Doctors have long argued that only by testing all patients for HIV antibodies can health care workers be protected from HIV infection. It has been argued that doctors have a right to know if patients are HIV-infected in order to know whether to take infection control precautions. But if a patient is HIV infected without yet having developed antibodies, they are not only undetectable, but also likely to be more infectious than someone who has formed antibodies.

The British Medical Association has two pieces of advice for doctors which are relevant to this situation, one from its general ethical code, the other specifically concerning HIV infection:

• It is unethical for a registered medical practitioner to refuse treatment, or investigation for which there are appropriate facilities, on the ground that the patient suffers, or may suffer, a condition which could expose the doctor to personal risk
• It is ethically acceptable for a surgeon to request a patient to be tested for HIV prior to an operation, providing that the criteria used to select those asked to be tested are reasonable, and explicit consent is obtained without pressurising the patient. In seeking consent, the patient should be told that the test is intended mainly for the benefit of the surgeon and that refusal to be tested will not affect the treatment given.

The assumption that routine testing of all patients for HIV antibodies protects health care workers from HIV infection is false. Only proper infection control procedures will protect health care workers from HIV infection.