I read through the 60 factors that can cause false positive HIV tests at your site and note with interest that your list of supporting research is quite dated. The most recent citations are over five years old. What current published research supports your claims about HIV tests being inaccurate?
Despite the dates of the chart references, the information on cross-reacting factors is as valid today as ever. All current forms of HIV tests—the HIV ELISA, Western Blot, viral load and virus culture—whether they test saliva, blood or urine, whether results come in a few days or a few minutes, all are verified for their so-called accuracy against HIV tests created in 1984 and approved for use in 1985.
While we have many new types of HIV antibody tests, the specificity, sensitivity and accuracy of all these newer diagnostics are determined by using the same old proteins found in the mid 1980s in Gallo’s unpurified cell culture. And to this date, no HIV test, old or new, has ever been validated against the direct finding of whole infectious virus in people with positive reactions.
Only two studies on the reproducibility of HIV antibody tests can be found in the published medical literature. Both revealed that positive results on HIV antibody tests were not consistently reproduced when a single “confirmed positive” sample was sent to multiple labs for testing or when one “confirmed positive” sample was sent to a single lab multiple times for testing. The first of the two studies published in 1991 showed that the same HIV positive sample sent to the same reference lab 45 different times over the course of several months was correctly identified as HIV positive only 26 of 45 times. The second study from 1993 showed similarly dismal results. Since then, no funding has been available for further investigations of HIV test reproducibility. If federal and local government, universities, hospitals and pharmaceutical and diagnostic companies will not fund research that tests the test, it’s virtually impossible to produce current data on cross-reactions or reproducibility or to conduct the long-outstanding validation studies necessary to establish the true accuracy of tests.
I think the idea that only current references are valid references is often used to dismiss data the opposes mainstream views on AIDS. The fact that the planet Pluto was discovered in 1930 doesn’t mean it has to be rediscovered each year in order to remain a current planet. Even though Sir Isaac Newton’s findings on gravity date back to the 1600’s no one argues that we should dismiss or discount gravity as “old” information.
One more thing, the data at our web site does not represent theories, rather, it is a presentation of facts from which people may draw their own conclusions or theories.
Thanks for writing,
HIV Antibody Test Certificate of Accuracy
to Questioning The Test FAQ's - Pissed Off About HIV Urine Test
to T Cells and Viral Load