LG
I assume the majority of porn stars are exposed to unprotected sex - no condom.
May be silly to ask, but if I see a porn star, young or experienced, does this significantly increase the chances of STD?

Dear likeGibson,

I do not have stats on this one, but a majority of porn stars actually practice safe sex WITH CONDOMS. You may not always see the condoms in the footage, but they are there. In 2004, the porn industry, largely situated in Southern California, received a big scare when two stars, a male and a female, tested positive for the HIV virus. AIM (the Adult Industry Medical Healthcare Foundation,) intervened and imposed a quarantine on actors who had been in contact with the performers in question. The official story is that the male performer contracted the virus while in Brazil. There is no reason not to believe this, since it truly shook the entire adult industry into adopting very safe sex practices.

Since then, standards, tests, paperwork and other regulations have entered the industry to make sure that performers stay healthy. Thus, your risk of contracting STDs if you consort with a porn star may be equal to, or lower than if you picked up a civvie at your neighborhood bar or at a random party. The system of checks and balances in the adult industry is only as good as its supporters, in this case those who make a living from making and being in adult films. Actors test monthly and they need to show clearance reports before going on the set. But remember that its their LIVELIHOOD that we're addressing, and I bet you that they care very, very much - just like the VAST majority of providers you'll find on TER. Spreading or contracting a serious STD is the death knell for a sex worker's career, so I'd bet my money on someone in the biz before I'd go out there and play roulette with civvies.

If you are worried, I suggest you contact the kindly folks at AIM, either via email or why not just call them. You don't have to leave your name [or you can invent any name] and talk it over with them. Their stats are very reliable and they will give you honest answers.

Always wear a condom if spending time with someone whose sexual history is unknown to you,
the Love Goddess

-- Modified on 10/29/2008 5:23:30 PM

I corresponded with a pornstar, and she indicated partners are tested and produce papers. She didn't say anything about the condoms. I've concluded that I am possibly at greater risk from a "normal" escort who sees guys that are not tested, ignorant or not as hygiene

and please feel free to not post this if you'd prefer but...I don't understand why providers commonly feel as though "civvies" are the ones who are responsible for STDs.  I've heard this comment before and every time I just don't understand.  The sheer numbers that a provider sees during a career would make this arguement seem absolutely absurd.  Most providers do BBBJ which can be responsible for many STDs including Chlamydia, Syphilis, Gonorrhea and Herpes.  Also, herpes can be spread easily even when a condom is used because it can occur where the condom does not cover.  A scarey statistic is that 1 in 6 people have herpes.  If you have some statistics that refute my theory I would love to hear them. Regardless, your advice on relationship matters seems to be spot and I do enjoy reading your posts.

if you are seeing a porn star as an escort she is most likely sees other gentlemen who do not produce test results, so its no different than seeing an escort who is not a porn star. We, most ladies in this business test regularly and often.
thats my 2 cents

Dear followfornow,

Are you saying that this is what providers feel? If so, then YOU need to come up with the statistics that make this claim about providers and their feelings. This may be your experience anecdotally, but please qualify your statement with this being your experience.

One reason why SOME providers may - and I say MAY - turn the problem back to civvies is that if you are not in the sex industry, you may not be as obsessed with protecting yourself from STDs as providers need to be, for obvious reasons. If you look at the stats for STDs at the CDC, the most common STD in the USA as of now is chlamydia. Now chlamydia is spreading the fastest among YOUNG women of childbearing age who are NOT sex workers in the least - or we'd have massive amounts of sex workers among us. Syphilis is spreading among gay males who are NOT sex workers. In fact, gay male sex workers are among the ones protecting themselves by using condoms - it's at circuit parties and among "bugchasers" that both syph, gonorrhea and HIV is spreading...events full of civvies.

