Rare Drug-Resistant HIV Found in NYC

[Danielle Foxxx]

http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20050212000809990004

Rare Drug-Resistant HIV Found in NYC

A rare strain of H.I.V. that is highly resistant to virtually all anti-retroviral drugs and appears to lead to the rapid onset of AIDS was detected in a New York City man last week, city health officials announced on Friday.
"This case is a wake-up call," Dr. Frieden said. "First, it's a wake-up call to men who have sex with men, particularly those who may use crystal methamphetamine. Not only are we seeing syphilis and a rare sexually transmitted disease - lymphogranuloma venereum - among these men. "Now we've identified this strain of H.I.V. that is difficult or impossible to treat and which appears to progress rapidly to AIDS."

"Risky behavior may be even more dangerous now, since there is a chance of infection with a virus we may not be able to treat," said Dr. Jay Dobkin, director of the AIDS Program at Columbia University Medical Center.

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN - LET'S ALL BE SAFE AND SANE AT THIS TERRIBLE TIME FOR HUMANITY AND LET'S PRAY THAT THIS TOO SHALL PASS!

PLEASE PTACTICE SAFE SEX[/b]

[Hugh Jarrod]

Scary isn't it?

[Bigwilly]

http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20050212000809990004

Rare Drug-Resistant HIV Found in NYC

A rare strain of H.I.V. that is highly resistant to virtually all anti-retroviral drugs and appears to lead to the rapid onset of AIDS was detected in a New York City man last week, city health officials announced on Friday.
"This case is a wake-up call," Dr. Frieden said. "First, it's a wake-up call to men who have sex with men, particularly those who may use crystal methamphetamine. Not only are we seeing syphilis and a rare sexually transmitted disease - lymphogranuloma venereum - among these men. "Now we've identified this strain of H.I.V. that is difficult or impossible to treat and which appears to progress rapidly to AIDS."

"Risky behavior may be even more dangerous now, since there is a chance of infection with a virus we may not be able to treat," said Dr. Jay Dobkin, director of the AIDS Program at Columbia University Medical Center.

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN - LET'S ALL BE SAFE AND SANE AT THIS TERRIBLE TIME FOR HUMANITY AND LET'S PRAY THAT THIS TOO SHALL PASS!

PLEASE PTACTICE SAFE SEX[/b]


Funny you say that Danielle, when you yourself practice unsafe sex in all your porn movies sweetie.

[thanos]

Don't be daft. Which is more unsafe, condom based sex with someone who's HIV status is unknown or condomless sex with someone who's HIV status is known?

Danielle, Vicki and Joanna have explained this plenty of times.

[Mugai_hentaisha]

http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20050212000809990004

Rare Drug-Resistant HIV Found in NYC

A rare strain of H.I.V. that is highly resistant to virtually all anti-retroviral drugs and appears to lead to the rapid onset of AIDS was detected in a New York City man last week, city health officials announced on Friday.
"This case is a wake-up call," Dr. Frieden said. "First, it's a wake-up call to men who have sex with men, particularly those who may use crystal methamphetamine. Not only are we seeing syphilis and a rare sexually transmitted disease - lymphogranuloma venereum - among these men. "Now we've identified this strain of H.I.V. that is difficult or impossible to treat and which appears to progress rapidly to AIDS."

"Risky behavior may be even more dangerous now, since there is a chance of infection with a virus we may not be able to treat," said Dr. Jay Dobkin, director of the AIDS Program at Columbia University Medical Center.

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN - LET'S ALL BE SAFE AND SANE AT THIS TERRIBLE TIME FOR HUMANITY AND LET'S PRAY THAT THIS TOO SHALL PASS!

PLEASE PTACTICE SAFE SEX[/b]

Thanks for the info Danielle. I appreciate it. You take care of yourself Danielle.

Trust me people this Meth is scary shit i have seen it made and to me Garbage that has been left out in summer is safer to use. the way it tears up your body it is no wonder HIV would spread so rapidly. Jeesh people wake up and get with it....its your existience here! :!:

[Danielle Foxxx]

I am going to start ignoring stupid people from now on...LOL
Trying to bring up a stupid old discussion... I can't please everyone sweety, this posting was not for my benefit, I am just trying to get awareness out there, and if you don't appretiate someone trying to watch out for you - FUCK YOU! I've had enough of you... GIve me a call we'll take your anger to the next level and settle this "man to man" LOL
What a low life!

Anyways, I didn't realize that someone already beat me to posting something about this already.


Sorry

[Felicia Katt]

Did everyone else notice how Bigwilly joined the site today and did his very first post just to attack Danielle? That's stalking, not talking. very VERY uncool.


Felicia

[Danielle Foxxx]

Felicia he is probably one of the uneducated people who migrated from The SFredbook posts...That web site is nothing but a buch of guys giving reviews on escorts, it gets like that in here sometimes, but most people in here can carry an inteligent conversation...

[Mugai_hentaisha]

Well i hope I can be counted in the "ones who can carry an intelligent conversation. :D

i saw his post when I posted and thought about saying something but it seemed to me that he just wanted to pick a fight.

Although he was bitching you out about not using a condom in your scenes i just wonder how many times he has worn one during sex and how many times has he not?

btw danielle love your avatar there makes me wish it was me with you . :P

take care and have fun

[Felicia Katt]

Rare HIV strain needs more study
Group says alert on danger of new virus was 'unnecessarily alarming' but useful.

By DONALD G. McNEIL Jr. and LAWRENCE K. ALTMAN
The New York Times


NEW YORK – On the day after the announcement that a rare strain of the AIDS virus was found in a New York City man, scientists said much work needed to be done to assess just how dangerous the virus is.

But, they quickly added, anything that scares people away from using methamphetamine and having unprotected sex with strangers is still a useful public-health measure.

Even doctors who joined New York City health officials in making the announcement on Friday said that it may have been misinterpreted, because it is impossible to say that an especially virulent bug is spreading when only one person is known to have it, and that person has been followed for only a few weeks.

"Every medical center in a major metropolitan area will have cases like this," said Dr. Roger J. Pomerantz, an AIDS specialist at Thomas Jefferson University in Philadelphia. "You've got to really prove something like this before you go on CNN and scream about a 'super strain.'"

Project Inform, a 20-year- old group in San Francisco providing information about AIDS and treatment, called the reports "unnecessarily alarming to the public."

In particular, experts said, it needs to be seen whether the same virus behaves just as virulently in any other men infected by the New York man. It might be less dangerous in someone with a different genetic makeup or less of a drug habit.

City health officials said only that they had two people trying to locate the infected man's sexual partners.

Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, a prominent AIDS researcher and head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said he had seen cases where two sexual partners had been infected by the same strain and "one does reasonably well, and the other progresses fulminantly" - meaning the immune system of the second person collapses rapidly.

What is not clear yet, several experts said, is whether the disease progressed so rapidly because the virus was strong or the patient was weak.

About 1 percent of all people infected are "slow progressors," who take decades to get sick. The reasons are unknown, but some have genetic mutations that disable the receptors on the outside of the CD-4 immune system cells to which the virus attaches.

At the other end of the spectrum will be 1 percent to 2 percent who are "fast progressors," who go to full-blown AIDS - meaning very low numbers of CD-4 cells and opportunistic infections like pneumocystis carinii pneumonia - in months. The average time between infection and AIDS is seven to 10 years.

The man in New York, who is clearly a fast progressor, has a "dual-tropic" strain of the virus, which means it can attach to two types of receptors, which are nicknamed the R5 and X4 receptors, on the outside of the CD-4 cell.

In a majority of people who get infected, said Dr. Robert C. Gallo, a co-discoverer of the AIDS virus, the first infections are attached to the R5 receptors. Only after several years do the X4 receptors kick in, and then the patient often goes downhill quickly.

In a very small number of patients, the primary infection is on the X4 receptors, and they are often - but not always - fast progressors.

But such patients are seldom-studied, so it is not known why the virus attaches there.

Pomerantz, who studies interactions between drugs and the virus, said there was some evidence that the infection moves faster in alcohol and heroin abusers, but little is known about whether amphetamines, which are chemically very different, suppress the immune system or affect X4 receptors.

By contrast, Dr. Jeffrey D. Klausner, director of prevention of sexually transmitted diseases for the San Francisco Department of Public Health, said he thought amphetamine use could lower CD-4 cell counts and could have contributed to the speed of the New York man's infection.

But that would mean his drug use, not the virus, was to blame.

The patient's virus was also resistant to treatment with three of the four classes of anti-retrovirals.

That is unfortunate, experts said, but hardly unknown: Thousands of patients in the United States have viruses with varying degrees of drug resistance

[Felicia Katt]

I posted the entire text of the article, because I couldn't just link to it (access required an account and password), but it is worth reading, in that it lends strong emphasis to Allanah's and Danielles posts. First, the infected individuals drug use was strongly implicated in how his disease progressed. And secondly, alwas use a condom or otherwise practice safe sex

Felicia

[AllanahStarrNYC]

The US media is quick to cause a public scare when these "AIDS" cases are made public-

But please read this article- here the the THINGS THE CDC and NIH forget to publish.


BBC Documentary

On the eve of World AIDS Day, the BBC featured a prime-time special that exposed viewers in the UK to some of the tragic results of America’s war on AIDS: drug experiments on children--some taken from loving homes and responsible parents--and the loss of human and civil rights for HIV positive moms. I was among several mothers interviewed for this segment by award-winning BBC producer Jamie Doran who delivered on his promise to make a strong and powerful statement.

