![]() |
NEW HIV plus just reported
In fairness XBiz broke it...but I will get to the bottom of it ;)
No info on who it is All they are saying is that he tested positive, he/she worked condom only and they dont think he/she got it on set Now guess who released that info? if you guessed APHSS “We wont know anyones status” you guessed right. I will follow up on this. |
that's just peachy
|
Gentlemen, plug your anuses.
Hide your hoes. |
The page via XBIZ:
http://www.xbiz.com/news/163936 |
Quote:
|
Quote:
so if its female look to a wicked contract girl (this is really really really unlikely) but also remember the source is APHSS "Not even we will know your status" The truth will come out though...always does meantime anyoine that knows anything is welcome to back channel me....your anonymity is guaranteed. |
wow, that sucks.
|
Quote:
|
So someone caught HIV who only worked with condoms, yet they think it was caught off the set where they obviously didn't have sex with condoms? One then needs to ask, why only work with condoms if you're willing to screw off cam without them?
That makes as much sense to me as girls without dicks. |
Quote:
|
well consider the source so far is APHSS what does THAT tell you?
APHSS says they dont get results. How did they get this one? How do they know it didn’t happen on set? was it a gay performer? Where did APHSS get the idea that it didn’t happen on set? What do they base that on? You probably know most of these answers as well as I do, apart from the fact there’s another HIV positive performer APHSS pulled the rest out of their ass. |
I'm sorry I didn't see this thread when I posted this... https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1112538
|
from the sword
http://thesword.com/exclusive-gay-po...y-measure.html According to multiple sources, The Sword can confirm that a male gay porn performer has tested positive for HIV. The positive results came back after routine testing for a scheduled shoot with Men.com. Given that Men.com’s shoots are condom-only, it’s highly unlikely that the performer contracted HIV while on set. Also, the performer is said to have worked “exclusively” in condom-only productions. When reached for comment, Free Speech Coalition’s Diane Duke confirmed the single case of HIV: An adult performer has tested positive for HIV. This performer worked exclusively on condom only sets. As a precautionary measure, APHSS is providing retests for the small number of performers with which the infected individual had performed. All retests have come back negative and there is no indication that any transmission—including that of the positive performer—happened on set. Duke would not confirm or deny where the performer had worked (or even his gender), but The Sword can confirm that multiple models working for Men.com (including one Men.com exclusive) have been contacted by APHSS and have been asked to come in for a retest. So far, no other results have come back positive. Again, it’s important to reiterate that all of Men.com’s shoots are condom-only, and they have (quite clearly) a testing protocol in place. Meaning, the system worked and caught what it was supposed to catch. |
Quote:
|
So basically, condom only porn DOESNT protect adult performers from contracting HIV.
But surely AB332 being law should have prevented this from happening, I mean, wasn't that the whole reason behind passing this little law? :helpme |
Will be waiting.
|
Quote:
he jumped out of an airplane and his parachute failed to open, therefor you dont need a parachute to safely jump out of a plane because it might not open anyway...WTF? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
THAT is why the law got passed... Allegedly... Nothing to do with stifling the industry in Cali... |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Using condoms (or not) on set had nothing to do with this performer being found to be positive, it was the fact he was tested, which the vast majority of the industry has been doing for many, many years. How exactly did ab332 help protect this performer in this instance? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
What *I* am saying is that the law got traction because people who voted on it were under the impression the performers were catching HIV from producing porn... We all know this isn't and hasn't been the case except for what 2 performers in the last... 10 years or so? |
So... during a hardcore gay anal sex porn shoot, a condom never broke once? Sounds legit.
But I guess if everyone else tests negative then they can rule that out completely, unless someone has a false negative. Mike, do you know if the performers (at risk) will do a few rounds of testing, or is it just one? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Here's what I find interesting...
from AVN... http://business.avn.com/articles/vid...TE-521362.html 4:25 p.m. update: AVN received an official comment from Manwin: “Third-party producers creating content for Men.com have been requested to cease all production until further notice. Men.com will wait on the APHSS to confirm when production may resume.” Manwin has distanced themselves from the director... now he/she is a third party producer... which in legalese means if someone caught HIV on set its not our problem go sue the "third party producer." |
Quote:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...4004422AATmcJx |
Quote:
Your second mistake was repeating what it says. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Sometimes it's almost too frustrating to read what's posted here at GFY. An adult performer has tested positive for HIV. This performer worked exclusively on condom only sets. As a precautionary measure, APHSS is providing retests for the small number of performers with which the infected individual had performed. All retests have come back negative and there is no indication that any transmission?including that of the positive performer?happened on set. As of this article.... 1. We do not know where this performer contracted HIV. 2. We DO know that it did not spread from performer to performer on set. 3. We DO know that testing identified it. Perhaps this performer contracted HIV from a non industry related partner. Regardless, at this point, this should be viewed as a win / win all the way around. In the gen pop, according to the CDC there were 47,500 reported new cases of HIV in 2010 and an estimated 1,148,200 persons aged 13 and older were living with HIV infection in the United States, including 207,600 (18.1%) persons whose infections had not been diagnosed. Source |
I thought most gay performers had HIV. So this guy is the only one?
|
Quote:
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/basic/ |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Your fourth mistake was sticking with Yahoo Answers. |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
HIV is not good.
|
Quote:
|
Gay performer, shoot was for men.com...end of story.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Anytime ANYONE gets HIV it sucks. :2 cents: |
Quote:
Either way, you know enough to know you're dealing with mostly switch hitters and the fact that everyone is OK with that pretty much says everything about the industry that needs to be said. |
I see more bareback content than ever these days, nobody fucking cares
|
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:54 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc