I've got some news for some of the earlier posters. The actors in question are straight porn actors and actresses and the action by the State of California is a strike against pornography in general. Save your righteous indignation for a time when it is warranted.

As far as requiring condom usage in porn, give me a break! Porn is all about fantasy. I mean if you could do what you want with who you want there wouldn't be any need for porn, would there?

It so happens that the big US straight porn companies have a policy of requiring that every actor be tested immediately before a shoot by a third party testing service using the most sensitive tests available. In the case in question an actor was infected during a shoot in Brazil but his antibody levels were not yet detectable when he had his next film in the US. His infection was detected the next time he was scheduled to do a film and all people he had worked with were embargoed from porn work until their HIV status could be determined. That is why there were only 4 people infected.

This is not a perfect system because of the seroconversion latency but it works quite well; the previous time an HIV+ stright porn worker was discovered was 5 years previously. This is still a pretty high rate but not as high as other occupations, such as race car driver, that nobody objects to.

Quote |