Alex Russell, a colleague in London who watched the special broadcast, had this to say: “The BBC documentary really spoke up for our views and was very hard hitting! It made a very clear point that when the children were taken off AIDS medication, their health improved dramatically.”

The BBC story is apparently reverberating through the media with coverage now coming from a number of outlets from Fox News to the LA Times. The program apparently moved even radio reporter Amy Goodman, who to the great disappointment of many, has consistently refused to include alternative AIDS information in her very popular alternative news program Democracy Now. In a break from her long-held position on airing only mainstream AIDS news, Amy actually made mention of the controversial BBC report. Her historic utterance has inspired a campaign to get her to do more. See details following these excerpts on the TV program from the BBC web site:

Guinea Pig Kids: New York's HIV Experiment
by Jamie Doran

HIV positive children and their loved ones have few rights if they choose to battle with social work authorities in New York City.

Jacklyn Hoerger worked at the Incarnation Children's Center, a New York children's home. Hoerger's job was to treat children with HIV, but nobody told her that the drugs she was administering were experimental and highly toxic. "We were told that if they were vomiting, if they lost their ability to walk, if they were having diarrhea, if they were dying, all of this was because of their HIV infection."

In fact, it was the drugs that were making the children ill and the children had been enrolled on the secret trials without their relatives' or guardians' knowledge. As Jacklyn would later discover, those who tried to take the children off the drugs risked losing them to state custody.

The BBC asked the Alliance for Human Research Protection about the drug trials. Spokesperson Vera Sherav said: "They tested these highly experimental drugs…expos[ing] them to risk and pain, when they were helpless. Would they have done those experiments with their own children? I doubt it."

When I first heard the story of the "guinea pig kids," I instinctively refused to believe that it could be happening in any civilized country, particularly the United States, where the propensity for legal action normally ensures a high level of protection. But that, as I was to discover, was central to the choice of location and subjects, because to be free in New York City, you need money.

Over 23,000 of the city's children are either in foster care or independent homes run mostly by religious organizations on behalf of the local authorities and almost 99% are black or hispanic. Some of these kids come from "crack" mothers with HIV. For over a decade, this became the target group for experimentation involving cocktails of toxic drugs.

Central to this story is the city's child welfare department, the Administration for Children's Services (ACS). The ACS, as it is known, was granted far-reaching powers in the 1990s by then-Republican Mayor Rudi Giuliani, after a particularly horrific child killing. Within the shortest of periods, literally thousands of children were being rounded up and placed in foster care.

"They're essentially out of control," said family lawyer David Lansner. "I've had many ACS case workers tell me 'We're ACS, we can do whatever we want' and they usually get away with it."

Having taken children into care, the ACS was now, effectively, their parent and could do just about anything it wished with them.

One of the homes to which HIV positive children were taken was the Incarnation Children's Center, a large, expensively refurbished red-bricked building set back from the sidewalk in a busy Harlem street. It is owned by the Catholic church and when we attempted to talk to officials at Incarnation we were referred to an equally expensive Manhattan public relations company, which then refused to comment on activities within the home. Hardly surprising, when we already knew that highly controversial and secretive drug experiments had been conducted on orphans and foster children as young as three months old.

We asked Dr David Rasnick, visiting scholar at the University of Berkeley, for his opinion on some of the experiments. He said: "We're talking about serious, serious side-effects. These children are absolutely miserable…cramps, diarrhea…joints swell up…[they] roll around the ground and you can't touch them." He went on to describe some of the drugs - supplied by major drug manufacturers including Glaxo SmithKline - as "lethal".

When approached by the BBC, Glaxo SmithKline said such trials must have stringent standards and be conducted strictly in accordance with local regulations. [But] at Incarnation, if a child refused to take the medicines offered, he or she was force-fed through a peg-tube inserted into the stomach. Critics of the trials say children should have been volunteered to test drugs by their parents.

When Jacklyn Hoerger later fostered two children from the home where she used to work with a view to adopting them, she discovered just how powerful the ACS was.

"It was a Saturday morning and they had come a few times unannounced," she said. "So when I opened the door I invited them in and they said that this wasn't a happy visit. At that point they told me that they were taking the children away. I was in shock."

Jacklyn, a trained pediatric nurse, had taken the fatal step of taking the children off the drugs, which had resulted in an immediate boost to their health and happiness. As a result she was branded a child abuser in court. She has not been allowed to see the children since.

In the film Guinea Pig Kids, we follow Jacklyn's story and that of other parents or guardians who fear for the lives of their loved ones. We talk to a child who spent years on drugs programs which made them and their friends ill, and we discover that Incarnation is not an isolated case. The experiments continue to be carried out on the poor children of New York City…

Guinea Pig Kids was broadcast on Tuesday, 30 November, 2004, at 7:30 PM on BBC Two (UK). For more information, visit http://news.bbc.co.uk
ssed. Revolutionary in scope, expect some heated discussions after the screenings.”

[AllanahStarrNYC]

There is also a documentary I really want to see called

"The Other Side of AIDS" which is getting lots of critical aclaim...

Hollywoof Reporter:

“Inspired by his HIV-positive wife, Christine Maggiore, Robin Scovill's documentary, The Other Side of AIDS, is a shocking indictment against the widespread notion that HIV causes AIDS, that people should take HIV tests, that AIDS drugs do more help than harm and many other ideas about HIV and AIDS. Focusing on many medicine-free individuals who have been HIV positive for years and peppered with major thinkers armed with skepticism and evidence contrary to popular opinion, this documentary should not be missed"

LA Weekly

“This cinematic hand grenade makes a convincing case that HIV is not the cause of AIDS, tracing the unchallenged belief to political agendas, government laziness and indifference and corporate greed. Having filled his documentary with reasoned arguments by political activists, medical experts and celebrated professors who don’t adhere to the HIV-AIDS connection, director Robin Scovill clears plenty of space for the conventional thinkers to make their case, and he doesn’t ridicule or dismiss them. But their arguments seem flimsy and unconvincing when stacked against the counter viewpoints, and the film sizzles within that gap of opinion."

[Bigwilly]

[quote="Danielle Foxxx"]I am going to start ignoring stupid people from now on...LOL
Trying to bring up a stupid old discussion... I can't please everyone sweety, this posting was not for my benefit, I am just trying to get awareness out there, and if you don't appretiate someone trying to watch out for you - FUCK YOU! I've had enough of you... GIve me a call we'll take your anger to the next level and settle this "man to man" LOL
What a low life!

Anyways, I didn't realize that someone already beat me to posting something about this already.




Using a condom & getting tested regularly-what's the big deal? Why is someone a tranny hater because they suggest to a TS porn star that they use condoms in their scenes?
In the recent threadi read in another forum, both these girls(Vicki and and DAN YELL) assert that because they get tested every 2 weeks that means they are safe to do BB scenes in their movies. They cite the low % of infection in the porn industry, especially among GG performers who do all sorts of traditionally risky sex acts. Ok, understood.

However, as i tried to point out, testing only tells you that something AFTER THE FACT. In other words, if you got tested today and it shows a negative result, that doesn't mean you aren't infected!

This is from the Department of Health's website:

"If you become infected with HIV, it usually takes between three weeks and two months for your immune system to produce antibodies to HIV. If you think you were exposed to HIV, you should wait for two months before being tested. You can also test right away and then again after two or three months. During this "window period" an antibody test will give a negative result, but you can transmit the virus to others if you are infected.

About 5% of people take longer than two months to produce antibodies. There is one documented case of a person exposed to HIV and hepatitis C at the same time. Antibodies to HIV were not detected until one year after exposure. Testing at 3 and 6 months after possible exposure will detect almost all HIV infections. However, there are no guarantees as to when an individual will produce enough antibodies to be detected by an HIV test. If you have any unexplained symptoms, talk with your health care provider and consider re-testing for HIV.

DO ANY TESTS WORK SOONER AFTER INFECTION?
Viral load tests detect pieces of HIV genetic material. They show up before the immune system manufactures antibodies. Also, in early 2002, the FDA approved "nucleic acid testing." It is similar to viral load testing. Blood banks use it to screen donated blood.

The viral load or nucleic acid tests are generally not used to see if someone has been infected with HIV because they are much more expensive than an antibody test. They also have a slightly higher error rate****************."

Soooooooooooo, unless you gals are 100% celibate during the "window period," your test results are meaningless. Am I missing something here? I may be wrong about this as I am no expert, so please, someone give me a non-defensive answer about this.

For example, what if an actor got tested the day before his scene with you and it showed a negative result. But in fact, he was HIV positive, just that the antibodies had not shown up yet in his blood (or at least enough to be detectible by the tests). If you do a BB anal scene with him, could you get infected by him? You could, right? Of course you could even if you used a condom, but then the chances of him being BOTH infected, non-detected by the recent testing AND the condom breaking or being ineffectual are infinitesimally small (which is the goal).

PS- there is no hatred here. I am merely discussing the risks of your activities and hopefully, to convince both of you RISKY ladies(YES u and Vicki) to be even safer than you already are (by using condoms in your movies. Also, I acknowledge that street girls who don't get tested or do so infrequently are probably a higher risk, even if they use condoms with their customers. But that doesn't make it any safer for you to do BB scenes.

[Bigwilly]

Felicia he is probably one of the uneducated people who migrated from The SFredbook posts...That web site is nothing but a buch of guys giving reviews on escorts, it gets like that in here sometimes, but most people in here can carry an inteligent conversation...


