TER General Board

Re: Who would admit it here??
Scaramouche 211 Reviews 3980 reads
posted
1 / 38

I haven't followed this regularly but hard to believe no one has posted about getting covid in the hobby.
I imagine people wouldn't want to talk much about it for reputational reasons...but still, given the debate you'd think there would be some... unless there is less risk in the hobby than it appears

lester_prairie 12 Reviews 192 reads
posted
2 / 38

There are still less than 1% of the US population with confirmed cases.    Yes there are estimates that actual cases are many fold higher.  But if they aren't confirmed then the sick person isn't going to be claiming to have it.  So the confirmed cases number is the one to use for identifying anyone who is known to have gotten the disease from an escort or client.
.

AznWhtTailHntr 17 Reviews 214 reads
posted
3 / 38

Of course I would announce it loud and far.  Same if I contracted and STD.  

Happy_Ed 84 Reviews 187 reads
posted
4 / 38

We worry about going to the grocery store, with a mask and staying 6 feet apart.  

Well going all over a sweaty body, making out, and doing minus 5 inches in social distance (ok, maybe you guys do 6 or 7 inches !!) is not exactly social distancing.  If she has it, you will get it.
She does maybe 40  to 50 guys a week, anyone of which could have the virus, and not show a temperature, and she will pick it up.  
Temperature checking will only show those that have symptoms, and the virus could be in his or her body for several days before showing this symptom.

So the risk in my opinion is very high.  

As far as all the other diseases of this hobby could entail, they are mild in comparison.  A condom will protect from many.  And there are cures for all of them.

So I am staying away until things settle down.  And I am saving a lot of money too.

Robertini 4 Reviews 184 reads
posted
5 / 38

like it was HIV or something

Scaramouche 211 Reviews 186 reads
posted
6 / 38
OldRanger 62 Reviews 175 reads
posted
7 / 38

With all the asymptotic people running around and if you came down with it X days after you saw her how would you know  you got it from her?

36363jensen 4 Reviews 168 reads
posted
8 / 38

In the general population you have a lot of potential sources of infection -- all the other people you might cross paths with -- but the probability of getting infected is relatively smaller if you have distance, a mask and not in an encloses space or long period of time. In a session the probability of the other person being infectious is much, much smaller than that of crossing paths with someone in public but IF one of you is infected you both soon will be.

A bit more concretely, for me the odds that any one person has the virus is about 0.07%. However, if I go shopping my best guess is that I will "cross paths" with about 100 people. The probability that one of them is infected is about 6.75%.

So you are much more likely to come in contact with an infected person in public than in a session. But much more likely to have the virus transmitted to your in a session than in most public interactions, assuming reasonable precautions were taken and it is not an enclosed setting for a long period of time (think work setting where temps are not checked and masks and distancing not used).

Oh, we did actually have one person claim to have caught it back in April or May but seems to have been a troll.

-- Modified on 6/26/2020 9:46:16 PM

GaGambler 212 reads
posted
9 / 38

This means that you are a LOT more likely to be exposed to COVID, but that you are also a lot LESS likely to die from it. Something that I have been saying all along of course.

AznWhtTailHntr 17 Reviews 175 reads
posted
10 / 38
gnubie 2 Reviews 189 reads
posted
11 / 38

I'd love to be able to say that I had it, and got over it. And then I would most likely be immune and not be shedding the virus. I'm compliant with whatever orders are in effect. But, I believe we will have "herd immunity" before there is a good vaccine. I'm in Arizona, and I don't think effective contact tracing would ever work, here. People just don't trust the government that much.

Hpygolky 233 Reviews 182 reads
posted
12 / 38

And how many here have actually got tested? My guess is that some here may have it and don't know it.
NBA had 302 players tested and 16 tested positive for covid, so...

GaGambler 298 reads
posted
13 / 38

Oh wait a second, even after decades of research and BILLIONS of dollars spent on those two diseases we STILL don't have a cure or a vaccine for either one. Well in the case of AIDS we don't have a vaccine that isn't almost as deadly as the virus itself.

 
40-50 Guys a week??? I am sure there a LOT of girls wishing that they saw that many guys a month.  

 
Now if you are high risk, if you are an old fuck, a fat fuck, or simply someone with any kind of pre-existing condition that would make you likely to die from this disease, than by all means I support your decision to take every possible safe guard, but for the rest of us, "you do you, and I'll do me" and all I can say is that the more guys abstaining from sex, "More pussy for me!!!" lol

36363jensen 4 Reviews 195 reads
posted
14 / 38

I said nothing about the consequences of an infection. I only talked about the likelihood of coming into some level of contact with someone that is infected.  If we want to talk about probability of infections then seeing a provider is going to have a higher probability than going out in public (based on the data for my location).  I just didn't feel like going down that path since it was a very low chance (a bit over half a percenct - 0.007%). The equivalent probability of getting infected from a buying groceries would have to be over 10% from just walking past someone which seems a bit high to me.

