarul pe care il asteapta, conform estimarilor, zeci de milioane de pacienti. Am zis estimarilor pentru ca numerele pe care le auzim la televizor si le citim in reviste nu sunt rezultatul unei adunari la nivel global, ci numai estimari ale autoritatilor, desi noua ni se da impresia ca numerele sunt corecte. In Africa, unde se estimeaza ca se afla 80-90% dintre bolnavi, sunt foarte putine tari care isi permit sa isi testeze propriii cetateni, asa ca se pune direct diagnosticul de sida, pe baza unui calup de simptome nespecifice (diaree, scadere in greutate, tuberculoza etc)... In cazul Romaniei, autoritatile n-au fost in stare sa cada de acord in legatura cu numarul bolnavilor si, mai mult de atat, in timpul guvernarii Boc, s-a demonstrat ca numarul celor diagnosticati a fost saltat artificial, ca sa creasca si nivelul finantarii... In timp ce auzim constant la stiri ca in nu stiu ce oras din Romania, bolnavii de sida nu mai au medicamente... Sa nu mori de rusine?!

Mai e mult pana departe, asa ca nu e cazul sa intram in panica, tu te-ai linistit, pentru ca toate rezultatele testelor converg catre aceeasi concluzie, ca esti seronegativ, cu toate ca ti-ai descoperit tot felul de simptome despre care ai citit ca sunt asociate infectiei cu hiv, dar exista multe alte explicatii pentru ele. Sanatate multa iti doresc!

http://www.fda.gov/d...s/UCM093317.pdf
The AMPLICOR HIV-1 MONITOR’” Test is an in vitro nucleic acid amplification test for the
quantitation of Human lmmunodeficiency Virus Type 1 (HIV-l) RNA in human plasma. The Test
can be used with either the Standard or UltraSensitive Specimen Processing Procedure. When the
Standard Specimen Processing Procedure is used, the Test can quantitate HIV-1 RNA over the
range of 400 - 750,000 copies/ml. When the UltraSensitive Specimen Processing Procedure is
used, the Test can quantitate HIV-1 RNA over the range of 50 - 75,000 copies/ml.
The Test is intended for use in conjunction with clinical presentation and other laboratory markers of
disease progress for the clinical management of HIV-1 infected patients. The Test can be used to
assess patient prognosis by measuring the baseline HIV-l RNA level or to monitor the effects of
antiretroviral therapy by measuring changes in p!ssma HIV-1 RNA levels during the course of
antiretroviral treatment. Monitoring the effects of antiretroviral therapy by serial measurement of
plasma HIV-1 RNA has been validated for patients with baseline viral loads 2 25,000 copies/mL.
The AMPLICOR HIV-1 MONITOR Test is not intended to be used as a screening test for HIV or as
a diagnostic test to confirm the presence of HIV infection.

Multumesc frumos de raspuns.

Uite niste pareri interesante :
http://www.medhelp.o...re/show/1827725
http://www.medhelp.o...st/show/1796635
https://translate.go...7725&edit-text=