AB1576's Rediscovery Of Testing: A Move Forward Or A Trap Door??

Of all of the developments involving Isadore Hall's recent bill, AB1576, to force condoms and other "barrier protections" in all porn shoots, the most interesting is their evolution involving performer testing.

In the past, the party line expressed by Hall and his mentors at the AIDS Healthcare Foundation was that testing, especially the testing regime currently used by the industry, was an utter failure that did nothing to protect the performers from STI's, including HIV, and that mandatory condom usage was the only tried and true solution.

However, with this latest effort, it seems that Hall and AHF have warmed up to the notion of mandatory testing, to the point that his current effort now includes a requirement that performers prove that they were tested no less than 14 days prior to shooting a scene, along with proof of using "barrier" protection.

Seems like Hall and AHF is reaching out to FSCPASS and meeting them halfway, right??

Not so fast. The car might look new, but a check under the hood for the actual details support a different, less altruistic agenda.

Keep in mind that the 14 day testing protocol is voluntary for porn studios. Most, due to cost considerations, can't afford a 14-day test, and instead go for 28 or 30 day cleared tests to allow their performers to shoot, along with varying degrees of condom protection. Some are condom only (such as Wicked and VIVID), and some are more optional, leaving that choice to the performer or producer.

AB1576, however, would force studios to undergo and pay for mandatory 14 day tests on nearly all of the standard STI's (HIV, Hepatitis A/B/C, HPV, chlamydia, gonnorhea, and syphilis), as well as require they use condoms, dental dams, and all other forms of barrier protection. Sure, Hall and AHF say that they only would require condoms; but they rely on the emerging CalOSHA standards for "bloodborne/sexually transmitted pathogen" protection, which does require the use of "personal protection equipment" as a form of "barrier protection". The CalOSHA standards would also forbid any proximity of sexually oriented body fluids to unwrapped "sensitive areas" such as the mouth, genitals, or anus..which would forbid facials, body shots above the navel and below the knee, and even perhaps oral sex without "protection".

The record keeping requirement that producers and studios keep and make accessible to health officials personal medical records of all performers depicting their test results and the degree of protection used in their scenes is already enough of a constitutional and personal privacy nightmare.

But that's not even the worst part of the proposal. The real devil in the details is in the type of testing for HIV that AB1576 would require, and how that could potentially backfire in a catastropic way.

Remember that the PASS standards use the most current and accurate HIV tests available at a cost....namely, the Aptima test, which is capable of catching the HIV virus within 6-10 days of initial infection. It has become the gold standard of rapid testing for screening out cases of acute HIV infection, a point that is vital with preventing the spread of the virus to other performers.

Problem is, though, Aptima is NOT the standard that the Center for Disease Control and Prevention or AHF uses for their HIV tests. They prefer to use the old and true ELISA antibody tests for initial screening, backed by viral load testing such as PCR-RNA or Western Blot for confirmation of a positive.

The problem with that is that antibody and antigen testing for HIV is notorious for not catching acute HIV cases, and have nearly a 60-90 day latency period where the virus can remain undetected. Now, no one doubts the accuracy of antibody testing for detecting HIV antibodies; but when you are trying to isolate acute cases before they spread to others, especially when it comes to shooting sex scenes that can go on for hours on end, having to wait 60-90 days for a positive or negative confirmation of getting infected isn't just a nightmare for the performer awaiting his fate; it's money out of his wallet.

Not to mention, the required moratoriums that force general work stoppages while testing of first- and second-generation screen partners of any potential infectee can cause serious impacts on performers and studios alike. I know of a model who was burned by the two back-to-back moratoriums while attempting to travel from Florida to California to shoot scenes; she now draws the line at performing only with condoms. (Out of respect for her privacy, I will not name her.)

The trap door, though, is this: AB1576 does not require performers or producers to get the latest and best testing for HIV, it simply states that they be tested under the guidelines set forth by CalOSHA and the CDC...guidelines that assume testing through ELISA-based assays.

Do you see the ultimate result here?? Studios not wealthy enough to afford the 14-day testing regime (i.e., those not owned by MindGeek) and overwhelmed by the requirement of full documentation of their testing regimens, would be the most likely to cave in to AHF's demands for mandatory condoms as a "fall back" in compliance with the potential law...and they would also be the most likely to cut corners for profits by offering their performers fly-by-night testing scams. Like, for instance, the quick and free OraSure OraQuick HIV swab tests made so famous by Mike South in his latest escapades.

Or, a fledgling porn producer could simply borrow some of South's mythical powers of reasoning and interviewing to clear a performer for shooting scenes, without all that need for actual testing.

Or...scared performers could just pull a Mr. Marcus and fake their tests in order to continue to shoot films and make money, because condoms would save them. Except, that they break, and they don't protect against all STI's.

Thusly, AHF and Izzy Hall create a wonderful illusion of safety, that covers up a free fire zone for performers. The big studios who will more than likely keep 14-day mandatory testing, but also be forced to include condoms, will survive as usual...though some will probably react by moving their businesses out of California altogether and taking their chances going underground in a less protected venue. The condom companies will get free placement and unwilling users, and will drown in the cash of respectability for "making safer sex hot". The medicos will fulfill their promise of using porn performers as unwitting guniea pigs for "safer sex". And, the communitarians will have one more piece of government regulation as a means of "behavior modification" and controlling a suspect population.

Whether this will actually do anything to reduce the pandemic of HIV or other STI's in the general population, or merely force performers into much less safe venues to fulfill their craft, or simply force them to quit and take their chances with less sexy exploitation, remains to be seen. Needless to say, considering how the current "sex trafficking" scare is now being used to suppress and slander sex workers and their clients, I have my doubts.

Sorry, Assemblyman Hall and Mr. Weinstein, but I'd much rather that performers themselves have the choice of how best to protect themselves, not be the unwilling and forced participants in a shell game.

AB1576, like all the other condom mandate bills before it, needs to be defeated. Like, yesterday.

Mike South: Proudly Spreading Ignorance About STI Testing In Porn Since 2003 (Pwnage By Sharon Mitchell And AIM, via AVN)

It's one thing to be deliberately obtuse and out-to-lunch about something as important as a person's health. It's another thing entirely to maintain that ignorance for an extended time.

You all know by now of the exposure to bright sunlight of the recent travails of Mike South, part-time porn producer/director/webminister, and full time gadfly/critic of the LA porn industry and its testing system for STI's.

Michael Whiteacre of The Real Porn Wikileaks has been running a series over there revealing South as a grand hypocrite who mocks LA producers for not forcing condoms down their perfomers throats and not universally testing them for every single infective threat, while he relies on oral swab tests, no condoms, and his own "common sense"/ESP/Spider-Man senses/boner blood as his own screenage against STI's and HIV.

As it turns out, though, South's "expertese" in HIV testing goes a long way back...like even before the initial Darren James/Lara Roxx outbreak hit in 2004. And, the need for real experts to correct his errors go back just as far, too.

The following is a repost of an article that was posted to AVN.com back in June of 2003, where AIM Medical Foundation director Sharon Mitchell responds point-for-point to some comments Mike South made at his blog the weekend before. South was responding to a viewer/reader asking questions about the testing regime used back then; and apparently, the answers he gave didn't quite tell the whole story.

