AIDSFive stars in American heterosexual porn tested HIV positive in 1998 - Kimberly Jade, Marc Wallice, Caroline, Brooke Ashley and Tricia Devereaux.
Veteran male performer Marc Wallice is widely thought to be the source of infection for everyone in 1998 (having engaged on camera in unprotected anal sex with the infected girls), and possibly Nena Cherry (2/97), Jordan McKnight (5/97), and French girls Delfin (6/97?) and Barbara Doll (5/95) in past years.
At a February fourth, 1998 talent meeting, Tricia Devereaux told her peers that she had tested HIV positive in early January. Then Sharon Mitchell told the crowd of 200 that virtually everybody had been exposed the HIV virus, and that the then-current Eliza test was no longer considered suitable. The industry standard was now the PCR-DNA test for HIV.
On March 27, Brooke Ashley tested HIV positive, after turning in a "50-man anal gangbang" in late January and early February, where she worked with Wallice.
In early April, Caroline tested HIV positive followed by Wallice April 30. Wallice's test revealed that he had probably been HIV positive for a year or so.
On May 29, Kimberly Jade tested HIV positive. She worked with Marc in late 1997. Her test revealed that she had been HIV positive for about six months.
During April and May of 1998, it appeared to many observers that leading talent agent Jim South colluded with the Free Speech Coalition to monopolize HIV DNA testing.
In April, performer Dave Hardman, whose agent is Rob Spallone, showed up to a set with an HIV DNA test from an independent agency. He was told that he could not work unless he received a test from Jim South's nurse (for $95).
An industry observer writes on RAME: "Is this the same Jim South who reportedly shepherds the new girls to his hand-picked hack-o-rama plastic surgeon? I wonder what his share of the testing fee is?
"I hope the law f---s with him over this aids test scam. Not the requirement to have one. Just that it has to be from his own hand picked provider. We've all seen the results of his taste in plastic surgeons. Who in their right mind would let this guy pick their AIDS test doctor?"
Among those testing HIV positive is the Hungarian Caroline. Her real name is Katalin, which caused confusion due to its resemblance to the name of porn star Kaitlyn Ashley who disappeared suddenly from the industry in late 1997.
Maven LT points out that all but two of the HIVs in the industry had natural breasts - exceptions Nena Cherry and Jordan McKnight. Those girls who take their porn careers seriously generally get implants.
On 5/20/98, performer Kimberly Jade tested HIV positive with the PCR/DNA test. She mainly worked on the road stripping in clubs the past year or so.
On 1/29/98, Kimberly tested negative on an Eliza test. That day she performed sex with Marc Davis and Lelani Lea. Davis and Lea have tested PCR/DNA negative for the HIV virus. Jade next performed sex for the camera 2/22/98 with Meridian, who has also tested HIV negative (PCR/DNA).
"People in this industry have secrets," explains Mitchell. "Not everyone cuts loose with everything…we do not know what people have done five minutes before they go on the set… We can just do the best we can. Get people to use condoms..."
Numerous male performers in heterosexual porn have done gay films including Peter North, Julian, Andre Bolla, R.J. Reynolds, Jack Wrangler, Joey Verducci, Marc Wallice, Marc Simpson, Eric Price, Jay Ashley…
A cameraman writes to Luke F-rd: "I was the videographer on John T Bone's gang bang last Saturday [5/2/98] and out of the 48 guys who performed, the only ones who wore condoms were the ones who chose to work with Cassidy as she required it. Otherwise it was bareback all the way. John did tell everyone involved that they were free to wear them if they desired and he provided about ten boxes. No one took him up on it.
"I have been in this business for eight years. I have shot a thousand sex scenes (approximately of course). The only reason HIV finds it's way into this industry is because of the irresponsible behavior that some of our talent partake in when off duty (ie. drug use). No one has ever contracted it sexually from someone else in the business.
"The people in John T Bone's gang bang were members of the general public. They were required to send an Elisa HIV test to CREAM productions a month previous to shooting and they had to bring a recent one to the shoot itself. All involved complied. This is a far greater precaution than members of the general public normally take. I believe that John T Bone fulfilled his responsibility to provide a safe work environment."
