Welcome back to the Forum. On this occasion, I will be answering your follow-up question.  Dr. Handsfield and I share the Forum and today I happened to pick up your question.  I did review your interaction with Dr. Handsfield a month ago however and agree with all that he said, your testing has proved, again and again, that you did not acquire HIV from your encounter of concern.  

Reading the description of your activities and healthcare encounters since you interacted with Dr. Handsfield, I can say that it sounds like the specialists you saw (the neurologist and ENT) have done a good job of evaluating you.  From the sounds of things you are in a state of "hyper awareness" which is causing you to look at yourself (in your mouth, the smell of your urine, etc.) which is causing you to see things that were likely present in the past but unnoticed.  This is not uncommon among our clients who are worried that they might have been exposed to an STI during an encounter which they subsequently wished they had not had.  Working with a psychiatrist is the right way to approach this problem- does he/she know that you have seen the neurologist and ENT?  If not , I suggest that you do.

My most important advice however is to continue on your efforts not to worry about anSTI from the encounter you described.  You did nto get HIV- that is certain and no additional testing is needed.  EWH

You absolutely do not need more testing for HIV of any sort.  Your results are completely and incontravertably conclusive.  Do not let the Internet mislead you.  EWH

1) I've seen 2 ENT's over the past two days for the enlarged circumvallate papillae on the back of my tongue.  The first doctor I saw was unfortunately quite rude.  He mentioned my tongue had a "coating" and I should rinse with salt water and use baking soda.  I just don't understand why he would write down "hairy leukoplakia"?? I look online and my tongue looks nothing like what I see on the internet.  It freaks me out because the condition he wrote down is associated with HIV.  So yet again, if the previous tests I took are reliable should I be concerned?  The second ENT I saw yesterday was excellent.  He too said he saw a coating on my tongue but said nothing about leukoplakia.  I told him what the first ENT said and he said no.  That typically shows up on the sides of tongue and cheeks. Not sure what to believe.  He took a culture which I'll have back in one week.  He said the coated tongue comes from dead bacteria cells and that I should add more roughage into my diet.  Obviously the first diagnosis is causing me to re-think the validity of the tests I had.

2) Based on the above, is there any reason at all I should go for another test?  Are the tests I took as reliable as a lab based test or should I go to the lab?  

I realize this is my last question and truly appreciate the great work and responsiveness you and Dr. Handsfield provide to your clients day in and day out.  Take care of yourself.  

Please don't let an ill-advised comment by the 1rst ENT you spoke with upset of shake the confidence that you should have in your test results.    Answers to your questions below:

1.  See my comment above.  Ignore the comments of the 1rst ENT..  Your tests are TOTALLY reliable and should be believed.  Parenthetically I should also point out that while there is an association of hairy leukoplakia with HIV, the fact is, most people with HL do NOT have HIV.  Further, you do not have HL.  

2.  No, to scientific or medical reason for further testing related to your exposure of concern.

Thanks for your thanks.  As you note, this will complete this thread which will be closed shortly,  In the interim, once more, please don't worry, believe your tests.  EWH