and i love how you make it seem like this is something you can buy and keep them with you at all times and dont require a lab handle.

i had one done back in FL and let me tell you this. the average porn talnet could not do this properly, it still requires medical professionals.

Edited by - Rob Longshot on 4/15/2004 1:35:04 AM

[Link]

Max Booty
"She smells like angels ought to smell."
Frank Miller, Sin City

[Link]

to answer your question though mike i will put it clearly:

1: with AIM we have a place where records are kept and can act as a way to make sure others are notified.

2: this test that gives results in 20 minutes still has the same flaws in the fact that as an antibody test it cannot always detect a positive in an early stage. in fact ELISA tests are not 99% accurate until 6 months. sharon is just using the MAXIMUM time right now as a precaution to protect everyone and is being responsible. if you were waiting for a full period on the ELISA test then they would be locked in a quarentine for 6 mos.

right now the system we have WORKS. the system DID NOT fail here, in fact it has worked EXACTLY as it should.

what went wrong was someone was irresponsible and shot in brazil with no condoms.

the RESPONSIBLE thing and the MOST CONSTRUCTIVE would be to quit trying to change an effective system and instead focus on fixing the breakdown that caused this problem (i.e. performers working overseas.) that would be the real solution.

[Link]

1 it didnt catch Darren James after he returned from Brazil on March 17th

2 it didnt accuratly allow for containment because the indirect exposures cannot be tracked

3 they still arent testing the right time period according to thier own statements

What part exactly has worked?

BTW The ELISA and the PCRDNA are almost identical in accuracy at 60 days...look it up. AND you fail to see that someone who has HIV can test Negative on a PCRDNA test, even Roche says so and they developed it.

[Link]

I will post what I find out from them on my website

[Link]

i cannot see how you can logically argue that point, or how you can argue that we should be fighting the real enemy of overseas shooting rather than a system that works as solidly as it possibly can, or insisting on mandatory condom use.

[Link]

I dont care what you decide to do I only want you to do it from an informed basis.
Sharon has persisted in spreading inaccurate information in order to protect her monopoly on testing. I am simply pointing that out.

[Link]

I like the idea of taking responsibility for myself. IF AIMS database is so good why cant they track even the first level of indirect exposures?

face it its already disconnected....

Hindsight being 20/20 and all what if Darren James had a few Orasure tests with him and performed them on his partners?

What if Kayla Marie who shot with Darren on April 8th had made him take one?

That beats a test every 30 days no matter how accurate it is every time....You want solutions find them...I am trying to.

[Link]

Performers need to be tested at least on
a weekly basis & have more than one type
of test available to them.

Does each performer pay for their tests?
Or does the studios or the agents help out
with the costs of the exams?

Condomless Porn - when you play with fire,
one day you'll get burned.

SyberScott - still a true Gonzo fan & supporter!

Edited by - syberscott on 4/15/2004 5:53:08 AM

[Link]

Or change the rates at aim, and have them test you once a week? But anyway, $30 out of your salary is nothing if it can safe your life.

[Link]

The Oraquick test has the same problem as the standard Elisa test - it measures HIV antibodies in the blood. Since it can take from 1-6 months for enough antibodies to develop in the blood for the test to pick this up accurately, a person can be HIV-infected and the test wouldn't necessarily give a positive result.

The test was developed for health clinics to use for screening purposes only, not for final diagnosis. A more definitive test has to be done if the Oraquick test is positive.

All this info is one the CDC's website at http://www.cdc.gov/hiv, under rapid testing.

Edited by - Renee on 4/15/2004 10:11:10 AM

[Link]

This test, which requires no blood, would appear to be doable on a porn set, if there is someone with a little practice at hand. However, it is not licensed to be used this way. What is permitted would be to collect a sample and take it to AIM to read the results.

The FAQ implies the false-negative rate ("sensitivity") is not worse than 7 per 1,000, which may or may not seem great to performers, and as Renee points out, that error rates is only measured against samples that do have antibodies present.

[Link]

actually the PCRDNA test has to be performed in a clinical setting by trained professionals and it has to be confirmed by a better test when its positive

as to whether or not it is easy enough to do I dont know I am waiting on an answer from Orasure

[Link]

From the CDC link above:
"What is the difference between the new OraQuick rapid HIV test for oral fluid and the OraQuick rapid HIV-1 test for blood approved by FDA in November 2002?
There is only one test. The primary difference is the type of specimen that can be tested. Until now, the OraQuick rapid HIV test required a whole blood specimen, either from a fingerstick or a tube of blood. The OraQuick test can now be used on oral fluid specimens taken from the mouth."

There's info on who can legally perform the test:

"Who can perform the OraQuick oral fluid rapid HIV test?
Right now, the test on oral fluid can be performed only in laboratories. However, the OraQuick rapid HIV test for use on blood was waived under the Clinical Laboratory
Improvements Amendments of 1988 (CLIA) in January, 2003, and we have heard that OraSure has been encouraged to submit a request for a CLIA waiver for OraQuick using
oral fluid. A waived test can be used in any facility with a CLIA certificate, rather than only in laboratories. As such, a waived test can be used in many more non-clinical
settings.