Pathetic how you changed your avatar after my post!!! Insecure Dan-Yell?
Sweetie there is a world of difference between the Favellas in Rio, and glitter of NYC or LA. :lol:

[Mugai_hentaisha]

I agree with what Thanos Allanah and others basically say about the condom issue. Personally for me if I were in the Adult business I would get the regular tests and wear a condom, but this is just me i cannot make that call for everyone and since i cannot, to me it is better to be safe than sorry.

anyway thanks for the 411 people

i personally think this is a knee jerk reaction from the way it sounds this persons body was burning up from repeated meth use and from some of the people i have seen on meth......shit it looked as if a Mosquito bite could kill them. totally destruction of the body....scary stuff indeed but then what do you expect from a man made drug that some people make with things like beercans and such.

[Vicki Richter]

Typical HIV thread on HA:

Anyone, "HIV is bad and dangerous and will kill you"

Allanah, "No it's not bad. It's all made up. Here's proof. With the right diet, you will actually live longer if you have it."

Misc Hater, "Danielle and Vicki do bareback in their movies. They will get AIDS. Testing isn't any good."

My response again to BigWily... I did this before on Redbook, but Arianna just did a 60+ guy creampie video. She still doesn't have HIV. I guess that is just dumb luck huh? 65 guys in one scene came in her unprotected pussy and she is still negative. Most people don't have HIV. The testing isn't flawless, but it's pretty fucking good. There is a small blind spot, but it's not excessive. Female pornstars have used this testing since 1998 and only .003% of the industry (as a ratio of total sex scenes) has contracted HIV from bareback scenes - including double anal cream pies, etc.

Everyone, "Yes we all agree HIV and AIDS is bad. Be careful"

Everyone, "Amen"

The End.

[The American Nightmare]

It really is astonishing how disease-free the porn industry has kept itself. It's probably much more dangerous being with a hooker or going to church.

[AllanahStarrNYC]

Allanah, "No it's not bad. It's all made up. Here's proof. With the right diet, you will actually live longer if you have it."

I don't think I have ever said that-

I have posted counter view point on the HIV=AIDS dogma
about things you do not usuallly hear in the news or media.

All from reputable sources and scientists who have the same questions.

Believe what you like- just get informed.

[Felicia Katt]

I'll second everything Vicki said, except to add this. Even, under Bigwilly's extremely unlikely scenario of someone all of a sudden contracting aids just before getting tested, and then doing a bareback scene, the odds are still overhwelming against their partner getting infected.

the basic information is here

http://hivinsite.ucsf.edu/InSite.jsp?doc=2098.4396&page=pr-04-02

to summarize the odds:

the receptive or bottom's odds are less than one in 100 (.82 %)when having unprotected sex with an HIV positive partner. and are even way more remote if you are the top Something on the order of .06%. Interestingly, the chance of contracting HIV when you are the top and using a condom is .04%. So actually, there is not a lot of difference, statistically between using and not using a condom. In either case, the odds are pretty remote, though you can reduce them even further by using a condom. If you are "bottoming"with a condom, your odds are 0.18%,which means you can enhance them by a factor of 4.

So, the short answer is that sex is always safer with a condom, but realistically, only fractionally so. Unless its mastubation, or sex with one partner in a totally confirmed monogamous relationship, or sex with someone who has been celibate for a while after being tested, all sex involves some risk. Even sex with condoms. But the risks are very, very remote. Certainly not risky enough to justify BigWilly's alarmist post or his crocodile tears of concern.

[Danielle Foxxx]

Felicia he is probably one of the uneducated people who migrated from The SFredbook posts...That web site is nothing but a buch of guys giving reviews on escorts, it gets like that in here sometimes, but most people in here can carry an inteligent conversation...


Pathetic how you changed your avatar after my post!!! Insecure Dan-Yell?
Sweetie there is a world of difference between the Favellas in Rio, and glitter of NYC or LA. :lol:

Its hilarious how much your idiotic comments have no grounds. I do scenes with condoms and without, the performers have the right to chose if they want to do it with or without, Me and Christian decided to do it just because....It was a decision made in the moment...BUt I have done anothe scene with him where we did it bareback.
I don't have to change my work just because a handfull of people disagree with my decision, a word of advice - don't buy or watch my movies, as a matter of fact....my name is not a bone to be in a dog's mouth - get smart dude.
And by the way....I haven't had an avitar for a few months because my old one was stored in my old web site which was erased, so now it it stored in my other account....Those are my new pictures....And I wouldn't make any decision based on any of your comments any where - I can care less for uneducated fools - Eat Shit!

[Danielle Foxxx]

By the way - what do you guys think of my new Animation, I am so proud I made it myself.....

[joyboy123]

By the way - what do you guys think of my new Animation, I am so proud I made it myself.....
Its filthy and its dirty, for gods sakes girl, you are tossing somebody's salad in one those shots!!! Love it, it makes me want to buy a membership at your site once my current membership on another site expires. :D :D :D

[SidChromeAU]

Allanah, "No it's not bad. It's all made up. Here's proof. With the right diet, you will actually live longer if you have it."

I don't think I have ever said that-

I have posted counter view point on the HIV=AIDS dogma
about things you do not usuallly hear in the news or media.

All from reputable sources and scientists who have the same questions.

Believe what you like- just get informed.

You don't quite say that, but that is the general tone of what you post on this issue. You seem to want to pretend that AIDS doesn't exist. Frankly, I'd believe my mates - the geneticist, or the various doctors - long before I'd believe an amateur scientist such as yourself. Anyone can find a scientist or two to back their views - so what. These people are generally fringe-dwellers, or not even actually working in the field in question. There may very well be other factors exacerbating the condition, but the fact is that it exists, and it will kill you. Blaming science for it is infantile and delusional. You have cast yourself as a self-appointed expert on HIV/AIDS, and frankly your opinion is dangerous.

[The American Nightmare]

By the way - what do you guys think of my new Animation, I am so proud I made it myself.....
Its filthy and its dirty, for gods sakes girl, you are tossing somebody's salad in one those shots!!! Love it, it makes me want to buy a membership at your site once my current membership on another site expires. :D :D :D
Agreed. Ironic how ass-rimming is more dangerous than the bareback scenes....

[AllanahStarrNYC]

LOL Sid did you just drop a hit of acid?

Or have u become dellusional
b/c
in NO WAY have I EVER said I was a scientist lol
or a doctor, or an expert.

The tone os my posts are that I have questions and SO do alot of other people.
I am not preaching anything- I am stating another point a view.

To call someones point of view dangerous who is offering diversity in a topic and optional opinions, such as the man who whon the nobel prize for chemistry in 71- is indeed dangerous because you are trying to censor other view points and not taking any of the experts or research I have posted seriously.


I am nort advocating any kind of "risky" sexual behaviour as myself will only do scenes with condoms and always preactice safe sex. In fact, I am not advocating anything.


Arent you British? Do u live in the UK? Maybe U should watch that BBC program I mentioned.

AIDS does exist and I have never said it does not. However, HIV is the probable cause of AIDS- SCIENTIFFIC FACT. PROBABLE-ASK YOU MATES THE GENETICIST. There is no scientiffic data that proves that if you contract HIV you will develop AIDS- the hypothesis says "most likely".

Go educate yourself before you start spewing out nonsense, especially about my post and what I claim myself to be...

BY the way- if you are interested in what I do claim to be-
a thinking human being.

[SidChromeAU]

Australian, not British (AU?). Look, I agree with you that all viewpoints must be looked at, but until something better comes along prudence suggests that the majority view be given due creedence. Although there is no outright link between HIV and full-blown AIDS, there is a lot of empirical evidence (I agree, not outright proof) to suggest a connection. That alone needs to respected.
Through no choice of your own, there are some here who are sycophantic in their approach to your posts. Your lack of acknowledgement of the opposing view to your own is potentially dangerous in that some here - and elsewhere - may well infer that there is little or no point in following the advice of the general scientific community. That is why what you espouse is dangerous - at least to an extent.

[AllanahStarrNYC]

Heu SID
here are EXACT quotes from your Mates-
Geneticist and Scientist- not people on the fringes of genetic and HIV research
I do my HOMEWORK on both ends- and I suggest you do before you come attack me

I realized that the whole group of viruses to which HIV is said to belong, retroviruses ...in fact do not exist at all. I was wondering what viruses are for... in evolutionary biology and found that ...every one of our genomes, and that of higher plants and animals, is the product of so-called reverse transcription: RNA transcribed into DNA.."

Dr. Stefan Lanka Ph.D.
Interview in Zengers Magazine
Virologist

" People have totally misunderstood the nature of genetic systems in higher organisms. This will probably turn out to be the greatest failure in the history of molecular biology."

Prof. Dr. John S. Mattick
Quoted in NY Times 21 Jan 2003
Director: Aus. Genome Research Facility; Institute for Molecular Bioscience Univ. Queensland; ARC Special Research Centre for Functional and Applied Genomics.


"If there is evidence that HIV causes AIDS, there should be scientific documents which either singly or collectively demonstrate that fact, at least with a high probability. There is no such document."

Dr. Kary Mullis
1993 Nobel Prize Winner for Chemistry

Dr. Harry Rubin, Professor of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California at Berkeley: "It is not proven that AIDS is caused by HIV infection, nor is it proven that it plays no role whatever in the syndrome."

