I recently found out a lady friend who has been escorting was just diagnosed with Herpes, HSV2.

She is asking me for advice as to what she should do regarding escorting. I told her to find another profession....

HSV2....is always contagious from what I understand regarding because of the cell shedding.  Shedding can be minimized using suppression therapy..i.e. daily ingesting antiviral medicine.
(many have seen the Valtrex commercials)

Her thoughts are too stay healthy and increase her  immune system using natural means..vitamins, minerals, and herbs...and only use antiviral medicine during outbreaks.

My findings regarding herpes population is that 25-30% of the US is infected which means there are persons in this industry who are active, and also  successful without placing the other party at risk.  

So my question is either as a hobbyist or provider, what would you do if you were diagnosed with herpes...would you still participate in this industry, or retire?

You may respond to this openly, by PM, or email me  @ [email protected]

Thanks

I would never think of hobbying again.

You would think that good common sense and respect would be the only choice but it isn't always.

I know a gentlemen who shared his tid bit of knowledge with me and has done Camel with other ladies. Girls please let's think about this and understand a stiff cock could care less what he's leaving behind. My mother related this info to me when I was in my late teens. Boy isn't this an eye opener.

OK  OK i'm sorry I brought this up again but it is on target in this case.

Kisses Haley

a date just because I had a cold sore.  It's HSV1, but can be passed on during oral sex. (though not all that often)  I won't take the chance.

Many things come and go in life...Herpes is forever

the chances one of them had herpes is very high!

Genital Herpes is very common, unfortunately...


Number of people in US with genital herpes: over 50,000,000
New cases per year: 1,000,000
New cases per hour: 114
New cases per minute: 1.9
Percent of US population affected: 20%
1 in 5 persons age 12 and older
Number of people unaware they are infected: Millions: Most of the population

Statistics provided by the CDC

So when I first read your post, I instinctively looked at your two reviews.
You may want to confirm that the infected provider is not one who you have reviewed. One of the providers is still active.

To answer the question, I would retire from the hobby if I were to be infected.

... that the sexual practices of providers are comparable to those of civie women.

To sanity check this, we can take that assumption through its paces.

If we were to make that assumption, and look at the total number of lifetime sex partners for the average civie woman (10 or less); we could see that for every 10 sex partners, the odds of a woman contracting herpes is 20%.

If we then look at the total sex partners for the average provider (860 according to LG); a quick bit of math would indicate that nearly ALL providers would have herpes.

So the initial assumption -- that providers follow sex practices similar to civie women -- is likely false.

However, my primary care physician favors your point of view. When I asked him about the wisdom of sex with high-end escorts; he characterized the practice using the terms "insane" and "suicidal." I don't know, though, if his reaction is simply knee-jerk or based upon what limited studies have been done. Because sex work is illegal in most of the U.S., obtaining reliable data is difficult.

Another benefit of legalizing sex work is that STD tests would be required as a condition of licensing. This would allow full characterization of the STD profile of providers.

And NO this is NOT a political statement.

The CDC is controlled by the government.  The info they put out is normally reviewed, and edited prior to release.  The final released data will reflect the message trying to be conveyed.
It works both ways------>  HIV/Aids, Genital herpes, HPV stats are grossly overstated in this country.  Just as deaths and addiction from cannibis were in the 60's and 70's.  Diseases which have a high incidence but could cause problems to certain industries, are usually supressed, and understated. There have been numerous scientists leave their posts in protest of supression, or editing of actual factual data to suit a particular need, of a particular administration.  
Look at the numbers...if 20% of the population were infected, healthcare workers would be treating more cases of Herpes than diabetes.  Valtrex would be a multibillion dollar drug.  This is simply not the case.  Also, these numbers include all forms of herpes, not just HSV2.  There are countless strains of herpes found in the body that are not virulent disease causing entities.  They are with us for life, dormant in tissues.  These numbers are NOT actual treated or newly diagnosed cases.  They are estimates based on a certain population, then extrapolated to the rest.  Right now, the climate of the country is a movement back to pre '60's morality...when BC pills were illegal for anyone except married women.