Will the test for oral fluid be sold over the counter?
No, the OraQuick test, either for oral fluid or blood specimens, is restricted for use by trained persons. However, if waived, the oral fluid test could be performed in the home setting as a part of partner notification or HIV prevention outreach activities.

What type of training is needed to conduct the test?
If the test receives a CLIA waiver, training requirements will be similar to those for the OraQuick rapid test for blood use. However, because blood is not involved, universal
precautions are not necessary (that is wearing latex gloves, disposing of blood-contaminated lancets, etc.)."

From my reading of this information, it sounds like the oral test was developed for home health care workers like visiting nurses, or for people who do AIDS counseling in homes, or for public health care workers who need to rapidly identify someone who is at high risk of having HIV. If you don't fall into a category like this, it is probably difficult to legally purchase the tests for use on a porn set. It is probable that AIM could purchase the test for use at their sites, since they are already licensed to draw blood samples.

Edited by - Renee on 4/15/2004 1:57:35 PM

[Link]

You are looking at the wrong test dude...follow the link on mikesouth.com on orasure.

[Link]

yes the oraquick is the right test and I am getting preliminary indications from Orasure that its very simple to perform, easier even than a home prgnancy test.

The issue with in home use seems to be proper notification and proceedure when a positive test does occur, they think a doctor should be the only one qualified to notify you of a positive test. But this is not the final word.

in large quantities this test can be bought for 15 dollars or less.

suggested retail price is 29.95

Im still on it.

[Link]

can't you see the number of problems associated with this.

(btw, mike) the discussion going on elsewhere i will apoligize for not making a one on one discussion with us first. i had recieved a message from someone who was VERY concerned and asked me a question, and in the heat of the moment i stated what i did. that should have been between us first. i am willing to admit i was wrong to do what i did there. but that has been a sore spot for me for quite a while that has been eating at me.)

[Link]

Im not in anyones database but mine ditto the people who work for me. Orasure is a potential perfect solution for me that is way better than anything else.

As to LA if you want full accountability and access to records thats a pipe dream, admitted AIM is trying but as is currently evidenced they havent succeeded, I feel it unlikely that they will.

The LA Porn talent pool is both irresponsible and honestly a breeding ground for STDs...it happens all the time. Thats the primary reason I have chosen not to work in that talent pool except in non sex roles. I don't consider The Clap and chlamydia to be just nuisances and I don't like the idea of taking antibiotics uneccesarily as a preventative measure like so many do in L.A.

I would not even shoot condom scenes in L.A. not even if Michelin made steel belted condoms.

You have half the male talent pool these days working in gay video as well and thats a real problem because they dont even use testing at all in gay vids. Even many of the ones who don't work in gay vids are bi in their private lives, No way I am trusting my health and life to the responsibility of these people...look at where that got us now.

My answers work well for me and I have a 100% track record of safety that I intend to keep, sure part of its luck but not all of it.

It works for me....And really thats the only person it has to work for.

[Link]

i agree that male talent should not be working in the gay side of the industry. some see it as a way to easy money because straight male talent get paid so little. they don't think about the possible consequences.

unfortunately that is all too true. Kei once had a talent show up on a set with no test and he seemed totally SHOCKED that she asked for it. saying no girl ever had asked for his so he doesnt bring it... and it wa 10pm, too late to call AIM. the director and i proceeded to explain to this dimwit rather loudly how stupid that is and he explained he doesent ask to see girls tests either, like that made it better.

putting testing in the hands of talent is a VERY bad idea.

they could put the swab just a little above th nessacary area as to only get saliva on the swab.... and in essence fake the tests.

so many problems with this idea.

it makes AIM sound flawless.

[Link]

Nope according to Orasure an insufficient swap will produce an inconclusive result. IE no Control marker

[Link]

Create a central "clearing house" type of arrangement where talent signs in for availability and companies hire them for multiple shoots over a (one week/two week?) period working with a very small group of people and get several scenes in the can over a period of perhaps 2 weeks for future release. Then the performers report for testing and after clearing, go into their next cycle, with another studio/group for the next 30 days. Work 2 weeks on / 2 weeks off. Then test. Next cycle. Repeat.

This minimizes exposure in a 30 day period to perhaps 3-4 people vs dozens or even hundreds when you count 2nd and even 3rd gen exposure. Complexity, organization and overhead issues aside, this is attainable if the major studios will commit to supporting it.

It will be expensive, but the alternative's cost could be a death blow to the industry, whose lifeblood is and always will be the talent and quality thereof.

Does anyone else have an idea to protect the talent that's practical and works?

Your thoughts?

Unicorn

[Link]