Dr. Richard Strohman, Emeritus Professor of Cell Biology at the University of California at Berkeley:
"In the old days it was required that a scientist address the possibilities of proving his hypothesis wrong as well as right. Now there's none of that in standard HIV-AIDS program with all its billions of dollars."



Dr. Harvey Bialy, Molecular Biologist, former editor of Bio/Technology and Nature: "HIV is an ordinary retrovirus. There is nothing about this virus that is unique. Everything that is discovered about HIV has an analogue in other retroviruses that don't cause AIDS. HIV only contains a very small piece of genetic information. There's no way it can do all these elaborate things they say it does."



"AIDS is a behavioural disease. It is multifactorial, brought on by several simultaneous strains on the immune system - (Dr. Gordon Stewart, Emeritus Professor of Public Health, University of Glasgow) drugs, pharmaceutical and recreational, sexually transmitted diseases, multiple viral infections."



Dr. Joseph Sonnabend: "The marketing of HIV, through press releases and statements, as a killer virus causing AIDS without the need for any other factors, has so distorted research and treatment that it may have caused thousands of people to suffer and die."

Physician, founder of the American Foundation for AIDS Research (AmFAR)

[AllanahStarrNYC]

SID if I advocated
"Go out and fuck everything with out a condom" then YES that would be dangerous...

I am not advocating anything-
Dont be afraid to hear other view points...

You have the same reaction to these post like the media does and the AIDS establishment-
b/c you say this stuff it means we should not be worried about STDS

that is not what this is about-
this is about a different view point from the view points we all know that is preached to us all the time-

i dont want to contract HIV and of course I am worried about it-
but i am no convinced with conventional medicine 100 %

btw
i believe there is an Australian scientist
in my list of quotes...cool ;)

[Vicki Richter]

My quick summary and "the end" comment clearly didn't work. Ha ha.

Allanah you know what I am talking about though. I certainly oversimplified it, but that is the point of summarization. Obviously my post failed to serve at the most simplistic of levels... sarcastic witty humor. What I really think is you should create a generic response to the HIV topic inquiries and Danielle and I should write one explaining safety in doing BB scenes in porn. We write the same thing ever time... which is really what I was asserting in my last post.

ps - As usual, thanks for your insight kitten kat (purrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr)
pss - Danielle, I love your animation. Good stuff
psss - I got Saturday's test back from AIM... Still neg. Woohoo!!! Glad I didn't catch something from those "dirty" porn girls. :P

freak on y'all,

~V~

[SidChromeAU]

Allanah, I'm referring to some actual friends of mine when I cited my 'mates'. The simple fact is, for every quote you come up with, I, or anyone else, can cite an opposing view. The fact remains that the sources you quote are still a minority view. Frankly, it doesn't matter: if they go off on a tangent and find something of value, great. It's happened before in other fields.
I fail to understand the level of vitriol in your replies - I disagree with you, and I think that your simplistic view, masked in pseudo-science and carefully selected strands of thought that enable you to keep burying your head in the sand, is erroneous. I don't, however, have any desire to personally attack you - just a desire to refute your stance.
Unless someone comes up with anything new in this thread, I'm done. I've made my point.

[Ecstatic]

By the way - what do you guys think of my new Animation, I am so proud I made it myself.....
Very nice, Danielle--and very hot, horny and dirty, whoohoo. You fit a bit of everything in there: top, bottom, rimming, man you like to tease us, don't you, girl? But seriously, I think it is well done. I like that the first and last photos in the sequence are slightly different shots from the same scene, with the other two scenes in between, and I love that you slowed the final frame waaay down on your sig. Nice touch. The frames are a tad too quick, maybe, but the frenetic pacing is offset by the slow fade of the first and last frames which bleed into one another. Very nice job on the fade (I see it took 27 frames to achieve). All too often people build animated gifs which flip in .1 seconds between frames, making you dizzy to watch them and not be able to enjoy each frame for a bit. Good stuff. Now do one with me in the scene (I'm still waiting to squeeze your tits, babe, hehe).

[Ecstatic]

Australian, not British (AU?).
And here I thought it meant Gold (Chrome and Gold together)!

[Vicki Richter]

By the way, just to highlight how I feel about this topic and why, a male performer recently (within the past 3 months) approached a str8 male director about not wanting to work with Arriana Jolie. When asked why, he explained to him that "well she works with transsexuals". When prompted further about it, he said, "they all hook and any guy off the street can blow his load in their mouth for $150." Asked how he knew this, "stammer, uh, uh, it's what I heard".

This was despite the fact that she had just done a 65 guy cream pie video in a foreign country. It just pisses me off that because I am a shemale I get perceived as dirty or disease ridden, etc. It should piss other shemales off as well, but instead we just get hate for it. Guys like the one above telling us R.I.P. in other forums for doing the very thing str8 porn has done, predominantly safely, for ages.

I see myself, Joanna, Danielle and some others are trailblazers here. While we may not get credit for it, we are working to equalize the perception of TS in the adult industry. High profile female performers working with us... without condoms... using the same testing that all of the other performers use. I mean fuck, I got to work in a str8 video last year "Tales of Perversity 11" which not only got 5A's, but got tons of AVN nominations and accolades.

I don't want to get sick. I don't want to get anyone else sick. I just want my gender to be well perceived in society... at least in a small way. They may be small steps, but last year was huge for shemales bridging a major gap in adult industry perception. By the male porn guy's reaction, we still have a long way to go.

V

[AllanahStarrNYC]

Hey Vicki

I totally respect your decision to work without condoms and I am sure u will remain negative using the mehtod u use-as per the majority of the adult industry

but

I have a Q:
Do u feel to have to conform to the adult industry standards to gain acceptance?

Quite frankly- alot of people will always have preconceptions about ts and be negative...so I am just thinking wondering, from your point of view- why do you think that doing condomless sex scenes is going to make that any different?

[Vicki Richter]

Hey Vicki
I have a Q:
Do u feel to have to conform to the adult industry standards to gain acceptance?

Quite frankly- alot of people will always have preconceptions about ts and be negative...so I am just thinking wondering, from your point of view- why do you think that doing condomless sex scenes is going to make that any different?

My hope is that "a lot" becomes "a few" and "always" becomes "occassionally". That is the most I can hope for. I genuinely think the mainstream public sees TS films always use condoms and wonders why. When people ponder it, they go back to regarding us as gay men who look like girls. It makes sense for gay guys to always use condoms right? I think small advances which allow mainstream guys to see us with female performers or eventually even have the str8 male performers crossing over to some extent would be awesome. Sure it isn't that big of a difference, but in the scheme of things, our genre isn't going to get overnight mainstream acceptance or societal norm acceptance. It's all little things.

I would like to think that your club stuff could morph from what they are to flashy nightclub type environment world renowned. A place people could go with people from work without feeling they were violating 100 different HR policies. Or hell, go the other way and do a big strip club type thing. NYC is where this type of thing could really happen. I think regardless, the more it goes on, the more exposure it will get, and hopefully it will expand. Little things can mean big things down the future for girls like us. That's all we have right now.

[Hugh Jarrod]

Breaking news a case has just been reported in San Diego Ca.

[tsluver247]

It was unfortunate that this person with the newly founded HIV strain was naive to think that testing regularly protected him from HIV while continue a lifestyle of unprotected sex with multiple partners that use drugs.

Personally, I believe anyone participating in unprotected sex, whether anal or vaginal, is dangerous in this day and age, especially during one-night affairs. I have this view point, because I am not a porn star that knows their sexual partner's last monthly STD test results. Knowing a person's monthly STD test results or your partner's sexual history changes some people's prospectives on unprotected sex.

As far as male porn stars not wanting to have sex with Ariana Jollee, because she had sex with a TS is plain ignorance. I find the porn industry has a double standard considering most heterosexual porn has anal acts without condoms but most gay and TS porn has anal acts with condoms. It is bullshit that we continue to have double standards in this day and age.

[LG]

tsluver247 wrote:

As far as male porn stars not wanting to have sex with Ariana Jollee, because she had sex with a TS is plain ignorance. I find the porn industry has a double standard considering most heterosexual porn has anal acts without condoms but most gay and TS porn has anal acts with condoms. It is bullshit that we continue to have double standards in this day and age.

True. No ever refuses to work with Sylvia Saint, yet she has had unprotected anal as well as vaginal sex with men dozens if not hundreds of times in porn shoots and DVD (as have most European starts- Color Climax and Private always show bareback sex, unlike Penthouse Black Label for example, or or a lot of American-made porn).

Vicki Richter wrote:

I think small advances which allow mainstream guys to see us with female performers or eventually even have the str8 male performers crossing over to some extent would be awesome.

I would be very intrigued to see if there would be any kind of backlash if one of the megastars of straight porn were to be in a transexual video (Danielle or Vicki with Sylvia Saint, Jenna Jameson or Tera Patrick, now that would be a DVD I'd buy). I think they'd never do it though, because they know how difficult it would be to find willing male costars afterwards.

and also...

I don't want to get sick. I don't want to get anyone else sick. I just want my gender to be well perceived in society... at least in a small way.

I see your point and agree that TS porn shouldn't be considered dirtier or more dangerous than gay or straight anal and also that transgendered people need to be accepted in society. I also undertand that porn stars have regular tests and I assume that anyone who was found to be HIV+ would be prevented from featuring in any more films or shoots. But, personally, as much as I enjoy watching bareback porn (straight or TS) and, like everyone, prefer having bareback sex, I think that condomless porn (of any kind) gives the wrong message in this day and age. If the movies that fuel our fantasies would only encourage safe sex, then maybe, just maybe, people would practice it a bit more.