Yes, rates of HSV-1 (not HSV-2, let's be clear about that) are as high as 80% of the population infected, but those infections have not been spread by sex workers, they've been spread by average individuals who have nothing to do with the sex industry whatsoever. HSV-1 can also be from unresolved chicken pox in childhood and most people with half a brain know not to kiss anyone when they've got a big sore on their lip. But of course, there is the prodromal stage, or the stage before a first outbreak, during which someone is highly contagious. In this case, the provider has to rely on the honesty of the client so as not to get infected. And so this issue then goes back to the client - if it's an ethical, honest guy, he probably will cancel his appointment and wait until the contagion/infectious period is over. But there is no guarantee, and each provider runs risks - the same risks that civvies run when they score at singles' bars or at private parties.

So when providers who DO PRACTICE SAFE SEX lay the blame at the feet of civvies, they do so with some statistics in mind. Now, the providers I assume that we are discussing belong to the middle-class, have reviews on TER and enjoy somewhat public personas. They have every interest in the world to protect themselves from STDs, and they seem to do a damn good job of it. In this case, we are not talking about crack-dependent street workers - that's a whole different ballgame, although even among them, condom use is rather frequent, thanks to many of outreach programs distributing needles/condoms for years since the 1980s.

Another issue with middle-class female providers (who unfortunately are not the ones described in journal articles and epidemiological stats) is that their clients are usually NOT drug abusers or bisexual/homosexual and hence do not fall into major risk categories. So they generally [and I really mean generally] don't bring diseases to their providers. Of course it happens, but if so, responsible providers immediately take themselves out of the business until they have completely addressed their health issues.

You need to go to the CDC website and look up the stats if you are worried. There, you will see that certain STDs are prevalent within certain populations [same-sex, late-adolescent, drug users, African-American (unfortunately)]. Also, I'm not sure that "most" providers do BBBJ. If you really are interested, do a check on TER's search function. My hunch is that it's probably quite evenly distributed between do's and don'ts, but I could be wrong on this one.

You can believe me or not, but as a therapist and with my personal connections to providers, I can tell you that I have NEVER met a provider - and yes folks, I really mean this - who has contracted anything from a client. Granted, the providers I know and care for are in a very high income bracket; conversely, I've met 2 or 3 ladies throughout my 50+ years who were infected with HSV-2 - fine, upstanding yuppie civvies during the 1980s-early 1990s. Go figure.

Please go to www.cdc.gov for the latest stats,
the Love Goddess

LG will speak for herself but since I have made this comment a few times I will tell you my thoughts.
It is my opinion that providers use protection more than civvie women. In regard to the good ol bacterial infections and herpes I believe providers get tested more regularly so if they do get a bacterial infection they will get treated where a civvie woman is less likely to know they have an STD.

So I will continue my absurd belief that I am safer and less likely to contract an STD with a provider than with civvie women who are dating a lot of guys. If you have some statistics to refute my theory I would love to hear them

over the past 25 years, since I got married, I've been with one civie and literally hundreds of sex workers. No STD's here, not one, ever. My best friend, who I've known since high school, has remained a bachelor, has been with hundreds of civvie gals (some real lookers to, the lucky bastard!) and has been to the local clinic for penicillin and Cipro more times than either he or I can remember...

Make of that statistic what you will, I'm convinced.

LG
I know you are not a doctor. My read of the literature at CDC indicates that chlamydia infects males when sex is between other males. ??

the largest increase of chlamydia in recent years appears to have happened among young women who have sex with men...and then they get infected and give it to other women...

The chlamydic cycle,
the Love Goddess

In reference to ...."Are you saying that this is what providers feel? If so, then YOU need to come up with the statistics that make this claim about providers and their feelings. This may be your experience anecdotally, but please qualify your statement with this being your experience." - Yes this is my experience with providers in person and from what I have read on this board and others it seems as though there are others (yourself included) who feel this way.  So no I do not have any statistics to back this up.

