You correctly predicted my response:  "i know you are going to say i m in the clear...."  You are.

The case report you cite is irrelevant to your situation and your interpretations of the medical literature on testing are correct. The patient described had negative antibody tests only, but his P24 antigen test was positive. I'm wondering whether 6 years ago in India "4th generation" wasn't interprested in the same way we view it now. If the had been tested with the standard combo test, as you were, it would have been positive. Your negative combo test at 7 weeks showed conclusively that you did not catch HIV; all other tests after that were superfluous. And in any case, what if this report were true? What if extraordinarily rare patients have negative tests despite having HIV? It's like learning someone was struck by lightning and getting more worried it might happen to you.

That you even found this case report says a lot about your obsession with your test results. It is an obscure journal, rarely if ever read outside India. I would advise you to entirely stop searching the internet about these issues. You don't have HIV and shouldn't be looking into it. Like most anxious or obsessed persons, you're just going to keep finding statements that confirm your fears.

Best wishes--  HHH, MD

And anyway, the papers you cite are referring to extremely mild kinds of immune system effects. I'll be nobody in the world ever had significant immune deficiency, or ANY kind of altered diagnostic tests, because they take fish oil. That you can find physiologicl effects on certain immune cells says absolutely nothing about actual effects in testing.

Re-read the last paragraph of my original reply above. There is no information you will ever find on the internet that would change my opinion or advice about your HIV tests and the chance you have HIV. So please don't ask.

That completes the two follow-up questions and replies included with each new question, and so closes this thread. Best wishes.