False Positive HIV Test

Does anyone know what other virus would make an HIV test come back positive??

Porn star's false-positive HIV test raises questions

The porn film star who tested HIV-positive last week and shut down Los Angeles’ billion-dollar industry, does not have the virus, an advocacy group for the adult entertainment industry announced....

...False positives can occasionally occur if the counselor contaminates a sample in some way, something is wrong with the actual test or the person has another virus that throws the test, Kenslea adds....

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Improper testing would be one way.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Happened to that boxer that was in rocky V too. Tommy gunn or whatever.

 

ummmm, did you mean boxER?

Tommy Morrison's professional boxing career effectively ended when he tested positive for HIV in 1996. Beginning in 2006, Morrison attempted a comeback, stating that he did not have HIV and, later, that HIV is a "myth." His claims are refuted by boxing and medical authorities.
After his enforced retirement in 1996, Morrison has been charged with multiple assault, weapon, intoxication, and drug offenses. He was sentenced to jail on several occasions, and served part of one sentence in 2000-2001.

 

yes and corrected it, you thread watching fiend lol

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

 

All kinds of things. Check this link out, it's old, but accurate as far as I can see.

http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/hiv/cjtestfp.htm

 

HOLY CRAP!!! There are things on there that would give me an HIV reading. Thanks for the list link

 

My opinion? HIV tests are supposed to be confidential and private. If a celebrity tests positive, it should be their choice whether to say why they are not competiting. THe pain and stigma and depression from a positive diagnosis is enough for a person to battle, but to have to deal with it publically is another thing. Forgive my spelling, I'm on pain meds and having brain malfunctions, LOL!

 

Your welcome (tips her hat)!

 

I agree unless it is a contact sport. Boxing has too high a risk of blood contact

 

There are levels of tests. Depending on the organism we're talking about.

Basic HIV tests look for a certain antibody in the bloodstream. Because there are a few other viruses that cause this antibody, it's not a huge big deal. Why? Simple. If you test positive for HIV, you're going to go back in for further blood tests.

Those blood tests check for other chemicals in the bloodstream that are far more particular to the HIV virus.

Why not do the second test first?

Expense.

The second test may cost thousands of dollars whereas the first one may only cost a few hundred dollars. Better to have a few people preoccupied with possible HIV infection than pass along the massive cost to the insurance company or government agency (whichever class you may fall into).

~String

 

from what i know alot of substances such as infections, vaccinations, certain food and drugs can cause false positives on various tests. so it doesnt suprise me that false positives happen, alot of the time it doesnt get any attention so we dont hear about it.

just watch doctor house do his thing and youll see, lol.

 

No!!! Do not thank anyone for promoting an agenda-driven proselytising pseudoscience website, and do not believe anything you read on that site for a single second.

Unfortunately there is an internet sub-culture of agenda-driven ‘Google scientists’ who, for some unintelligible reason, deny that the HIV is the cause of AIDS. Sometimes they can’t even get their story straight and deny the existence of HIV in the first place. That website is an example. It involves using all the same tricks that various other mainstream science denialists use – selective quotation mining, quoting out-of-context, ignoring evidence, invoking conspiracies, using anecdotal evidence, using non-peer-reviewed evidence, and so on.

The intension of that list of so-called “Factors Known to Cause False-Positive HIV Antibody Test Results” is to wow you. But a closer look at that reference list reveals the tricks of the trade that these denialists use. For example:

-- Some of the references are reports of specific individual cases of false positive tests, not analysis of the accuracy of tests across wider populations.

-- Some of the references are basic biology investigations of potential new test platforms. Negative evaluations of such reagents say nothing about the applicability and accuracy of existing tests.

-- Some of the references actually conclude that false positives are rare but that they happen at a frequency that requires careful monitoring. Admission of the need for care in diagnosis is hardly evidence of widespread false positives.

-- Some of the references report spikes in false positive tests that were specifically linked to a specific batch of vaccine or specific batch of test kits. Once the vaccine batch/kits were identified and removed, the spike in false positives stopped. Such a report is hardly evidence of a systematic problem with HIV tests.

I could go on. The take-home message is that this list of scientific references does not support the notion that HIV tests produce a large number of false positives. It’s a disingenuous intellectually dishonesty attempt to con people into thinking that these denialists have science on their side. Because, let’s face it, how many people will actually wade through those references when they are presented with so many? Most people without a background in science would take one look at that list and think “wow, point proven”.

The intellectual dishonesty of these people is on a par with those who deny the public health benefits of immunisation and fluoridation. These people are outright dangerous, as are the immunisation denialists.

There are different types of HIV tests – antigen-based, nucleic acid-based and immunological-based. And there are subsets of different tests without each of those categories as well. Each type of test has its own limitations in terms of accuracy/specificity, time, portability and cost. No single test is relied upon for a diagnosis; initial positive results are always confirmed with a secondary different test.

So, having said all that, HIV testing as a whole is very accurate. False positives do occur but they are rare. But don’t take my word for it. Have a look at peer-reviewed scientific sources of information (rather than a personal agenda-driven website as per the Virus Myth website that was linked to).

Maybe start here:

 

I remember browsing around and reading the posts of one nut that used to be here ("Metakron", or something similar) who was adamant that HIV/AIDS was a myth.

Of course he was nut on several other topics as well. Another one was heat pumps - in a thread that went on for several pages, he insisted that you could not "force water to go uphill" and despite the fact that there are literally hundreds of thousands of them in use that they are all "outright frauds." ( I suppose the idiot had never heard of water pumps either.)

Thankfully, he and several others like him, have gone the way of the dinosaurs.

 

Well, thank you for your corrections. Although there were some on there that I have seen in the past as a reason to a false positive test. Question I have, which test was used that created the false positive. Iknow the quick tests at local agencies can create a false positive or be "inconclusive" and then they do the more serious detailed test. That you are right. Perhaps I should have dug a little more, I'm side tracked as I organize a protest against PETCO for the inhumane treatment of the animals during the floods of where I live. Turning into a big who haw.... my sincerest apologies and I appreciate you taking the time to correct my extreme oversight.

 

No, not extreme.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Perhaps I should clarify that I wasn’t having a go at you.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

On reflection it could be construed that I was. I was merely trying to draw attention to the problem that sometimes these website subsections are found in searches and used as a source of information by people without them realising the broader sphere of activity and agenda of the owners.

Good on you. :thumbsup: PETCO should be banned from selling animals. (But that’s a topic for another thread/forum.)

 

I'm not denying the existence of HIV or the importance of screening for at risk populations, however false positives are a significant issue if testing low risk populations.

Say a test yields 1% false positives, if you test ten thousand members of the general population (HIV incidence about 15 per 100,000) you will get 100 false positives and 1.5 true positives. Even if the test is 99.99% accurate (0.1 % false positives), you'll still get more false positives than true positives (10 false positives to 1.5 actual cases of HIV).

Thus the issue of false positives should not be minimized. On the other hand, among certain demographics (men who have sex with men, IV drug users, presumably porn stars), this is not as much of an issue. Also, a confirmatory test should always be done with any positive screening test which greatly reduces the false positive rate (down to something like 1 in 250,000.

 

1% false positives per test. Given that an initial positive (or any subsequent positive result) is confirmed with at least one additional test, the chances of someone remaining falsely identified as positive is remote.

 

i see where hes comming from but if you do 2 tests that does reduce it to vertually zero