What Is a Full STI Panel?

And Why the Phrase Does More Harm Than Good

People use the phrase “full STI panel” as if it means something standard or universal. It does not. In fact, that phrase has probably contributed to more STI transmission than any other assumption in sexual health.

Here is why.

Most people think a “full panel” equals a clean bill of sexual health. But take a look at the first image below. It shows a negative STI panel. Everything looks reassuring.

Now look at the second image. Two positive infections.

The twist is that both images belong to the same patient.

The only difference is what the second panel actually tested for. The more thorough panel found infections the first one missed entirely. This is the problem with assuming a “full panel” is full. It almost never is.

You could ask ten different healthcare providers for a “full STI panel” and walk away with ten completely different sets of tests. The phrase gives people false confidence, and false confidence creates spread.

Let me break down why this keeps happening.

⸻

Why Personal Physicians Rarely Run a True Full Panel

Most primary care physicians receive very little specific training in sexually transmitted infections. Their electronic ordering systems do not contain a button labeled “Full STI Panel.”

When a patient requests testing, the physician must manually remember every STI, find each one in the EHR system, and select them one at a time.

Syphilis.

HIV.

Genital gonorrhea.

Oral gonorrhea.

Anal gonorrhea.

Genital chlamydia.

Oral chlamydia.

Anal chlamydia.

On and on.

No human being performs this perfectly. And the data proves it. One study reviewing forty five million gonorrhea and chlamydia tests found that only one percent of women received a throat swab. Most infections were simply never looked for.

A “negative” result is meaningless if the test never checked the site where the infection lived.

⸻

Why Taxpayer-Funded STI Clinics Are Not Comprehensive

People often refer to these clinics as “free,” but taxpayers fund them and funding determines what gets tested. Grant money flows toward whatever crisis is currently threatening a community. If the priority is congenital syphilis and HIV, that is where resources go.

That means essential infections like Mycoplasma genitalium and Trichomonas are almost never included.

Free testing is important for public health, but it is not designed to be the gold standard. It is rationed, crisis-oriented testing. It will not provide a complete picture of someone’s sexual health.

⸻

Why Most Telemedicine Companies Miss the Majority of Infections

Telemedicine companies are limited by the labs they choose. For example, companies using major national labs like Quest or LabCorp cannot offer throat or rectal swabs because those labs do not process them at local phlebotomy centers.

I know because I have met with them personally while building our program.

This alone explains why companies like stdcheck.com do not offer oral or anal testing for gonorrhea and chlamydia. If you cannot swab the sites where the infections actually are, you will miss most of them.

Other companies, like EverlyWell, simply omit extragenital testing altogether. I cannot tell you why, but I can tell you the outcome. They miss a significant portion of gonorrhea and chlamydia cases in sexually active adults.

⸻

Why the Phrase “Full Panel” Misleads People and Spreads STIs

Here is the real issue. When people hear “full panel,” they assume complete testing. They assume they were screened for everything in every relevant site.

Nobody says:

“I was tested for some STIs in some locations, and for those specific tests in those specific sites I am negative.”

Instead, they say:

“I had a full panel. I am negative.”

But the reality is that most people were tested for a random mix of infections based on whatever their physician remembered, whatever the grant funding allowed, or whatever selection their telemedicine company thought was marketable.

So when two people start dating and proudly say they each had a “full panel,” they almost certainly were not tested for the same infections. And neither was tested thoroughly.

False reassurance fuels transmission.

⸻

When Companies Add Tests That Are Not Even STIs

Some testing companies add organisms like Ureaplasma or Mycoplasma hominis to their panels. These are not STIs. They are normal genital flora found in many healthy adults.

Why include them?

Because longer, more scientific-sounding panels sell better.

It creates the appearance of thoroughness without actually offering real clinical value.

⸻

If the Term “Full Panel” Must Exist, Here Is What It Should Mean

We do not believe the phrase should exist at all. But if it must, then a true full panel in the United States should include:

• HIV

• Syphilis

• Gonorrhea: anal, oral, genital

• Chlamydia: anal, oral, genital

• Hepatitis B

• Hepatitis C

• Mycoplasma genitalium

• Trichomonas

That is the minimum required for someone to confidently say they were screened for the major sexually transmitted infections found in sexually active adults today.