Vegas Vic writes on RAME: "I'm not trying to minimize the tragedy of those performers who have been infected with the HIV virus, but if you look at the number of confirmed cases vs. the tens of thousands of sex scenes that have been shot (without condoms), the percentage is infinitesimal. One could make a strong argument that police officers, firemen, stuntmen, race car drivers, postal workers, construction workers, teachers, elementary school students, etc. have a higher mortality rate than porn stars."
RAME moderator Brad Williams:
If Porn Star A or Writer B states publicly "Performer Z has tested positive according to what Performer Z told me his/herself," Porn Star A or Writer Z may find themselves quickly in another line of work.
Before the posts on Devereaux, Doll, Ashley, Caroline, and now Wallice saw the light, I had heard from performers and non-Luke sources that they had all tested HIV+. All these rumors are coming straight from the industry (performers, sometimes writers generally) itself.
The Wallice HIV+ bit I heard repeatedly from people a week or so ago. Unfortunately, the situation of "where's there is smoke there's fire" is turning out to be true.
Until the adult industry itself gets some semblance of honesty though, it breeds an atmosphere of rumors and great distrust, especially when almost every one of the rumors comes from people active in the industry to begin with. What the FSC tried to do during the Doll situation was convince everyone to shut-up and have some kind of "united front." It didn't work then, and it sure doesn't work now.
Here's a sample of messages I have received from performers or others that are active in the biz before it hit the public eye:
"Marc Wallice is bisexual, did indeed attempt to forge a negative HIV test, and is known to have been HIV+, even with some of the performers and most of the directors who refuse to use him."
"I have personally seen Tricia inject herself several times before going onto the set."
"Barbara Doll has unfortunately developed full-blown AIDS."
"Brooke Ashley has tested positive, and we're really freakin' now."
About the time e-mail like this started arriving, posts from others (or same) started coming in shortly afterwards.
I think it points out that it is mainly the performers themselves who are VERY concerned about the HIV issue, and also the most likely to spill the beans.
Responding to the latest HIV outbreak in the heterosexual porn industry, industry powers like VCA, Vivid, Wicked and distributors like GVA in an April 13, 1998 meeting demanded use of condoms in their productions.
Asia Carrera, who retired from porn because of the HIV outbreak, wrote on RAME 4-18-98: "VCA and the Free Speech Coalition appear to be butt buddies now. If you want to shoot for VCA in any capacity now (and that includes crew), they have all sorts of neat little rules you have to follow. Everyone who shoots for VCA must join the Free Speech Coalition first. That's $50 apiece for talent and crew members, and $500 for directors. All talent must have a DNA and Eliza test every 30 days ($130 a pop), and there's talk of only allowing tests administered by the Free Speech Coalition as valid. Talent must make a separate trip before every shoot to VCA to get their tests and Ids notarized. And of course, mandatory condom use in all boy/girl sex scenes. I was not amused by the dictatorial actions of the not-so-Free Speech Coalition and VCA. While I understand and respect what they are trying to achieve, I don't care for the way they are going about it. I am a responsible adult, and I don't need anyone to make decisions about my safety and welfare for me. And I certainly don't need them reaching into my wallet to fund their totalitarian plot. I had four days of shooting scheduled for VCA over the next two weeks. I cancelled them all, and now they can run around and find replacements who don't mind being told how to spend their money and enjoy their sex."
Porn Movies To Feature Condom Use
By MICHAEL FLEEMAN
.c The Associated Press
LOS ANGELES (AP) - For the first time since the AIDS outbreak, major producers of heterosexual porn videos will require actors to wear condoms on camera.
The move is prompted in part by reports that three adult movie actresses tested positive this year for the AIDS virus, industry representatives said Thursday.
``It's a fairly big step,'' said Paul Fishbein, publisher of Adult Video News, a trade magazine. ``It's interesting that it takes people to get a little bit scared for them to be proactive.''
The agreement emerged at a hastily called meeting April 13 of more than 40 adult film producers. The condom requirement extends to some of the biggest companies in the multibillion-dollar industry, including Vivid Video, VCA and Wicked Pictures.
Andiamo writes on RAME:
REGULATION: How can you regulate an "unregulated" industry. Aside from a few forms one needs (which can easily be forged), any young, pretty women can get into porno.
PRODUCERS: It should not be their responsibility to provide a "clean bill of health" to pornstars. It should be the porn stars themselves that take a vested interest in who they are having sex with. After all, it is their health at risk. Also,how can a performer prove that they contracted HIV on a particular set or shoot for a particular producer?