 
Also, you need to get off the it is only about dying boat. The evidence is growing that the possibility of dying is only ONE of the results of getting infected. Yes, none of us want to die but framing the situation as die or recover and be fine is bullshit.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-effects/scientists-just-beginning-to-understand-the-many-health-problems-caused-by-covid-19-idUSKBN23X1BZ

http://www.cdc.gov/mis-c/hcp/

 
Last, yes I am fully aware that the case rates and the actual infections are much different. However that 10 times is more likely hyperbola than reality. None of the stories (and I am NOT going to take CNBC at face value) I've seen ever provide a link to the actual study or how various factors are controlled. This is important because:
"Note: This test can sometimes detect antibodies from other coronaviruses, which can cause a false positive result if you have been previously diagnosed with or exposed to other types of coronaviruses."
http://questdirect.questdiagnostics.com/products/covid-19-immune-response/b580e541-78a5-48a6-b17b-7bad949dcb57

 
And there are LOTS of types of coronavirus that people get exposed to. How is CDC/Redfield controlling for those?

This background on Redfield might be relevant.
http://www.cnn.com/2020/06/04/politics/cdc-redfield-aids-walter-reed-army-investigation/index.html
"This is not the first time Redfield has been at the heart of a controversy over the government's response to a virus epidemic. In the early 1990s, Redfield, then one of the Army's top AIDS researchers, was at the center of a scandal over a purported HIV vaccine. Allegations that Redfield oversold data and cherry-picked results sparked an internal Army investigation into his work. 
The Army ultimately did not charge Redfield with scientific misconduct. But interviews with former colleagues with direct knowledge of the investigation, and a review of internal documents suggest Redfield knew he was misrepresenting the data behind the vaccine, even as he publicly touted its results— an effort that ultimately helped garner millions in federal funds for further testing."

nevertoolarge 30 Reviews 189 reads
posted
16 / 38

i got tested for C19 last week - Negative!  .... now when a guy tells an escort " I got tested"  you have to ask "for what?"  LOL  

nice and interesting to see such thoughtful long posts here.   just goes to show that despite what others about think about the hobby, its not degenerates and women missing teeth.  ...........   well not all degenerates  he he he he

Happy_Ed 84 Reviews 191 reads
posted
17 / 38

I hobby in San Mateo, and , in the old days, it was always a challenge to schedule the same day.  I would go thru 3 or 4 providers from the same org,  asking for a early meeting, 10 or 11 or 12, and they were often booked.  Finally the org allowed pre-booking for good customers, and scheduling is not as much of an issue now.    I would ask the girls their availability and if they had another appointment, and they were always busy.  10 or 12  hours a day, 6 or 7  days a week.  just a few breaks.   There are 2 or 3 gals in the same apartment, and they were always cautious to not meet in the hallway.    They would take a week or two vacation every month or two.  All the providers were consistently good or great, and the PO was great in scheduling, so I am assuming that they had a lot of business.  These apartments cost $4,000 to $5,000 a month, so they need to cover that cost

So that is where my 40 to 50 estimate comes from 6 days at 7 meetings is 42.   Maybe it could be just 30.

Regardless, my point is that they see many guy very intimately,  and statistically speaking , 1% or 2% could be asymptotic carriers of Covid.  They could catch it, and transmit it over the next several days of working.

Badboy1234 10 Reviews 168 reads
posted
18 / 38

Remember the adage that when you have sex with someone then you are having sex with everyone that she had sex with and so on. I would give your estimate credence in this case.

GaGambler 235 reads
posted
19 / 38

But I will freely concede that any good AAMP girl can easily see 40-50 clients, especially in a 7 day work week.  

 
Personally I am not in any of the high risk categories, nor do I have any family living nearby that is high risk either, I fully expect to get exposed someday if I haven't been exposed already, and it doesn't keep me up at night, again I freely concede if my personal situation was different my POV would be different as well.

coeur-de-lion 400 Reviews 192 reads
posted
20 / 38

that its risky, or are you actually seeing Kgirls during Covid.   I saw over 40 individual Kgirls from  February through May.  With the new hygiene protocols they are using, I never felt I had much risk.  I heard no reports or even rumors that any girls at the orgs I patronized had tested positive.  I was tested three times during those months and once at the end of April for the antibodies, in case I had it and was asymptomatic, and all came back negative.  I did take care to avoid "hot-spot" areas in LA, and stayed mostly in OC where the infection rates were running much lower than in LA.   I'm 61 and in the so-called "high-risk" group, but they way they were doing things, I felt it was worth the risk.  

