AIM Irresponsible? AIDS Rampant in Calif?

[gonzo]

Interesting week out on the west coast.
Recap from my point of view is that AIM [the group that does testing for STDs in Calf.] did not publicize a recent performer testing positive for HIV.

Now I see this in Xbiz and I know for a fact that kayden Kross postponed her shoot on Weds after hearing this news. Dangerous time to be shooting porn in Calif again. Way to go Sharon Mitchell with your bogus doctorate! I see no value in this testing based on this...

*********
NEWS STORY
16 Previously Unpublicized Porn HIV Cases, L.A. County Health Says

LOS ANGELES — Los Angeles County Public Health officials released information Thursday that indicates that there have been 16 previously unpublicized cases of confirmed HIV cases of industry performers since the last outbreak in 2004.
The data released Thursday brings the number of known HIV cases in adult performers to 22 since 2004, including “Patient Zero,“ the actress who tested positive June 6.

Ten of those cases involved men who had sex with other men, according to health officials.

In all, 16 men and 6 women who worked as adult film industry performers contracted HIV between 2004 and 2008, the Health Department said. The county agency also said that between 1998 and 2003, there were 14 confirmed HIV cases among adult film performers.

It was not immediately clear whether the previously unpublicized HIV infections involved transmission of the virus on the set.

“Rumor is rampant when the words HIV and porn are in the same sentence; the media is like a moth to a flame,” AIM Healthcare cofounder Sharon Mitchell said. “We are finding that many clients, patients and companies are tempted to discuss this delicate matter with the world for whatever personal or professional gain.

"Fact is, that we are still awaiting final confirmation on the Patient Zero, who was given a positive result on Saturday, June 6.”

AIM administrator Brooke Hunter said Patient Zero is a "video performer."

AIM’s Dr. Colin Hamblin described the actress as having had two recent sexual partners, a fellow porn actor who worked with her on June 5 and her boyfriend, who is not in the porn industry. Those men have had sexual intercourse with an additional six people and all have been notified.

The performer's last negative test was April 29, according to AIM. She previously had been described as being in "a small number of films," which would explain the 36-day gap between tests.

There are two first-generation industry partners for Patient Zero.

One of her industry partners has tested "not detected" by a PCR/DNA test, most recently on June 8. He will retest on June 22, at the end of 14 days. His last negative test was May 13.

A second industry partner, in Las Vegas, tested "not detected" most recently on June 9. He worked with the infected woman on June 5. He will be retested on June 19, at the end of 14 days.

A second-generation exposure, the girlfriend of one of the industry partners, last tested negative on May 19 and will retest on June 19.

The last outbreak in 2004 involved an actor who had returned from working in Brazil spread the virus to three actresses who had performed with him. A transsexual performer unrelated to the other cases also tested positive.

XBIZ calls to AIM for comment late Thursday went unreturned.

[Toby]

What is the law in Calif. in regard to reporting positive results to Public Health?

[TheEnforcer]

If there wasn't such a financial mess going on in California I have no doubt the state would come down hard on the industry. But, with the mess they have, likely not too much will be done I imagine.

[EmporerEJ]

Lest we forget California must also follow Hipaa.
Not sure how it applies to this situation, but I'll bet it alters the reporting practice, even in California.

[RawAlex]

The important quote in the whole story is:

"n all, 16 men and 6 women who worked as adult film industry performers contracted HIV between 2004 and 2008, the Health Department said"

2004 includes Lara Roxxx and all that crap. The vast majority of the male performers, if I understand correctly from various stories kicking around, includes most gay male performers doing bareback scenes.

Even with all the head counts, nobody has come close to find 6 female performers. Some have suggested that the 6 may have included "potential" new performers that AIM declined because they were already HIV positive.

[miz_wright]

I'm pretty sure that AIM can't be all "SO AND SO HAS POSITIVE TEST!" 'cos it's illegal.

And, frankly, that's not the point of AIM as I understand it - the goal is to make sure that all performers have access to regular testing so when they show up at a shoot, they have the most current available tests to prevent an epidemic-level spread where possible.

