@jilted

Lol…OIP was a dead giveaway 😉

Saw this which is why I lmao about Kernes using a report with no data to refute data making its way through standard process.

Btw…if data has no verifiable source…it isn’t data and can’t refute or debunk jack shit.

PS,,,,jake is jilted,,,I did not know that “Jake” had logged onto my laptop this morning, sorry if that caused any confusion. I tried to edit the comment and post it under jilted but the time limit to edit comments had expired.,

And before tha Kazoo goes crazy with a conspiracy theory here just let me ad that I made the same mistake a few times when Gene Ross was printing my articles on Adultfyi about 10 months ago, several times calling me “The Samuri” and some other name that I cant recall right now. So Rob, just remember, alot of the things you have ragged on me about here,,,your buddy Gene had been printing my stuff for quite a while, since your show has been on the air, and you never had any problem with it them.
PS,,,Rob, you show today hit some great points, well done,,,except for that part about wanting to put a bullet through my head.

Here’s that John Hopkins study regarding the last survery. As usual the industry never questions the methodologies used in any report that seems favorable to them, while automaticl dismissing any negative report as ‘flawed.’ But lets take a very close look at page 7 of this report.

There is a graph on this page created by the author based on numbers that he says “Application of the CDC methodology calculating period prevelance to the AFI chlamydia gonnorhea and chlamydia data I RECIEVED for years 2004-2010, yeilds the following prevalence estimates.(then there is a box of stats)

So exactly what does “Data I recieved” mean, and who did it come from, who complied that data, and what methods were used to compile that data? (now, remember my post the other day about the old AIM trick,,,”we did 3000 tests last month,,,but really on tested 1000 people) Dr. Mayer here then does the same thing, using the number of tests, not the number of patients as his denominator.
Lets make it simple for y’all, using nice easy numbers and just gonn/chlam. 100 performers get tested 12 times a year, . Thats 1200 tests. And during the entire course of the year lets say 5 of these 100 people every month test positive for one os the diseases. At the end of the year that means 70 of the 100 people caught an std, 70%…..But if you say 70 out of 1200 thats a much lower percentage.

How come nobody in the industry questioned where Dr. Mayers numbers came from. Every month, because my lab systems were able to compile stats much easier than AIM,,,I would put together a spreadsheet of stats,,broken down by gender, multiple tested patients, previous positive results(to track those at high risk), and myriad of other criteria. To say the least, I have no clue where he got these numbers, and quite frankly I doubt anyone whoever spouted their support for this report knows where they came from either.

Like the old saying goes, when the numbers don’t fit your need, find numbers that do.

The author also makes the statement about the general public no testing as frequently as porn performers. Of course they dont, because the general public rarely has near the number of unprotected sexual contacts as porn performers either. It only makes sense that an educated adult who chooses to have dozens, if not more, unprotected sexual contacts in such short periods of time would get tested more often. ONLY IN PORN

Simple question, Kernes, Ackworth,Stabile, Bueller,,where did the numbers that Mayer says “I recieved” come from, and what methodology was used to compile those numbers?

No single study can ever be all inclusive but it’s a disappointment to not see alcohol listed to see if marijuana number is a reflection of legalization or use as an alternative to alcohol. Aside from the growing trend of marijuana use the other numbers seem like they might apply to any major US city without regard for regional differences.

The surprise for me as far illegal drugs goes is how low the figures are. The study says 58.7 percent of performers use marijuana but I don’t consider that to be a hard drug. Many times when someone says that another person does drugs, he or she is not even thinking of Marijuana. Marijuana is much more socially accepted then it used to be. This study also says Cocaine is used by 20 percent and Methamphetamine by 5 percent. One of the things to keep in mind is that these figures include both casual and frequent users (one person may do something once a month and another person may be a daily user).

Gay or straight is relatively insignificant, since 75% of the participants are female. It’s only significance would be if the 24% who tested positive for gonorrhea and/or chlamydia were made up entirely of gay men or TS performers who never wore condoms – but since at least some of the non-female participants were probably straight men, you have to have a very unusual set of circumstances. The large percentage of women says that some segment of those with STDs were female. Since its pretty tough to pass on an STD via girl-on-girl sex, even if some of the women are gay in their personal lives, they probably got an STD through male/female sex.

@lacey

Description about using west oaks to skirt pass is exactly why I tend to believe AHF about forth and fifth mystery performers last year…anyone with half a brain and concerns that they didn’t dodge the bullet this time would have been stupid to show up at a PASS facility in the middle of that mess. Outside folks in direct line of liability risk no one really cares who leaked test info but plenty care that it happened and don’t care to chance it happening to them too.