I'm going to start with something from my closing comments in the first of your three questions:

My final advice is that you stop searching about all this online. It seems clear that's what is generating much of your partial knowledge, uncertainties and fears. Anybody can post anything, and the internet is not a friend to most anxious persons who look for information related to those anxieties. The famous statistician Nate Silver (fivethirtyeight.com) wrote a book about public understanding of statistics, "The Signal and the Noise". In it he writes (approximate quote) "Give an anxious person a computer with an internet connection in a dark room, and soon he'll believe his cold is the bubonic plague." Sound familiar?

---
---

Thank you for your prompt reply. I was just confused since it seems that that journal entry was written by a nurse that has worked very closely with ID doctors for years and hadn’t encountered or met doctors that have encountered this and she stated stats on a forum you were previously affiliated with and other moderators unanimously agreed. 

Testing when the risk is exceedingly low is of course a personal decision, and it can help some people move on and sleep better, especially those particularly anxious or worried. On the other hand, it's a waste of health care resources. It's almost like someone who doesn't own a car purchasing auto insurance "just in case". Or a better medical analogy might be mammograms in males:  breast cancer in men is rare, but it happens, and male mammography probably would save a few lives each year through early detection. But it's not a valid or recommended prevention strategy. A much smarter approach for HIV and STI is for persons with low but repeated risk (e.g., a handful of new low-risk partners each year) to be tested periodically, like once a year, but not after each new low-risk event. This is what's done by most sexually active singles (at least among those who test at all -- of course some people are oblivious to any danger and never test).---
---
---

That makes sense. I guess most of my apprehension comes from the symptoms I’ve been having. If I didn’t have weird symptoms I wouldn’t be quick to jump like getting a sore throat exactly 7 days after and the swollen lymph nodes. I know symptoms are nonspecific but I go back and forth in my head if they are a coincidence or not or if I’m being hyper aware of everything. 

Also what are swollen lymph nodes in ARS like? Are they usually visible? The ones I feel are deep in the armpit. If I hold my arm up  straight I don’t feel them but if it’s 90 degrees I do but they aren’t visible on the surface or anything. 

Symptoms are exceedingly poor in either judging possible HIV or excluding it:  they almost never help in a meaningful way and should be disregarded, whether present or absent. The blood test results always overrule all other considerations, i.e. no matter how high the risk at the time of exposure and no matter what symptoms are present, the test results is the gold standard and the only standard by which to judge whether or not someone has HIV. Scanning your previous two threads, these exact issues were discussed then. You might want to go back and re-read those discussions. I also will add (which I may also have said previously) that self-assessment of enlarged lymph nodes by non medical professionals is exceedingly unreliable --- and your description suggest you do not have any lymph node problem at all. And if in fact enlarged or inflamed, HIV isn't the cause. (HIV nodes are body wide, never in a single location like a single armpit.)

---