INFORMED CONSENT is a must! Nothing else will do because someone in our industry is HIV+

Yesterday Talent Testing added a new test at no additional cost to performers. Almost immediately the FSC came out swinging, saying it’s not an accurate test and that it will cost $15 more per test.

I Googled’ the test and found that it has a 99.8% level of accuracy for both HIV 1&2. That’s crazy accurate. How much more accurate do they want a test to be?

Rather than identifying the HIV virus itself, these tests look for specific proteins (antibodies) that are produced by your body in response to the infection. They’re highly accurate.

This new test is the standard test offered by most UK clinics, as recommended by the British Association of Sexual Health and HIV (BASHH). It detects HIV-fighting antibodies produced by your body (like the Ab test does) but also the specific p24 antigens found on the surface of the HIV virus itself. These antigens are detectable in your body earlier than the antibodies are, so they can give an accurate result after a shorter window period.

Then I found out the FSC tried to make people think this test was pointless and would only increase the cost of the bi-weekly test. Talent Testing isn’t charging an additional $15 per month for this, it’s free. Talent Testing isn’t going to charge performers more for this test. So why would the FSC do this?

I then read something on Twitter, “FSC is trying to twist what the antibody test is for by saying it’s for new infections when it’s to determine who is currently Positive and taking ART so performers have true informed consent. It is just strange how every other testing facility in America utilize both the antigen and antibody test by CDC guidelines, but FSC refused to follow suit. When they claim to care about performer safety! ~ KP

And you know what? That makes sense to me.

Why else would they react in the way that they did to the news that Talent Testing was offering this free test?

So to be clear those who use Talent Testing, you get two kinds of tests for HIV.

  • – HIV-1 NAT
  • – HIV Ag/Ab

HIV-1 NAT is the standard test, the main one that matters most. The NAT system, which was approved for use in 2002 by the FDA, can detect HIV and HCV infections in blood donors earlier than other screening tests because it detects viral genes. This is the one that looks at your “viral load”. This is the main test used in the industry to determine if someone is HIV positive.

The new test, HIV Ag/Ab is what people commonly refer to as an antibody test. This will let you know if anyone has the HIV antigens known as the protein or p24 and from what I’m told, this will show up, even if a person is on their meds, suppressing their viral load.

Why is the FSC fighting so hard to keep us from knowing that the person we are working with is HIV positive?

Informed consent matters. Nothing else will do.

Why is the FSC fighting so hard against this?

I want you to read this tweet. Read it carefully because I’m about to drop a big one on your ass.

This person who legally we can’t name, we can tell you recently won an AVN award for his (or her) scene in a movie they performed in for Evil Angel.

This person has had sex either directly or indirectly with at least 11 performers in the mainstream talent pool.

This means they either had sex with someone in the talent pool or had sex with someone who had sex with someone in the mainstream talent pool.

This person was also on a set, 9 days after the last breakout/shutdown. NINE DAYS.

Do you really think you are safe knowing this?

This is an active performer who also does content trades on the regular.

Be safe and don’t accept any test from a performer that isn’t from Talent Testing and that you’ve personally verified as valid through the Talent Testing website.

Trust no one.

 

 

8 Replies to “INFORMED CONSENT is a must! Nothing else will do because someone in our industry is HIV+”

  1. mharris127

    Fair enough. This is what people have been talking about on here for years — having both what is usually referred to as an ELISA test and the PCR-RNA test both being required. I hope this forces the FSC to mandate both HIV tests for performing in this industry. No one with HIV or AIDS would be able to perform using this methodology. As far as outing the HIV positive performer, I would do it and let my errors and omissions insurer deal with the lawsuit if it comes to that (you all do have journalistic errors and omissions insurance, don’t you — I would certainly have one if I ever served as a reporter for a site like this). Mike did it for years and the only lawsuit he had to deal with didn’t have a damn thing to do with outing these people. A physician or employee of a medical facility cannot out the person. A journalist can (discuss with your attorney but this is the way I understand HIPAA — it only binds health care professionals) and in order to prove malice or libel/slander the person would have to prove he is not HIV positive in court to hold a journalist liable. This is why you pay for that errors and omissions insurance policy — so you can take a chance when journalistic integrity and the societal good require taking a chance like this.

  2. Fabrise

    Strange Coincidence maybe. Remember the AHF president Michael Weinstein was pushing condoms in the porn industry or even worse forcing the use of condoms and perhaps later into our homes was later found out may have owned Life Styles condoms or had a financial interest in it. I hope no one here is getting kick backs for Prep or Truvada

  3. Mike South

    I said this for years…glad to see this finally being addressed…The FSC is about to get national exposure on this i expect..I talked to NYT just yesterday about it

  4. Mike South

    HIV positive performers is insanity in and of itself but not notifying talent is criminal….and let us not forget I exposed this years ago…and guess who owned stock in the company that makes truvada….if you guessed lepew you guessed right…hope he gets his sorry ass feet held to the fire over this

Leave a Reply