This is not to say that these diseases are not fairly wide spread, and there is no need for care and diligence.  This is to say that these are not true statistics, but extrapolated estimates! They are also more prevalent in certain populations than others, but the numbers are spread to the general population.  This is an invalid equation, but is still used none the less.
Be careful, practice safe sexual techniques, but do not live in total fear, and paranoia, and not enjoy it.  Instilling fear is the purpose of skewed numbers like these!

She should retire. Immediately!

... in the way it collects and reports information in order to forward ... certain ... agendas?

I'm shocked!  (*grin*)

Hey, just recently, some government numbskull suggested that women shouldn't be taught and encouraged to do breast self-exams anymore because most lumps found that way are benign and it would save money on followup tests. Same numbskull wanted to change mammograms from age 40 to age 50 for coverage -- same reason, overall cost savings.

Bottom line is big daddy government can be trusted to serve only ONE interest: its own.

I personally believe the government deliberately downplays some things while exaggerating others.

I can understand that a lady would find it difficult to leave a lucrative career and suffer through a career change, but for to good of others, I think she should retire. A hobbyist should stop immediately, and not doing so is extremely self-centered.

This has always bothered me. According to the statistics I should be infected. If the statistics are true then I have a better chance at winning the lottery than remaining disease free. And yet, I continue to get tested and it seems that I am the luckiest woman on earth. Sure, I use condoms, but everyone knows that they only make things slightly safer and not truly safe. Every time I have the tests run and they come back negative for everything I ask my Dr how this can be. I have had relations with more men than I care to admit. If 20% of them had herpes and _% had gonorrhea, and_% had syphilis, and_% had whatever else, How can I have possibly escaped infection?
It just doesn't add up.

is the number of participants, and exactly where they got their subjects. I'd be willing to bet that if they did a study where all of the participants are providers and hobbyists, the numbers would be staggeringly lower. The civie population numbers have to be higher, simply due to carelessness.

A "government numbskull" didn't suggest either of those things.

A group of scientists employed by major universities reached the conclusion that mammograms in women in the 40 to 50 age group with no risk factors yield a very low incidence of positive results due, in part, to the rarity of positive results to be found, and to the firmer breast matter involved in this age group.  They also suggested that breast self exams to be very ineffective while causing undue stress for the ladies who find benign or normal textural anomalies.

This has caused much discussion recently as to whether official guidelines should be changed, but AFAIK none have as yet.

By posting this, there are many ladies on here who will choose not to see you now, for fear of being exposed, assuming that you have been with this infected provider.

We all appreciate the info here, albeit not very helpful because you didn't give a name in the original post, but did you really think before you posted this on a public forum?

It was my intent to quit.  I even posted openly about it here on the boards.  Fortunately it ended up being something else much more temporary (Molluscum, for anyone who is interested) and I'm fine now.

Interestingly the result of my open discussion was that several hobbyists confided in me that they actively hobby with Herpes, but take Valtrex (or similar) and don't hobby with active lesions.

You can bet that many ladies (no, not all) take the same approach of using suppressive drugs and not providing with active lesions.  Just being... you know... really careful... LOL.

Point it that it's out there.  The percentages can be up for debate, but not it's presence.  Beyond that we all have to make our own decisions because this is NOT a subject that many people on either side of the hobby will be open or honest about.

There is plenty of room in the sex industry for someone with HSV2.  FBSM, BDSM, web cam shows, etc.  If she loves what she does and wants to find ways to do it without putting others at risk she should look into the other avenues of practice.  IMHO, it is immoral to continue seeing clients one on one.

You ask what "you" (I) would do?  Shift my practice entirely to tantra and FBSM.

If this is a lady that you have had close contact with please visit your own doctor and ask for the blood test.  Even without symptoms you may have been exposed...

Let's assume it does -- and it is all correct.

Yes, the incidence of positive results will be lower in 40-49 than in 50+. No doubt.

And, yes, women find benign stuff in their breasts all the time (often due to doing the self exam at a different spot in their monthly cycle, etc.), and this can be distressing.

Lots of money being spent in exchange for finding a relatively small number of positives.

YET -- we all know that early detection is KEY to surviving cancer. There are undoubtedly people alive today who would otherwise be dead, were it not for self exams and mammograms starting at ages younger than 50.

