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.
Bringing you all the insider information from the xxx industry.