When diagnosing HIV infection, a typical mistake often occurs when the diagnosis of HIV is established on the basis of some laboratory test, in which the doctor, for one reason or another, has too much confidence.
Diagnosis of HIV infection includes two stages: establishing the actual fact of HIV infection and determining the stage of the disease. Determining the stage inextricably follows the clarification of the nature of the course of the disease, and then the formation of a prognosis for a given person, as well as the choice of treatment tactics.
As is known, the diagnosis of any infectious disease is based on a comparison of epidemiological, clinical and laboratory data, and exaggeration of the significance of one of the groups of these data can lead to diagnostic errors.
From the very beginning, the reader should be warned that when diagnosing HIV infection, a typical mistake often occurs when the diagnosis is established on the basis of some laboratory test, in which the doctor, for one reason or another, has too much confidence. Some laboratory workers even take it upon themselves to diagnose HIV infection without ever seeing the patient.
Sometimes clinicians also implicitly trust the results of laboratory tests, which can only serve as anecdotal evidence in identifying HIV infection. Over the thirteen years that we have been observing HIV infection in Russia, we have seen dozens, if not hundreds, of cases of errors associated with the fanatical trust of some doctors in laboratory analysis. We don’t have to dwell on the common “ordinary” errors that occur when serums are mixed up, documentation is filled out incorrectly, etc. The clinician simply must know the “diagnostic value” of a particular method.
We know of a case when in St. Petersburg, as a result of the inept use of some “new” method, one “scientist” gave a diagnosis of “HIV infection” to a healthy and uninfected person (whom, by the way, he had never seen), as a result why the latter committed suicide. Another, no less “outstanding scientist,” led the leadership of one former Soviet republic by the nose for several years, proving that the population of this country was “affected by the AIDS epidemic,” since the “ultrasensitive” research method he developed “detects HIV infection in those infected much earlier,” than all other known methods." In both cases, of course, we were talking about false reactions that their “newest methods” gave.
As we have already noted, new diagnostic methods must be confirmed by old ones, and not vice versa. Therefore, our general recommendation for clinicians and epidemiologists is to be skeptical about all “newest” techniques until they become “outdated,” that is, until all their advantages and disadvantages become known. In the current situation, this directly concerns diagnostics based on polymerase chain reaction - PCR (PCR) and other “gene diagnostic methods”, with the help of which some researchers have already “discovered AIDS in Egyptian mummies” and “have already begun to detect it in rats.” Recent advances only show that it will take several more years to fully adapt these techniques to medical needs.
Due to the tradition that has developed in Russia, millions of people are examined for antibodies to HIV without specific indications, and in most cases the doctor first receives the test data (a positive reaction to antibodies to HIV), and only then sees the patient himself and can interview him.
In this state of affairs, it is quickly forgotten that laboratory research only serves as confirmation of clinical research. In those cases when the doctor already knows that the patient being examined has antibodies to HIV, he can easily make a mistake by following the piece of paper with the corresponding entry.
Of practical interest are cases when the patient is in the incubation stage or the stage of primary manifestations of HIV and the amount of antibodies in his blood is still too small to be detected. However, with sufficient experience, infectious disease specialists recognize these cases fairly quickly.
Among the most studied and widespread is the method for detecting antibodies to HIV. Since HIV infection in most cases lasts for life, the very fact of detecting antibodies is sufficient for diagnosis. With HIV infection, unlike other infections, in most cases there is no need to use paired sera, that is, taken after a certain period of time, sera.
Antibody detection can, in principle, identify more than 99% of people infected with HIV. Some difficulties are associated with the fact that antibodies to HIV are absent in the first weeks after infection, and their number can noticeably decrease in the terminal period of the disease. There is information about isolated, but quite rare cases of HIV infection, when antibodies are not detected for a long time or disappear for a relatively long period.
All known test systems have some limitations in their ability to detect all sera containing antibodies to HIV (in terms of sensitivity), if only because the amount of these antibodies can be very small, especially in the initial and final periods of the disease. However, in model experiments with pre-known positive sera (“diagnostic serum panel”), the sensitivity of some test systems can reach 100% - that is, they detect all known “positive” sera used in this experiment. At the same time, of course, we should not forget that persons conducting tests may accidentally or deliberately select sera with certain characteristics, which affects the test result.
At the same time, false-positive reactions are inherent in almost all test systems. This is due to the fact that the materials being tested may contain antibodies to antigens similar to HIV antigens or contaminants to the antigen. Thus, with the classical method of obtaining HIV antigen from the lysate of cell cultures of the virus, fragments of lymphocytes are found in the final product, antibodies to which can give false reactions (5), etc. It was noted that as the sensitivity of the test increases, there is a tendency for the number of false-positive reactions to increase.
In practice, this is also supplemented by false negative and false positive results that arise due to personnel errors, deterioration in the quality of systems due to transportation and storage under incorrect conditions, and due to a decrease in the quality of test systems due to long-term storage. Therefore, along with specificity and sensitivity determined in laboratory conditions, these parameters are sometimes determined in “field” conditions, that is, the way they are in practical healthcare. As a rule, “field” characteristics, due to the above reasons, are lower than laboratory ones. The results of using test systems can even be influenced by factors such as the quality of water used for washing dishes, etc.
Most often, antibodies to HIV are detected using enzyme immunoassay methods. There are no fundamental differences in numerous commercial test systems for enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays, although they may differ significantly in sensitivity and specificity. It is quite often observed that the same sera give different results when using different test systems. Hence, it is certainly recognized that “positive” examination results in one test system cannot be considered an unconditional “true positive” result.
In this regard, a number of methods have been proposed and used to test the specificity of antibody detection results. Among these methods, the most commonly used reaction is “immune blotting” or “immunoblot” in the modification of Western Blot. (In this beautiful scientific name, “blot” is most likely translated as “blot”, and “western” as “western” reflects the direction of distribution of this “blot” across the paper from left to right, that is, on a geographical map this corresponds to the direction from west to east ."). The essence of the “immune blot” method is that the immunoenzyme reaction is carried out not with a mixture of antigens, but with HIV antigens, previously distributed by immunophoresis into fractions located according to molecular weight on the surface of the nitrocellulose membrane. As a result, the main HIV proteins, carriers of antigenic determinants, are distributed over the surface in the form of separate stripes, which appear during an enzyme-linked immunosorbent reaction.
A method that theoretically simplifies diagnosis is the method of detecting antibodies to HIV in saliva, which is currently approaching the sensitivity of detecting antibodies in the blood, but is still significantly inferior in specificity, that is, it gives a greater number of false positive results.
In addition to enzyme immunoassays, other methods for detecting antibodies in the blood are being successfully developed: agglutination, immunofluorescence, radio-immunoprecipitation and others.
The site provides reference information for informational purposes only. Diagnosis and treatment of diseases should be carried out under the supervision of a specialist. All drugs have contraindications. Consultation with a specialist is required!
Anonymous asks:
I was examined for sexually transmitted infections (no symptoms - I wanted confidence in my relationship with a woman). The HIV test was positive. Next, an ultrasound showed a tumor on the kidney, which was removed (it turned out to be malignant).
I read the book by I.M. Sazonova, it says that a malignant tumor can give a positive test result for HIV.
Could this be exactly the case, or is there nothing to hope for?
You need to conduct a control test for HIV. If the first HIV test was determined by ELISA, then the result may be false positive. Its reliability can be verified by a more sensitive diagnostic method - PCR (polymerase chain reaction), which detects the DNA of the virus in the blood.