And..."Yes, rates of HSV-1 (not HSV-2, let's be clear about that) are as high as 80% of the population infected, but those infections have not been spread by sex workers, they've been spread by average individuals who have nothing to do with the sex industry whatsoever." - I'm not sure how you can make this claim.  There are no statistics provided to back up this claim that I can tell.  If condoms do not prevent the spreading of herpes fully then how can a provider who practices safe sex with clients all the time still completely prevent its spread.  The simple answer is they cant.  Also, I have spoken to several physicians who indicated that the spread of herpes can happen from somebody who does not even carry the virus if they have had sex recently with somebody who does.  i.e. If client in the a.m has herpes it could be spread to client in the p.m. via the same provider.  Also, anyone with the virus can spread it regardless of the stage of outbreak(even if one is occurring or not).

You are also making a lot of assumptions in you post that providers are always honest about their health conditions and always good with hygiene.  Although I'm sure this is the case in general it cannot always be the case.  This is also true of the clients.

There are many studies abroad that show the STD rates among sex workers to be signigicantly higher than the general population, although I have not seen one domestically.



-- Modified on 10/31/2008 2:16:11 AM

That's right, carefreeinnova,

I SPECIFICALLY discuss the DOMESTIC, MIDDLE CLASS providers - not street workers in Thailand, or even in New York. Studies abroad cannot be generalized to the United States' MIDDLE CLASS providers. So now that's out of the way. I'm not sure how many more times I need to reiterate the fact that middle class providers are GENERALLY not studied in the USA.

As to HSV-1 rates, I am stating UP TO 80%, which means that rates can vary. Eighty percent is certainly higher than your 1 in 6 ratio that you provide. But assuming that it is between 60-80%, rates vary, the ratio of sex workers among the general population is very low. No one can say with certainty HOW MANY sex workers there are in the United States, but statistics are based on the general population, not a specific class of people. Now, I am not saying that sex workers NEVER spread any STDs - and I certainly apologize if it came out that way. What I am saying is that you cannot with specificity pin the general domestic spreading of STDs on sex workers, that's all.

And, as I state in my posting, providers and clients are still at risk. Nowhere did I say that providers COMPLETELY prevent its spread.

As for my "assumptions that providers are honest" - where do you see that in my posting? But what I am saying is that an infected provider is not able to maintain a career on TER once she infects someone, since she is subject to scrutiny in the form of reviews and postings on discussion boards. This is not a question of "provider honesty" but a question of salvaging a career. Providers in pain from STDs with visible signs of disease are not idiots - obviously, they would not go to work with evidence of illness. In addition, if you have been afflicted with genital attacks of the herpes virus, you would know the pain and agony of the outbreak. Women have extreme difficulty performing simple acts like sitting down - how do you think that they are able to have sex? Granted, prodromal symptoms are indeed up to the provider's discretion in terms of work and disclosure, but again, you may find the same deceit operating among civvies.

The fact remains - until we have reliable statistics on MIDDLE CLASS PROSTITUTION in the United States, I wouldn't go comparing rates of infection among street prostitutes with those of women reviewed on TER.

Hope that clears things up,
the Love Goddess

PROSTITUTES in the United States, but I can't find the statistics on-line. Specifically, I think sex workers in the Nevada bordellos qualify. Nevada requires these sex workers to have regular testing for HIV and other STDs. Unfortunately, I can't find anything better on-line than the following statement

"Since 1986, when mandatory testing began, not a single brothel prostitute has ever tested positive for HIV. The mandatory condom law was passed in 1988. A study conducted in 1995 in two brothels found that condom use in the brothels was consistent and sexually transmitted diseases were accordingly absent. The study also found that few of the prostitutes used condoms in their private lives.[7]"

from the Wikipedia article in the Related Link.


-- Modified on 10/31/2008 10:13:19 PM

Unfortunately, mathesar,

That still does not analyze the behaviors of middle class prostitutes who are NOT under mandatory state regulations. Nevada brothel regulations are draconian in more ways than one, regulating behaviors such as prostitutes going to restaurants, movie theatres, locations where they can and can't go on vacation, all within the state of Nevada. This can, in some ways, be compared to the regulations of porn stars and their work, but not to prostitutes earning a living out of their homes, advertising on TER and being subject to nothing other than self-policing or the "tyranny of the masses" in the form of reviews.