RUMORS: Rumors and gossip are everywhere. Its human nature to gossip. Look at your workplace. If a person is "rumored" to have HIV, that same person should come forward to quell the rumor, or suuport it. At least John Stagliano had the maturity to com e forward and state the truth.
TRANSMISSION: The medical field itself is still in debate about HIV and all its related facts. The means of transmission; its dormancy period, how some people have been recognized as "carriers" (and would mostly test negative), ect. If the domino effect of sexual transmission is correct, then porn stars have had sex with thousands, if not tens of thousands, of people. Of course by proxy. How in the world can a simple condom, so late in the game, protect someone from that?
RESPONSIBILITY: It's up to the individual. They know the risks involved. If a woman chooses to have sex with 246 strange men in one day, it's her choice. The same goes the men involved. The plea now for regulation, black-listing of those infected or rumored to be, protected sex on shoots, medical documentation, the producers responsibility, etc, all seem to bea vain attempt at correcting something we can never legislate. Personal choice and responsibility.
THE GOVT: Any politician taking the moral highground unquestionably has an edge on an opponent. Will the Senator's grandchild who got HIV from porn bring the wrath of BIG Brother? Could be. It took Brady getting shot himself to enact legislation. In my city the politicians have attacked the Dance Clubs, and are in effect, putting them out of business. Is the porn world next?
Pornographers John Holmes, R.J. Reynolds, Wade Nichols (shot himself in 1985 while dying of AIDS), Marc Stevens, Wade Nichols (according to reports) and Chuck Vincent died of AIDS in the mid to late '80s. Lisa (Trego) DeLeeuw died of AIDS at age 35 on 11-11-93.
A porn performer named Dusty disappeared in November 1992 and is widely thought to have tested HIV positive. Carrie Morgan left the industry in Spring 1993 for similar reason. France's Barbara Doll left in April 1995.
Roxanne Hall tested falsely positive in September of 1995.
In early 1997, John Stagliano and Nina Cherry tested HIV positive. Nena says that was a false result. In the spring, Jordan McKnight tested HIV positive. Later in the year, French girl Delfin tested positive.
American producers usually require performers to take AIDS tests at least every three months, if not every month, and present a photocopy of the negative result before working. Standards around the rest of the world are more lax. The Europeans, for instance, almost never use condoms while Americans frequently do, particularly in politically correct productions, such as by Vivid director and producer Paul Thomas. Gay porn mandates condom use.
"The vast majority of male porn viewers do not want to see condoms in explicit movies," notes Jim Holliday. "Further, woodsmen do not want to wear them. Any opinion to the contrary is personal and spoken with agenda." (AVN 9/96)
Mainstream media and the PC element in X-rated entertainment, and those frightened by them, came out with apocalyptic warnings that virtually every performer in the industry would contract AIDS and die. See for example the article on Doll in the first issue of Men's Perspective. "It's a small miracle that the entire industry isn't already HIV positive."
After Doll's two positive HIV tests, talent agent Jim South said it seemed "that was the end of pornography as we know it." Ona Zee, a veteran of over 1000 sexvids, spoke in the same tone. "The industry doesn't want to know about this question. They are wearing blinders and hoping, praying that nothing happens."
Even before the Doll incident, going back to the early '80s, numerous persons inside and outside the industry predicted AIDS would wreak havoc on performers. Here's a typical statement from Vanity Fair's March, 1987 issue. "For in the age of AIDS, nothing could be more crazily chancey than the multiple-partner unsafe sex practiced by porn stars (who are also often substance abusers and/or bi). The Meese Commission may not have to make a move. The porn industry seems intent on sodomizing itself into extinction."
AVN took the opposite approach of most media and initially wrote little about the AIDS scare. Instead, the magazine which is part of the porn industry, worked with pornographers to minimize bad publicity which could've shut down Porn Valley. While hysteria about heterosexual AIDS infected many of America's elite in politics, civil service, medicine, media, mainstream Christianity and Judaism, entertainment and academia, AVN helped keep the hysteria in porn under control.
Gene Ross writes in the 6/95 AVN:
"In my 27 years of journalism, I don't recall ever using the word imbecile in print, but it disturbs me to think it will obtain frequent flyer status in months ahead when describing the mindset of this business regarding AIDS.