Margarita asks:
Help!!! 12/16/10 ELISA (+) IB(+) then from 03/23/11 to 05/19/11 nine negative ELISA (-) and quantitative PCR. will not be determined. in 2002, during pregnancy, ELISA is either (+) or (-) but IB is always (-). from 2004 to 2008 I took ELISA (-) 2 times a year, but on 04/30/08 IFA (+) and IB was indeterminate. then again every 2 months I took an ELISA test always (-). and since December 2010 it has been written above. At the same time, I have never injected, my husband always has ELISA (-). CD4 980 cells. and the blood test for syphilis on April 29 gave 3+++. And then three times. negative every 10 days. hepatitis all (-). Has anyone had something like this??? Thank you.
Please clarify whether you have undergone RIBT (treponema pallidum immobilization reaction), and if so, what are the results of this study.
Margarita asks:
no, no one suggested that I do such an analysis. What will it show? I hope you understand that I was talking about HIV tests. Thank you. Have there been similar cases in your practice? By the way, information security was unclear in 2008 because... there was p24/25 protein. in 2010 IB(+) proteins gp160.41.120 p24.17.31. then when IFA was again 3 times (-) they sent me to IB on April 4th. the result was positive, but proteins gp 120 and 41. the rest are crossed out with red paste and below in red IB REPEAT!!! but PCR will deny the same number. After April 4, I took the ELISA test and it was already rejected 4 times. everything at the speed center including antigen and antibody tests. Now I’m waiting for a repeat IB and high-quality PCR. These are the things... I'M VERY TIRED OF THINKING AND WAITING... HOPE FOR THE BEST!!! THANK YOU. I'm REALLY looking forward to your answer!!!
If you ask any question, please try next time to formulate it more specifically, clarifying the diagnosis. RIBT is used to confirm the diagnosis of syphilis. To accurately diagnose HIV infection, antibodies to HIV in the blood are determined by ELISA and immunoblot. The diagnosis is confirmed only if both of these results are positive.
Margarita asks:
Sorry for formulating the question inaccurately.... I wrote that in December ELISA and Imunoblot came back positive for HIV. but since March IFA has been negative for HIV 9 times. If I was registered at the speed center, does this actually happen??? HIV is either always positive or negative. and how, if the HIV ELISA result is negative, can an immunoblot be used? then everyone will deny ifa, you need to check for immunoblot, so what happens? Our speed center can’t answer me anything. So I turned to you. Thank you.
Unfortunately, both ELISA and immunoblot can give false-positive results. That is why the diagnosis of HIV is considered final only with the simultaneous detection of HIV using ELISA and the immunoblot method.
Margarita asks:
Hello. Today I received the results of a high-quality PCR test for HIV - the virus was not detected and a repeat immunoblot for HIV resulted in indeterminate due to protein 41. The AIDS CENTER said that most likely there is no HIV, but in my body there are bodies similar in structure to HIV. What do you think, considering my questions from June 15 and 16 (see above) is there HIV or not????? THANK YOU.
In this case, the diagnosis of HIV infection is doubtful.
Margarita asks:
You write that only with the simultaneous detection of HIV using IFA and immunoblot, the diagnosis of HIV is considered final. But what then in my case? after all, everyone will deny PCR. and blot and ifa are jumping around all the time. for 9 years. Tell me, if the virus was in my blood, then its RNA and DNA could be accurately determined after so many years??? and can the incubation period or “window” last so many years? Are there any false negative PCR results for HIV given such a period of time? Yes, I forgot to say that the express tests for HIV that I take at the CVD are always negative. Or can’t you rely on them either? Thank you.
In this case, PCR diagnostics is not the main method for identifying the dynamics of the process - serological methods are more informative. In this case, the probability of false negative results is high. Express tests for HIV have a high sensitivity threshold, so they can also give a false negative result.
Margarita asks:
Sorry. I definitely wrote it in the wrong place. please answer in the topic HIV or not HIV. Thank you.
If you have not received a notification that you have received a response, you can view the answer to your question at this address http://site/news/answers/vich-ili-ne-vich-.html
Anonymous asks:
Hello! Please tell me how to register with the LCD (I’m currently 10 weeks pregnant), I took tests for HIV, a couple of days ago the doctor called me and said that the preliminary tests for HIV were positive (the first one was done in Kirovograd, but there is no official result from Kiev yet ), on the same day in our city laboratory we did two rapid tests from the Pharmaco company CITO TEST HIV 1/2, both results were negative, the laboratory assistant said that these tests are reliable and I don’t have to worry, since this happens during pregnancy, and those tests could simply be mixed up. The doctor told me to donate blood again and I had my blood tested twice more in different hospitals (I still don’t have any of the three results). I’m very worried, I’m not a drug addict, I haven’t had any questionable sexual relationships, and even if I get sick, I get sick very rarely, other tests are all normal. Can rapid tests be trusted? Does this really happen during pregnancy? The doctor scared me too much. Thank you
First of all, you need to calm down and not think about the bad. Sometimes during pregnancy there are false positive results. It is necessary to retest blood for HIV and wait for the results of the examination.
Maxim asks:
Hello! The fact is that 2 months ago I had sexual contact with a girl (we are still dating). after 1.5 weeks the temperature rose to 37.4. Soon she was asleep. To be sure, we took an IFA test after 2 weeks and again after 1.5 months. Both answers are negative. But I still have fever and cough, with variable improvement. Tell me, please, is there a risk? In addition, I worked for a long time without days off and a week ago I was on sick leave (with SARS). Blood and lung tests are normal. Thank you.
Artem asks:
Hello. Here’s the thing: More than a year ago I had unprotected sexual contact with a girl who was walking around. She insisted that she was not sick, but I couldn’t trust her 100 percent. She also assured that she had undergone a medical examination before applying for a job (she worked as a salesperson) and everything was fine. 7 months after contact, I still took an HIV test in the citylab laboratory; the result was negative. But lately I’ve been getting sick often; for 3 weeks now I’ve had a red, sore throat and I can’t cure it... I started to be afraid again, what if I caught it then? Tell me, is this possible, and should we trust the analysis from CityLab? I'm afraid to take the test again, my nerves won't hold up...
If the result is negative, then most likely you are not sick or infected with HIV/AIDS. However, to clarify the diagnosis, it is recommended to take a second test in specialized laboratories at government institutions; this examination is carried out anonymously. If self-treatment does not bring the desired result, it is recommended to consult with an otolaryngologist to conduct an adequate examination and prescribe appropriate treatment. Read more about HIV testing in a series of articles by clicking on the link: HIV.
Artem comments:
Tell me, can you give any characteristics of the citylab laboratory? Still, it is not always possible to get tested at a government agency. And what is the percentage chance for a man to become infected through unprotected contact?
Unfortunately, we do not provide comparative assessments of laboratories and private medical institutions. If you doubt the reliability of the results, conduct an examination in another center and first ask for a license to provide these medical services, whether this center has the right to conduct this examination and whether everything complies with accepted standards. The risk of infection is the same for both sexes through unprotected sexual intercourse. Read more about HIV testing in a series of articles by clicking on the link: HIV.
Dmitry asks:
Good afternoon The child is 8 months old, was tested for HIV using ELISA, gp160 + and p25 + were found in the blood, the rest is all negative, the conclusion is doubtful. Judging by these tests, it turns out that the child is +? gp160 + gp110/120 - p68 - p55 - p52 - gp41 - p34 - p25 + p18 -
Unfortunately, based on the data obtained, it is impossible to make a diagnosis with 100 percent probability, since a false positive result cannot be excluded. To make an accurate diagnosis, you will need to undergo a number of examinations, including repeating this analysis using the ELISA method, as well as taking a test using the PCR method. After this, you should contact a specialized medical institution, where an infectious disease specialist will be able to comprehensively evaluate the results obtained. You can learn more about the manifestations of HIV infection in the thematic section of our website by clicking on the link: HIV
Dmitry comments:
Can it show a false positive result for acute respiratory infections or more acute infectious diseases? I read somewhere that for 58 diseases or even higher, a “+” can be shown, including vaccination against hepatitis B, if the kidneys, etc., are affected?