With this, I am certainly not implying that TER providers are more lax, I am merely saying that you can't make any reliable correlations between the behaviors of these two groups.

If you really are interested, please buy the book Weitzer, R. (Ed.). (2000). Sex for Sale: Prostitution, Pornography and the Sex Industry.
New York: Routledge., where a large chapter is devoted to an in-depth study of brothel practices in the various counties of Nevada.

Thanks,
the Love Goddess

I am in my late 50's. Got divorced 8 years ago.
Married for 23 years. Never cheated. Had sex with about 20 women before I got married. All middle class, low risk profile etc. Had been with 2 providers after the divorce. 1 massage only. 1 massage and BBJ.

Had been tested for HIV only a few times in the past and decided to get a full STD test to share with my new and current girl friend a few years ago so we could take the Condom off.Imagine my surprise when I tested positive for
HSV-2! Had some outbreaks about 20 years ago so it wasnt from a provider, and thought it was a yeast infection or something like that. It was not a problem in my marriage. I didn't even know I had it, which I did at the time.

My new girlfriend is ok having sex since I don't usually have outbreaks now. I did have one and told her that sex was not a good idea for that night. Yeah I know it can be spread even with no outbreaks, but she see's the Valtrex commercials too and knows that. I think there probably a lot more people that have HSV-2 than is known since they probably have never gotten a full STD test.

I personally feel that the board moderators suppress any reports of STD from providers.  I am sure some people have gotten infected during the 7 years that I have been reading the reviews and discussion groups.  I have never seen any kind of story about someones wife becoming infected from a man who sees providers which seems highly unlikely to me. I just think it's bad for the business that this board covers and would discourage use of providers should stories like that start to appear.

I like TS girls even tho for STD fears I have never taken the chance of visiting one as a provider.  I have seen a few stories of these girls who were reputed to be HIV positive, but no stories of any man catching an STD.  Highly unlikey in my view. Once again it looks like moderator discussion group censorship to encourage VIP subscriptions and $$ to TER.

Just my 2 cents

Jimmy

Dear Jimmy 8,

As someone who runs a very ethical board, I can tell you that I WOULD NEVER SUPPRESS ANYTHING A PROVIDER WOULD POST. In fact, since the vast majority of providers are NOT moderated, it means that they can post immediately, without ending up in the moderated queue.

Now, if someone else were to post a story about a provider, they most likely wouldn't do it here. This is a psychosexual Q&A board, not an opinion or comments board like the General Discussion board or the regional boards. Now, I can only speak for "my" moderating duties on this board, but rest assured that I would not suppress anything a provider posts - nor I would I suppress some type of report on a provider. What I frequently do when someone posts a comment rather than a question, I redirect the person to the other boards which are more suited to this purpose.

Your other insinuation over "encouraging VIP subscriptions to TER" is completely erroneous in the case of this board. You don't have to subscribe to TER to post on this board - we welcome anyone with a psychosexual question. Case in point: periodically, we get people who don't have reviews or websites, people who just find the board somehow on the Net and decide to ask all sorts of sexual questions.

So please think before you level any kind of assertions to this board regarding "suppression of information." The fact is that your posting ended up in the moderated queue and I could just as well have deleted it - but I didn't. That in itself should be of some reassurance to you. And of course, I seriously doubt that a provider would post a message regarding her health status here or anywhere else. If they wanted to conceal it, this would hardly be a good place to post, would it?

The fact that you got HSV-2 is regrettable, although as you point out, that was not from a provider. Meanwhile, it seems that you have learned your lesson regarding getting tested, although you do not indicate if you know what happened to the providers you saw for FBSM and BBBJ and their HSV status, much less the other women, among them the woman that contaminated you with the HSV-2 in the first place. The 1980s were a time of HSV-2 contaminations all over the place, and, as I have stated, I have known at least two women who had nothing to do with the sex industry and who contracted it during that era as well.