"If one is to gather anything from the tenor of the April 28  performers' meeting, the conclusion is that we seem to be outfitting our own militia of delusional love children...
"It's past time for the adult industry to take bold initiatives. A universal mandate for condoms, a toned-down lifestyles...beats the hell out of caskets... The alternatives are less appetizing...be they a total industry shutdown, a reassembly of the talent pool...or total abstinence from hardcore.
"This magazine endorses life whatever it takes."
In the same AVN issue, Mark Hanau of A.I. Multimedia writes in with the following thoughts which AVN headlines as "Ignorance Is Bliss":
"Fear can result in actions that are neither rational nor logical. The news that antibodies to the HIV virus have been found in the blood of Barbara Doll has been received by the industry with hysteria...If the adult industry buys into the AIDS terror campaign, the US government will close us down on health not moral grounds.
"At the last meeting of the Free Speech Association, I offered to inject a sample of Miss Doll's blood to demonstrate that I am prepared to stake my life on what I am saying. I will also be happy to be her sexual partner. I do this after ten years of research, not for publicity or shock value but to counter the AIDS hysteria."
AVN's Mark Kernes responds. "As you admitted at the above-mentioned Free Speech meeting, you are not a medical doctor... That makes your opinions on this subject...of no value.
"As to your offer to inject yourself with some of Barbara Doll's blood to prove your point - sorry, but there are laws against assisted suicide... Anyone in the adult industry who takes your wishful thinking seriously is...due for a sad awakening."
AVN describes the early 1995 performers meeting about AIDS in its 6/95 issue: "What seemed lacking was the realization of personal responsibility, the idea that if you think that using a condom is necessary to your personal safety, then be prepared to insist... and be prepared to lose work for sticking to your principles. Every crisis seems to bring the industry closer...but in the end each performer will be responsible for his/her own safety. The only question is whether he or she has the courage to walk that moral high road."
Men's Perspective opines: "Remarkably, after all the furor and bitterness brought on by Barbara's false positive, the industry did nothing to formulate a coherent condom usage policy."
Despite the politically correct rhetoric, porn's AIDS cases demonstrate that the disease does discriminate - gays and intravenous drug users are far more likely to get it than straights, women more likely than men.
Journalist Mark Kernes writes in the 7/98 AVN:
"As we all now know, Eliza tests are f---ing worthless," Mitchell added. "Anything that you can get back in 10 minutes that's supposed to tell you whether you have HIV antibodies, you don't want to pay attention to; trust me."
The fallibility of Eliza tests was driven home more deeply when Mitchell obtained such a test, dated March 30, 1998, from actor Marc Wallice, who tested positive on a PCR-DNA test less than 30 days later.
"When we got the Marc Wallice results, it was the day of that talent meeting, April 29th, and he was positive by PCR-DNA," Mitchell recounted. "After an explosion of rumors on the Internet that Marc Wallice had knowledge that he had HIV for several years, and that he had been on everyone's list, I looked back, and I found that indeed I had made an exception in Marc's case, which was an error on my part, which is something I'll never do again, obviously.
"I distinctly remember telling Marc several times to get tested for the Trish [Devereaux] thing. Her list actually went from 65 people down to none. I had pretty much everyone else's test except for two people that slipped through at that time, one of which I doggedly pursued and found. She and Marc were the two that slipped through. Marc told me, "Yeah, I'm getting tested," and every time I would see him at Jim [South]'s, I'd say, "By the way, you haven't come in [to be tested]. Are you going elsewhere?" And he"d say, "Yeah, I go to another clinic for my tests." I took that as an answer, and I took it as gospel, and the better part of the staff in the office here did too. He's been around so long, he's been a friend of mine for so many years, I thought, "well, the guy is working for himself; that's fine.""
But finally, the evidence pointing to Wallice as the likely source of infection became so great that Mitchell redoubled her efforts to have Wallice take a PCR-DNA test. She even had Elegant Angel's Patrick Collins, who distributes Wallice's video series Tails of Perversity, call Wallice from Hungary and insist that Wallice submit to follow-up blood tests after his HIV+ status had been established.
While Mitchell refuses to draw conclusions about the possibility of Wallice being "Patient Zero," Wallice"s May 6 Western Blot test revealed six positive bands and a viral load in excess of 100,000, the upper limit of the test's capability.