You will note, of course, that the PCR-DNA test that was the gold standard back then has now been itself upended by the Aptima test, which further cuts the latency period down from 14-30 days to 6-10 days. Also, the "protease inhibitors" that used to cloak HIV+ readings for viral load or antibody tests do not affect DNA-based tests or Aptima; and neither do the more recent "retroviral" drugs now used today as treatment for HIV+ people. Other than those caveats, what was said then is as much true today.

I will simply reprint the article in its entirity; the original can be found by clicking the title.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Who's At Risk For HIV — And How Do You Know? Mitchell Answers South

Over the weekend, Mike South, a producer/director in the adult video business and Internet columnist, answered a question from a reader who asked him to explain the differences between the RT-PCR/PCR-DNA test(s) and the ELISA test. Since AVN is in the process of preparing a series of articles on healthcare within the adult industry, we asked AIM Healthcare Foundation executive director Sharon Mitchell to comment on South's answer to his correspondent's questions. What follows are South's answer, broken into its component parts, and Mitchell's comments on each part, with some amplification questions from AVN Senior Editor Mark Kernes: 
 
Mike South: The Viral load tests measure the amount of virus in a blood sample by one of two methods. The first, the PCR is a process by which the RNA is chemically treated to cause it to replicate itself, the idea is to induce replication to a high level, then measure that level knowing that the replication factor is a constant. This is called an indirect test because it indirectly measures the amount of RNA in the sample. 
 
Sharon Mitchell: That's a PCR-RNA test. 
 
South: The second called bDNA, this is a direct measurement of the RNA. The sample is treated to induce the RNA to lumenesce [sic] or "glow" the amount of light given off indicates how much virus is present. 
 
Mitchell: That's a branch DNA test, which is a form of an RNA test. It's still a viral load test. We do neither the bDNA nor the RT-RNA. We do PCR-DNA. 
 
Mark Kernes: When Mike South says, "RT-PCR," that's incomplete? It has to say either RT-PCR-DNA or RT-PCR-RNA?
 
Mitchell: That's correct, and we do the PCR-DNA, not the PCR-RNA.
 
South: The problem with these tests is that they are only accurate to about forty parts per million, below that point the virus is undetectable. Someone who has HIV and has been on protease inhibitor drugs can fall well below this level and the tests determine them to be HIV Negative which they clearly are not. They are also most certainly still capable of passing on the virus to someone else. 
 
Mitchell: That's all correct, bearing in mind that "forty parts per million" is equivalent of 400 copies per milliliter [see below], but it refers to the PCR-RNA test. 
 
South: The ELISA test tests for antibodies to the virus to be present in your system, even though you may show no signs of illness 95% of all people will develope [sic] antibodies to HIV within 3 weeks of exposure.
 
Mitchell: No, no. In fact, some people can go without developing antibodies for six weeks to six months, and while six weeks may be great for the general population, it's not good for people having multiple partners in porn. And remember, we are using monitoring. We're not looking for a one guy/one time diagnosis here; we're looking for monitoring based on every 30 days by PCR-DNA — not RNA, not viral loads. That's why USA Referral [a testing referral service] is not a good facility for that very reason. 
 
Kernes: So the first time someone came into you, if you gave them an ELISA test and it showed negative, they could actually have been HIV positive for up to six months and you would not necessarily be able to see it on the ELISA test? 
 
Mitchell: Yes. That's why we don't use the ELISA test. 
 
South: This "window period" is in reality no worse than that of the PCR tests, and may even prove better in some cases. 
 
Kernes: He's talking about the PCR-RNA test, apparently.
 
Mitchell: Right, I know, and this is all relevant to PCR-RNA, but we don't do PCR-RNA. We can't afford to wait for the window periods of an ELISA or RNA. 
 
Kernes: So an ELISA test and a PCR-RNA are really about the same in the sense — 
 
Mitchell: No. One's an antibody test and one's a viral load test; they're two entirely different things, but they're not effective for this population when dealing with monitoring. 
 
Kernes: So if someone had HIV and was not taking protease inhibitors, and got an ELISA test and a PCR-RNA, which one would be likely to detect the virus first? 
 
Mitchell: Well, it depends. Now, remember, HIV is going to surge in the first 18-30 days, so if you're catching it early, HIV-RNA is going to show a sky-high viral load. But if we're not catching it early, there'll be some viral load and it will be relatively over 400 copies per milliliter, and that could occur any time, at any point. But usually when I've done the RNA tests, I've done them very early because I've done them as a confirmatory after ELISA, Western Blot and then RNA, after a positive PCR-DNA. 
 
Kernes: So they're confirmatory tests for you?


Mitchell: For us, yeah. 

Kernes: And even then, the tests may not confirm because depending on a variety of circumstances — how long the person has been positive; whether or not they're taking protease inhibitors — the only one that will actually show that they have the virus is the PCR-DNA. 

Mitchell: Correct. In this case [see below], the RNA will mask the virus because they still have HIV but they're undetected, and the patient can still transmit the virus at least 15 percent of the time. Therefore, the one that we depend upon in case someone is trying to hide the fact that they have HIV is PCR-DNA, because it will always show the virus is detected. 

South: I am surprised that AIM would not offer the ELISA test if you requested it, specially since it is the ONLY HIV test that is recognized by either the CDC or the AIDS Foundation as a valid HIV Screen. 

Kernes: Why would you give the PCR-DNA in preference to the ELISA test or the PCR-RNA test? 

Mitchell: Because of the window period. It's not three weeks; it can be minimum six weeks to as long as six months, and that's most of the time. Young, healthy people, for the antibody to mature, could take a lot longer than your average Joe, and we're dealing with young, healthy people between the ages of 18 and 25. And also remember, we're monitoring for the HIV disease every 30 days. That's key here. It's a monitoring system.

Kernes: Is the ELISA test the only test that's recognized by the CDC or the AIDS Foundation as a valid HIV screen? 

Mitchell: I don't know.

South: PCR and bDNA testing are emphatically stated as NOT to be used as an HIV screen. 

Mitchell: That may very well be, but again, they're dealing with average, everyday people, everyday tests for the general population. We are dealing with adult entertainers for pornography and this is a system that has kept HIV successfully out of porn since the inception of this Foundation in 1998. 

South: Some companies and performers have been mislead [sic] by AIM so make sure that the person you are going to work with knows that you have not been tested by AIM, but have tests from a certified independent [sic] lab. I only accept an ELISA test but some in porn valley [sic] may only accept a PCR test, until they have been educated to the facts. 

Mitchell: He's got the wrong facts. PCR-DNA is the one that will always show the virus. PCR-RNA is the one that hides the virus. I've got the proof right here. 

[Note: To support her statements, Mitchell produced two tests given to the same HIV-positive individual who is currently taking protease inhibitors, the standard treatment for HIV: A PCR-RNA test, which indicates that the individual is "Within Range Result" with "Fewer than 400 copies/ml" of the virus, which would indicate to a physician who had no idea of the person's actual HIV status that the person was HIV negative; and a PCR-DNA test, which indicates that the person is "Outside of Reference Range" and is "Positive" for HIV.]

Kernes: So if someone in porn attempted to work with just an ELISA test or just a PCR-RNA, what would be your advice to their partner or to the company that's employing them? 