Having said that, no tests are foolproof, and when one uses one's body as one's livelihood, there are levels of wear and tear one will expect - and part of that will be the fact that a performer can be carrying HIV without being positive on certain tests and a scene partner always has the potential to be at risk.

[softball]

The real problem is you can be tested, walk out the door have unprotected sex, catch hiv and walk onto a set with clean test results.

[miz_wright]

Originally Posted by rhetorical

The real problem is you can be tested, walk out the door have unprotected sex, catch hiv and walk onto a set with clean test results.

Yeh, hence my comments about wear and tear and nothing being foolproof. It sucks, but no test is a guarantee.

[EmporerEJ]

Originally Posted by LizAEBN

Yeh, hence my comments about wear and tear and nothing being foolproof. It sucks, but no test is a guarantee.

Exactly.
You can walk out the door, step off the curb, and get hit by a bus.
So, no jobs, or houses close to roads?

You work on a crab boat, fall over, and you're dead.

But here's the thing......what are the odds?
Can anyone point to ANY person who has died as a direct result of this "risky" behavior?

No. It's a risky job, but not the riskiest job, and certainly not near the top of the list.

I don't think we need a new law to require condoms.
It's just another way for the government, to try to get control of your balls.
I think we need a law requiring all fisherman to wear survival suits the entire time they are on deck. In fact, anyone going on a cruise.....they need to wear a survival suit all the time they are on the boat.
Now, how stupid does that sound?

[softball]

I don't think we need a new law to require condoms.
It's just another way for the government, to try to get control of your balls.

your penis, actually

[EmporerEJ]

Originally Posted by rhetorical

your penis, actually

No, I meant to say "Balls."
I was going for the literary effect there. That is, for the reader to imagine the "government" actually "grabbing" one's delicate "balls." As any real man knows, the balls, being a delicate organ, subject to swift discomfort at the lightest assault.
Now the Penis can "take a beating," (See what I did there, with the little Pun?) and some men might find that enjoyable.

But, if you want to be a Dick about it, (See there, another little pun?) My statement still makes more sense.
Since concern here is the contraction of AIDS from sexual intimacy, the balls would make it more risky. Casual contact with the skin, even the skin of the penis, has a lower incidence of infection than the exchange of seminal fluid/mucus membrane. No balls, no seminal fluid. MORE difficult for you, the Aids infected, "ball-less" man, (Or balls controlled by the government) to transmit the disease to vulnerable mucus membrane/vaginal membrane/anal lining, without said, seminal fluid.

But, as I said, I wasn't going for technical detail. I was going for a graphic literary effect.

[softball]

Originally Posted by EmporerEJ

No, I meant to say "Balls."
I was going for the literary effect there. That is, for the reader to imagine the "government" actually "grabbing" one's delicate "balls." As any real man knows, the balls, being a delicate organ, subject to swift discomfort at the lightest assault.
Now the Penis can "take a beating," (See what I did there, with the little Pun?) and some men might find that enjoyable.

But, if you want to be a Dick about it, (See there, another little pun?) My statement still makes more sense.
Since concern here is the contraction of AIDS from sexual intimacy, the balls would make it more risky. Casual contact with the skin, even the skin of the penis, has a lower incidence of infection than the exchange of seminal fluid/mucus membrane. No balls, no seminal fluid. MORE difficult for you, the Aids infected, "ball-less" man, (Or balls controlled by the government) to transmit the disease to vulnerable mucus membrane/vaginal membrane/anal lining, without said, seminal fluid.

But, as I said, I wasn't going for technical detail. I was going for a graphic literary effect.

and I was j/k.

[TheEnforcer]

I'd still feel safer having sex with a pornstar who gets tested regularly than random women in a bar.

[miz_wright]

Originally Posted by TheEnforcer

I'd still feel safer having sex with a pornstar who gets tested regularly than random women in a bar.

That's always been my argument when it's come up as a topic at the Zoo ("Would you fuck talent? Why or why not?"). It is always stunning to me how many are completely ok dating/ fucking strippers or barmaids, but not a fuckpro.