There is a possibility of a false-positive result, so I recommend that you do the following: do the test again - using the ELISA method and the PCR method, and then visit the infectious disease specialist again. You can learn more about diagnosing HIV infection from the thematic section: HIV
Ivan asks:
Good afternoon The immunoblot is indeterminate due to the p25 protein. What is the likelihood of HIV?
In this situation, it is necessary to carefully study the study protocols in combination with other indicators, since it is not possible to make an assumption based on these data. Presumably the result can be considered questionable and a repeat study is required after 3 months. Read more in the section of our website: HIV
Anna asks:
Good afternoon.
Can you comment on HIV ELISA?
1 serum +3.559 k=13.3
+2.121 k=4.9
p 24 neg
2 serum +3.696 k=13.9
+2.477 k=5.7
In this case, a false positive result cannot be ruled out, given that the ELISA method is indirect, so I recommend that you get tested using another, more sensitive method - immunoblotting. You can find out more detailed information on this issue in the corresponding section of our website by clicking on the following link: HIV
Margarita asks:
Good afternoon, tell me what to tune in to? A year ago, when planning a child, my husband and I underwent all the tests, including HIV (they took them very seriously and correctly), I was examined in Kr. Rog, my husband in Kiev, his answer was negative, I was told that some reagent did not work, I need to take it again at the Center AIDS in Kiev. Having taken the test at the Center, the answer came back negative for me too. Now I am in the 14th week position i.e. I register and go through all the tests and again the answer came back, the HIV test was indeterminate, I took it again at the clinic and took an express test at Dovir to reassure me, but they didn’t reassure me, the express test showed a positive result (the second line was less pronounced), right after all this procedure, I wasted no time contacting the AIDS Center and also took a test and am awaiting the result. (I can’t calm down) Please tell me how much you can trust the express tests and why there is no answer to the HIV test the first time? (my husband and I lead a healthy lifestyle and love each other). Thank you.
Do not panic ahead of time - express diagnostics is not the basis for diagnosing HIV; it allows you to identify groups of patients who require more in-depth research. In such situations, it is recommended to conduct immune blotting and personally consult with an infectious disease specialist. You can find out more detailed information on this issue in the thematic section of our website by clicking on the following link: HIV. You can also get additional information in the following section of our website: Laboratory diagnostics
Ilya 1983 asks:
Hello, I was in the infectious disease ward, just today I was discharged when leaving, the doctor called me and explained that I have a positive IFA, first when I was admitted to the hospital, it was negative, then when I re-tested it became positive, they sent tests for an immunoblot to Sokolniki Mountain they said it would be ready next week, I was in the hospital with a sore throat and parainfluenza viruses, I arrive in a state of shock, I still don’t understand how to evaluate this, an extract for my clinic was also drawn up indicating that ifa was detected and below that the immunoblot is in work, if I’m discharged to tomorrow your clinic, then in this extract everything will be indicated how likely it is that HIV is present? Could it be that because I was treated for parainfluenza virus sore throat, show positive results for ifa?
The probability of a false positive result is very high. The presence of one positive result does not yet provide grounds for making a diagnosis of HIV, so we recommend that you wait for the immunoblotting result, and then personally consult with an infectious disease doctor regarding further examination and observation. Sore throat, parainfluenza and other colds do not have a significant effect on the results of the analysis.
Ilya 1983 comments:
I want to believe this, but at the end of August I felt unwell, the temperature rose, 37.5-38 I had loose stools for about 4 days, it was on vacation where there were a lot of discos, I drank tap water like many others, because which was very expensive, a glass of water cost 300 rubles, I associated loose stools with such a temperature with some kind of intestinal infection caught in the water, I don’t remember exactly, but there was also a small rash in the upper part of the body, when I arrived home with a temperature I called a doctor, she wrote rotavirus infection, after 5 days of sickness, I volunteered to leave him and go to work, where a few days later I fell ill with sinusitis (at that period of time, due to my work duties, I needed to be outside) I attributed this to the fact that the large temperature drop from vacation and poisoning lowered my immunity and therefore I caught a cold again with sinusitis, so this is sick leave again, according to the instructions of the ENT, I took Klacid SR 500 for 10 days, it passed, I went back to work after 3 weeks, I was on a business trip in a hot country for 3 days. The air conditioners in transport and the hotel were merciless and upon returning home, on the plane my temperature was already 39.5. Here I am at home with a temperature of 40, I called a doctor at home, wrote an acute respiratory infection and said my throat was very red, I have chronic tonsillitis and told the ENT specialist, I myself wrote to take the antibiotic Levolet r. I called an ambulance because I had a fever and the rate was 40 and did not decrease, they did not offer hospitalization, the next day the same story - the ambulance gave an antipyretic injection and left. The third time I insisted on hospitalization, they barely took me away to the infectious diseases hospital, where a mixed infection of parainfluenza and adenoviral infection was detected, but upon discharge, the doctor-head of the department said that I was diagnosed with HIV ifa positive and that they did it twice, I’m in shock, I don’t know what to do, I can’t eat or drink .she said that I clearly have an acute HIV infection and to check, they sent an immunoblot test of my blood to the AIDS center,
Now, drawing an analogy of the events that happened to me over the last time, as well as 3 sick leaves in a row, I tried on all the symptoms and I was horrified by what could be, after being discharged on the same day I went to get tested at invitro anonymously and the next day the IFA result was the same +
I’m sorry for such detailed information, but I’m confused and killed, I drink strong sedatives and I have no appetite and I practically don’t eat, I’ve lost a lot of weight
I also have a question: the doctor with the discharge from the hospital indicated the result of HIV was detected by IFA and below that the immunoblot is in the work, but how can I close the BL in my local clinic, everything will be written there... what should I do? This is no longer the case will be confidential... I asked the attending physician not to write this analysis in the discharge, to which she refused me, to what extent are my rights regarding non-disclosure of information respected here...?
Unfortunately, the results of studies carried out in the hospital are included in the extract, since the attending local doctor must have complete information about your health condition. In this situation, we are not talking about the disclosure of information, since it is only transferred to another attending physician, who will further monitor you.
Andrey asks:
Hello! I took tests for HIV because I needed a certificate for the FMS, they didn’t give the tests for a couple of weeks, then they invited me to the manager and gave me a positive result, they took a bunch of receipts and sent them to the regional AIDS center for further examination, as it says on the certificate... I want to take it in another clinic and then there is no point in going to the regional one or retaking it? I just don’t understand why they didn’t give them for so long, well, the doctor said that supposedly they did some kind of analysis and I supposedly owe them another 4 thousand rubles, because if they did it, then probably in addition to the certificate they would give detailed information about the disease?
In this situation, you should not panic ahead of time - receiving one positive result does not allow you to reliably judge a possible infection, since false positive results cannot be ruled out. We recommend that you take the test again and if there is a positive result, you will need to undergo another examination - immunoblotting. As a rule, the laboratory does not provide detailed information about the results, which is normal and common practice. Any questions you may have can be answered by your attending physician after an examination during a personal consultation.
ilya 1983 asks:
I forgot to add that from the beginning of June until mid-September I took a course of anabolic steroids, namely Sustanon 250, a mixture of testosterones and stanozolol with primabolan, I wanted to prepare myself for the summer and vacation, could they knock down my immunity and everything that happened to me. ..
Impaired immunity, as well as the presence of autoimmune diseases, can give false positive test results for HIV. That is why, in case of receiving 2 positive results using the ELISA method, immunoblotting is recommended, which will allow us to accurately answer the question of whether there is an infection or not.
Can HIV testing give a false result? And what to do if you suspect an error? When does a negative result definitely guarantee the absence of the virus?
