[Question #9134] hiv risks through a needle
 |
36 months ago
|
hi doc, sorry to bother again.
I was lucky enough to have Dr. Hook answer me a couple of questions yesterday and clearing out some of my concerns. While i truly appreciate his answers, i am still a bit worried about certain things. According to Dr. Hook's response to my case (I felt like i was needle pricked on my back elbow, and a sudden pain came up, i saw no blood or red spot on the area), " it did not draw blood suggesting that it did not penetrate your skin since such an injection would have drawn blood ." My question would be, wouldnt the action that causes infection be "injecting" rather than "drawing blood"? Is visible blood guaranteed in the process? Does the needle really have to go deep and complete the action of "injecting" (which requires a push right?) to be infectious? I am just curious and worried that if there are wounds or spots that are too small for me to notice or see, though I indeed did not see any blood ever since the pain.
I am sorry if this is bothering, but I am still in a bit of a concern. I hope one of you great doctors could answer these questions for me. Thanks a lot and I truly truly appreciate it.
 |
Edward W. Hook M.D.
36 months ago
|
Welcome back to the Forum although I'm sorry you felt the need. For HIV transmission to be transmitted with a needle, infectious blood must reach deep into tissue where it can initiate infection. Superficial scratches or surface contact with infectious material (blood or genital secretions) while theoretically infectious (just as it is theoretically possible you will be struck by a meteorite falling from space today) has not be observed to be associated with meaningful risk for infection. It is not something to worry about. If the surface of your skin was not penetrated enough to draw blood, it is just not something to worry about. EWH---
|
36 months ago
|
ok doc, thanks for clarifying. So there wouldnt have been cases where the needle is too small or thin that even tho blood is drawn but remain not visible on skin? Will it always be noticeable? I am not too familiar with how wounds work so am still bit concerned. Basically, no blood = no infectious wounds?
|
Edward W. Hook M.D.
36 months ago
|
Sigh. You really need to accept the response you have received. These "what if" questions serve NO purpose. The risk is not meaningful. Please see my comment about the likelihood of being struck by a meteorite from space. While we learn new things every day and very strange things that cannot be readily be explained happen from time time time, worrying about such things is a waste of your time.
No puncuture drawing blood, no appreciable risk. EWH
--- |
36 months ago
|
Hey doc, thanks for clarifying once again, those help a lot.
My final question would be, will antibody tests always be accurate and reliable after the 3 months window period? I had sex with someone in august 2018, whose health status i wasnt sure of, and i then had my first ever hiv test in Jan 2020, so thats about a year and half later. Ever since 2020 till today i have had about 10 hiv tests and they are all negative. Are these results reliable? Does patients at their final stages of hiv still able to be tested positive with antibody tests?
Also, no need to test for the needle incident right? thanks.
Have a great day, and thank you again in advance.