"Testing positive" is a laboratory construct, so just about anything
is possible.  The "HIV/AIDS" notion is based upon assumptions that
were generated from a model.  In other words, it is a fiction.  It may
appear to respresent some aspects of the physcial reality accurately,
of course, as might a "witch doctor's" mumblings and prancing.  My
investigation has led me to believe that the "HIV" antibody test leads
to "positives" in people who have been exposed to certain kinds and
amounts of oxidizing agents.  For example, if the LDL in your body
gets oxidized, the body attacks it as if ithe LDL were "foreign,"
generating "inflammation" and antibodies to the various kinds of
oxidized molecules that result.  This is why if you have an
"inflammatory" disease, you are more likely to be a "false" "HIV
positive."

The easiest solution would be to lie and say the person is
    infected--even if they weren't.

On 23 Apr, 02:51, "dwayne.vick...@gmail.com"
<dwayne.vick...@gmail.com> wrote:

Don't bother with the lunatic rantings of people like Monty who will
invent any possible explanation, no matter how absurd, to explain
biological test results.
The primary tests for HIV are serological, detecting antibodies. This
is a good place to start for info:
http://www.aidsmap.com/en/docs/AD1EDAEA-0E6F-4DBE-B6DD-2FB831711544.asp

As with all tests, there may be innacuracies, or the test may detect
what appear to be antibodies to the infective organism when none
exist. These are false positive reactions, and there may be several
causes for them.
HIV tets are among the most accurate virological tests, there are
infections where the chances of innacurate results are much higher
than with HIV tetsts.
There commonest cause for serum being "reactive" for the presence of
HIV antibodies is a nonspecific interference with the test because of
another acute infection at the same time, such as Hep B. Some immune
disorders (not unexpectedly, will cause aberrant results with antibody
testing (eg auto-immune diseases). Preganacy is associated with a
tiny, but measurable, increase in false positive testing rates. The
fact that these false positives can occur does not mean that they
always occur - this is the trap that many denialists fall into, such
as Rebecca Culshaw who asserted that "most" HIV tests will be positive
in pregnancy.

A reactive test is never left "unconfirmed" - usually the protocol for
testing ensures the tests are repeated from the same sample using 2 or
3 different serological assays to "confirm" the result. Then a second
sample of blood is taken, and the process repeated. This system of
multiple testing usually clearly irons out any false positive test
result that uses only a single assay.