So even though I tested way to early for both test, how was my IGG able to pick up a positive reading so quick (1.19). If that IGG test was able to pick it up that soon wouldn’t the biokit be able to do the same since it’s a more accurate form of testing.
Also I’m confused about this statement
“ you tested way too soon after possible exposure. It is unlikely that you were infected, your testing would be positive that soon”
I’m confused because , I know I tested early and it still came out positive. So how is it unlikely I’m infected ?
My logic was if an IGG test could pick up the virus this soon no reason a biokit couldn’t either. The anxiety of knowing killed me so that’s why I retested. I also had no idea that it was too soon to test at the time. I know a lot more now then I did then considering I spend my days researching the web and forums to help convince myself I’m not hsv 2 positive and it was just a false positive and all this is just a learning experience to wear protection.
Thanks for the response Terri.
Couple of questions
You say IGG test pick up 92% of infections
Then how do you explain my 1.19 result. Does That mean there’s 92% chance that result is accurate?
Before I took my last IGG test which resulted in the 1.19. Then the following day I took the biokit which came out negative. I was on acyclovir for about a week. Could that have lowered my score or impact my biokit?
And both IGG and biokit were taken two weeks past possible exposure.
I’m 10 weeks past exposure, if I were to wait for the 3 month mark and retake the biokit and if it comes out negative, could I completely lay it to rest.
Last question, if you were in my shoes. would you have moved on after the negative biokit and put it behind you or would you do further testing ?
Thank you again. Truly appreciate your advice !!!!