[softball]

Originally Posted by LizAEBN

That's always been my argument when it's come up as a topic at the Zoo ("Would you fuck talent? Why or why not?"). It is always stunning to me how many are completely ok dating/ fucking strippers or barmaids, but not a fuckpro.

Personally, I think in the real world, if you are fucking "real" heterosexual people you meet in "real" life...far far away from porn, strippers, etc. You are probably pretty safe. Those stats are really low.
I mostly stay away from productions that have real safety issues. The boys are usually boyfriends of the girls but mostly I do girl girl and single girl stuff.
Outside of that it is condoms. But most of the people I work with, I know and trust. It is the trust that is the biggest problem in the porn business. Honesty is no a commodity with a lot of currency in this game.

And I hate shooting boy girl stuff. Its time consuming, expensive and boring as stink.

[StrokeKing]

Sometimes I tend to believe that the primarily conservative-run media tends to blow these things out of proportion in an attempt to attribute any negative attention then can on the adult industry.

It's easy to get freaked out, but when you consider the thousands of performances in adult every month, it's a miracle it doesn't happen more often.

[miz_wright]

Originally Posted by rhetorical

Personally, I think in the real world, if you are fucking "real" heterosexual people you meet in "real" life...far far away from porn, strippers, etc. You are probably pretty safe. Those stats are really low.
I mostly stay away from productions that have real safety issues. The boys are usually boyfriends of the girls but mostly I do girl girl and single girl stuff.
Outside of that it is condoms. But most of the people I work with, I know and trust. It is the trust that is the biggest problem in the porn business. Honesty is no a commodity with a lot of currency in this game.

And I hate shooting boy girl stuff. Its time consuming, expensive and boring as stink.

I think I would disagree with the idea that away from porn and what not your risk levels drop. I mean, we have more than 22 cases of HIV/ AIDS in the country right now, which means that the majority of the transmission is happening outside. In that "real world" you speak of. Where stats are "low."

Actually, though, when I review the CDC's information out there for the last compiled year (2007*), new infection rates are about 16% of population in both white and black males and between 3 and 8% for white and black females. Scarier? Roughly 14% of the male populations between the ages of 14-29 are newly infected.

I think it's safe to say that I'd rather fuck a porn star.


* Source: CDC, Table 3, "Cases of HIV Infection and AIDS in the United States and Dependent Areas, 2007"

[softball]

I kinda have to think about where I live and work...
http://www.avert.org/canada-aids.htm

Here is the telling number (for me as a heterosexual male) last year in Canada there were 592 women reported having hiv and 45 having full blown aids. Now, how many of them were high risk crack hos, that I would probably stay away from in the first place...probably a lot.
Aids stats can be spun six ways to Sunday and I have seen it done. I still maintain in the real world, with a modicum of safety and good sense, it is still not a huge issue.

BTW, here is the same site with American stats....

http://www.avert.org/usa-statistics.htm

[TheEnforcer]

Those bar call hook ups I used to do so often in my early 20's before I started dating my ex-wife and got married are much scarier than the idea of having sex with a regularly tested pornstar.

A lot of those women got around with FAR more partners than many porn stars and didn't get tested.

[softball]

Originally Posted by TheEnforcer

Those bar call hook ups I used to do so often in my early 20's before I started dating my ex-wife and got married are much scarier than the idea of having sex with a regularly tested pornstar.

A lot of those women got around with FAR more partners than many porn stars and didn't get tested.

Ah yeah, they all look good at closing time. At midnight a six becomes a ten.

[DannyCox]

Originally Posted by rhetorical

Ah yeah, they all look good at closing time. At midnight a six becomes a ten.

With enough Beers, a "one" can start looking like a 20!

[softball]

Originally Posted by DannyCox

With enough Beers, a "one" can start looking like a 20!

I never went to bed with an ugly girl, but I have woken up with a few.

[DannyCox]

Originally Posted by rhetorical

I never went to bed with an ugly girl, but I have woken up with a few.

oh, the embarrassing stories we all must have....

[RawAlex]

Originally Posted by DannyCox

With enough Beers, a "one" can start looking like a 20!

A four and a six pack is a ten.