Rod Daily tweets hes HIV Postitive

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by christianxxx

I don't understand your argument. how would condoms help prevention of HIV? let me say this again, NO ONE HAS CONTRACTED HIV ON A PORN SET IN OVER 9 YEARS AND THOUSANDS OF SCENES. How much lower can you get from 0?

two tested performers contracted the virus OFF CAMERA. When they went to test so they could perform in porn scenes, they tested positive and were removed from the talent pool. No one else tested positive. Just like in 2010 with Cameron Reid.

again, just because someone has the virus, doesn't mean that he is automatically going to pass that virus on to a partner. Unless he gives her an anal creampie, shares a drug needle, or gives her a blood tranfusion with his infected blood. the HIV virus isn't easy to pass.

Darren James did like 20 something scenes in 2004 while carrying the virus. He gave it to 5 girls, all of whom he cream pied anally. the other 10-15 girls he performed with non-condom did not get the virus.

---

two people who perform and get tested contracted the virus off camera presumably because one person gave it to the other. you're saying that it hasn't happened on set, but isn't that a technicality? that's the point i'm trying to make. neither one of them just caught out of the air. as you say, it is a hard virus to catch.

also cameron bay was clean according to a test done on july 27. she only re-tested because she heard about alex gonz having hepatitis c. the re-test was two weeks later i believe and that's when she found out about the hiv. had she not gone for a re-test she could've worked for another couple of weeks with the virus. would she have infected everybody she worked with? no, but it could've happened.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by christianxxx

Darren James did like 20 something scenes in 2004 while carrying the virus. He gave it to 5 girls, all of whom he cream pied anally. the other 10-15 girls he performed with non-condom did not get the virus.

---

So that's a 1:4 chance of getting it if you have anal sex with someone with HIV?

Posted by Christian: "the person receiving the anal creampie has to have a low enough immune system to contract the virus"

You do not need to have low immune function to contract HIV. I am not arguing the rest of it because I don't know precisely how effective the tests are, what the exact window period is, or the precise number of times sero-discordant people have to screw for the uninfected partner to get infected.

http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/policies/law/risk.html

Here's a cdc link with some transmission statistics. There's a lot of useful stuff on this site.

Edit: http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/39/4/1064.full
This other link says that risk of transmission from receptive anal is 1.4%, a significant number.

I don't really know how anyone can reason that condom use wouldn't reduce risk. I'm not saying it should be mandatory because I think people should be allowed to make their own choices. But it must be statistically less risk to have performers tested so that the status is known to as great an extent as possible, but then use condoms to lower transmission rates.

I say status known to as great an extent as possible because if testing were infallible and there was no window period then there would be no difference in risk between condom and no condom use as long as people were tested right before sex. But we know that's not currently the case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seanchai

So that's a 1:4 chance of getting it if you have anal sex with someone with HIV?

---

no i am saying its 0:15 for vaginal and 1:1 for receptive anal creampie in that specific Darren James instance from 2004

also the same holds true for Marc Wallice in 1998 with his faked tests, none of the girls who had vaginal sex with him contracted the virus and 100 percent of the 8 girls he did anal creampies with did contract it in that specific instance

humans will be humans thats the problem ... as a model you never really know what other people are upto off camera ..

I escort and because of that there are models in the uk that will not shoot with me ... Yet these same models are plastered all over swinging sites lol .. irony eh :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ew86riv

also cameron bay was clean according to a test done on july 27. she only re-tested because she heard about alex gonz having hepatitis c. the re-test was two weeks later i believe and that's when she found out about the hiv. had she not gone for a re-test she could've worked for another couple of weeks with the virus. would she have infected everybody she worked with? no, but it could've happened.

---

no, how is she giving the virus to anyone on set? transmission female to male vaginally is extremely extremely extremely low and anally not much higher....

i see your point, but its more valid using Rod Daily as the example. Thankfully these are fringe performers who work 2-3 times a week at most. The biggest fear in the straight biz is one of the top males who work 6-7 times a week contracts the virus and becomes able to infect others early in his valid test window.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by broncofan

I don't really know how anyone can reason that condom use wouldn't reduce risk. I'm not saying it should be mandatory because I think people should be allowed to make their own choices. But it must be statistically less risk to have performers tested so that the status is known to as great an extent as possible, but then use condoms to lower transmission rates.

I say status known to as great an extent as possible because if testing were infallible and there was no window period then there would be no difference in risk between condom and no condom use as long as people were tested right before sex. But we know that's not currently the case.

---

both condoms AND testing reduces risk. unfortunately, non condom scenes produce more sales for all companies across the board. ultimately consumers believe no condoms in a scene is a fantasy that they want to see. that fact (or that producers believe its a fact) means non-condom porn will be in demand forever. If condoms are made mandatory and enforced in California, you will see producers move to Vegas, then Miami, then London, then Australia, then the next location. Once Pandora's box has been opened, its not going to close. Again, this isn't for everyone, there are companies who will become 100 percent condom just to get away from the government scrutiny, but the majority of companies will simply figure out a way to get around it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seanchai

So that's a 1:4 chance of getting it if you have anal sex with someone with HIV?

---

You may want to break out your computer and recheck your math calculating that probability...

http://www.pc-history.org/TRS80mod3.gif