Two women who work for me have had breast cancer. One at age 35, and the other at age 52. The 35 year old is in remission; but things are not looking so well for the older lady. These are fine people -- really fine people. People who matter not just to me, but those around them, as more than merely economic units.

Should the 35 year old have waited ... how many years longer? 15 years to do a self exam? She would already be dead. Good thing she was doing that self exam and then had the mammogram followed by the biopsy ...

This is my point. When you start looking at these things in a purely economic sense; it goes to the benefit of whoever has the gold -- and not the individual woman whose life might otherwise have been saved.

In other words, it is trying to apply group averages to individuals.

RETIRE! Why even RISK passing it on to other men? He may be intimate with other women thus spreading the disease further.

If she decides to continue, the only word I can think of is SELFISH. It's a two-way street. Would you want to pay a woman with an STD to sleep with you? No. If a man had herpes I'd say the same thing, do everyone a favor and retire.

Maybe I'm overreacting, but this is a no-brainer. To give her some credit, it was nice she told you....

The area (the shaft and head) where herpes shedding occurs in men is covered by condoms. The same cannot be said for women unless one uses the female condom. Hence the risk of male to female infection is nil if the infected male is using suppressive therapy, has no active disease and uses condoms.If a lady is concern  she should use condoms that cover as much of the saft as possible. For men use a female condom.  

I agree with most that it is impossible to advoid ladies and gents in this hobby that are not infected with Herpes.

You guys actually expect a guy with Herpes to stop having (paid) sex?

Guys put everything on the line everyday to have paid sex - they risk their families, their jobs, their reputations, yet they still go hunting for pay-for-play. You think they would let a little something like Herpes stop them?

If anything the guy will say "Well, I already have it (herpes) now, so might as well keep hobbying. Nothing to lose."

I don't know where you got that stat but I highly doubt it's accuracy. At least not the women of my generation. up---->up---->up---->

And I mean that in the nicest way.  

Herpes doesn't have to be only on the shaft and head.  You can have lesions all over the pubic and abdominal area.

With contact comes risk.  Period.

And how would you ever really know?

But, like I said -- who keeps track?

that I don't know any women who've had less than ten dicks invade their personal space. Shit, they're usually to that number by the end of college, if not highschool. And that doesn't include other girls. Less than ten is born-again-virgin by Gen X standards.

There's an old saying about asking people how many they've slept with -

If you ask a man, take his answer and divide it by half to get the truth. For women, double it.

Well, according to the study below, for women it is 4 and for men it is 7.

If we divide the men by 2 and multiply the women the same way, it means men have had 4 and women 8.

My experience is similar to yours. I've been with 28 civie women. But, maybe that would bring me into contact with women more prone to be with guys like that?

I know my ex-wife has only had 4 so far. She's not old. 41.

What happens, I think, is some fairly promiscuous folks give us a certain impression that isn't there among the less promiscuous.

Age 20 - 59; number of lifetime partners.

Well, the women in their 50's, being of a slightly more "wholesome" era probably were at 4 or less to offset the 20 year olds...either that or they were too high to remember all the "free love" they gave out in 60's? (so I've heard many were). But in any case, how do you apply the data from the 20 somethings who did this when they are only just getting warmed up - they have a lot of fuckin left to do, and they are gonna spread it around. Only 4? yeah...so far. Ask her again next week.

Some suggested reading for you

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3634/is_200111/ai_n8960858/

Yes with contact comes risk. However, the risk is much greater if the contact is with the moist warm  mucosal area like the mouth and vagina or the eye than between epidermal areas of the skin.


-- Modified on 11/18/2009 5:59:24 PM

but I think the level of promiscuity in 20-somethings is greatly exaggerated.

Human females are not naturally monogamous throughout a lifetime -- that is true. Rather, they are *hypergamous* -- which implies they will ditch a guy when something better comes along.

But the operative term is "something better." They aren't put together by nature to seek lowest-common-denominator men. They are put together to seek the best men they can possibly find. (How "best" is defined is a social construct, however which will vary to a degree with the specific woman's values.)

This argues *against* heavy-duty promiscuity. Multiple partners throughout life? Sure. 100? No way.