3270925 11 Reviews 170 reads
posted
21 / 38

When I used to visit agencies two girls told me a bit about their business.  I always booked two hours so there was normally 20-25 minutes of time at the end to chat.  These two pretty ladies both said almost the same thing (different agencies).  They only get 1-2 breaks a day and normally work 8-10 hours.  It wasn't uncommon for them to see several guys per day for six days straight.  One of them laughed and said that's why she jokingly hated that I could have sex for 60-70 minutes straight.  She was tired.  She joked about it, but I knew she was serious.  

useyrhead 4 Reviews 182 reads
posted
22 / 38

Melody calls those “candy boys” (her term for frequent mongers) who have high sexual endurance “Good boyfriend. Bad customer.”

coeur-de-lion 400 Reviews 189 reads
posted
23 / 38

is just for the opportunity to take a swipe at GaG?   He's living in your head, rent-free.  Doesn't make you look too good to chase him around the boards like this on posts that aren't even his just for a chance to personally attack him.  Makes you look small and petty, but Hey, that's who you are, right?

GaGambler 236 reads
posted
24 / 38

According to the CDC your math does need recalculating regardless of whether or not you agree with my conclusion about the fatality rate.

 
If there are ten times more people with the virus, then your chances of exposure go up by the same ratio, it's simple math and I know you know how to move a decimal point. Your .7% chance (not .007% which is 7 in 100,000) moves to a 7% chance of each person you come across having the virus and I am sure you can do the rest of the math from there.  

 
PLEASE reread my post and then your own and unless you are as dumb as GG or as dishonest as LTM you will concede you need to recalculate your math if the infection rate is ten times higher than you thought is was. If you question that foundation your beef is with the CDC not with me as I am only quoting the CDC numbers and not inventing my own. I can't help it that the conclusions you'll reach using the CDC's new numbers aren't the ones you hoped for.

36363jensen 4 Reviews 216 reads
posted
25 / 38

Yes, my beef is with CDC on this. I don't buy the 10x number and provided the reasons why.

Yes, if if we can know what the true infection rates is the numbers can be reworked, and will likely change a bit in terms of the relative risk between the two settings. However, just adding more soft numbers is not really the best plan in my opinion.  

However, doing an initial check on that it seems the probability of exposure with the provider moves to about 0.663% while public goes to about 48.58%. That does mean that the probability of contracting the infection from someone in public goes way down to make an equivalence between buying food and seeing a hooker, however we don't have good stats on probability of transmission under various settings. I can only say where I am people do practice distancing, where masks and don't do a lot of indoor gathering (dining outside just started up within the past week). So I don't know taking the type of precautions we have here make public transmissions on the order of 2% or 0.2%.  

Given that with the assumption of 10x the equivalence probability of transmission would be about 1.3%, rather than the 10% based on the reported cases, I agree that the numbers are moving in your direction but I don't think we can say which is riskier based just on that. So you can say perhaps we have a semi well defined range to consider but we have some more work do to if you want to claim seeing a provider or buying the beer and chips at the store is riskier. Note, I was just offering a starting point that was an estimate of the probability of the presence of the virus in the two settings -- not anything about the probability of infection. I think I was pretty clear on that.

When seeing a provider the risk is about her (or you) having the infection. In the case of going out in public the risk is about the transmission more than the probability of walking past someone that is infectious. That was the point of my OP.

GaGambler 211 reads
posted
26 / 38

Is that the data is hardly complete, reliable, or in many cases anything we can actually believe. When our own CDC makes the claim that the underlying data we have been relying on is off by a full decimal point how can any intelligent person really make the leap of faith that ANYTHING we are being told has any degree of accuracy to it.  

 
Back to deaths, some people claim that the blue states are OVER reporting their deaths, while other people are equally convinced that the red states are UNDER reporting. You've already had a taste of the P&R board, I know enough from talking to you that you at least "lean" left, but you were accused of having "your head up Trump's ass"  for not falling in lockstep with the board lefties. Do you really think there will ever be a consensus opinion on the data in this politically charged environment?