Mitchell: Do not do it. To a performer, I'd say you're putting yourself at risk because these two types of methods, ELISA and PCR-RNA, are hiding HIV at its earliest, and you may be working with someone that just has gotten HIV — it's not going to show up on either of those tests — or you may be working with someone that's HIV positive that's on medications and is not showing up on this RNA test, that can still transmit the virus 15 percent of the time. PCR-DNA test always will show up, and that's why we did this experiment here with Kevin. 

Kernes: And on the PCR-DNA, the virus can show up within seven days?

Mitchell: No. Let's say minimum 14, to 30. We've seen it at 14 days.

Kernes: But it will definitely show itself by 30 days? 

Mitchell: Absolutely.

Why People Living In Glass Houses With Busted Septic Tanks Shouldn't Talk Sh*t About Others: Mike South Exposed As A Hypocrite...And WORSE

Blowback can be a real bitch sometimes. There is a saying: The things you do and say will come back on you, like bad food. Whichever end it comes out of, however, says a lot about you.

For amateur porn producer and profoundly loud critic Mike South, that saying is even more prescient today, in the wake of current events.

Michael Whiteacre over at The Real Porn Wikileaks has been running a fine series of articles there exposing South for the hypocrite and double talker he seems to be.

Most of you know Mike South as one of the most verbiose critics of the Free Speech Coalition's testing protocols and of certain performers in the Los Angeles-based porn industry. Along with his protege, "President" Rob Black, he has been on a rolling campaign from his North Georgia base to support the drive to mandate condoms in all porn shoots, while all along smacking his lips about how superior he is in locating and shooting talent.

Needless to say, that "superiority" took some major crotch blows this week, thanks to Mr. Whiteacre and TRPWL.

It began with an expose post last week where TRPWL relayed the story of a performer named Jessica Chase, whom had attempted to shoot some porn with South in Atlanta for his websites (and for possibly creating a website for her), only to experience all sorts of hell. The actual article goes into full detail of what Ms. Chase endured; here's just a brief sample:

Jessica Chase picks up the story from there:

I go down there with him, we stay at Lindsey Lovehands (who is a sweetie). Come to find out, she had no idea that we were supposed to be shooting (only South knows how that happened as he set up the shoot because it was for [our] website). She and I get it together the next day and do our two shoots (one for her site, one for mine).

I let South know I was upset when I found out that there were no more shoots. So I ask, “What shoots do I need for my site that I can actually do?”

“Oh, a bj video,” he says. I’m like, “why didn’t you bring this up when I had a room full of guys, one being a male friend when I shot the Bukkake for you?” I didn’t get a straight answer other than,” You can shoot your bj video with me.” I declined, due to the fact that he is supposed to be a producer, not talent, and frankly I’m not stupid, so I angrily left Florida and returned to Ohio.

And so it was that Mike South didn’t get his blow job.

As for the matter of the COD package sent via UPS, unsurprisingly there’s more to that, too:

About half-way back I remember my company airbrush tanning equipment is at his house, where I had stopped to follow him to Florida. He had ridden his bike, so I took my airbrush equipment etc. out of my car to make room for his stuff. I text[ed] him to let him know, to which he said that he would ship it COD to me once he returned home from Florida.

He found he had to pay money to ship his photography stuff, etc back to his house, as he couldn’t fit it on his bike, and thus began a huge Mike South tantrum. This tantrum included not giving UPS correct addresses his nor mine, even after I told him my address again and what needed to be done.

The article provides support through emails and texts provided by Ms. Chase to TRPWL.

For his part, South simply dismisses Ms. Chase as a "bimbo" and a "dumb bitch", and responded to the original article with his customary "Consider the source".

Problem for him was, that was just a foreshock, albeit a decently sized one. Yesterday, came the proverbial follow up, and it was The BIG ONE in comparison.

In the follow up piece, Whiteacre expounds on Jessica Chase's travails with Mike South to reveal what could be one of the greatest hypocrisies of all time: The man who incessantly attacks the porn industry for not meeting his high standards of HIV/STI protection, not only doesn't follow his own standards, but actually violates them with impunity.

Turns out that in those shoots that Ms. Chase did with South for his sites, he only used a quick instant swab test (OraQuick) for HIV, provided for by the male "talent" (who was also not even paid for their efforts, BTW), instead of the expanded testing regimen (HIV-Hepatitis A/B/C-Chlamydia-Gonorrhea-Syphilis) required by the FSC-PASS protocols. And..he didn't ever require condoms, either.

In fact, for one particular shoot, South allegedly even blew off the fact that Ms. Chase's testing period had lapsed beyond the 28 day period, and told her not to retest, though she offered to do so, because he didn't deem it necessary....because there was no "penetration" in his scenes. "Penetration" in this case refered to vaginal and anal sex; the scene actually shot was a "blow bang" featuring oral sex and facials.

It would be deliciously ironic were it not for the fact that the same Mike South was blasting out posts galore busting LA's porn scene for not mandating condoms and doing more to protect their talent from the apparent STI pandemic that was supposedly ongoing. Or, that the same Mike South had the sac to label as a "moron" and an "idiot" a 30 year veteran of porn and a certified registered nurse whom had more knowledge about STI prevention on the ground than he could ever get.

But, even all that pales to the most ironic aspect of all this: the entire point of the South/Black/AHF condom mandate campaign is to effectively destroy and dismantle the FSC-PASS testing regime and replace it with mandatory condoms reinforced by "local" decentralized testing that would be "free" and based on the OraQuick HIV swab method...in short, the very system that South used against Jessica Chase.

Never mind that the proposed CalOSHA "bloodborne/sexually transmitted pathogen" regulations would also ban facials and require condoms for oral sex acts as well (unless the performers involved take Hep C vaccines and are cleared by approved medical personnel); I guess that South would probably consider that a win since that would shoot down competition for his amateur porn market. If those regulations were adopted by his own state's OSHA, though, South would be out of business....and let's not also forget the fact that Georgia isn't exactly a porn friendly state, either.

And as for South's claim that his "commom sense" approach would beat across-the-board universal testing in screening out STI+ individuals....well, I'll just let Michael Whiteacre hit that knuckball of a lie out of the park in conclusion (bolded emphasis added by me):

And how does Mike South claim he prevents STI transmission on set?

No system is perfect but common sense goes a long way….maybe that’s why in 20 + years in this industry not one person on any of my shoots has ever contracted any kind of STD. Ever.

But then I won’t shoot just anyone either, I have an interview process and if I don’t like her answers (or his) I don’t care how hot they are I ain’t shooting them.

I can’t think of a girl I didn’t stay in touch with for quite some time after we shot, but that’s because (partially) I interview most of them in person at least twice prior to shooting so we kinda becomes friends.

South on LIB, April 25, 2012

So, Mike South claims he has special powers: the ability to determine someone’s STI status, or their scene partners’ risk of contracting an STI, based on talking to them twice.

As I told South at the time, “Those are anecdotes, Mike, not data, You know better. It also assumes the performers in question actually know where they caught it and/or desire to tell you. That’s not science and it’s not logic either.”

