Am I the only one afraid of this with the high volume providers with pages of reviews?  Exponentially, we're really bedding millions when we see them...  What do you thing the std/hiv rate is in our community here?

...with the possiblity of a few exceptions I believe that most of the women who choose this line of work do so with the intention of staying safe and healthy.  I have the impression that more times than not the providers have done some research and try to keep things safe for themselves and their clients.

and will probably start sticking with one or two providers and not jump around so much.  Granted, this may be like the little Dutch boy trying to keep the dike in place, but unless one opts out of the hobby, there aren't a lot of other options I see one can do.

I also do not do DATY except for my regulars.

However, I agree with 2k1. The girls who are highly rated on TER get more business from TER members who also give reviews. So the reviews are many, but the volume served is not necessarily much higher than other providers.

Providers who give excellent service are able to, primarily because they have self-respect. In my opinion, self-respect is the key to a provider enjoying her work and enjoying her work is the key to doing it well. Self respecting providers do not have the hang-ups of low self-esteem that cause people to be reckless and engage in self-sabotage. (ok, so psychology was my minor)

These ladies are only able to be caring, enthusiastic and affectionate to their clients to the degree that they care about themselves. They play safe, they're careful and they see gentlemen who are members of TER. On average, these gentlemen like yourself, are also self-respecting people.

I think there are much higher risk ways to get laid.

In his book " The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS" Michael Frumento has statistics which show that you are not necessarily at greater risk with multiple partners.

I'm sorry, that's all there is.

-- Modified on 6/1/2002 3:40:30 PM

It's Michael Fumento not "Frumento", and Fumento doesn't know what he's talking about. The present global AIDS epidemic was accurately modeled in the mid-80's, assuming that certain high-risk groups (drug abusers, homosexuals, promiscuous heterosexuals eschewing safer-sex techniques) would become saturated, and then act as a driver/entry point to the more general populations. Although less successful in the U.S., these models have been very accurate in predicting the sub-saharan African disaster, and the impending epidemics in Asia and Southeast Asia. The predictions made in the mid-80's by Oxford types like Robert May and Martin Nowak were for ~50 mil infected with HIV by the year 2000. And folks, that's what we've got.

Check Michael Fumento in PUBMED, the repository of all peer-reviewed literature in medical research. There isn't anything. If you find something out in science that is new, you have to submit your work to your peers for review, not publish a book.

-- Modified on 6/1/2002 7:09:06 PM

-- Modified on 6/1/2002 7:29:21 PM

In terms of STDs, and HIV common sense prevails.

For STDs, there are visible signs of breakouts, rash, cooties, discoloration of skin, scars, etc... that should ring warning bells.  The overall appearance, and hygine of the peson also should be considered.

Terms of HIV there is a lot of literature out there that helps dispense off several myths.  For starters, you cannot contract HIV by kissing.  The most common way to contract HIV is through personal fluids (blood, semen) getting into your body by accidental contact.   Be safe and wear a condom, and select elite providers who see select few screened clients.



-- Modified on 6/2/2002 7:52:57 AM

To worry about what anyone else might have... it's your job to do your very best to ALWAYS protect yourself... and therefore you should get your butt out on the web, and research every activity you have interest in engaging in, to see exactly what the risks are as defined by the CDC and other research organizations, to determine what risks you are and are not willing to take. If EACH of us does that, we reduce our OWN risk, and in doing so, the OVERALL risk is reduced. But first we have to take that responsibility for our own safety.

One more thing to consider is the time frame you are looking at with these pages of reviews. If you see 100 reviews for the month of May, well... maybe there is cause for concern because that girl would have to be working nonstop =:O Most of the reviews are spaced out... I think I have 7 reviews here and they are spaced out from last July when I started, to now... Most of us ladies DO get tested at least every three months... at least I do!  Better safe than sorry!  

Hugs*
Nicole

A provider who sees two guys a day and works about 250 days a year will have about 500 dates a year. For the sake of discussion let's define a high-volume provider as someone who has 1000 dates a year.

A previous post said that 50 million people world-wide are HIV positive. The United Nations estimate I just looked up said 40 million at the end of 2001. Whatever. There are more than 6 billion people in the world. That is an infection rate of under 1%. I think the rate for the United States is about 0.3%. Let us assume 1% for the sexually active US population.

A high-volume provider having 1000 dates a year can expect to have (on average) sex with a HIV positive man about 10 times in a year.

According to a NIAID study (see link) using a condom reduces the risk of HIV transmission by a factor of about seven. I have seen other estimates as high as 20. Let's assume a condom reduces risk by a factor of 10.

If our high-volume provider is using condoms (isn't everyone?) then her risk in having 1000 dates with men with unknown HIV status is equivalent to having unprotected sex once with a man who is known to be HIV positive.

You would do better to be more worried about the HIV status of the provider's boyfriend or husband if she has one. She is probably having unprotected sex with him a lot more than once a year.

Don't forget that HIV is an EXTREMELY difficult disease to transmit. The following three paragraphs are quoted from the link.

----------
COUPLES STUDY IN HAITI SHOWS REDUCTION IN HETROSEXUAL HIV TRANSMISSION

A study in Haiti of "discordant" hetrosexual couples -- those in which one partner is HIV-infected and the other uninfected -- found that almost half of sexually active couples receiving counseling and free condoms adoped safe sex practices (either abstinence or consistent condom use), according to investigators supported in part by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). The rate of new HIV infections among couples who consistently used condoms was one-seventh as high as those who did not.

...

The investigators observed a seroconversion rate of 1.0 per 100 person years for couples who always used a condom, and 6.8 per 100 person years for couples who used condoms irregularly or not at all. The seroconversion rates were similar between couples who never used condoms and those who used them irregularly, underscoring the importance of consistent, correct condom use. The female-to-male rate of HIV transmission was 7.6 per 100 person years; the rate of male-to-female transmission was 4.8 per 100 person years.

The investigators confirmed previous reports that other sexually transmitted deseases significantly increase a person's risk of becoming infected with HIV. Gential ulcer diseases, syphilis, and vaginal or penile discharge in the HIV-negative partner, and syphilis in the HIV-infected partner each increased the risk of HIV transmission.
-------

In other words, if you have sex for a year with a regular partner who is HIV positive and don't use any protection you stand about a 7% chance of becoming HIV positive yourself.

Athough it is obvious that the risk of getting HIV increases with the number of times you have sex with an infected partner it seems to me that having protected (safer, but not safe) sex with a large number of partners with unknown HIV sex is minor league risk compared to having regular unprotected sex with a single infected partner.