The accuracy of HIV diagnosis is of paramount importance, because an error in diagnosis can lead to psychological trauma or the spread of HIV. Therefore, high-quality test systems are used for HIV testing. However, no examination is 100% accurate. After receiving the result, it is important to consult with a specialist.
Technical errors
The results of an HIV examination may turn out to be erroneous, for example, due to non-compliance with the rules for storing and transporting blood taken for testing for HIV infection - this is now extremely rare in medical institutions.
Diagnostic errors in pregnant women
False-positive HIV antibody results can occur during pregnancy. In this case, the woman registers with the AIDS center, where observation is carried out. The examination is repeated after 3 months - if the antibody level increases, this indicates HIV infection. If the number of antibodies remains the same, then the suspicion of HIV infection is not confirmed.
Diagnostic errors in chronic diseases
False-positive results can also occur in chronic diseases with impaired metabolism, for example, diabetes mellitus or collagenosis. This diagnostic error may be a consequence of other infectious or autoimmune diseases. In oncological processes, there is also a high probability of diagnostic error.
Errors when examining children born to HIV-positive women
In children born to HIV-infected women, antibodies to HIV can be detected in the blood in the first 18 months of life in the absence of infection itself.
"Serological window"
When determining antibodies to HIV by ELISA or immune blot, a false negative result is possible if the HIV-infected patient is in the “window” period and the amount of antibodies is below the threshold values determined by the test systems.
Mistakes when the immune system is malfunctioning
A false negative result can occur with a so-called atypical reaction of the immune system - when an adequate immune response to the infectious process does not occur. Also, a false negative result often occurs at the final stages of the disease, when the immune system is so weakened that it is not able to produce antibodies. Another condition is long-term immunosuppressive therapy, for example, after organ transplantation - in this case there is also no immune response.
When the HIV diagnosis result is definitely negative
A negative HIV test result almost completely guarantees the absence of HIV infection if a person has not had situations in the last year that pose a high risk of HIV infection and there are no clinical signs characteristic of AIDS. If there was a dangerous situation in terms of HIV infection, then the absence of infection can be said if the test results remain negative within a year. The problem of AIDS and HIV has become very relevant today, all over the world. Doctors know firsthand how many people (almost half a million) die annually from acquired immunodeficiency syndrome. AIDS and HIV are two different diagnoses. AIDS (acquired immunodeficiency syndrome) is a progressive disease that becomes fatal for many who become infected; HIV is just a virus that allows people to live with it for a very long time and be carriers of the disease.
In simple words, with acquired immunodeficiency syndrome there is a complete absence of immunity - antibodies that fight infection, viruses and bacteria that enter the blood. A person diagnosed with AIDS can die from the most harmless runny nose. HIV and AIDS are not transmitted by rodents, insect bites or personal hygiene items. The main link for infection is blood and semen. The only way to make sure whether antigens are present is to donate blood anonymously for AIDS and HIV. Moreover, you can take the analysis if you wish - anonymously or without hiding your data.
After decoding is carried out and the results are known, it will be possible to find out whether the result is positive or not. Even if a person is not promiscuous and is not antisocial (does not use drugs or alcohol), the indicator and result may be positive, but questionable.
Before taking an anonymous HIV test, you need to take a clinical blood test and then draw a conclusion whether it is questionable or not. That is, it is possible to determine whether the immunodeficiency virus is negative or HIV-positive only after donating blood anonymously. After decoding is done and the results are processed, it will be possible to draw any conclusions.
Antibody levels in case of a false positive result for HIV (anonymously) will exceed the norm. But based on indicators alone, it is impossible to say that a person has the virus. In 50% of cases, indicators may be overestimated for completely different reasons.
Many people are interested in the question of how long it takes to get results and what is the shelf life of the analysis. It doesn’t matter whether the analysis is anonymous or open, its validity period is 5-6 months. And the question of how long to wait for the results can be answered unequivocally - 2-3 weeks.
HIV diagnosis is carried out in several stages:
- carrying out enzyme immunoassay (ELISA);
- immunoblotting technique.
An enzyme immunoassay clinical blood test for HIV is carried out in order to identify the total spectrum of antibodies against immunodeficiency virus antigens. This method is screening. It identifies suspicious antibodies and screens out healthy ones. But this blood test is not enough. It is at this stage that false positive results occur.
Immunoblotting is a more comprehensive blood test for HIV. With its help, the fact of infection is confirmed. Its essence is the destruction of the virus into antigens (ionized amino acid residues that have different charges). Using electrophoresis (extracting plasma and red blood cells from the blood) and further examining the serum, doctors determine whether antibodies are present that interact with the immunodeficiency virus. This method is much more effective, but cannot provide a guarantee.
False-positive results for the immunodeficiency virus are quite common, literally shocking the person donating blood. The thing is that there are a lot of diseases that can provoke a false positive result.
It should be noted that ELISA for AIDS can only be called preliminary testing for the immunodeficiency virus and there is no need to rely on its description. In most cases, it is suggested to take it for the general clinical picture. Only after the second stage of testing can you anonymously verify whether the blood result is questionable for AIDS, HIV or not.
Many people ask how long the study itself takes. It takes 15-20 minutes to collect blood. Only disposable medical devices are used for the study. By the way, it is much easier to become infected with the immunodeficiency virus in a hairdressing salon or in a movie theater than in a medical laboratory.
Even the most cutting-edge equipment is not always able to detect the presence of antibodies and antigens of HIV infection. And the point is not in the equipment itself, but in the period of reproduction of virus cells in the blood. In some cases, especially after taking an ELISA test for AIDS and immunodeficiency virus, people get a false positive result. But this does not mean that the person really has AIDS. To do this, you need to take repeated tests after some time (the shelf life of the result is valid for about six months). The reasons why the result can become false positive, no matter whether it is anonymous or not, are violations of the rules for donating blood. Ordinary seeds or previously consumed spicy, sour, fried foods, and even mineral carbonated water, especially alkaline water - for example, Borjomi, can provoke a dubious result, no matter how much of them is eaten - a lot or a little.
Only highly qualified medical laboratories can guarantee anonymous and accurate research. But in order to make sure once and for all that there is no AIDS or HIV virus, it is better to repeat the study after six months. This is no longer needed by doctors, but by people themselves. All people have a window period. It is also called the incubation period, and it is impossible to identify the immunodeficiency virus immediately after infection. There is no need to stop; if the result is positive, it may be a false positive.
How is the incubation period of HIV classified?
The initial stage of infection with the human immunodeficiency virus in almost 99% does not manifest itself in any way. It depends on the general state of the immune system and the body as a whole. It may take a long time before a person develops symptoms that confirm the presence of HIV antigens. But on the other hand, a person remains a source of infection for other people. Whether HIV is present can be determined only if you take an ELISA test 3-6 months after the actual infection. A window period is a period of time. Its beginning is the penetration of the virus into the blood, and the end is the detection of the virus. Each person has a different window period. How long is the window period? Approximately from 2 to 5-6 months. And how accurate the research will be depends on this period. It is during this period of time that the results, under the influence of certain factors, may be false positive.
False-positive HIV test (anonymous)
An ideal HIV test is 100% accurate in determining whether the virus is present or not. But for a number of reasons, the result may be questionable. Today, anonymous analysis at home is considered very fashionable and widespread. This provides people with complete confidentiality, but cannot protect against mistakes. It is at home that test results often become false positive.
In order to dispel doubts, it is better to take an ELISA test in qualified laboratories. In this case, the risk that the result will be questionable is eliminated by 99.9%. In addition, home research can give results that are not at all expected by people, both positive and negative.