Setting aside the fact that, without a universal testing AND monitoring/surveillance system that could access records of the test results of all performers with whom he worked both before AND AFTER they worked with him, South could not possibly know for certain whether any of his performers had ever contracted an STI.

Does South honestly expect anyone to believe that 20 years ago when, for example, he shot scenes in hotel rooms at adult conventions, when testing was not what it is now — and new talent went from room to room shooting scenes — some performer showed him even a one or two-day old test, and he can somehow be 100% sure that “not one person on any of [his] shoots has ever contracted any kind of STD”?

People lie about their STI status, people can be mistaken, people can fail to get a follow-up test, etc — it is exceedingly difficult to determine where a sexually active person who is doing scenes contracted an STI, or transmitted an STI – but it is scientifically impossible to know this if one can’t look at a tests for EVERY performer before and after the scene. People walk around with STIs for YEARS without knowing they even have them.

And when Mike South tells people not to bother getting tested, they WON’T find out.

It was just this kind of "Trust us" mentality that led to Marc Wallace, Darren James, Derrick Burts, Mr. Marcus, and Cameron Bay/Rod Daily. And if folk like Mike South get their way and get to dismantle the testing protocols that have worked, there will be plenty more.

Let's Play Porn Scare Whack-a-Mole!! Clover Finally Gets Cleared; Lisa Ann Goes SuperSleuth And Defuses Another Bomb

One thing about the porn industry....never a dull moment. One scandal gets defused; another one rises up from another hole. (No pun.)

This weekend, not one but TWO potentially dangerous situations that could have spelled disaster emerged and were diffused, but not before the usual suspects and peanut gallery shouters got in their licks. Fortunately, so far, no actual injuries or casualties, but there's been more than enough flak thrown to muddle up and confuse people who might be following....so, for your viewing pleasure and as a public service, we will try our best to clear things up on both fronts.

First, we have the Great Syphilis Scare, Part Deux...the one where both porn blogger/gadfly Mike South and the AIDS Healthcare Foundation were all a gaga over the potential propaganda gains when a performer was reported to have tested "positive" for syphilis. Unfortunately for them (and fortunately for the rest of us), the tests turned out to be more "inconclusive", and follow up tests ultimately cleared the performer, named Clover. Today, both the porn talent agency group LATATA and the Free Speech Coalition's APHSS testing system officially announced that Clover had been cleared to perform again, and that all was well that ended well. Some questions may remain about how the tests turned up "inconclusive" to begin with, though there is the possibility that the cause was the hypersensitivity of the TrepSure test used by the industry for their syphilis tests. But, in any case, we can close the book on this one.

The second sitch, on the other hand, is still an ongoing project, though it too managed to resolve itself before anything dangerous happened. What makes this story interesting is that it took the actions of a performer icon going rogue on her own to resolve the potential crisis.

And when that performer is none other than Lisa Ann (aka Sarah Palin's Worst Nightmare), it kind of turns heads and raises eyebrows.

This isn't the first rodeo for Lisa Ann, either, when it comes to independent calling out. Remember a while back that she was the one to bust the Internet radio show Pornstar Babylon when she caught original Syphilis Scare Dude Mr. Marcus doing the live dirty on Jessica Bangkok's show, and promptly raised Twitter hell. When the dust settled, Bangkok (along with Debi Diamond and Christy Canyon) was pink slipped, and Manwin was forced to enforce their "NO sex on radio" code.

During the original syphilis scare of last year, LA was also one of the strongest critics of the original plan of protection devised by APHSS in the midst of the panic, requiring all performers to undergo treatment through taking a series of vaccine shots. Her objection was that those who were not infected should not have to risk the aftereffects of taking unnecessary treatments that could potentially backfire.

Let's just say that Lisa Ann is not known for being quiet about things she does not like. And she will use her power to call out those she thinks are threats to the industry.

And last Sunday night, on her Twitter live stream (@TheRealLisaAnn) she went off long and strong. I'll just let the full text of her tweetage speak for itself.

These are all cut-and-pasted snapshots from LA's Twitter page; due to the extended length I had to break them down into segments. Plus, you have to read from the bottom tweet up for each segment.

Again, please read from the bottom up for the correct sequencing.

Segment #3:

 

Segment #4:

The website Lisa Ann is talking about is the APHSS "whitelist" page of performers that are cleared to perform pursuant to testing by the two major testing centers, Talent Testing Services and Cutting Edge Testing.

I believe that the picture is becoming a bit clearer as to what LA is implying: an agent is basically allowing a performer who potentially might be spreading a pretty nasty infection to game the system and continue performing in spite of a positive test kicking him out of the "whitelist". 

But, wait...it soon gets real. As in....really REAL.

That is what you call proactive intervention.

"Free Speech" = Free Speech Coalition, for those of you playing at home.

And the outing of LA Direct Models may ring some bells, because Lisa Ann has had a bit of a rivalry with that agency -- in particular, it's chief boss Derek Hay -- going back to the days when LA had her own autonomous talent agency, Lisa Ann Talent Management.

 

Here's how Lisa Ann concluded her Twitter bomb:

But, she didn't stop there....she then went over to XBiz.com and busted out a few more details about the potentially tainted performer and the testing debacle. Quoting from their article posted on Monday:

Lisa Ann said she found out on Wednesday, Aug. 7 that she was booked to work with the performer on Sunday, Aug. 11. She immediately requested the performer's test in advance of the shoot, which is part of her routine. She said she has worked with the performer before but not for about three years.

She said the performer sent her a photo copy of his test electronically and she noticed it was from LabCorp. Tests from somewhere other than Cutting Edge Testing (CET) or Talent Testing Services (TTS) are not typical, Lisa Ann said.

She said that because it was unusual that the performer presented her with a test from LabCorp, she was compelled to call both CET and TTS to ask if the performer was available to work. "I got a verbal from both sides that he is 'unavailable' to work," she said.

Then she logged into the Free Speech Coalition's Adult Performer Health and Safety Services (APHSS) database to check the performer's status, and his status was listed as "unavailable."

Lisa Ann said that LabCorp does not test for Hepatitis unless it is requested, and that CET and TTS just temporarily began testing for Hepatitis B and C in June. Neither provide the Hepatitis test now, unless it is requested and an additional fee is paid for it.

She said she believes the performer is positive for some type of Hepatitis because "it's process of elimination, and plus other people knew about it when I talked to them."

But the performer still had been planning to work with her on Sunday had she not canceled the scene herself on Thursday, according to Lisa Ann. She also claimed the week before last that the performer in question did "two gangbang scenes and an orgy."

For their part, the FSC, through their CEO, Diane Duke, verified LA's story, with the additional caveat that the APHSS system of testing relies on the trust and good faith of performers and agents and companies cooperating with the protocols to ensure prompt action.

Duke continued, “I don’t have proof of what Lisa Ann had suggested, so I can’t speak to knowledge that that has happened. But what I can say is performers or anybody who has been marked 'unavailable' on our database from cause should not be performing. And anybody who supports that person performing, that’s unacceptable.”

Lisa Ann said she has "had some banter" with the performer in question about his tests since she canceled their scene. She told him, "if you don't do something about this, I'm going to the county health department." According to Lisa Ann, he told her, "I don't know what to say."

Lisa Ann would not name the production company that booked her with him.