[Danielle Foxxx]

This is the kind of discussion that is good for the mind and informs people who only read posts and don't really participate, Vicki, again you not only are great looking but have a brain... WoW what a combo.
Allanah comes in with credible questions and contridicts with valuable facts...
Danmmmmmm this is great!

Give me More!

[Vicki Richter]

Danielle adds an insightful introspect to the thread. A play by play if you will. You should keep starting interesting topics that inspire others to comment on. Why don't you start a great threat on the Extravaganza girls.

Danielle also has a very tight asspussy. If I catch her and Allanah kissing again I am going to have to go back to men.

[hillbilly]

there is no safety in doing BB sex pure and simple. ANY BB sex is an open window to the virus.

nobody should need any articles or stats. unprotected sex is russian roulette. but for a couple bucks i guess its justified. right?

totally insane. you wash your hands after going to the bathroom but would have sex with a virtual stranger unprotected? putting your life on the line. screwy.

shit everyone on this board is probably connected sexually. scary shit.

[GMan]

This is the kind of discussion that is good for the mind and informs people who only read posts and don't really participate, Vicki, again you not only are great looking but have a brain... WoW what a combo.
Allanah comes in with credible questions and contridicts with valuable facts...
Danmmmmmm this is great!

Give me More!

Here goes:

A recent study published in the New England Journal of Medicine suggested that everyone should get a yearly AIDs exam. I strongly disagree with this. And it's too bad that they we have this feeling of politically correctness in this country that we can't just say; "Look, if you're engaging in xyz, you NEED to get tested for AIDs OFTEN." Here's a few things that come to my mind:

If you're engaging in unprotected sex with multiple partners, you need to get an AIDs test.

If you're doing drugs and sharing needles, you need to get an AIDs test.

If you're working with blood products, you need to get an AIDs test.

If you've had more than five sex partners, regardless of whether or not you are gay or straight, you need to get an AIDs test. And when I say sex partners, I mean people you have had sex with, including oral, vaginal, and anal, protected or unprotected, it never hurts.

But let's stop with this "everyone" thing. Not everyone needs to get tested. If you can't say to certain groups of people they should be tested, a) you have no balls, and b) you're skirting the issue.

Something else, I also feel that if you know you're HIV positive and you're going around having unprotected sex with people, you should be charged with first degree murder. Here's why: HIV leads to AIDs which is a deadly disease that kills people every single year. If you know you have HIV and you're having unprotected sex with people and not telling them you have HIV, you are willfully and deliberately spreading a deadly disease, and there's no telling how many people could get it from a person you infected. And if you live in a state that has the death penalty, I would have no problems seeing it invoked.

As far as this super AIDs virus or however it's being dubbed goes, I don't take too much stock in it. Drug addicts have weaker immune systems (to my knowledge the first person this was found in was a major meth user), HIV weakens the immune system even more, so just imagine what it would do to someone whose immune system has been turned into liquid shit by drugs. Either it's a huge scare by the liberally biased media who enjoys jumping the gun and reporting stories by the media, or it really is a super AIDs virus...until I get my hands on some concrete medical studies, I put little stock in what the media tells me...unless it's Fox News, since they do report both sides of the issues.

[hillbilly]

i think the concept is that everyone should get tested as a safegaurd because you can't put any numbers or parameters on the virus. a virus doesn't discriminate or give you a few free passes.

if you sleep with x amount of partners you aren't at risk? huh?

aren't people statistically unfaithful? do you know who is being faithful?

no we don't. hence everyone maybe should get tested. i can't imagine why someone would resist.

why do people resist? fear of...? its a shame there are people out there dedicating themselves to the stop of the spread of the virus and others who almost seem to be going out of their way to spread it.

now where is my crystal?

[The American Nightmare]

there is no safety in doing BB sex pure and simple. ANY BB sex is an open window to the virus. What if neither of them are positive? What if the two partners are in a monogamous relationship?

Is this reminding anyone of the South Park episode?

[hillbilly]

did you read my whole post?

monogamy? what's that? so in theory we are dealing with 2 monogamous virgins? where are they i'd love to meet them hahah.

is that the idea?

[The American Nightmare]

So to answer my questions....?

[partlycloudy]

http://img19.exs.cx/img19/4954/condom16ii.jpg

[Danielle Foxxx]

I rest my case, we obviously have differences of opinions here and I totally respect everyone's opinion and I thank you for your concern. I do not think I am putting anyone at risk, and if one day I test positive ( knock on wood - Vicki's wood to be exact ) I will not work anylonger. Number one - they test in Porn - I don't do 5 movies every week, I do 1 movie a month - if that - This includes web site modeling and video. Girls who are working all the time are GGs who are at higher risk then me - if I may ask. I see sleeping with tranny chasers a higher risk then sleeping with porn stars who are tested, I don't know if some of you are too old to get that through your thick head, but it looks like it. So, as I can put it, I order flavored condoms online and extra thick/large condoms as well, I have them with me all the time, in case I run into one of you. I practice safe sex basically most of the time - Most because I do bareback scenes, but I would let Vicki cum inside with right now w/out a test because I know she is the most safest person out there - You all should see that there are some girls that care about more then a few bucks, I am sure you are used to dealing with cheap whores all the time, girls you have to call and bargain prices with, trust me, you tried to call me several times - cheap asses - but the truth is - if a girl looks like she needs to shower with a bottle of hand sanitizer, or doesn't land scape, or has bumps on her crotch, or has red balls, if she looks too skinny etc...DON"T TOUCH IT! I mean this is a stereotype and I am sorry for doing it - but since you are all treating me and Vicki like dirty sluts because we do care to get regular tests then you can kiss both of our HIV negative Asses!
By the way - here are a few pictures of STD infested pubic areas...

[Danielle Foxxx]

more

[hillbilly]

baby you're hot but nuts.

you say you accept all of our opinions then tell us we have thick heads. hahahha. i think you're sweet but get real smug when it doesn't go your way and try to pass it off as your endearing wit, sarcasm whatever you call it. you and vicki cluster together like little schoolgirls.

the bottom line is you generally only speak of half of the equation in this problem. i trust that you can speak for your own safety but can you speak for the safety of every partner you have had?

is there now such a thing as being too safe?

nobody called you or vicki dirty sluts or whatever kind of crap you are trying to project. bring that shit up with your therapist.

i don't need to negotiate any prices honey. least of all with you.

hey get this. i can make money without selling my body and soul. what a concept! can you? have you?

don't be telling me about your dreams. i've heard all the ts dreams i can stomach.

i'll be sure to give you a ring next time you're in NYC cause i'm dying to pinch those apple cheeks of yours. lol.

get off your high horse cause your attitude and v.d. pictures do nothing to bring the issues forward.

later tater. :D

[domweb]

Safety is pretty relative to different people, as I can see from all your posts.

Without pitching in another opinion about what is safe and what isn't, the no condom movies and photo shoots do have one advantage. As far as I can tell, people prefer to see bareback action in their porn.

I guess I don't understand why the players in a porn video don't just meet three or four days before a shoot, get a fifty dollar HIV test kit from a drug store, prick their fingers and Fedex in the sample.

Three days later you can call an 800 number with your anonymous ID number and have the computer tell you if the test was positive or negative. I am not in a high risk group myself, but I have tested myself three times in the last four years for safety sake. It's a great feeling to hear the computer say "NEGATIVE".

Seems like you could happily toss out the condoms for the shoot and have a great time. After all, condomless sex feels better and it feels ALOT better when you know you having sex with a clean partner.

Or am I just totally missing something?

P.S. Recent studies of HIV transmission have shown that giving or recieving oral sex with an HIV positive partner has almost no risk of transmission.

[hillbilly]

this is the problem. there is always a window of opportunity for the virus to be passed BEFORE it is detectable by an HIV test. please read below.

taken from http://www.avert.org/testing.htm

The HIV test looks for antibodies in a person's blood. When HIV (which is a virus) enters a person's body, special chemicals are produced. These are called antibodies. Antibodies are the body's response to an infection. So if a person has antibodies to HIV in their blood, it means they have been infected with HIV (an exception is the case of an HIV negative baby born to a positive mother, who will retain her antibodies for some months).


For most people it takes 3 months for these antibodies to develop. In rare cases, it can take up to 6 months. It would be extremely uncommon to take longer than 6 months for antibodies to develop.


Getting tested earlier than 3 months may result in an unclear test result, as an infected person may not yet have developed antibodies to HIV. The time between infection and the development of antibodies is called the window period. In the window period people infected with HIV have no antibodies in their blood that can be detected by an HIV test. However, the person may already have high levels of HIV in their blood, sexual fluids or breast milk. HIV can be passed on to another person during the window period even though an HIV test will not show that you are infected with HIV. So it is best to wait for at least three months after the last time you were at risk before taking the test. Some test centres may recommend testing again at 6 months, just to be extra sure.


It is also important that you are not at further risk of getting infected with HIV during this time period. The test is only accurate if there are no other exposures between the time of possible exposure to HIV and testing.


The only way to know for sure whether you are infected with HIV is to have an HIV antibody test. It is not possible to tell from any symptoms.

[hillbilly]

more of the same. simple facts from GMHC.

http://www.gmhc.org/health/basics.html

either way all any test does in the end is tell you pass or fail. so once you've failed then well youv'e failed. you get it? no extra credit on this test.