Conditions that can cause a false positive result:
- cross reactions;
- pregnancy period (risk group - women who have given birth several times);
- the presence of normal ribonucleoproteins;
- multiple blood donations;
- infectious lesions of the respiratory system;
- influenza and hepatitis virus;
- recent vaccinations (tetanus, hepatitis B, influenza);
- very thick blood;
- primary autoimmune liver diseases;
- tuberculosis virus;
- herpes virus;
- poor clotting;
- fever;
- liver diseases caused by alcohol;
- arthritis;
- violation of immunoregulatory processes;
- damage to small vessels of the body;
- oncological diseases;
- different types of sclerosis;
- organ transplantation;
- increased bilirubin;
- increased levels of antibodies;
- critical days.
Some diseases may cause cross-reactions. For example, due to allergies, antigens that are incomprehensible to the body can be produced in the blood, which it recognizes as foreign. Such antigens can cause a false positive result.
During pregnancy, a woman experiences a hormonal imbalance, so in some cases there may be a false positive test result. During the menstrual cycle, it is not recommended to donate blood for the immunodeficiency virus.
Any infectious, fungal or viral diseases almost always test positive for the presence of the immunodeficiency virus. For this reason, doctors advise undergoing treatment for the disease, and only after 25-30 days undergo an examination.
Diseases, oncology, increased bilirubin levels, vaccinations - all these factors affect the result. If a non-standard set of enzymes is present in the blood, then the anonymous analysis will be false positive.
For these reasons, doctors do not tell people that they have already been diagnosed with an immunodeficiency virus infection. And having heard that the analysis is positive, a person should first of all think about what could have provoked a positive result.
False-positive test results for the human immunodeficiency virus are very common after organ transplantation, especially during the period when the organ is taking root. In this case, unknown antibodies are produced, which, when tested, are encoded as antigens of the immunodeficiency virus.
Before taking an anonymous test for HIV or AIDS, you must notify your doctor about whether the disease is present and how long it lasts. This must be done in order to exclude a false positive analysis.
To avoid becoming a hostage to a false positive analysis
An ELISA test must be performed after questionable contact after 6-12 weeks. During this period, human immunodeficiency virus antibodies are detected. In this case, a false positive analysis can be excluded by 70%.
Before donating blood for HIV (ELISA), you must not break your diet, drink alcohol, drugs, and not be sexually active at least 2-3 weeks before taking an HIV test. Blood is donated only on an empty stomach. How much blood the doctor will take, how much the test costs, as well as the expiration date of the test can be found directly at the medical center. If you have existing viral or infectious diseases, it is better not to take the test; you must contact the laboratory 35-40 days after recovery. If you have other chronic diseases, you should inform your doctor.
Even if the test turns out to be positive, there is no need to panic; it may be a false positive. How many months should pass after the first delivery?
After 3-4 months, the ELISA test can be retaken. In a person whose blood does not contain the immunodeficiency virus, the result is guaranteed to be negative.
Many people are interested in the question of how long does HIV live? The human immunodeficiency virus, when exposed to air, dies almost instantly. It dies at temperatures above 40°C. Therefore, if it were possible to warm a person’s blood to such a temperature, HIV would be defeated, and as many people would not die as are currently dying from the virus.
False-positive HIV test - medical errors
Very often, people become hostages of a false-positive test for HIV and AIDS, not only because they only took an ELISA test, but also because of the mistakes of medical personnel. A false positive result can be caused by:
- improper transportation of collected blood;
- the use of low-quality serum for ELISA analysis;
- improper storage of collected blood;
- in case of violation of blood sampling rules.
By committing negligent acts, incompetent medical personnel call into question the social development of a person’s personality. Of course, not all medical centers allow such mistakes. Basically, even pregnant women go to a regular hospital to donate blood for HIV and AIDS without any fear.
Today, many laboratories are equipped with good equipment that will help conduct a complete and extensive examination for the presence of human immunodeficiency virus in the blood.
The website 101analysis.ru names the reasons for false positive HIV testing results. The information provided gives rise to complete distrust of these tests.
"False-positive results for the immunodeficiency virus are quite common, literally shocking the person donating blood. The point is that There are many diseases that can cause a false positive result...
The reasons why the result can become false positive, no matter whether it is anonymous or not, are violations of the rules for donating blood. Ordinary seeds or previously consumed spicy, sour, fried foods, and even mineral carbonated water, especially alkaline water - for example, Borjomi, can provoke a dubious result, no matter how much of them is eaten - a lot or a little...
Conditions that can cause a false positive result:
cross reactions;
pregnancy period (risk group - women who have given birth several times);
the presence of normal ribonucleoproteins;
multiple blood donations;
infectious lesions of the respiratory system;
influenza and hepatitis virus;
recent vaccinations (tetanus, hepatitis B, influenza);
very thick blood;
primary autoimmune liver diseases;
tuberculosis;
herpes virus;
poor clotting;
fever;
liver diseases caused by alcohol;
arthritis;
violation of immunoregulatory processes;
damage to small vessels of the body;
oncological diseases;
different types of sclerosis;
organ transplantation;
increased bilirubin;
increased levels of antibodies;
critical days.
Some diseases may cause cross-reactions. For example, due to allergies, antigens that are incomprehensible to the body can be produced in the blood, which it recognizes as foreign. Such antigens can cause a false positive result.
During pregnancy, a woman experiences a hormonal imbalance, so in some cases there may be a false positive test result. During the menstrual cycle, it is not recommended to donate blood for the immunodeficiency virus.
Any infectious, fungal or viral diseases almost always test positive for the presence of the immunodeficiency virus.For this reason, doctors advise undergoing treatment for the disease, and only after 25-30 days undergo an examination.
Diseases, oncology, increased bilirubin levels, vaccinations - all these factors affect the result.If a non-standard set of enzymes is present in the blood, then the anonymous analysis will be false positive.
For these reasons, doctors do not tell people that they have already been diagnosed with an immunodeficiency virus infection. And having heard that the analysis is positive, a person should first of all think about what could have provoked a positive result.
False-positive test results for the human immunodeficiency virus are very common after organ transplantation, especially during the period when the organ is taking root. In this case, unknown antibodies are produced, which, when tested, are encoded as antigens of the immunodeficiency virus.
Before taking an anonymous test for HIV or AIDS, you must notify your doctor about whether the disease is present and how long it lasts. This must be done in order to exclude a false positive analysis...
Even if the test turns out to be positive, there is no need to panic, it may be a false positive..."
Such an impressive list of reasons for false-positive reactions in HIV tests, published on the website 101analysis.ru, already gives rise to complete distrust in these tests. And it is worth paying attention to who and how often turns out to be HIV positive.
But first of all, you need to pay attention to the fact that the HIV/AIDS theory itself was initially built on the unproven hypothesis that it is the HIV virus, which supposedly causes immunodeficiency, that is, accordingly, the root cause of the development of AIDS-associated diseases in HIV-positive people. Therefore, if a patient has developed such a disease, and when tested for HIV, he turns out to be HIV-positive, then, in accordance with this theory and with instructions, speedologists simply automatically diagnose such a patient with HIV infection, and already at the stage of AIDS, that is, the development of AIDS- associated disease.
And if a patient has symptoms or diseases from the list below, then for speedologists they are not a signal that if they are present, the HIV test may be false positive - quite the opposite! - for them they are just a direct and legal reason for testing such a patient for HIV, and one of the “evidence” of his “infection”.
LIST OF INDICATIONS FOR HIV/AIDS TESTING
TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF HIV DIAGNOSIS.