"The systems we have are working, but it's your responsibility as talent to call in and get a verbal or to log into APHSS's database," she said.

Duke echoed Lisa Ann's point.

“Producers and directors and performers have to use this system in order for it to work. Producers aren’t even paying for it. There is absolutely no reason why people should not be using this system," Duke said. “We can only hold the industry so accountable. The industry has to be responsible and hold each other accountable. We’re providing the service, we’re providing the doctors and approved testing protocols and testing facilities.” 

"People trust us," Lisa Ann continued. "They don't think we will bring them an irrevelant test."

Also, later that evening, XBiz posted an addedum containing the response from Derek Hay of LA Direct Models, denying Lisa Ann's charges and citing the inconsistency of the testing system.

Derek Hay, owner of LA Direct Models, which represents the performer in question, told XBIZ Monday, “The adult industry does not currently require someone to demonstrate negative test results for Hepatitis in order for a performer to be cleared to work. The current demand is for an HIV test by Aptima. Gonorrhea, chlamydia, and syphilis is provided by Trep Sure and RPR tests by TTS, and only Trep Sure by CET.

“As far as the allegation that Lisa Ann has made I cannot comment other than to say I have no evidence that supports her allegation and any information that we have at the agency shows him testing cleared for work. And through all of the last three to four months when what must be the time period that Lisa Ann alleges a positive test result, we have no record or information that he has not been cleared for work. Based on her public allegation today we are doing some investigative work to review if there is any truth to her allegation, but have nothing of substance from which to investigate.

"I will first be recommending to the actor that he be transparent and truthful at all times and likely that means test at TTS as soon as possible to dispel any doubt."

Hay also noted that only “a minority” of production studios currently utilize the APHSS database.

“The majority of studios set their own testing policy which always includes the four or five tests previously mentioned showing negative results. And the period of time from date collected to the date the test expires varies between those studios. Some are 14 days, some 15 days, some 28 and some are 30.”

And then the next day, LATATA got into the game with their own statement mirroring that of Hay and also announcing that Talent Testing would add Hepatitis C screenings to their regular testing panel. (Cutting Edge had been offering Hep C as a supplemental screening since June). In that statement, LATATA founding member and ATMLA founder Shy Love also publically denied Lisa Ann's claims of a positive test, citing that all the tests they had access to had come out negative.

The most damning statement of all, though, is that no studio has seen fit to include Hepatitis B or C testing as a reason for blacklisting a performer, even though the performer cited was in fact taken off the "whitelist" and flagged as "unavailable". That has been a sore spot with many performers, and one of the major propaganda points of groups like the AIDS Healthcare Foundation in their crusade to impose mandatory condom usage for all performers.

The irony of it all is that both CET and TTS had integrated a program during the month of June adding Hep B/C screenings to their panels at no additional charge. On Monday, TTS announced that they would revive the program through the month of August as a precautionary measure.

And as for Lisa Ann?? Her response to the antics of LATATA and LA Direct was to the effect of: "Not impressed."  (Also reposted at Mike South's blog)

 Well I TOO can release an official statement.. and here goes…

 Sure LATATA and anyone else can imply that I did not have the information I needed to make such claims, but can they prove me wrong? If so, I would be thrilled. Thrilled to know no one in the industry I love so much is sick. That is not what anyone wants for anyone that is here.

 Too further address the fact that I am not privy to the information of someone elses health records, you are correct. But I am privy to common sense, I am also wiling to apply that common sense to satisfy my own research and to protect myself and the health and well being of MY business.

 It was not difficult for me after hearing some talk in the business and then getting to actually see the outside test come in to my phone, i knew I got asked to work with [name of possibly infected performer redacted] for a reason. A reason much larger than a scene. The reason was to do my homework, which I did. My first phone call was to Derek at LA Direct Models, I asked him some important questions. First question was “Derek, do you let your talent work with Talent who have tests that are NOT from CET or TTS” . he said “NO”. I then asked why he would have one of the Male Talent that he represents through his agency, that is active on his site, testing at Lab Corp. Derek tried to deny it but then he went on to mention there was an issue about it on another set, but he wasn’t sure what it was about …

NOW I CALL BULLSHIT.. Derek knows everything that goes on on every set because thats how he watches his money. So Please don’t try to pull that with me. I have been in the business longer than Derek, and by the looks of how this is playing out, I will be in the business a lot longer than him too.

 Rightfully so. For those of you who read the Statement from Derek on XBIZ, he states the industry does NOT require a clean Hep test in order to shoot.

WELL HELLO Derek, thank you for admitting you knew about this. You came clean in your own, round about way. You are guilty, but since the Industry doesn’t require a clean HEP test, as you said, you will keep [redacted] on your site as available to work in sex scenes.

 What I do want and need is, for those who are more worried about money than  the health of the industry to get shut down. If you are an agent and you are allowing you talent to go to set with a Test from a Center outside of the parameters of the Testing Centers we all go to, well then you are wrong, and more so, you need to be shut down. If you are trying to say it is ok to work with a test that proves you have an illness, but you state that the industry doesn’t require you to be clean of HEP, well you are a sicker mother fucker than even i ever imagined. Like being the largest illegal PIMP and pushing your girls to escort and be in unsafe situations off set. Now you want us all to be unsafe on set as well.

 Don’t anyone forget that I worked at LA Direct Models for a year. I learned a LOT that year. I have enough information to do what ever i need. But that would do nothing for me.

Protecting this business does EVERYTHING for me.

Thank you,

XO LA

Obviously, we will follow this as it breaks.

[Addedum: The statement by Lisa Ann posted at Mike South's blog reveals the name of the potentially infected performer; I have decided to redact his identity here pursuant to standard BPPA policy.]

Why Mike South Should Be Treated As The Alex Jones Of Porn Gossipers: The Latest Syphilis False Positive "Scare"

You may not have noticed it this week, but the adult industry just escaped yet another nuke in the form of another syphilis "outbreak".

A performer named Clover whom originally tested "inconclusive" for syphilis last week and was temporarily quarantined as a precaution, was ultimately retested through the services of the Free Speech Coalition's APHSS protocols, and found to be clean.

But this post is less about how the system of performer testing once again worked to avoid a major disaster. This is about how certain people, in particular one person, took it upon himself to invent and inflame the controversy to begin with, for no reason other than to satisfy his own long term vendettas and myopias.

That's right, Mike South, I'm looking directly at YOU.

(And BTW, this is Anthony talking, not Ernest, Nina, or anyone else. This rant is mine and mine alone.)

When you and your "detailed sources" decided to dive head first into that empty pool and report initially on the "NEW SYPHILIS OUTBREAK!!!!!!!!!!!", did it ever even bother you to even ask the actual performers involved? Or, to defer your victory celebrations until actual confirmation of the positive test had been verified by medical professionals? Oh, wait...who needs verification when you can just fling more of your shit at the FSC and APHSS, like you have been doing for, I don't know, the past 10 - 20 years?? It's not as if every charge that you have flung at them has been proven dead WRONG, right, Mike?

Does it ever even bother you, Mr. South, that the only other sources parroting your squawking about a "porn syphilis epidemic" were Monica Foster, Shelley Lubben, and the AIDS Healthcare Foundation?? Considering the level of credibility these three actors have when it comes to performer testing, let alone the not so hidden agendas against the industry they all pursue, it probably would have been a good idea to slow your road a tad and at least wait until the tests came out?