[castabyss]

Hillbilly,

Not all testing is antibody testing. There is viral load testing as well which detects the actual presence of HIV in someone's system. These tests can detect HIV long before an HIV antibody test will and shortens the "waiting period" considerably. As far as I know, most XXX performers use these tests since they are reported to be more precise and a better gauge of the presence of the virus in your system. This testing is available to the public, but at a much higher cost than antibody testing, which is usually free.

[hillbilly]

thanks for correcting me.

either way the aversion to precaution is puzzling to me. don't you think?

once you're sick you're sick.

oh well i guess i can only look out for myself.

thanks again. :D

[domweb]

Of course there is a window that can fool at test. Is that a reason not to test porn actors?

Lets see...you have a 99% chance of detecting if your partner in a scene has HIV. Cheaply, quickly and anonomously. The only complication being that if infection has taken place in the last six months, the test might miss it.

If you are going to do a bareback scene, why not test?

[Danielle Foxxx]

LOL Are you guys dumb?
Do you actually read?

THE AIM TEST CAN DETECT HIV WITHIN CONTRACTION....No six month window!!!!! It does not detect HIV antibodies but the virus itself - and like I said - I don't shoot everyday....so....My chances are minimized, and when I have personal encounters I protect myself.

The finger/mail test is not an option, there is AIM for that - much faster and accurate.

Hillbilly you always see what i am trying to explain to say in a negative light...as in calling me sarcastic, it is obvious you don't like me, so why don't you just disregard my posts and don't comment on them. I will do the same. Like I said - I respect your opinion but I think you are a hypocrate! But then again, that's just my opinion. When were you born? 1840? Times have changed, science is much better then it was in the 1800's. Like I said - you don't like my work? You are a minority, if it wasn't for people criticising me I would not be where I am today, I think, criticism is great, I love negative comments as it makes me work harder to change your mind. I will one day win you over - you are just so danm hard headed

Kisses
Danielle

[hillbilly]

yes i certainly am hard headed. you know takes one to know one?

anyways can we read? yes. if you read the posts i stood corrected as i made reference to the wrong type of test. but this is a post about EVERYONE and this AIM test is less common that is more the adult industry standard. correct? fortunatlely i'm not schooled on the multiple HIV tests out there.

do i hate you? certainly not. shit i don't even know you.

so maybe next time spread the education instead.

i'm not sure how i would see this in a positive light:

"I don't know if some of you are too old to get that through your thick head, but it looks like it."

but i'm happy to hear your explanation.

please please stop posting pictures of your vd. lol. shit why would you have those pictures?



sorry but i won't be skipping your posts anymore than you mine. if i'm interested in the topic i will certainly comment on it. just ask my mom. lol

are those cute cheeks of yours real? when can i grab hold of them?

love you. yours forever.

[Danielle Foxxx]

Now you are acting like a bitch fag like some in these posts, I love proving a point - you are nothing but a bitter old queen. and which sheeks were you talking about? Doesn't matter - they are both fake....whats your point?
You can do better then that bitch boy....

[The American Nightmare]

you know takes one to know one?
OooOOoooOooooh.... What's next, "I'm rubber and you're glue"?

[Vicki Richter]

this is the problem. there is always a window of opportunity for the virus to be passed BEFORE it is detectable by an HIV test. please read below.

taken from http://www.avert.org/testing.htm

The HIV test looks for antibodies in a person's blood. When HIV (which is a virus) enters a person's body, special chemicals are produced. These are called antibodies. Antibodies are the body's response to an infection. So if a person has antibodies to HIV in their blood, it means they have been infected with HIV (an exception is the case of an HIV negative baby born to a positive mother, who will retain her antibodies for some months).

For most people it takes 3 months for these antibodies to develop. In rare cases, it can take up to 6 months. It would be extremely uncommon to take longer than 6 months for antibodies to develop.

Getting tested earlier than 3 months may result in an unclear test result, as an infected person may not yet have developed antibodies to HIV. The time between infection and the development of antibodies is called the window period. In the window period people infected with HIV have no antibodies in their blood that can be detected by an HIV test. However, the person may already have high levels of HIV in their blood, sexual fluids or breast milk. HIV can be passed on to another person during the window period even though an HIV test will not show that you are infected with HIV. So it is best to wait for at least three months after the last time you were at risk before taking the test. Some test centres may recommend testing again at 6 months, just to be extra sure.


It is also important that you are not at further risk of getting infected with HIV during this time period. The test is only accurate if there are no other exposures between the time of possible exposure to HIV and testing.


The only way to know for sure whether you are infected with HIV is to have an HIV antibody test. It is not possible to tell from any symptoms.

This is bullshit. The test at AIM where adult performers are tested has a ~ 2 week window. I have informed you of this a gazillion times.

http://www.aim-med.org/faq.html

And I quote... Again...


The standard test you would get in a doctor's office would be the ELISA test, which is a great test, but it has a window period of 6months because it tests only for the antibody which can take up to 6 months to mature in a young healthy person. Can you imagine how many people you can infect in 6 months if you are working in porn? A lot.

The PCR (polymearase chain reaction) test tests for the HIV inhibitor itself (the disease) and through an amplification process, HIV can be detected just after about 2 weeks (give or take a day or two). We screen the Adult Industry by this test every month. It has become the standard used in the adult entertainment industry in the USA and you can thank AIM for that.

Therefore you are spreading incorrect information about the available testing practices. Since I have published this several times and you keep ignoring it, it just gets annoying and obvious that you refuse to accept facts.

Nobody is arguing that there is a window. There is. However, please don't produce ELISA test information in your justification when that isn't even the test we take. The window is small, and the infection rates in the adult industry are tiny.

[hillbilly]

i've acknowledge that mistake a couple posts back conceding that i didn't know what tests the adult industry uses.

i'm not familiar with all of your post vicki and by no means have chosen to ignore any of your information.

danielle talk about bitter? yikes! do you read your own posts? hahahha. just put some latex on that thing and get it over with!

[Vicki Richter]

i've acknowledge that mistake a couple posts back conceding that i didn't know what tests the adult industry uses.

i'm not familiar with all of your post vicki and by no means have chosen to ignore any of your information.

danielle talk about bitter? yikes! do you read your own posts? hahahha. just put some latex on that thing and get it over with!

I think Danielle is just frustrated at having to explain her position over and over and we have people, like yourself, spreading misinformation. I thought I read in a few posts back that you were one of the guys over on Red Book that we were arguing with. If that is the case, we've been over all this before. It gets really old.

The funny thing is, adultdvdempire and other sites popular for mainstream porn fans don't have people bringing up HIV all the time from a pornography perspective. It's because we're shemale - construed by some as gay guys - and HIV is classified as the "gay" disease that this is such a big discussion item here.

You guys should be saying, "wow these porn girls have tests and will show them to me if I want" vs "oh this girl I am seeing tonight has no test and may not have been tested in a year or more".

I would think a guy would have a significant amount of added peace of mind that, even though he is going in covered (or vice-versa), he knows that the girl has a current test. I can almost guarantee statistically that some girls that you see in the escorting profession are infected. If you have seen 5 different girls, your odds are pretty high.

I don't want to hear about how our best practices of being tested and working with other tested people is worse than fucking someone with a condom where you have no idea of their status. One is a lot riskier than the other and it's not the porn scenario. What about all the guys who BBBJ the girls... I have heard that isn't all that uncommon?

[Danielle Foxxx]

Not for you sweety, not with your mentality - why don't you write a complaint to the adult industry and tell EVERYONE to practice safe sex then....Is that what you are saying? Or is it just me?
Cause you were just nice to Vicki....I tried to be nice to you on your first rude post - but lost my mojo after I realized you are an old fart

[Danielle Foxxx]

excuse me - I stand corrected - An Old Bitter Queen that's had too much tranny cock in his ass

[Danielle Foxxx]

By the way - Vicki I think you are right - It's because we are shemales that he is acting this way.
I am glad one of us has smart information in here, you have waayyyyy more patience to deal with dumb asses then me....LOL
So are you a blond Naturally? And is your cock real? Can I squeese it to make sure, and by the way, I know your nose is not real - How dare you get plastic surgery....That is such a bad thing!
LOL

[hillbilly]

hahaha how did you decide i was an old fart? interesting.

nonetheless i'm not at all sure what you are talking about danielle as my first posts on this thread make no mention at all of you.

look > http://www.hungangels.com/board/viewtopic.phpt=2002&start=40

i attacked you when you claimed you were open to our opinions and the proceeded to bash us

look > http://www.hungangels.com/board/viewtopic.phpt=2002&start=40

same thread actually. so you tell me where and when i crossed you before that?

anyways...thanks for the info ladies

danielle i need you to do some squats by the way.

[Danielle Foxxx]

Cheap shots babe..... Eat me!
Just like a fag....LOL

[hillbilly]

acting what way? that HIV and AIDS is dangerous? huh?

what way?

[hillbilly]

you're too funny talking about gay this or gay that and cheap shots and then you call me a fag.

if i'm a fag god only knows what the hell you are? yikes!

[Vicki Richter]

acting what way? that HIV and AIDS is dangerous? huh?

what way?


She agrees that it is. So what is your dysfunction? You are putting words in her mouth and suggesting she is nonchalant about it. That is not the case. So why is it that you are antagonizing her?

[Danielle Foxxx]

HERE IS A SQUAT FOR YOU BABE, ENJOY AND DON'T FORGET TO COME CLOSE TO THE SCREEN....CLOSER....CLOSER....NOW KISS MY ASS!