1. Patients according to clinical indications:
Fever for more than 1 month;
Having enlarged lymph nodes of two or more groups for more than 1 month;
With diarrhea lasting more than 1 month;
With an unexplained loss of body weight of 10 percent or more;
With prolonged and recurrent pneumonia or pneumonia that is not amenable to conventional therapy;
With subacute encephalitis and dementia in previously healthy individuals;
With villous leukoplakia of the tongue;
With recurrent pyoderma;
Women with chronic inflammatory diseases of the female reproductive system of unknown etiology;
2. Patients with a suspected or confirmed diagnosis:
Drug addiction (with parenteral drug administration);
Sexually transmitted diseases;
Kaposi's sarcomas;
Lymphomas of the brain;
T-cell leukemia;
Pulmonary and extrapulmonary tuberculosis;
Hepatitis B, Hbs antigen carriage (at diagnosis and after 6 months);
Diseases caused by cytomegalovirus;
Generalized or chronic form of infection caused by the herpes simplex virus;
Recurrent herpes zoster in people under 60 years of age;
Mononucleosis (3 months after the onset of the disease);
Pneumocystis (pneumonia);
Toxoplasmosis (central nervous system);
Cryptococcosis (extrapulmonary);
Cryptosporidiosis;
Isosporosis;
Histoplasmosis;
Strongyloidiasis;
Candidiasis of the esophagus, bronchi, trachea or lungs;
Deep mycoses;
Atypical microbacteriosis;
Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy;
Anemia of various origins.
Compare the list of reasons for false-positive reactions with the list of clinical indications for HIV testing (and in fact, AIDS-associated diseases and symptoms attributed to HIV infection), and you will find that some items are the same, such as fever, tuberculosis, herpes, hepatitis, and other infections and oncological diseases.
Thus, it turns out that on the one hand, according to the HIV/AIDS theory, the development of all these diseases and symptoms in HIV-positive people is explained by the progression of HIV infection, as if it were their root cause, and if they are present, one can literally diagnose HIV/AIDS automatically, but on the other hand, almost the exact opposite is stated - all these factors themselves can cause a false-positive reaction when testing for HIV, and therefore, if they are present, this testing cannot be considered reliable.
The contradiction between these approaches, as you see, is fundamental, and one might say insoluble in the sense that the HIV/AIDS theory itself was initially built on the fact that HIV leads to the development of AIDS-associated diseases, in particular infectious diseases, since they are accompanied by a decrease in immunity, and within the framework of this theory, the very discussion that the presence of such diseases in itself can be the reason for a positive reaction in HIV tests is, to put it mildly, unacceptable, since it completely contradicts this theory and casts great doubt on it.
Judge for yourself: if the diagnosis of HIV infection itself is made precisely by the presence of clinical signs, that is, the presence of AIDS-associated diseases and symptoms, and this is enshrined in theory and practice, then abandon all this and actually stop testing for HIV according to clinical indications - for the AIDS industry, this can be said to be an act of suicide, an admission of the complete failure of the HIV/AIDS theory. After all, it will immediately lose all meaning if HIV testing is canceled for clinical indications, recognizing these very indications as nothing more than the reasons that cause false-positive results of HIV tests.
And what have we come to?
Whether HIV causes AIDS-associated diseases and symptoms, or whether these diseases and symptoms themselves are the cause of a positive reaction in HIV tests - this is a question that has long required research and resolution in the form of an unambiguous answer.
AIDS orthodox, of course, adhere to their position - HIV tests are quite reliable, and by definition they detect nothing more than antibodies to HIV (ELISA and IB tests), or its genetic material (during PCR testing). And in principle they never admit that all these tests can give a false positive result for some other reason.
Judge for yourself: if they admitted this, it would again mean that HIV tests are in fact completely unreliable and unsuitable, and then what about the millions of previously diagnosed HIV infections? For the AIDS industry, any move towards discussing the fallibility of HIV tests is tantamount to suicide.
But if we start from an alternative point of view, or HIV denial, then the picture with these tests turns out to be exactly such that they do not work positively against the mythical HIV virus, but obviously and by definition are unreliable, fake, and all their positive results are - everything! - are false positives.
And in the light of this opinion, the list of reasons for these false positive reactions is quite relevant and deserves attention, research and proper objective assessment.
Do HIV tests really work positively for the reasons stated in it? Why not? If, on the basis of these tests, a diagnosis of HIV infection is made to certain categories of test subjects, with very specific diseases, symptoms, conditions, then it is a very logical and reasonable assumption, and even a statement, that the positive results of these tests are directly and directly related to these causes and factors.
Let's take one example to illustrate. The most common AIDS-associated disease in Russia is tuberculosis. Almost all patients are tested for HIV. Of these, about 10% are HIV positive. Official medicine makes no mention at all that tuberculosis caused a positive reaction to HIV tests. A diagnosis of HIV + tuberculosis is immediately made, and all that remains is to sympathize with such patients if, in addition to anti-tuberculosis treatment, they are prescribed antiretroviral therapy, since their chances of recovery are greatly reduced, but their chances of joining the sad statistics of those dying from AIDS increase.
And that in connection with this is very remarkable and curious. According to the HIV/AIDS theory, AIDS develops in HIV-positive people within 10-20 years from the moment of “infection”. That is, if a patient has already developed tuberculosis, and as HIV-positive he was identified precisely during testing based on clinical signs, then speedologists, without blinking an eye, claim that this patient has been living with HIV for a long time, it’s just that it was not previously detected, and you yourself know did not know that he was infected.
And note, again, there is no talk that tuberculosis can be the cause of a positive test for HIV, and it is, in principle, impossible and unacceptable within the framework of the HIV/AIDS theory.
But after all, this very statement about what they say the patient has been infected for a long time, just was not previously identified, and he himself did not know anything This assertion is completely unfounded and unprovable. After all, it is absolutely impossible to go back in time with a time machine and take blood from this patient for analysis before he developed the disease and check whether he was HIV-positive or not.
Moreover, the very wording “Yes, he’s been infected for a long time, he just didn’t know it, and realized it too late.” provokes us to ask a simple question: why does it happen that such cases turn out to be the rule and not the exception? Why does every patient find out about their HIV-positive status only when they are admitted to the hospital? Is there any statistics on such patients whose HIV-positive status was known for a long time, and they developed AIDS-associated diseases within 10-20 years?
There are simply no such statistics. There is only an absolutely unfounded wording from speedologists “They’ve been infected for a long time, they just didn’t know about it.” And go and check them, and prove that it was not HIV that led to the disease, but the disease itself is the reason for the positive reaction of HIV tests.
I hope that the essence of the fundamental contradiction between the unproven HIV/AIDS hypothesis and the statement that HIV tests work positively for a number of reasons, among which it is worth highlighting AIDS-associated diseases, or clinical signs of HIV infection, is quite clear.
The first point of view dogmatically asserts that HIV tests are infallible, and if the patient is HIV-positive and has an AIDS-defining disease, then there is and cannot be any doubt - he is HIV-infected, and for a long time, even if he just found out about HIV status.
The second point of view is almost exactly the opposite: it is forbidden test patients for HIV for a number of reasons that are likely to may cause a false positive result , and in particular patients cannot be tested for HIV exactly according to all the notorious clinical signs of HIV infection.
A compromise between these approaches is in no way possible, since any step in this direction will lead to the complete collapse of the AIDS system...
Who is diagnosed with HIV and how often in Russia?
Some statistics.
In 2013, 28,327,314 people were examined for antibodies to HIV in Russia.
A positive result in ELISA (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay) was obtained in 271,408 of all those examined.
A positive result in IB (immune blotting) was obtained in 103,168 of the previous ones.
Only in 38% of cases a positive result in ELISA is confirmed by a positive result in IB. That is, in the remaining 62% of cases, a positive ELISA result is a false positive. And there were 168,240 such false positive results in ELISA in 2013.
What does this mean? And this suggests that ELISA tests for HIV are completely nonspecific due to the fact that in almost 2/3 of cases they erroneously give a positive result. And of course, the sensitivity of 99% or higher indicated in the description of these tests is nothing more than a blatant deception on the part of their manufacturers. And the most amazing thing is that this fact of blatant deception has long been self-evident based on well-known statistical data, and yet no one pays attention to it at all, and still all doctors, like zombies, blissfully believe that the specificity of ELISA is tests for antibodies to HIV is 99%.