In the civie world, where you find most promiscuity is among young women who grew up without a close relationship with their biological fathers and who are seeking to feel loved; or among young women with poor self-esteem who seek to gain it through acceptance by men. Often these young women seem to go against nature by seeking pretty piss-poor men in order to reinforce their own negative self-perceptions.

And, of course, peer pressure can play a role. Putting out a society-wide message (implicitly in movies, music, etc. Check out lady Gaga.) that any woman who hasn't screwed at least 1000 guys by the time she is 30 is a loser can also have an affect.

Either way, how many girls does the average geeky guy in college get to be with? I'm not talking about the star quarterback at an Ivy League school. I'm just talking a regular schmuck from a middle-income family going on Pell grants and student loans. How many? If he's lucky, I'd guess 2-3; and 1-2 of them will be drunk girls at a frat party.

That argues against the equivalent college girl boffing 50 guys. I'm sure that a handful do. But most can't. If they did, those geeky guys would be sore from all the sex.

There are meds that suppress breakouts, and with condoms combined she should be fine (and her clients)
HIV or AIDS are the only two things I would consider not hobbying over...

Yeah - these two paragraphs pretty much sum up the state of things in my generation.

"In the civie world, where you find most promiscuity is among young women who grew up without a close relationship with their biological fathers and who are seeking to feel loved; or among young women with poor self-esteem who seek to gain it through acceptance by men. Often these young women seem to go against nature by seeking pretty piss-poor men in order to reinforce their own negative self-perceptions.

And, of course, peer pressure can play a role. Putting out a society-wide message (implicitly in movies, music, etc. Check out lady Gaga.) that any woman who hasn't screwed at least 1000 guys by the time she is 30 is a loser can also have an affect."  

I don't think I'm exaggerating the promiscuity of 20 year olds at all. The sex isn't all up to the "geeky guys" - I was neither a geek nor the star quarterback and getting laid between age 16-25 was like shooting fish in a barrel, and not just for me. 2-3 for college guys? Yeah, if they WANT to be monogamous - and that is mostly the kind of guy who has limited options, maybe because he is a "geek". (BTW Geeks are in now days so I think the nerds are even getting laid more). But for the many guys who don't wanna be tied down, which is typical of those who know how easy it is, more like 20 - 30. Hell, that only equates to about 1 every other month, so I might be underestimating. Here is a fact - The random hook up has ceased to be a source of shame for most women that age. They made it easy for us, and so we took advantage, simple as that.

And really, a lot of the same girls from then who are now in their late 20's and early 30's are still at it. Head out to a hot night club and the saga continues - they're a little bit wiser, a little less suggestable, but so are the guys who are still in the game. It's still not what I would call a challenge. It may have been different when you were 20 something, but then, that is my point, in part.

More than anything, I think it's due to relaxed social standards where womens sexuality is concerned. Certainly there is still a negative stigma and a major double standard but it ain't what it used to be. And frankly, I think they give less and less of a fuck about such things. More women are adopting male views of sex - a guy these days is almost as likely to be "used" for meaningless sex as a girl...if you can "use" a guy for such things. LMAO

At some point you have to look at these things in a economic and risk sense and apply group statics to individual.  Women in their 20s and 30s also get breast cancer, often the more aggressive forms, and die from it. At some age point the benefits of screening before age 50 don't outweigh risks and the cost involve.  Should we reduce it from 40 to 30 or 20 in an attempt to prevent death from breast cancer in these age groups.

yeah right, i dont think the ladies will quit there is to much money out there and going to a regular job wont pay the same.
ang guys, well we just love sex so i dont think guys can quit, maybe for a ew months but eventually the hormones will win

I was just talking about this subject on the PO board.

I had tons of unprotected sex before I ever started providing.  Stupid yes, but fortunately NEVER had so much as an STI.

So I start providing, about a year later I visit my Dr because something just isn't quite right with odor, and discharge.  Test revealed an STI, Chlamydia.  Talk about fucking pissed!  I was a whore on a mission to find out who the fuck gave me this shit.  Wish I had all the hours back that I spent obsessing, trying to figure out who the idiot was passing along the infection.

Never figured out who, but stopped providing certain services such as bbbj, and dfk as a result of some asshole who exposed me to his infection.

I feel fortunate Chlamydia was the end result, and a three day dose of antibiotics cured me.