[hillbilly]

hahahah hey thanks. i'll be sure to hit that when you are in ny. will you smile like that for me? if i bring a test can i fuck you bare?

i was gonna get close to the pic but you are looking a little gassy tonight. maybe later.

hey you can yell at me on yahoo if you want. let it rip!

spinwillymagic@yahoo

[hillbilly]

vicki are you reading these posts or just reacting?

i'm not putting words in danielles mouth. she said "It's because we are shemales that he is acting this way."

i said acting what way? etc.

what words did i put in her mouth? how am accusing her of being nonchalant?

[MaxiJavi]

Hey


I never had any intention of joining this board, I thought I'd be content amusing myself with the content and lurking around from time to time ...

However, I think this thread is really interesting ! And I just had to chip in :-)

Although things have taken a dive since yesterday :-(

First of all I realize this is a life-and-death subject, but people really do seem to judge too easily. I don't work in the adult industry or expose myself to this danger in any way, so I guess I look at what is said here by our lovely ladies as coming from people who have made important choices in their lifestyles and have to live with them every day. I would imagine that the life of a "hung angel" is one of non-conformance by definition, which seems to make a good base for free thinking :-)

Take the points that Alanah raised for instance, as much as you may have reasons to agree or disagree with them they do draw attention to important issues in how our society treats the sufferers of this terrible disease, and how (and this important), we don't really have all the answers to the aids/hiv issue (which we obviously don't) ...

... To call this "dangerous" is pretty amusing as I don't think we are supposed to live in a society that calls independant thinking and personal freedom "dangerous" or "bad for you" (specially on a "hung angel" site). Don't get me wrong, I think there is little doubt that unprotected sex is one of the worse ideas going, not just because of HIV/AIDS but because of all the other nice stuff you can get from it :-) And there ARE safer ways to get a thrill :-)

I believe that Alanah's thinking takes many outside of their "comfort zone", as it challenges the view that "we have everything figured out" and things are either black or white ... Something I (for one) would have thought is self evident. But then again we live in the land of punditry where nuance is looked upon as a european vice and weakness, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised :-).

Either way

When it comes to Porn ... Really, come on ... As a job it seems (again, I have no personal experience, but I dare to assume) to be a calculated risk by definition, as no protection really seems enough when it comes to sex. And when much of the public will prefer "bareback" I guess you have to factor in the all the issues and decide if it is "worth" the risk. The girls have obviously made this decision (being in the unique position they are in), and I don't see how it is up to anyone to tell them what to with their lives, as at the end of the day they don't hide the facts or their faces, and more importantly, no one forces you (or anyone) to have sex with them (specially unprotected sex).

Another thing that made me laugh was someone saying how they didn't have to sell they body or their soul (selling your soul is a whole other conversation), I had to ask myself if anyone "would want" to buy his "body", and either way, as a consumer of the girls art it seems like a funny thing to say ... Anyway, never mind, these are the sorts of people who will do half-baked research on tests they have never done and, (again) talk like if they are in entire possession of the truth and somehow know what it is like to live the life :-)

But lets face it, everyone knows that trolls like trolling ... So it seems the worst thing you can do is engage, as when it comes down to it chances are that no-one is going to get through to them. Why bother, these people have to finish "on top" and the issue normally gets lost in cheap jibes and self affirmation (which at the end of the day is what tends to be most important to them). Unfortunately that is what seems to have happened here :-( ... But then again, I guess there are worse ways to pass the time and use your intelligence than being a troll, specially if you are a hillbilly ;-)

Lastly I'd like to say that I am pleasantly surprised that some of the best looking girls are producing some of the best conversation too, as I am sure many appreciate the insights just as much as I do.

So Alanah, Danielle and Vicki ... Please keep it coming !!

Hope I didn't bore anyone :-)

Cheers

[GMan]

I can't remember where I had read it, but it was a pretty interesting article. It was about how AIDS is basically no worse than the common cold, but HIV weakens the immune system so our body can't fight it off. Is there any validity to this or is it just some theory? Forgive me if I sound naieve, wait...I am when it comes to HIV/AIDS because STD education is taboo in the United States.

[Felicia Katt]

from his posts, I would say Hillbilly is so dumb he probably would study for an AIDS test

meow

[hillbilly]

i truly want to thank everyone for the enlightenment.

the general point of my posts before getting into it with danielle was that you can look at the issue this way or that way or crunch the risk numbers anyway you like. in the end wear a condom.

so to me the dumb people are the ones talking and talking about something to no end that there is solution to already.

why argue the risk and such? nobody really answers that for me. why tempt fate?

i'm not climbing the corporate ladder on this board and certainly don't need to edit or express my opinions in a diplomatic way.

"oh yeah i see your point, blah blah blah, but hey take a look at this"

so somehow i'm being called dumb for practicing safe sex? for busting on danielle? for not tirelessly kissing the girls asses? hahaha ok then I AM dumb i'll take the crown.

[Mugai_hentaisha]

i don't know if anyone can be called "dumb" for practicing safe sex. However Hillbilly everybody that has posted on this thread has in my opinion been practicing Safe sex. Not one person on here has avocated going out and fucking everybody they see no matter their health status. Danielle, Allanah, and the rest get tested and have the people they work with tested on a regular basis while it may not be "Full bodycondom protection" you're looking for it is nevertheless safer than what most people do.

I believe what is making you seem dumb hillbilly isn't what you said, hell these ladies live with differences of opinion everyday of their lives, I believe it is the way you're saying it. You are coming across in some of your posts as being "To hell with your opinion, mine is the only one that matters and you all should go by that and stop having ones of your own."

sounds very "Limbaugh" to me :D

but what do I know?

loved the pic Danielle

personally instead of all this "bickering back and forth", I would rather be hearing about theAllanah, Danielle, and Vicki fantasy lust triangle :shock: :D :P

[LG]

GMan said:


I can't remember where I had read it, but it was a pretty interesting article. It was about how AIDS is basically no worse than the common cold, but HIV weakens the immune system so our body can't fight it off. Is there any validity to this or is it just some theory?

You're kind of right there, GMan. The common cold is much more easily transmissible than AIDS. Like the influenza virus, which causes the 'flu' the many virus that can cause the common cold (which is a set of symptoms rather than a virus) can be spread by sneezing, coughing and even hand to hand contact. It wasn't so long ago that people were dying from these diseases.

It's also true that most people who have contracted HIV don't die of AIDS, but of an opportunistic disease such as Karposi's Sarcoma or a lymphoma, pneumonia, tuberculosis or some other infection that would be unlikely to kill a person without AIDS.

hillbilly said:

the general point of my posts before getting into it with danielle was that you can look at the issue this way or that way or crunch the risk numbers anyway you like. in the end wear a condom.

I agree, and I would rather have been spared all the pictures of diseased dicks (although the picture of you bending over was nice, Danielle).

hillbilly also said:

you're too funny talking about gay this or gay that and cheap shots and then you call me a fag.

if i'm a fag god only knows what the hell you are? yikes!
That's another cheap shot and unneccessary. Then again Danielle did call him "an old bitter queen" and "a fag". I'm not sure who started it, and I don't care. Just please lay off each other you two! We can be at this all week, but I'd rather not.

Rather than debate forever on whether HIV causes AIDS (probably), whether AIDS can kill you (yes, but usually not directly), or whether safe sex san prevent disease (oftentimes) or who is a fag or not (who cares), I would rather thrown in some lines I found on a Canadian site entitled WorldVision. The points below seem to agree with current medical and scientific thinking. Read them any way you want.

HIV is transmitted in the following ways:

* from hetero- or homosexual contact with an HIV-positive individual
* through contaminated needles or other skin-puncturing devices
* through tainted blood products – now extremely unlikely due to thorough blood screening
* from mother to child during pregnancy, birth or breastfeeding
* through other body fluid-bloodstream contact, such as health care professionals may be exposed to

HIV is not transmitted by:

* casual contact such as a handshake or hug
* random scratches or scrapes on non-medical or non-contaminated items
* door handles, toilet seats, cutlery or other day-to-day items, however, toothbrushes and razors should not be shared, as they may come in contact with blood
* someone coughing or sneezing on you
* mosquitoes or other biting insects


There you have it, boys and girls. You've heard my opinion. Make your own up. And whatever you do, respect mine as I will always respect yours.

Increase the peace.

[Danielle Foxxx]

Hey

I never had any intention of joining this board, I thought I'd be content amusing myself with the content and lurking around from time to time ...


I absolutly love this post, well said and inteligent

[Danielle Foxxx]

HOW THE FUCK DO I QHOTE SOMEONE???? LOL I CAN NEVER GET IT RIGHT....

[LG]

Sorry, after my last serious post, I'm in a really frivolous mood at the moment, so I made this up. Actually it's only semi-frivolous. I find the idea of catching an STD scary as hell. And Danielle's post (you know, the one with all the gross pictures) really hammered the point in again when I read it yesterday. It also turned my stomach (not something I expect on this discussion forum). So here my little rhyme. It's got a little of Dorothy Parker about it (but with dirty words and less humour):

Warts on your cock,
zits on your clit,
festering pustules,
that smell like shit.

Lots of diseases,
so easy to catch,
infecting your todger,
your bunghole or snatch,

Wearing a condom,
is safer than not,
unless it is ripped,
then what have you got?

AIDS, gonorrhea,
syphilis, warts,
herpes, chlamydia
can all break your heart.

