egafd.com

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/feedarticle/9309116

It's not rocket science to make a link clickable!!!!! !annoyed!

Yo chill Bob mon chill!!laugh!

Oh yeah...these are the ones you know about.

I've been told by people inside the biz in the US that this sort of thing happens every few months or at least twice a year that they know about that doesnt get publicised.

The infected usually leave quietly and disappear somewhere to get on with their own bsuiness and avoid controversy.

But we've been here before and it results in the same thing: An uproar in accusations of scaremongering etc.

People seem to have short memories. Funny thing that cos Sharon Mitchell said the same thing on 9 To 5 Days In Porn (anyone see that?)

I always thought the purpose of documenting history was to make informed choices to bad ones made in the past but if people want to play Evel Knieval with their pussies and dicks then so be it

Quote from the article: "Weinstein said the latest case is the ninth HIV-positive adult film star to be treated at the AIM clinic since the 2004 outbreak."

I've no idea how many people (performers) have passed through the California porn industry over the past 6 years, but surely (hazarding a guess) it must run well into the thousands?

So if that figure of 9 since 2004 is indeed accurate, then that's only a fraction of one percent of all the performers over that period of time. Which is far less in percentage terms than the number of infected in the entire general population of the USA, which IIRC is estimated to be something in the region of 1%.

So is 9 in 6 years cause for major alarm, or does it show that the testing system they have in place is in fact a pretty good one (bearing in mind that no system is ever perfect, and also the sheer number of partner exchanges that take place on porn sets)?

Not trying to belittle the seriousness of it for those affected, just offering up food for debate.

I don't have the figures but what you say seems about right. I would suggest that the testing regime in place in the industry might actually make it safer than for promiscuous non-porn-performing people who would certainly not be getting regular check-ups but would in all likelihood be having multi-partner unprotected sex.

Interesting in that the 2 studios mentioned make a point of insisting that the 'cocks' wear condoms in all their penetration scenes. Just as well eh?

Talking as a prolific performer , I just hope that we in the UK don't immediately have a "Knee jerk" reaction as a result of this latest scare in LA. The scene there is very different to here, it is like a sausage machine churning out porn every minute of every hour of every day. Many studs drift in and out of the gay/ bi porn sector as well. (I am not suggesting that the actor that has been found HIV positive has been involved in gay porn, by the way.)

We have our own way of doing things here, ours is a cottage industry in comparison, everything is at a slower pace and less people are involved. I'd hate it if we ended up like LA.

But it is still fairly astonishing that here in the UK we haven't yet (where's that peice of wood to touch) had one HIV case in hetrosexual porn in the 28 years I've been involved. That is mightily impressive or maybe just fucking lucky !

Or maybe all Roundheads and small willies??