 
Personally I think the best way to get at least a general idea about the true infection rate is to do something akin to random polling in different neighborhoods around the country. Test a hundred people at random in each zip code (or something like that) and than make your conclusions from the results. Yes the numbers are going to change, but it would at least be a starting point, right now the guesses are all over the map and that's really all they are is guesses.

36363jensen 4 Reviews 193 reads
posted
27 / 38

Yes, we agree that there are still more questions than answers and whatever numbers we have are not comprehensive.

I do agree in general with your approach and I am pretty sure some have been doing that. I think the 10x number might have come from such an effort in CA which was not quite as well constructed as statisticians and survey design people would have really liked.

I am also aware of some testing related to the quality of serology test for SARS-CoV-2 and the problem of other coronavirus infections leading to false positives. (Too long ago to recall where I read it). I've not seen anyone talking about how to how to design around that and am pretty sure we don't have a good handle on that today. So while I fully agree that the reported numbers everywhere are under estimates (this has been known for months) we just don't know how under reported they are. I don't think 10x is closer to the true number than what is reported but not at all sure what level of confidence I would place on that position.

Left/Right? Put whatever label you want. I don't really think in those terms. But as you noted, I tend not to follow party lines or stand with the "team" but will be critical of pretty  much anything. That does tend to get some to see me as on the other side of the fence. Whatever.

But, no it's pretty clear the P&R board is not about discussion as much as positioning -- with some seeming to be running some type of support campaign  as if people reading here might actually swing the results. LOL. Okay, that is probably going too far; just the usual testosterone driven bragging. I would have said "on steroids" but just seems redundant and not worth thinking of a better phrase.

coeur-de-lion 400 Reviews 123 reads
posted
28 / 38

Of coming here in defense of your butt-buddy GG and whining about me speaking up for the ad hominem attack on GaG????  Quite the hypocrite aren't you?  Thanks for taking the bait, though.  I thought I would snare someone else, but you're just as dumb, so you'll do.

DViejo7 175 reads
posted
29 / 38

I'm sorry, but where in the hell do apartments go for $5,000 a month??!!!!  That's enough to pay two mortgages.

Note: I don't know where San Mateo is and I was too lazy to look it up.

Also, 40 to 50 a week is a bit much.  One of my regulars sees no more than 2 clients a day.

AlexandraMilw See my TER Reviews 177 reads
posted
30 / 38

I doubt any logically guy could blame it on a swer... Knowing that plenty are asymptomatic, for all we know, he could have given it to us.

Black-Panther 178 reads
posted
32 / 38

Tested and nope. I was sure I had it in January - same symptoms. Test came back negative, and like others wish I did have it. Then again, tests aren't all that reliable either.

36363jensen 4 Reviews 199 reads
posted
33 / 38

I've never had the classic symptoms but was concerned back in early April and talked with my doctor. He was very much against me getting tested I did not appear to be a good case (and testing was highly limited then). I still have wondered if perhaps I was one of the mostly asymptomatic people so got the serology test a week ago just to see if I might have antibodies. Nope.

GaGambler 196 reads
posted
34 / 38

but then I found out that in my area at least you don't get the results back for about a week, so what's really the point if you aren't already sick? By the time the test results even come back a negative test is worthless.

 
I may take the antibody test someday in the future just for shits and grins, but right now the testing is so inaccurate I had to ask myself the same question, what's really the point?

herbtcat 6 Reviews 223 reads
posted
35 / 38

The lab I use for STD tests provides over night results. They recently added a COVID-19 test for an additional $35 and the results are included in the overnight results.  In addition, I can get another COVID-19 test every two days for another $35.  
.
What?  Oh, yeah... all negative, thank you.  
.
Life is good.
.
The Cat

Happy_Ed 84 Reviews 217 reads
posted
36 / 38

San Mateo is on the San Francisco Peninsula, between San Jose and San Francisco.  Probably the most expensive real estate in the world.  Cheap apartments are $3,000, high end ones can go to $6,000 and up.  A 3 br, 1 bath house goes for $1 million to $3 million.   The organization is very well managed, and they do a lot of volume.  And a lot of cash. Typical pricing is good.  $220 to $240 an hour.   And demand is high. Lots of tech guys around.

Drumguy25 23 Reviews 173 reads
posted
37 / 38

I havent gotten it hobbling, because i stopped hobbling when the girls dropped gfe service with no advance warning...
Im sure some still gave top notch service, but i wasn't lucky enough to find one of them. Right now, the options aren't to my tastes, and definitely not to be met with a turned cheek upon attempting to kiss. Since all this shit is still going on....im just sitting on the sidelines.

bocabuster 19 Reviews 162 reads
posted
38 / 38
Register Now!