What is answer?
you'll hear us debate,
steer clear from sex.
and just masturbate.


By the way, Danielle said:


HOW THE FUCK DO I QHOTE SOMEONE???? LOL I CAN NEVER GET IT RIGHT....

Danielle, to quote someone, cut and paste their words into the box, then highlight them with your mouse and click on Quote. Make sure you have a set of square brackets before and after your post, one containing the word quote and the other /quote

Happy quoting!

[hillbilly]

great little poem LG. it made me giggle.

i also felt sick seeing those VD pics.

[Danielle Foxxx]

Hillbilly that was the reaction I wanted to get from everyone, I want you also to see that I am indeed concerned sweety...Infact I am one of the people who is very curtious and would stop working if I had HIV... In fact I am going to stop "working" soon, I am almost done with school, so you don't have to worry about me anymore :D I love people and I know several girls that are positive and still work, only because they feel they have no other choices in life, and life has consumed them so much that they are just going on auto pilot. I know a girl who recently went to jail for an unrelated charge and she was positive. I know she was in need of money and she used to tell me if a client wanted her to bareback and would pay her more she would not think twice....I was extremely mad at her because she was not only thinking of his life and maybe his wife and kids, but she was not thinking of her fellow TS friends who would matbe see this same person, so I started to tell her to drop my name to these guys and eventually they started to call...."I was sent to you by your friend #@#$%^%$...." and I would simply refuse to see them.
I am scared everyday, even playing safe I hate it, I hate not knowing personally who I lay next to, but I am one of the people who actually talks to each one of my "friends" and I am even as careful as not seeing "friends" who read the TER, transsexual "esquire" reviews. I believe these are the guys who "girl hop" or "Trade" as we call them. Could they be at a higher risk? YES indeed, but it's my choice, I also don't see a few other "types" which if I mention here I might get called racist or hypocrite, these people have a higher risk of practicing unsafe sex, how do I know that? I don't, but I am not taking the risk....As you are saying, you don't have to sleep with me, or with any girl you know who practices unsafe sex, but if you always worry about who does and who doesn't you will never EVER enjoy sex again. I am not here promoting unsafe sex...People know that performers are tested and they run a very low risk, most likly they do not practice unsafe sex in their private lives. Even with my ex I wore a condom....it was back in my "gay days" as one person kindly put it in here.
So....I am patiently waiting for your hatrid mail in response to my very nice email, I must say

[hillbilly]

danielle i found that very touching and heartfelt. it moved me.

it truly breaks my heart seeing how some girls have to live to survive. i feel guilty at times for being any part of it. so i'm happy you have found a way to move on in a healthy way.

i hate to hear that anyone is in pain. i've been there. so many of the girls seem so trapped. chasing the money with no real plan. so many seem to think money is the cure all.

what becomes of those girls.

anyways...now i feel sad.

i better go to allanahs tonight and get drunk. it is simply is my only choice, to make myself feel worse. lol
:D

[domweb]

LOL Are you guys dumb?
Do you actually read?

Actually, yes I do read your posts. Is the new test cheaply and easily available to the public? Can you buy it anonomously at the corner drug store?

Ahem. No. It's new and probably can only be performed presently in a few labs. The finger prick test has been around a few years, is cheap because it's been streamlined for use and its fast.

Getting a bunch of porn crew down to a doctor for testing, paying appointment and lab fees for every participant and waiting for results for maybe weeks is probably NEVER going to fly in the porn biz. This is porn, not Universal Studios.

You are missing my point. If it isn't cheap, fast and easy it won't be adopted by the porn community as a whole.

I don't understand why someone would not utilize at least that mininum level of screening when it's so bloody cheap and easy.

Anyhow...Danielle you are far to attractive to be insulting people. I detracts from your beauty. I hate to see beauty like your's sullied in any way.

[Danielle Foxxx]

Dearest Hillbilly,
You did miss the point....Its not a new test for say...You pay $110 dollars and your HIV results are in the next day, the rest are in in 3 days....So basically in 3 days you have all your results. NO NEED TO PRICK YOUR FINGER AND WAIT, AND WAIT AND WAIT....It is available to the public, you can go in there and they see private parties. YOu do need your ID however, but if you are ashemed of getting tested then you have something to hide, no one should be ashemed to walk into a clinic and ask for an STD test....AIM is not like that - They are friendly, down to earth and the nurses are sweet hearts, they are skilled on taking blood samples, it doesn't even hurt.
This has been used in the industry for years and years. It is just now being talked about because alot of people are giving it "exposure" with time more of these tests will be available to the public, but for now AIM health care in Los Angeles is the only place I use for my tests and as you all know an HIV test is 99.999999999% accurate, they don't say 100% because they don't want a lawsuite....that's understandable I guess...
BUt from your last post Hillbilly you seemed to miss what me and Vicki were trying to explain to you because you were too quick on the defensive...

[Danielle Foxxx]

OOOPS I STAND CORRECTED - DOMWEB

IT WAS MEANT FOR DOMWEB

[tsluver247]

I believe all males are gay to a certain degree. There are a lot of straight males that love watching porn that has huge dicks banging chicks. :D

[Vicki Richter]

LOL Are you guys dumb?
Do you actually read?

Actually, yes I do read your posts. Is the new test cheaply and easily available to the public? Can you buy it anonomously at the corner drug store?

Ahem. No. It's new and probably can only be performed presently in a few labs. The finger prick test has been around a few years, is cheap because it's been streamlined for use and its fast.

Getting a bunch of porn crew down to a doctor for testing, paying appointment and lab fees for every participant and waiting for results for maybe weeks is probably NEVER going to fly in the porn biz. This is porn, not Universal Studios.

You are missing my point. If it isn't cheap, fast and easy it won't be adopted by the porn community as a whole.

I don't understand why someone would not utilize at least that mininum level of screening when it's so bloody cheap and easy.

Anyhow...Danielle you are far to attractive to be insulting people. I detracts from your beauty. I hate to see beauty like your's sullied in any way.


The point is, the testing is quick and easy and it IS adopted by the porn community as a whole. I don't know what you are talking about here. All porn performers are tested at least every 30 days.

Vicki

[domweb]

The point is, the testing is quick and easy and it IS adopted by the porn community as a whole. I don't know what you are talking about here. All porn performers are tested at least every 30 days.


I am afraid that accordind to AVN (Adult Video News) you are not correct, Vicki.

I quote,

"CHATSWORTH, Calif. - After Darren James was found to be HIV-positive in March after a trip to Brazil, the Adult industry as a whole realized there was a hole in the testing system that acts as their only defense against HIV: while Porn Valley subjects performers to PCR-DNA tests at least once every 30 days, performers across the globe don’t enjoy the same safety protections."

Click here for Entire Article (http://www.avn.com/index.php?Primary_Navigation=Articles&Action=View_Article&Content_ID=201836)

While it is true that the recent HIV problems have caused 'Porn Valley' in California to institute thirty day HIC testing, not all Porn is made there. (Just most of it).



You did miss the point....Its not a new test for say...You pay $110 dollars and your HIV results are in the next day, the rest are in in 3 days....So basically in 3 days you have all your results. You seemed to miss what me and Vicki were trying to explain to you because you were too quick on the defensive...

I didn't think I went defensive, but interpretation is in the eye of the beholder. Did you state there was a three day waiting period in an earlier post? If so, I truly apologize, I missed it.

Great discussion by the way. I appreciate the info on the new tests.

[Vicki Richter]

Not 3 days. They are talking about the international community. American porn is fairly well regulated for the most part.

[Toro]

Am I missing something here? There are places in NYC where you can get your test results in 20 minutes for $95 - which would seem to have a window narrow enough to safeguard against infection after the testing. I'm not sure if the other tests are more accurate, but why wouldn't this test be the one used?

I also get pissed that it's not something readily available for people to use at home. I know that if a positive result comes up, the person would need counseling desperately and that's a large reason why instant home testing isn't around, but wouldn't the fallout be less deadly if you could buy something to use at home? I am also aware that it might make people use condoms less, but I still think the benefits would outweigh the danger. It might not be the most romantic thing to do before you hook up with a new partner, but to me, saving a life is a pretty romantic notion.

Also, I haven't read anywhere on these boards about the 'incubation period' between the moment you are infected and when it actually appears in your tests. I have asked doctors and heard anything from 1 week to 6 weeks. That means if you had sex and got infected on any given night, you might not yield a positive result for 3 weeks. THAT'S where the real danger is. I'm not terribly educated on the details, but isn't this an issue?

[Vicki Richter]

The test you can get results in 20 minutes is the shitty one not the PCRDNA.

[MaxiJavi]

Vicki


The test you can get results in 20 minutes is the shitty one not the PCRDNA.

Forgive my ignorance on the subject ... I am probably asking something that has already been explained :-(

How do you know which is which test ? What is the one you girls do and how do you go about getting one of those ?

I thought the shitty one was pretty cheap and wasn't effective until up to a few months after actual infection ? I don't see the point in getting the result after 20 mins if it is that crappy ... :-)

Cheers

[Toro]

The test you can get results in 20 minutes is the shitty one not the PCRDNA.

After some research...
The PCRDNA tests specifically for the HIV virus; the ELISA tests for antibodies. The antibodies can take up to 13 weeks to develop, but the virus presence would be detected in cells right away (the results are available usually within 48-72 hours), and if a PCRDNA comes back negative it's usually confirmed with an ELISA 13 weeks later.