Oh, and on the subject of AHF....boy, were they really quick to use you as a convenient foil to fire off TWO press releases in less than 24 hours, in their attempt to milk the panic for all its worth. What better way to prove to the masses that this dirty porn industry just can't be trusted to protect their performers, and that AHF through their newly created City of LA Health Department should run to the rescue with boxes of condoms to save the day!!

Oh, I know, LA County DPH is the main reg agency, and they have to be the ones to investigate any porn outbreak once they get a confirmed and verified positive test....which they never got. But, hey, why let such irrelevancies as protocol and legality get in the way of such a wonderful crusade? Tens of performers are being INFECTED even as I type this!!! WE MUST ACT NOW!!! Perhaps that should have been the red flag for you, Mr. South, to stop for at least a millisecond? Oh, no, we can't do that, not when we can bury FSC and APHSS for good and the final coup of AHF and Cal-OSHA and Rob Black and Gail Dines can be completed and bareback porn banished from the face of the earth!!

So now that the entire "outbreak" scam has unraveled quicker than a dandelion in an April wind, Mike, do you decide to...be a man about it and admit you were wrong and that Clover deserves an apology, and that the system developed by FSC/APHSS actually WORKED?

Ahhhh....nope, you decide to spin it as part of your continuing vendetta against FSC and APHSS, splitting them and Manwin (your other pet pinata) off against LATATA and Clover. Sorry, Mike, but it doesn't sell, since APHSS does indeed control the testing, and since Talent Testing and Cutting Edge Testing have buried the hatchet and actually coordinated with the agents to make the testing work.

Of course, the key element in all this was Clover not panicking and trusting his instincts that he was clean all along and that the '"inconclusive" tests were really false positives based on the strength and intensity of the TrepSure arrays used for the syphilis testing. Imagine if Clover had only relied on the propaganda you and AHF were swilling out, and assumed that he was indeed  "positive" for syphilis, and then attempted to pull the same act that Mr. Marcus did last year. Oh, what am I saying, you STILL would have convicted APHSS and FSC of spreading the virus...smearing them is simply part of your porn DNA by now.

Since Clover has now been cleared, all of this is now a moot point....but I still find it fascinating how you attempted to pull other performers into this through indicting Manwin for the two female performers whom had not been reached by LATATA by last Monday (but were ultimately reached by FSC later).

And please, Mike, spare us your attempt to split the difference regarding your support for AHF and the condom mandate. We know you have supported their efforts openly for the past 2 years through attacking their critics, so don't sell us the "unattached" line. It makes your alliance with Rob Black and Shelley Lubben (and possibly Gail Dines) that much more unseemly.

Now, I am NOT an insider who gets any sources from anyone; I write from the perspective of a fan and an advocate of consensual adult porn; so that makes me as much an outsider as anyone. But, I do have eyes and ears, and I can read; and as such I can see for myself who's being real and who's pushing BS and rumors. I can be as critical of the FSC as the next guy, but in this case of this latest "scare", they acted immediately and promptly to do their job, and thankfully everyone came out OK.

Well...everyone except those who invested themselves in priming the pump of fear in order to soothe their ingrown prejudices and stroke their old vendettas. For those people -- yourself included, Mike South -- there is not a pit in Hell deep enough or hot enough for you to melt in.

Oh..and Julie Meadows and Kayden Kross gives their best regards.

Porn Panic 2012: Oh, Great: Just What The Doctor Ordered..Disunity!! The Great Testing War

Never let it be said that an industry as dysfunctional as the adult film industry can't find new and different ways to bite their own hands.

It's bad enough dealing with Michael Weinstein and CalOSHA and the condom mandate, but now there is an emerging dustup over modern testing standards that threatens to blow the entire industry standard to smittereens.

Basically, the issue is a war of words between two testing agencies: Talent Testing Services TTS), and Cutting Edge Testing (CET). The former has been one of the primary testing services for porn performers since the demise of the Adult Industry Medical (AIM) Foundation; the latter was formed directly out of the ruins of AIM itself. The latter also happens to have one big advantage: it's backed by the Free Speech Coalition, the main lobbying group for the adult industry, via its main protocol agency, the Adult Production Health and Safety Services (APHSS), which essentially rebooted AIM's old protocols and database and upgraded it for the present.

You will recall last year in the latest HIV porn scare where a performer was found to have been tested positive for HIV, only to find that the series of tests turned out to be a false positive due to contamination of the original sample. You will also recall that the performer had used TTS as his backup test after he was first found to be "reactive", then he switched over to another clinic that was backed by APHSS, which verified the false positive. That raised some barbs from some, since TTS had opted not to be a part of APHSS, citing both costs and "performer choice". Also, FSC had noted that their protocols required any testing agency to have an in-house doctor on staff to verify the accuracy of their testing, which TTS didn't have. It was soon after that episode that Cutting Edge Testing was born, offering updated tests with results as quickly as 24 hours after the needle draws blood, and the latest and greatest testing procedures.

And about those tests?? Well, here is a description of them from the FSC website:

Second, APHSS accepts the Aptima HIV-1RNA Qualitative Assay and the Abbot RealTime HIV 1 Assay HIV PCR tests. After considerable research and contact with infectious disease specialists,pathologists and physicians, APHSS determined that these two tests best meet the needs of our performer population. Both tests have the 9 to 11day window. The Aptima test is sanctioned by the FDA for detection and diagnosis of HIV. The Abbot test is sanctioned by the FDA to determine the viral load of HIV–the amount of the HIV virus present. While the Aptima has been FDA approved for diagnostic, the Abbot test has been identified by experts as an excellent option for the industry because of the doctor’s ability to know the value of the viral load.  The purpose of the initial HIV test is to screen for the presence of HIV, not to diagnose. If a performer tests positive, an additional diagnostic test will then be administered–regardless of the initial test’s brand.

The controversy here is that the Abbot test is sanctioned only for viral loads, but not for diagnosis of HIV (in that, it's similar to the old Western Blot test that was part of the old AIM regime of testing), while Aptima is more related to the old PCR-DNA tests. CET, being an APHSS-sanctioned facility, uses both tests; TTS only uses the Aptima test for their standard.

Nevertheless, for those who prefer TTS either because they personally prefer their facilities or they don't trust CET for its "monopoly" and its backing by the FSC/APHSS, it has become a burning issue with them..especially concerning what they perceive as a power play by FSC to make CET into the one and true gold standard of testing, and freeze out all others.

One particularly not-so-happy performer is Shy Love, who just so happens to be the owner and manager of the Adult Talent Managers - Los Angeles (ATMLA) talent agency, which manages the careers of well over a hundred active performers. She has been one of the more active antagonists against what she sees as CET's "monopoly", as well as what she percieves as the FSC/APHSS' drive to control and standardize performer testing, what she sees as nothing more than a shakedown by the FSC to raise money for their organization.

She is reinforced by other critics of the FSC, including director Nica Noelle and performer January Seraph, who originally questioned the security of the APHSS database when it was formulated last year, as well as former producer, now porn critic, Mike South, whom has been a long-time opponent of the FSC and their stewardship of the testing process.

