My question is regarding exposure.  i had a regular massage that only lasted a few minutes as i did not continue it.  massage was hand massage on my lower leg and foot.  i noticed that i had a scratch on my big tow afterwords. did not notice any bleeding. just redish.  If lady had curs on her hands. would that have exposed me to hiv if my scratch was open?    massage was on july 13th.  i had unproteced sex with my wife on july 19th. I had a sore throat myself around july 29th. My wide started to have a sore throat. few days later huge headache, fever, chills.  now she has rash from her body. mostly upper body and face. at times itchy and also red spots inside her mouth.  could i have been exposed to hiv and could i have passed it to wife that quickly all of this occurring within about 3 weeks. is their any chance if me getting infected from massage i described and would someone be able to infect another person within a week of getting exposed?

You were at zero risk for HIV and for any and all STIs, which never are transmitted by hand contact, massage, body rubbing, etc. You and your wife undoubtedly are sharing a cold virus, and she has had a more severe than usual case -- which conceivably you acquired during the massage, but in any case it cannot be HIV or any STI. The answer your closing question is no:  even if HIV were a risk, 6 days is too soon for you to transmit it, and her symptoms started too soon.

Having said all that, I would suggest you be tested for HIV and syphilis. I advise it strictly for reassurance:  once HIV and other STIs are on someone's mind, professional advice alone usually is not sufficient to resolve all concern about it. Most people in your situation need negative test results to become convinced and stop worrying. I mention syphilis in addition to HIV because it's the only STI that could cause a body wide skin rash. I am confident your test results will be negative, but feel free to let me know the results if you decide to be tested.

I hope these comments are helpful. Let me know if anything isn't clear.

HHH, MD

2) for clarification- if my exposure was 7/13 and i had sex with my wife 7/19, are you saying that in those 6 days- it would be to early for me to transmit to her? 

3) lets say on 7/19- it occurred- whats the earliest that my wife would start feeling symptoms?  her fever started about 5 days ago. before that a few earlier she had a sore throat, and yesterday the rash occurred- rash is mostly upper body and face and itchy at time feels like it tickles her. - fever still persists, otherwise no sore throat, no muscles or joint aches. 

again i would only test if you think its medically necessary, your advice will put me in piece of mind.   

2) How quickly HIV can become transmissible isn't clear. 6 days probably is too early, but conceivably it could happen.

3) HIV symptoms typically start 10-14 days after catching the virus, sometimes up to 3 weeks.

You already have my advice. There has never been a case of HIV known to be transmitted by the kind of exposure you describe. However, the timing and symptoms conceivably could be HIV. 

The smart thing is for your wife to see a doctor for proper diagnosis. Symptoms alone NEVER are reliable either to diagnosis HIV or prove it isn't present.

again i appreciate your patience

i have read previous post and all say that this type or activity would never pose risk for hiv.  but your response leaves me worried a little about testing recommendation .   

1)medically speaking- did that exposure have any  risk of hiv?

3) would it be weird for my wifes symptoms to start before mine?  i remember that she started feeling symptoms before me. 

2) and not for reassurance purpose for me but medical purpose would hiv test be recommended base on my situation.  

I have told you there is NO medical necessity to test for HIV. I was very clear in my advice that most people in your situation are more reassured by negative test results than by professional opinion. Reassurance alone is a legitimate reason to be tested in such situations. It is entirely up to you. There is no medical need and if somehow I were in your situation I would not be tested. That the doctor you saw didn't raise HIV and suggest testing further supports no need for testing. You're the one who raised the issue of HIV with your questions.

To these last questions:

1) See my original reply, starting with "You were at zero risk...."

3) The sequence of your and your wife's symptoms indeed does not fit well with HIV. On the other hand, symptoms NEVER are useful indicators either for or against a new HIV infection. Even the symptoms considered most typical for HIV, usually it's something else; and many or most new infections have no symptoms anyway. Exposure history and testing are the ways to judge HIV possibilities, not symptoms.

2) See my discussion just above ("I have told you....")

That concludes this thread. Do not start a new one on this exposure, symptoms, and HIV concerns. There is no possibility our advice will change. Thank you for your understanding.