And you might think that all the cases of erroneous, false-positive results listed above in the above article constitute only 1%. But in fact they make up 62%!!! ELISA tests for antibodies to HIV are absolutely non-specific and unreliable!
On the part of their manufacturers, this is a blatant fraud, and on the part of consumers, either complicity in this fraud, or complete ignorance of the complete unsuitability of these tests, and the waste of billions of money is not just wasted, but also to the detriment of those who become victims of this completely unreliable and erroneous testing .
Moreover, here we theoretically accepted IB as the standard and gold standard, and in comparison with it, ELISA turned out to be an absolutely unsuitable test. But we are talking about the unsuitability of all HIV tests in general, including IB. But in essence these are similar tests, they have the same principle, and of course the same shortcomings...
According to data for 2013, a positive result for HIV antibodies in IB was obtained in 0.364% of all 28 million people examined. This is essentially the average value of a positive reaction in IB according to these data.
3,837,983 people were examined in a planned manner (medical examination). Of these, 1288 received a positive result in IB. This is 0.034%. 10 times less than the average.
3,382,246 donors were examined. Positive IB was obtained in 1111 of them. This is 0.033%. Practically as among the surveyed planned, that is, relatively few.
455,737 doctors working with HIV-positive people or with contaminated materials were examined. Of these, a positive result in IB was obtained in 177. This is 0.039%. Slightly more than among those surveyed planned and donors. That is, also relatively little.
238,885 patients with drug addiction were examined. Of these, 11,337 received a positive result in the IB. This is 4.75%. 13 times more often than the average value. 140 times more often than among those examined as planned and among donors. The difference is colossal. What explains it? Is it really the HIV virus? Of course no.
886,168 patients with STDs were examined for antibodies to HIV. Of these, 4,798 received a positive result in information security. This is 0.54%. One and a half times more often than average.
398,807 people were examined in places of detention. 10,791 of them tested positive in the IB. This is 2.7%. 7 times more than average. 2 times less than for drug addicts. A prison is not a sanatorium. And in general...
5,914,421 people were examined for clinical indications. The list of these indications includes all AIDS-associated diseases and symptoms attributed to HIV infection, as well as drug addiction and pregnancy. But here it is important to simply understand that in this case this category consists of patients with diseases such as tuberculosis, pneumonia, toxoplasmosis, cytomegaly, Kaposi's sarcoma and everything else from the list of AIDS-associated diseases.
Please note right away that in 2013 alone, almost 6 million people in Russia actually had clinical signs of HIV infection, and that is why they were tested for HIV. And of these, 27,229 people received a positive result in information security. This is 0.46%. Just 1.26 times more than average. The category is quite numerous, so this is not surprising. But what is very, very surprising and remarkable is precisely the fact that clinical signs of HIV infection are detected annually in almost 6 million Russians, and less than 0.5% of them turn out to be HIV-positive. If you check the statistics of HIV diagnoses made this year, it is even less, and significantly.
And what does it mean? This means that for every HIV-positive patient who shows clinical signs of HIV infection, there are at least 200 patients with the same clinical signs of HIV infection, but when tested for HIV, they all turn out to be HIV-negative. And from here a self-evident medical fact directly follows: it is absolutely impossible to diagnose HIV infection based on the presence of these notorious clinical signs, because they are 200 times more likely to be found in HIV-negative people.
Not only are HIV tests themselves profanation and fraud, but in addition to this, the notorious clinical signs of HIV can be attributed to millions of HIV-negative patients. And this means that these signs have absolutely no diagnostic reliability for the presence of HIV infection.
5,223,644 pregnant women were examined, including cases of termination of pregnancy. Of these, 8,136 received a positive ELISA result. This is 0.16%. Twice less than average. But 5 times more than among those examined routinely and among donors.
In the Other category, 10,147,879 people were examined. A positive result in the information security was obtained from 26,363 of them. This is 0.26%. Less than the average, but nevertheless this is a quarter of all positive information security results. These include military personnel entering military service and military educational institutions, as well as those examined at their own request. The latter are the most “gifted”, to put it mildly, they are still idiots.
During epidemiological investigations, 176,092 people were tested. A positive result in the IB was obtained from 10,549 of them. This is 6%. At first glance, this category has a record number of HIV-positive people, although it is the smallest of those already listed. But the fact of the matter is that during the epidemiological investigation, so-called contacts are tested for HIV, that is, children of HIV-positive mothers, sexual partners of HIV-positive people, participants in the sharing of equipment for injecting drugs. That is, this category should not only be the leader in the percentage of obtaining a positive result in information security, but it should be a very high percentage. In this case it is only 6%.
What does this mean? Let me explain clearly.
100 people have already turned out to be HIV-positive based on testing results.
During the epidemiological investigation, their sexual partners are tested for HIV.
And among all the examined sexual partners of these 100 HIV-positive people, only 6 HIV-positive ones were found, and in the remaining 94 cases all partners turned out to be HIV-negative. The source of infection has not been found. That is, epidemiological investigation in the vast majority of cases is a complete fiasco and is a pointless waste of effort, resources and time. And therefore it turns out that among sexual couples with HIV, the vast majority are those in which only one of the partners has this diagnosis. And this fact alone shatters the myth about sexual transmission of HIV and the HIV virus in general!
Let us present the obtained figures again. Positive IB for HIV antibodies was obtained
during epidemiological investigations - in 6% of cases (a shamefully low percentage for the HIV/AIDS theory!);
among drug addicts - in 4.75% of cases;
among prisoners - 2.7%;
in patients with STDs - in 0.54%;
in patients with clinical signs of HIV infection - 0.46% (shamefully low percentage for the HIV/AIDS theory!);
in pregnant women - 0.16%;
among those examined as planned and among donors - 0.033-0.034%.
And these are actually all the main and mass categories, that is, almost all those examined for HIV. It is these categories that are tested for HIV, and accordingly they make up the lion's share of all cases of HIV infection diagnosis, namely drug addicts, prisoners with clinical signs of HIV infection, pregnant women, patients with STDs, and another quarter of all cases are examined in the Other category.
On the one hand, all this can really be regarded as direct evidence that HIV tests give false positive results when using drugs, during pregnancy, for a number of different diseases, and much less often (10 times or more) generally give a positive result when testing completely healthy people, the same donors, health workers undergoing preventive medical examinations.
On the other hand, taking into account the fact that even in such categories as drug addicts, those with clinical signs of HIV infection, and pregnant women, the percentages of HIV-positive people among all surveyed are approximately 5%, 0.5%, 0.16%, respectively. , that is, very small, it is absolutely impossible to categorically state that HIV tests give a false-positive result in precisely these categories of subjects, precisely in connection with diseases or other indicated reasons. Millions of such people are examined, and a fraction of a percent of them turn out to be HIV-positive, a few people out of a thousand tested. Therefore, it is in no way possible to assert, for example, that “Any infectious, fungal or viral diseases almost always test positive for the presence of the immunodeficiency virus.” Yes, they almost always don’t give it, and if they do, it’s quite rare.
Well, of course, the HIV/AIDS scam could not have been so cleverly introduced into life, and the false HIV/AIDS theory into official science and into the consciousness of the population, if its false premises were self-evident from the beginning. For example, if HIV tests gave a positive result in almost all drug addicts, or in all patients with AIDS-related diseases, or in a relatively large number of pregnant women. But this is not the case. Even among these categories, the number of HIV-positive people is very low, the figures are shown above.
And year after year, as a result of HIV testing, tens of thousands of people in Russia alone are diagnosed with HIV infection, and the general picture of the epidemic seems to be quite plausible, at least for complete laymen in this problem.