Mark Kernes has a nice breakdown of the entire donnybrook over at AVN.com; here's how he summarized the debate between Love (backing TTS) and FSC/APHSS:

"Talent Testing Service's requirements were requested by [Free Speech executive director] Diane [Duke]," Love stated. "All requirements including doctors—they have a doctor on file. They said it's done. Diane had also requested that if someone came out positive, that there would be counseling done. TTS had agreed that if someone came out positive, with their new HIPAA paperwork that they had, they had the right to have that person converted over to the APHSS system, where they would provide the counseling. They said they had no problem; that was done. The last resource [sic] was, their APHSS system, to enter the data of positives/negatives into the system so APHSS could have it, TTS told them that they were breaking HIPAA laws and against the law because that actually puts the man in charge, so if there's an error, they're liable, but that there is a program that a programmer can put into the back of the system, which at the time Manwin has said that they are willing to pay for the programming and everything else so that that information can be put into the back of the database, and that requirement was met. So all three requirements that Diane had requested..."

However, when AVN's Roy Salter brought up the objection that there was no doctor at the TTS facility when the performer's blood was drawn, Love responded, "No, the doctor is available. The doctor's the one that writes the prescriptions. Diane's issue was, she wanted the doctors to be the ones to contact the patient if they came out HIV-positive, and by law, the doctor does not have to do that. They can actually have a licensed HIV specialist who is a counselor contact the patient directly to notify them of the circumstances, and if APHSS was going to be doing the counseling, at that point tell them to come in to retest, go to APHSS for counseling, which we fixed all that in two seconds."

Duke made the point, though, that in order to fulfill APHSS's protocols, testing would have to be ordered by a California-licensed physician, which TTS does not currently have. 

Moreover, TTS has previously stated that it would immediately report any positive HIV performer to the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health even before any confirmatory test had been done, which would likely result in the shutdown of the industry for as long as a month before even a false positive could be sorted out.

 Or, more likely, in the wake of the condom mandate law, a total seizure and takeover of the industry testing protocols by AHF and an imposition of the condom mandate..which would be far, far worse.

At any rate, the debate seemed to be reaching a stalemate.....that is, until The Gorrilla arrived and put his feet down.

That would be "The Gorilla" as in Manwin, the holding company that has essentially taken over porn production overnight via its holdings of sites like Brazzers, MoFos, Reality Kings, the Playboy collective, Digital Playground, and other sites/production companies. It was Manwin companies who got nearly singed in the last porn panic, since it was accused that Brazzers had allowed the "positive" tested performer to continue to shoot videos while his tests remained in limbo...a charge that was publically leveled by none other than Michael Weinstein of AHF during his attempt to milk it for the condom mandate campaign. And, it was APHSS who rescued Manwin out of the firepit by offering alternative testing that ultimately cleared both the performer and Manwin/Brazzers of any wrongdoing.

Naturally, such good deeds do not go unrewarded. And, when you are the King, you can really, really, really reward. Once again, AVN.com recites the tale:

Manwin Sets New Production Standards

LUXEMBOURG—Manwin has decided to set new best practices regulations for all performers and third party producers hired to create content for its websites.

In its proposal, Manwin supports the system put in place by the APHSS, while also moving beyond the standard industry practice of 30-day interval testing.

The APHSS has set forward a best practices guideline and system that allows performers, producers, and agents to create a controlled work environment.

It includes consistent standards and guidelines for testing and treatment of adult performers, a secure database that ensures performer privacy and protects producer liability, protocol for performer support in the event of a positive HIV test result - including testing of 1st and 2nd generation partners—as well as health and safety resources provided for producers and performers.

In other words..APHSS/FSC is Manwin's choice. Sorry, TTS, but...Scoreboard.

But that wasn't the real game changer in that announcement.  THIS was:

Following months of research, and meetings with various doctors and medical experts from the most respected universities and health institutions in North America, Manwin has decided to implement additional rules for anyone involved in producing content for its sites.

The company will require FDA-approved tests from the clinics listed on the APHSS.org website, specifically the HIV-1 Aptima RNA Qualitive Assay. In addition, the company will require 15-day interval testing for performers.

As of July 1, 2012, adult entertainers performing in scenes commissioned for websites belonging to Manwin will have to provide health tests that are no older than 15 days. Manwin will pay for all additional tests needed under these new rules, in case a performer works for any of the company's brands multiple times in a 30-day period.

Manwin expects producers, performers and agents to be in full compliance with these new regulations, and looks forward to working with the FSC in setting the highest possible standards for the industry.

To summarize, Manwin essentially revolutionized the art of performer testing, by narrowing the window of testing from 30 days to 15, and even backed it up with the option of footing the dime for any performer having to work for any of their sites in multiple scenes.

Oh, but that's not all, either, Clones. Some talk the walk, but it takes real money to back it up. Is this real enough for you??

Manwin Donates Gen Probe Aptima Machine to Cutting Edge

 LUXEMBOURG—Following its decision to enforce stricter health rules and guidelines for its producers and performers, Manwin has purchased the Gen Probe Aptima machine for Cutting Edge Testing.

This piece of equipment performs the Aptima RNA Qualitive Assay, the FDA approved test that Manwin requires as part of the new health standards and procedures from producers, performers and agents.

While researching its new guidelines, Manwin collaborated with various North American health experts and organizations. During this time period, Dr. Peter Miao became a great source of information and support. The renowned infectious disease expert, who was part of the original team of physicians that encountered HIV infections in 1981, oversees the Cutting Edge Testing center.

“Aptima testing by Gen Probe has been available for many years, and is approved by the FDA for the diagnosis of acute HIV infection," Dr. Miao said. "At Cutting Edge Testing, we are now transitioning to the Aptima test for screening of HIV [infections] very shortly."

Manwin is pleased to support Dr. Miao and Cutting Edge Testing.

“This demonstrates Manwin’s concern for the health and safety of all the performers and the industry as a whole,” says Dr. Miao. “By their generous gift, we now can move ahead and perform the Aptima test in the very near future.”

Manwin hopes that the donation will help Dr. Miao and his team continue their work in providing optimal health services to adult entertainment professionals, as well as the public at large.

Yeah. That pretty much settles the case of who Manwin trusts, doesn't it?

The basic reactions from the porn community to this can basically be reduced to two polar opposites: "Whoa!!! Manwin's bringing the porn industry together and finally fighting for performers!!!  KEWL!!!" and "Yeah, right...all Manwin's doing is taking everything over so that there will be nothing left for the rest of us!!!  BOOOOOOO!!!!" I guess that only time will tell who turns out to be right.

And as for Talent Testing Services...well, there is now a movement afoot to get them integrated into the APHSS orbit, so that they can get with the Manwin program, and possibly get themselves some of that green sunshine. (Remember, they already perform the Aptima test long before CET did.) Maybe that can defuse some of the flame throwing now going on.

And then again, there will be folk like Mike South who will dismiss the entire thing as a sideshow circus that detracts from what he considers to be the fundamental flaw with the entire system: the dependency on the databases and the possibility of another breach like what happened with AIM via the original Porn Wikileaks and Desi Foxx, the refusal to add testing for other STI's like HPV, herpes, and syphillis, and ultimately, the refusal to adjust to the new enforcement regime from AHF/LA County/CalOSHA that still may override their best efforts to avoid the condom mandate. Once again, time will either vindicate or crucify his analysis.

