Here it is jilted! Where Mike said that It was Jen.

@BT
Yes/No? Not arguing law here..I do see a parallel
Civil -McNeil/JJ nine years fighting…closed settlement with plaintiff.
Criminal laws created for product tampering
FDA- forced all pharm to change production process
Beyond FDA many other regulatory agencies were also involved.

By saying they were held accountable, I don’t say they were at FAULT or WRONG, only that as a result McNeil/JJ and EVERY other pharm had to change how they did business.

AFI rightly defends “creation of their unique product” but is no less responsible for the safety of that product and it production PROCESSES start to finish. AFI has been fighting infringement on the development and production processes.

LaCHD stepped out of Vivid Lawsuit..rightly so..foolish to spend on protracted litigation vs services…now WHY are they dropping out? Did they lose interest..no. Other Agencies are fighting their battle and they expect to achieve their goal.

OSHA …OPIM-STI draft will be amended, drafted and enacted.

FDA isn’t applicable to AFI product creation, they were the regulating agency for Tylenol case. That’s the parallel

Before OSHA draft it was all or nothing, once it gets approved I expect its amended form to offer flexibility for condom free production as well as mandating safety measures.

Alex is just the latest public event in this saga. HepC is just one of the exposure risks society has been trying to address while preserving the first amendment rights of creation/production.

LurkingReader: McNeil/J&J did not accept liability in the Tylenol case. The settlement was sealed. Tamper proof bottling is required by the FDA. It is not a result of the civil suit, which dragged on for 9 years. Lotsa cool stuff in that case; none of it relevant to Alex Gonz and Hep C.

Well Lacey I must say I tested positive at AIM for chlamyadia they treated me with pills then I was told that by law they had to send paperwork to the county health department that was there protocol so if its still the same county would have to know how many people in the industry do test positive for a std. So I don’t know how that can be a cover up by CET. But it is a good question about how FSC would know, and what would be there reason. At CET you have a choice to be put into the aphss database its simple if you have a green check you can work and a red x you can’t. If you have a red x that doesn’t necessarily mean you have a STD it can also mean your test has expired. So I really don’t know how the FSC knows how many std’s are actually in the industry. Now about John Stagliano, what a few people have heard including myself is John called Cameron’s agent out of concern and told him he’d be more than happy to talk to Cameron since hes had HIV for years. But again that’s hearsay too. So what is the real story, who knows except maybe John himself.

Yep jilted…now look to DOJ, EEOC etc
OSHA is there after you get the job…lots of others are there before you get job.

@BT
Yep..settled out of court..accepted liability.
despite no knowledge, intent, etc the product did harm and now knowing (it could be tampered with )they must prevent it.
Lotsa cool stuff in that case.

But it is illegal to make the employee pay for it. THe testing in the OSHA draft might be deleted. If you are NOT YET an employee, then OSHA has no authority. IF the wording becomes something like, “After being hired you can test employees for a,b,and c, to determine their suitablilty for specific jobs that might involve the risk of OPIM exposure. Its a fine legal line that will be hashed out by the lawyers.

And CAL-OSHA cannot pass any regulation that is not at least equal to the Federal OSHA standard, which very well mean the deletion of the ‘no comdom if tested” part of the proposed regulations.

This crap about illegal to test/screen for HIV as part of employee fitness…is crap. Already happening…PCR is HIV screening and not only legal but included in OSHA draft.

The laws about no preemployment HIV testing relate to from employer insurance to keep rates down and Discrimination due to ignorance about HIV.
Companies fought back and case law exists allowing employer to exclude HIV+ to prevent occupational harm to employee. (Haven’t looked to see if it was based on antibody or viral load testing)
Okay to exclude HIV+ but not okay to tell WHY they got excluded.

Agreed on OSHA. However, OSHA has to bring the action. If a private citizen – meaning talent – is going to sue Alex Gonz – or the production company – they have to prove damages to prevail. That’s just the way civil suits work. Now, if OSHA wants to bring an action, that’s a different matter.

Tylenol is actually an interesting point to bring up. The deal is that someone tampered with the product and laced Tylenol products with cyanide in the early 1980’s. Seven people died. The case was never solved.

Their families sued McNeil/J&J, the maker of Tylenol. The lawsuit dragged on for nine years and never went to trial. McNeil/J&J settled out of court without the case ever going to trial. So, there was never any determination as to whether McNeil/J&J knew or should have known that their packaging could be tampered with.

So, how do you know it was Jen? Does it come from a confidential source? For Jen to have done this would constitue a felony on her part, punishalbe by a $25,000 fine, and six months in prison. And to wrongfully accuse her of this would be slander.(I wonder if this is why the source for this information wishes to remain anonymous) I would think that if you’re goingto accuse somebody of committing a felony you would at least let the person being accused know who the accuser is, wouldnt that be fair? An anonymous accusation of felonious behavior, sound like FUCKING BULLSHIT to me. But then again, the only person I have seen accuse Jen of illegally leaking this information is Mike, unless Mike is just repeating what was said elsewhere, and that is his source, possibly Rob Black.