Down side... Jaded, and paranoid.

Should a lady or gent hobby if they have Herpes???  Hell fucking NO!

Quite frankly, I see no reason to sympathize with your provider friend.  Fuck her if she remotely considers seeing gents with her condition.  Even if she is taking antiviral drugs, she CAN STILL PASS IT.  Antiviral's reduce the risk, but it's just that...  REDUCE THE RISK.

By the way people...  Although it's easier to contract if there is a visible outbreak, it doesn't mean its the only way to pass it.  It can still be passed, even if the outbreak isn't visible.  Hell, some carry it in their mouths and throat.

Personally, I would let each, and every person I know in the hobby be aware of who has the infection because unfortunately some have no guilt, and see only a means to an end... (Themselves either getting laid, or getting paid)

This tops the most ignorant replies of all time.  

"Guys put everything on the line everyday to have paid sex - they risk their families, their jobs, their reputations, yet they still go hunting for pay-for-play."  You don't think us ladies out ourselves at risk as well?  We are just robots then without families, other professional jobs, our safety, etc?!

If it's so life threatening to you, why play the game?!

And I saved the best for last: "You guys actually expect a guy with Herpes to stop having (paid) sex?"  You sound like you think it's okay to knowingly spread STD's.  Which is actually a crime.  If you knowingly have an STD and do not tell your partner, it is a crime.  Look it up.  Yeah, I highly doubt a provider is going to go running to LE and report you, however, think like an educated human.  It's guys like you that make responsible, safe women such as myself question my choice of business.

I guess this study impacts civie/SO relationships more than hobby life as it emphasizes the risk in asymptomatic carriers and the need for protection (one assumes that protection is always part of hobby life)
The bottom line: many people may have it and don't know about it because the body itself keeps suppresing outbreaks; the virus may be in skin more often than previously thought; there may be short lived periods of shedding even in absence of recent or impending outbreak.
Goodamnit!! Somebody invents a fix for this!
Nevertheless one reason to be cautious and always protect. No camel rub for me, nothing personal


http://www.healthday.com/Article.asp?AID=633254

What's your beef with my response?

I focused on guys because that was the major point of the topic - that guys with Herpes should quit the hobby. I didn't make any statement about women not also putting things on the line to be providers. Why the anger?

As for knowingly spreading disease. I did not make any statement that guys would intentionally pass on their disease. I assume they would still wear a condom and do whatever safe sex practices the provider insists on. It's not a crime to have sex if you have herpes. Hell, it's not a crime to have sex if you have AIDS, as long as you use safe sex practices.

I stand by my point - thinking that a guy with herpes is just going to stop hobbying is unreasonable.

I know one provider in Las Vegas and Los Angeles who has HS2 and HPV. You will get banned on most of the boards (sites) if you mention the name of the provider, though.

I can understand wanting to protect the providers against untrue attacks - but there has to be a way to communicate this to other clients.

For example, the girl in question routinely kisses, BBBJs, and allows DATY - all of which can easily transmit these two viruses.

When there are hundreds of providers available I would think most guys would want to find a different one - but when I have told other guys most will exclaim that she is so HOT that it doesn't matter to them and will continue with her anyway.

I like to thank all of you for your serious discussion concerning this topic.

Reading about Herpes and coaching her with this life changing issue, I believe she is making the correct choices for all...she has a dozen or so clients...which she will tell, if they stay on with her they know the guarded risks.

She will not seek out new customers, and is moving in the direction of changing back to her previous profession.

btw.......I do not have any STD's...lol, I been medically castrated and fighting Prostate Cancer for the last 2 years, and out of the loop other than participating n the boards....I did let my membership drop on TER, when I return to Hobbying I will pay for re-instatement.

I also might have over 100 reviews written on TER in the past 8-10 years, I write my reviews anonymously, and change my name every 12-16 months, so my review name and hobby name is not detected.

Again thanks for all that posted.

Miss Marie,

Yes I thought before I posted this.....I wanted a sampling of opinions, and it looks like I achieved my purpose.

The lady could be real or fictitious, what does it matter, and regarding my posting and alienating myself from seeing other ladies, that is crazy talk, and thoughts.....but I understand your paranoia.