And of course, we'll follow everything as we always do here at BPPA. Because we can.

More analysis from Dr. Chauntelle at PVV here; and some from Lydia Lee (channelling Julie Meadows once again, happy to announce) here (also check her podcast here, too).


Update: Uh-oh....seems like Manwin might have spoken just a bit too soon. From the latest post by Sean Tompkins over at The Real Porn Wikileaks:

Manwin is forcing people to test at a certain place as a condition of them getting hired. Manwin insists that all talent pay for the test themselves unless booked more then twice in same 30 day period.. This is a clear violation of LC Section 222.5

No person shall withhold or deduct from the compensation ofany employee, or require any prospective employee or applicant foremployment to pay, any fee for, or cost of, any pre-employmentmedical or physical examination taken as a condition of employment,nor shall any person withhold or deduct from the compensation of anyemployee, or require any employee to pay any fee for, or costs of,medical or physical examinations required by any law or regulation offederal, state or local governments or agencies thereof.

Now I’m not a lawyer and I’ve never played one on tv so I could be wrong.

Now, this would get into the debate over whether a porn performer really is an employee or an "independent contractor"; not to mention the fact that California law expressively forbids using HIV status as a condition for denying employment.

There's also been a genuine Twitter debate going on now between Charity Bangs, a performer who is signed with Talent Testing and has raised serious issues about the "monopoly" practices of Cutting Edge Testing and its alliance with FSC/APHSS and now Manwin; Michael Fattorosi (aka "Pornlaw", who has offered some prime legal opinion on the entire episode), and Keiran Lee, Brazzers' main "stud" performer, whom has also raised some astute questions.  

HIV Porn Panic 2011 Update: "Patient Zero" Possibly Exposed, Brazzers.com (In Florida) Implicated

[UPDATED: Scroll to bottom.]

Remember, the following information is still speculation, and should not be assumed to be the absolute truth until it is verified.

More information is being released this morning about the background of the most recent HIV porn scare. It's a bit convoluted, so try to follow me.

This morning, AdultFYI.com reposted a blog entry by former porn agent Mike South in which the latter "outs" the alleged "Patient Zero" at the center of the crisis. Pursuant of this blog's stated policy, I will not give out the name of the performer (though, both AdultFYI and South obviously do at their sites), but I can give out some other information via the blog post by South, which was reposted by AdultFYI.  (Redacted to protect privacy and presumption of innocence)

"What is troubling is that he tested positive and still worked, that is undisputed what is disputed is whether he tested negative after testing positive using the same methodology.

"A positive test should ALWAYS be confirmed with a Western Blot no matter if its PCR or ELISA, retesting with another test that isn't Western Blot doesn't mean anything.

"Only the Western Blot can confirm a positive test.

"The really fucked up part is the Director also reportedly knew that [redacted] had tested positive, but let him work on the basis that it was believed it was a false positive.

"It is being said that [redacted] is being retested via Western Blot to confirm his results and that the results of that test are not back yet.

"I do hope he is negative but this should be a lesson to everyone either way."

Gene (Ross, AdultFYI reporter) adds: "Now that the cat's out of the bag, here's what I'm told- [redacted] also goes by the name [redacted].

He was found by Brazzer's Producer [redacted].'

[Redacted] is known to throw sex/swing parties where [redacted] met him.

[Redacted's] test came back 'false positive' and allegedly talked [redacted] into still shooting him with a positive test.

Apparently 13 Florida Female Talent have been exposed."

So, apparently, the performer tested positive using a company not within the APHSS grid, then went to yet another testing company also not in the grid for a followup test which essentially concluded that the first test was a false positive, to which the latter test was used by him to persuade the producer to clear him to shoot scenes.

The implication of Brazzers.com is fascinating in its own right, too, since Brazzers' Florida-base production center (as opposed to their LA and Vegas centers)  has developed a really bad reputation from talent and consumers alike for cutting corners in regards to protecting performers and putting their own profits above their talent. (That, and Brazzers' overly lenient attitude towards tube sites and content piracy, which has really ticked off other adult production companies struggling against content thievery.) Also, Brazzers was not amongst the main production companies who contributed to the creation of APHSS.

The scariest thing about this, though, is that 13 women whom had worked with this performer (and possibly all of their partners) are now exposed enough to warrant testing. It remains to be seen whether or not any of those women had done any other work outside of Florida.

I'm still going to reserve judgment on Brazzers until we have more reliable information, but if this editorial by a blogger at the porn gossip/info site LukeFord.com (not to be confused with LukeIsBack.com) has any weight to it, then Brazzers may be in a heap of trouble. (His sentiment, NOT mine.)

In school when they teach you about sex they are quick to remind you that you not only slept with the person you are with but every person they have been with and every person they have been with, so quickly 1 partner can become 34, 34 can become 340.  So when the news broke that Brazzer’s knowingly exposed 13 performers to HIV [source]  …. we know the impact is much larger because since their potential exposure, who else have those 13 girls slept with, and then who else have those people slept with?

So if stealing content, running 5 of the most popular illegal tube sites wasn’t enough, how about this?  Is knowing a performer tested HIV positive and still letting him perform with others enough for ya?

Why do I go on twitter day after day and see some performer bragging about doing this or that with Brazzers?  What the heck is wrong with you people?  Are you blind?  Do you not see day in and day out what they are doing?

I mean sure there can be arguments made for people like Jules Jordan and Wicked Pictures deserving to get screwed … they after all knowingly entered into business deals with the devil, Brazzers – so they got what they deserved … but what about you?  What’s your excuse for still doing business with them?

Do you realize that because of their illegal activities, other producers were forced to reduce the amount they pay performers, so every time you do any work with Brazzers you are directly contributing to the further success of a company that fucked you and your friends.

As far as the HIV scare goes, if you have worked in Miami in the last month or so or worked with anyone who has worked in Miami than now is a good time to go get tested.  Just remember, it is always better to be safe than sorry so if you have concerns about working with a performer, it’s okay to say no.  Your life is far more important than that scene is.

And please, please, for Goddess sake, please, for those of you in Miami heeding that final graph's advice....use an APHSS approved clinic that has the proper protocols and procedures.


UPDATE (8-30-11): The director that was implicated in the original blog entry by Mike South (and outed by both South and the AdultFYI.com mirror post), has now responded, through an email that was posted to South's blog this evening. I'll simply repost it for posterity's sake.

I understand that there are rumors circulating concerning the identity of "Patient Zero."  If the rumors are true, the last time I shot this particular individual was on August 19.  That person had a valid negative test.

There has been a lot of false information circulating about this situation. I want to be clear that there is absolutely no truth to any of the statements about my filming this performer with a positive test.  I would never, ever shoot anyone with a positive test, even if they claimed it was a "false positive."  I make no exceptions.

Please put an end to this vicious and harmful rumor.

Our lawyers are CC'ed in this e-mail and have verified the documentation.

The title of the post over at South's blog does list the director's name, but, consistent with this blog's policy regarding performer/director privacy, I will not reveal it here.