My suggestion to you is that you post your views on the General Discussion board to a) see if you are moderated and b) check the reaction of others. In the meantime, I suggest that you reconsider your accusations leveled against this board in particular, since NOTHING AS YOU DESCRIBE COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH, PERIOD.

Thank you,
the Love Goddess

"I do not have stats on this one, but a majority of porn stars actually practice safe sex WITH CONDOMS. You may not always see the condoms in the footage, but they are there."

        I think you are  wrong. Immediately after the 2004 HIV scare, some studios such as Vivid apparently did institute a condom only or condom optional policy and other producers followed in varying numbers. The market for harder and harder porn, however, soon led to a bareback productions from a large number of producers.

         As of 2008, I have  not seen the statistics either but woud be greatly surprised if the majority use condoms. Scroll thru "Freeones" sometimes to get a sampling. Whatever the statistics on the total porn production (if indeed such statistics are kept) may be, there is no question but that hundreds of scenes including many anal scenes are shot condom free.

         But even if you are correct that the "majority" use condoms that could mean that as many as 49% do not! And testing is not per scene. So you can begin the week completly free of STD but by the end of the week it is a different story, notwithstanding you have a current test. See the many posts on the Pornstar Board where gono and herpes are described as being "rampant" in the industry by some the pornstars themselves.

         As to the standards and regulation, see in particular the post from Lora Maze where she describes showing up at a shoot without her test and they told her _"don't worry about it. We'll take your word for it."

        So the only prudent answer to the original post is "yes, if you have a sex with a porn performer you should factor in a greater likelihood that she has an STD than  sex with someone at your neighborhood bar, or at a random party."

       And as far as herpes goes -a STD which condoms only provide limited  protection against and for which I understand is not included in the AIM test - the likelihood of  a porn performer being infected must be substantially greater than someone in the general population. This follows bc the average porn performer has so much more sex and with so many different partners than the average gal that the chances of infection must be astronomically higher.

Am I wrong about any of this? The favor of your response is requested.

Here's my response, marikod,

Unless I see stats on who is spreading disease - and I mean stats from the CDC and the like - I don't want to make statements such as you propose. It's not a question about being personally right or wrong, it's a question about observing the stats and what they tell us. It's very easy to cast aspersions/insinuations/suggestions onto a particular group of individuals - the oft-used statement that AIDS is a "gay" disease comes to mind - and so I avoid it until I really see some reliable numbers. What I have said is that everyone is at his/her own risk when playing in this arena (or the pornstar world, for that matter). What I have also said is that I don't believe that escorts or pornstars are responsible for the numbers we see in terms of epidemiology - these groups of people are far too small. Are they high risk - possibly, but then again, each sex worker has his/her own boundaries on what they will/will not do.

"Astronomically higher?" Please provide data. 'Significantly higher' maybe - astronomically, doubt it.

I am sorry, but I just can't say to someone to "factor in the likelihood that there is a greater likelihood that she has an STD." I would say that the risk is higher, but higher likelihood of an STD present at the time of sexual contact with a hobbyist? What kind of STD? Herpes? HSV-1 or 2? I can't make those kinds of statements without facts and figures from reliable sources.

Hope that answers your question,
the Love Goddess

-- Modified on 11/2/2008 10:54:51 PM

I think I am in total agreement with most of your points. Without accurate statistics, one really cannot say with reasonable certainty
whether porn performers as a group have a higher incidence of STD than (1) the population at large or (2) the hobbyist-escort community.

And as you say we do not want to make generalizations about a particular group without proof because that is so unfair.

Nonetheless for my personal conduct I do screen out partners who are members of what I presume to be high risk groups even in the absence of statistics. This is only common sense. But in your position as a professional adviser I agree that reliable statistics are the starting before you can offer advise.

M