egafd.com

Sam Slater wrote:

> [quote]You say ??High class married businessmen pay street
> girls as often as high class escorts? ? but if you have no
> experience of the escort industry how do you know this?[/quote]
>
>
> Being the partner of someone running an escort agency, tells
> you nothing about the escorts/punter STD history, so I don't
> see your point in questioning my experience.
>
> More partners equals a greater risk. If the porn industry wants
> to minimise risk, start with minimising escorts and people who
> forge certificates. Both are irresponsible.
>
>

You say ? ?Being the partner of someone running an escort agency, tells you nothing about the escorts/punter STD history? ? yes it does because I know how often girls could not work (not just at that agency, but at many other agencies) because they had caught an STD ... and it is no way near as high as you are making out

More partners does equal greater risk, but safe sex greatly reduces that risk

So what about swinging, I know lots of porn stars who swing (More partners equals a greater risk)?

Okay its way past my bedtime, good night

Sam Slater wrote:

> [Please insert banal, inane drivel here]

>


Either you're a troll or you're a fucking moron!

Or perhaps your dick is still a mass of festering sores from your last ?20 to Kings Cross.....?



PS: You don't happen to read the Daily Mail do you? !adolf!

This board has really gone down hill recently. I've never read such a bunch of unfair, fake, ill-informed, obsessive statements against escorts recently.

They are not the root of all evil, any one who does it with any kind of brain is going to use protection, they are not going to risk their health, their partners health and their career for a few extra quid.

Now can we move on from these wild statements and fake profile messages please?

How original.

Is it an unwritten law on UK forums to name anyone who you disagree with a troll, or Daily Mail reader?

That 'drivel' was the thoughts of someone who has the performers health at the forefront of their mind. The point of my posts were to make people aware (rightly or wrongly), and to put forward a possible solution to all these outbreaks in the industry.

Now, what was the point of your post? Plain abuse? Now who's the troll?

Interesting range of responses. Thank you for your contributions to the debate. All of our female - and male - performers have sex outside the film industry. So does every contributor who posted. So do your partners and all the people with whom they are engaging in sexual relations: with or without your knowledge. Right now (it being Saturday night) perhaps 5 million people are having sex in the UK - even the married ones. And tomorrow, around 50 will be doing so on camera throughout the UK. Our STD clinic worker contributor can perhaps tell us which is the larger risk pool. Now if the general population undertook and exchanged tests with the regularity and transparency of Bluebird performers, then the general risk pool would reduce. Adult performers by definition have a lot of sex. The remarkable fact is that through a combination of testing and personal responsibility the actual incidence of STDs in the adult film industry is LOWER than in the general population. Remember that around 17% of the general population between the ages of 16 and 30 have contracted chlamidia. If our industry were suffering that rate of infection, all the studios would be out of business by now. Responding to some specific points of information: (1) We did not close for 2 weeks. We used our daily updated database of performer tests to ringfence performers at potential risk, informed them and provided our free testing service, and then scheduled shoots with other performers. (2) Our preferred clinic partner is SameDayDoctor in Wimpole Street. Finally, another perspective: all STD's (except HIV) are curable with a simple dose of antibiotics. By contrast, in 1997, there were 523,000 reported workplace injuries costing 30 million lost working days [HSE Statistics]. It's a dangerous working world out there. Bluebird and our perfomers feel a lot safer in here.

truthandlies wrote:

> This board has really gone down hill recently. I've never read
> such a bunch of unfair, fake, ill-informed, obsessive
> statements against escorts recently.

I don't believe every1 who's been posting on these specific topics of late, hate escorts, it's just that why do escorting, if your a porn actor/actress ?

For myself, I do not have anything against those who work as Escorts, Prostitutes, Call Girls, I just don't see why a Performer needs to do that work as well as working in the Porn Film Industry.

> They are not the root of all evil, any one who does it with any
> kind of brain is going to use protection, they are not going to
> risk their health, their partners health and their career for a
> few extra quid.

No, they are not the "root of all evil", but these topics are obviously on people's minds, otherwise no1 would be posting their views to them.

> Now can we move on from these wild statements and fake profile
> messages please?

Not every1 has been posting from Fake Profiles, from what has been seen/discussed on BGAFD lately, there only seems to be 2 Profile ID's under scrutiny.

Good idea Wayne, but there might be a lil problem in that.

What if you have some performers, who are located in the north of england, the test centre chosen is in the south, & the said northern performers rarely work down south, they then have 1 heck of a trip/payment scheme to sort out, just for tests.

Also, those who arrange to travel longer distances for work, might have to make complicated work shedules, so that they can fit in work, with travel to the central clinic, even though they live the other end of the country.

Oh come on Paul....

[quote]Remember that around 17% of the general population between the ages of 16 and 30 have contracted chlamidia.[/quote]

That 17% includes drug users, prostitutes, escorts, pornstars, everybody, as they are part of the general population. Thus, people working in the sex industry affects the percentage within the general population, but the general population do not affect the percentages within the sex industry. The statement means nothing.

Thanks for answering a few questions though.

P.s. it's 'chlamydia' but you can be forgiven !happy!