But. If not only HIV deniers say that HIV tests react positively to antibodies that have nothing to do with the HIV virus, but doctors who adhere to the orthodox theory of HIV/AIDS also report this, then we must think a question mark over HIV testing is becoming more and more widespread, and perhaps HIV testing itself will soon cause more doubts and mistrust than blind faith in it and in the HIV virus itself.
After all, previously it has always been stated: HIV tests are absolutely reliable, there can be no mistakes, there are errors, but they are completely excluded by additional double checks, etc., etc. Now it seems to be recognized that a positive result can still be caused by a number of known reasons, and therefore they should be taken into account and excluded when diagnosing HIV infection.
But in this case, let me ask right away: are all the reasons for the false positive reaction of HIV tests known and voiced? Maybe there are some others that are still unknown, and which are precisely the most significant? Who can responsibly assert that the existence of such causes is completely excluded?
P.S.: Personally, I share the opinion of HIV deniers, the essence of which is that HIV is pure commercial and political fiction, from which big money is made and with which the “surplus” population is cynically exterminated. And today it turns out that the mystery of HIV tests is gradually ceasing to be a mystery and is beginning to be revealed. And if yesterday they were officially considered absolutely reliable, and today they are considered to have serious shortcomings, then perhaps tomorrow they will finally be recognized as completely unsuitable and fake, which they obviously are.
All that remains is to find out for certain the real reasons for their positive reaction, and then there will no longer be a bold question mark above them, but a bold cross. And it is possible that the answer has long been known and voiced many times, and is that these tests give a positive result with a generally elevated level of antibodies in the blood sample being tested. That is, to be HIV-positive, it is not enough to use drugs, or have some kind of disease, or be pregnant, or get vaccinated, or for some other reason. As we have just seen, all these reasons are associated with HIV-positive status in almost isolated cases. In particular, out of 200 patients with clinical signs of HIV infection, only one is HIV positive. Why? Why is his case so different and stands out?
Moreover, the diagnosis of HIV infection is often made to completely healthy people, and such people have been living with this diagnosis for 30 years, without any treatment. Remember about those who receive a diagnosis of HIV infection during medical examinations, donations, enlistment in military service, due to their own stupidity.
How are these people different from the rest? What's so special about them?
Maybe the whole point is really just that HIV tests react positively to a given threshold of total antibody levels in the blood? And if their concentration exceeds this threshold, then the person is declared HIV-positive?
And further, in accordance with the theory, just sit and test for HIV drug addicts, patients with AIDS-associated diseases and STDs, as well as everyone who can be fearlessly declared HIV-infected - and among those tested, of course, there will be those who have obviously false, programmed known test result will give a positive result.
And you don’t even need to prove anything. Drug addict? Test positive for HIV? Everything is clear, HIV-infected. It's an epidemic...
In general, we can rightfully say that the greatest effort and investment in promoting the HIV/AIDS scam was due to its promotion in the media of disinformation. The very same whipping up of AIDS hysteria, fear and panic in front of mortal danger and extinction of humanity, a new plague and the end of the world.
Well, and, accordingly, sucking out all the “discoveries” related to HIV/AIDS, and their introduction into official science and practical medicine, and, if necessary, into the empty heads of billions of naive humanoid bipedal bioorganisms. This is what was most difficult and costly.
And then everything went as if on a well-worn track. And here you have the day of the fight against AIDS, and the day of remembrance of those who died from AIDS, and all sorts of actions and months, and the fooled population is now so mired in this deception and self-deception that the very idea that the whole fight against AIDS is just a deception , many are simply horrified, and they are simply unable to accept the truth. And even if they themselves become victims of the AIDS industry, and it would seem that their eyes should open, even then their brain is not able to turn on and earn money, and find the truth and make an independent decision. They follow the lead of the speedologists, and thoughtlessly and doomfully follow their recommendations, in particular the chemotherapy against HIV prescribed to them, which, of course, does not bring them the slightest benefit, but on the contrary only cripples and kills the naive imaginary HIV-infected people who take it...
So what are the real reasons for positive HIV test results?
You know that?
Or do you simply believe everything that swindlers from science and medicine have told you for their own financial gain?
And until you find the most complete and comprehensive answer to this question, I would very strongly advise you to refuse HIV testing. Because you are as much a layman in it as I am, and perhaps even 10 times more ignorant and naive.
P.P.S.: But it has long been known...
List of reasons causing false positivesHIV antibody test results
And the Research Foundation for the Management of Civilizational Processes brings to the attention of the entire medical community that research conducted by a number of foreign scientists has convincingly demonstrated the absolute unreliability of HIV testing.
Considering that HIV testing has tragic consequences for people who, for one reason or another (see list of reasons), test positive, scientists are calling on doctors around the world to stop this testing as scientifically unfounded.
List of Causes of False Positive HIV Antibody Test Results (Continuum Magazine)
1. Healthy people due to obscure cross-reactions
2. Pregnancy (especially in a woman who has given birth many times)
3. Normal human ribonucleoproteins
4. Blood transfusions, especially multiple blood transfusions
5. Upper respiratory tract infection (colds, acute respiratory infections)
6. Flu
7. Recent viral infection or viral vaccination
8. Other retroviruses
9. Flu vaccination
10. Vaccination against hepatitis B
11. Tetanus vaccination
12. “Sticky” blood (among Africans)
13. Hepatitis
14. Primary sclerosing cholangitis
15. Primary biliary cirrhosis
16. Tuberculosis
17. Herpes
18. Hemophilia
19. Stevens/Johnson syndrome (inflammatory febrile disease of the skin and mucous membranes)
20. Q-fever with concomitant hepatitis
21. Alcoholic hepatitis (alcoholic liver disease)
22. Malaria
23. Rheumatoid arthritis
24. Systemic lupus erythematosus
25. Scleroderma
26. Dermatomyositis
27. Connective tissue disease
28. Malignant tumors
29. Lymphoma
30. Myeloma
31. Multiple sclerosis
32. Kidney failure
33. Alpha interferon therapy for hemodialysis
34. Organ transplantation
35. Kidney transplantation
36. Leprosy
37. Hyperbilirubinemia (increased bilirubin in the blood)
38. Lipemic serum (blood high in fat or lipids)
39. Hemolyzed serum (blood in which hemoglobin is separated from red cells)
40. Naturally occurring antibodies
41. Anti-carbohydrate antibodies
42. Anti-lymphocyte antibodies
43. HLA antibodies (to leukocyte antigens class 1 and 2)
44. High level of circulating immune complexes
45. Samples subjected to high temperature treatment
46. Anti-collagen antibodies (found in homosexual men, hemophiliacs, Africans of both sexes and people with leprosy)
47. Serum positivity for rheumatoid factor, antinuclear antibody (both found in rheumatoid arthritis and other autoimmune diseases)
48. Hypergammaglobulinemia (high level of antibodies)
49. False positive response to another test, including the RPR (Rapid Plasma Reagent) test for syphilis
50. Anti-smooth muscle antibodies
51. Anti-parietal cell antibodies (parietal cells of the gastric glands)
52. Anti-hepatitis A immunoglobulin M (antibody)
53. Anti-Hbc immunoglobulin M
54. Antimitochondrial antibodies
55. Antinuclear antibodies
56. Antimicrosomal antibodies
57. Antibodies to T-cell leukocyte antigens
58. Antibodies with high affinity to polystyrenes, which are used in test systems
59. Proteins on filter paper
60. Visceral leishmaniasis
61. Epstein-Barr virus
62. Receptive anal sex
(September 1996, Zengers, California)
Such a huge number of conditions that give a positive reaction to a supposedly specific test indicates its absolute unreliability and the impossibility of using it for diagnostic purposes.
Every doctor prescribing HIV testing must be aware of his responsibility for causing irreparable moral damage (leading to serious consequences) to people for whom this testing gives a positive result.
Chairman of the Medical and Biological Section
research fund problems
management of civilizational processes
Sazonova I. M.
Moscow, August 2004