By comparison, Mitchell noted that one case that was "caught early" as the victim was tested within one month after being infected had only two positive bands and a viral load of 5970, while Tricia Devereaux's load was measured at about 8000.
Mitchell also noted that Wallice had never had a PCR-DNA test prior to April 29. All his Eliza tests came from a clinic which she refused to name "on San Fernando Road in Burbank, California," which Wallice told her had been recommended to him by the late Cal Jammer.
Mitchell's best information is that no other current performer obtains tests from that clinic.
An inspection of the test carrying Wallice's name, dated March 30, 1998, lists his age as 49. "If he's 49, I'm 65," Mitchell snorted.
Pat Riley writes on rame:
I was going to head this up "Pity the poor performer", "How f---in' Incompetent Can You Get" but then that might be considered a negative view. DiGiorgio chided me recently about suspending disbelief but I thought that only applied to movies and not the supposed expertise of Sharon Mitchell in making pronouncements on AIDS/HIV in the industry and Kernes' supposed journalism.
The article "HIV Update: Kimberly Jade Is Fifth Industry HIV Victim Since January 1" is attributed to Mark Kernes and appears on pg 32 of the July 1998 issue. I will quote parts of it in accordance with the fair use doctrine. The whole article is available at: http://www.avn.com/html/avn/news
Just who appointed Sharon Mitchell the "testing coordinator for Protecting Adult Welfare" and who authorized her to do the genealogies on the HIV+ performers? Why wasn't someone competent appointed, say someone with expertise in the epidemiology of AIDS? Or someone who could at least use the resources of the web and look up the wealth of information on testing found in such places as:
Both Kernes and Mitchell sound like they get their information from Springer (groan) instead of some reasonably reliable (on this subject) source. Even dissident fanatics (the virus doesn't exist types) had the following to say when I posted some quotes from Kernes on
"The comment [about number of reactive bands] you have quoted above is utterly meaningless."
Another respondent was Dr. Robert Holzman, a lecturer in infectious diseases at New York University, who I will quote where applicable.
I also received a response from Brian Foley whose signature reads:
|Brian T. Foley email@example.com |
|HIV Database (505) 665-1970 |
|Los Alamos National Lab http://hiv-web.lanl.gov/index.html |
|Los Alamos, NM 87544 U.S.A. http://www.t10.lanl.gov/~btf/home.html |
The Los Alamos National Lab is where the strain matching for the FL dentist case was done. See the later paragraphs in this post.
The point is anyone can get this sort of factual information and in dealing with a serious matter should have. (Permission to quote them was obtained from both Mr. Foley and Dr. Holzman.)
[quote from Sharon Mitchell about Kimberly Jade] "She did not work with Marc Wallice...She was coming back into the industry. She had not had a PCR-DNA. Her last Eliza (sic) test was January 29, and it was still negative, and her Western Blot was positive on eight bands."
According to informed sources, the large number of reactive bands on Jade's Western Blot test would suggest that Jade has had the disease for about six months.
FROM DR. HOLZMAN
"No. There is some evidence that the intensity may decline with time. A recent tv news show commented on a new test comparing the strength of the tests as a marker for recent infection."
Neither the CDC nor the other web site quoted (and both go into lots of technical details) say that the number of bands on a Western Blot are indicative of length of time since infection. On the contrary the stronger the reaction, the more antibodies have been detected and antibodies seem to be highest at the earlier stages of infection.
Western Blot is a test used to substantiate a positive on an Elisa test. The Elisa test gives a small number of false positives (no problem in the porn industry; they don't work), the WB tells you if it was really positive or was a false positive (or is sometimes indeterminate but lets not get into that). Does Mitchell mean that the Elisa tested negative and the WB positive at the same testing time? That's crazy.
"As we all now know, Eliza tests are f---ing worthless," Mitchell added. "Anything that you can get back in 10 minutes that's supposed to tell you whether you have HIV antibodies, you don't want to pay attention to; trust me."
First of all, it's ELISA (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay) not ELIZA, a mistake repeated throughout the article. This is not an NG posting or a simple typo, but calls into question whether Mitchell and Kernes are sufficiently familiar with the subject matter.
ELISA is one of a group of tests collectively known as EIA tests that are used to screen persons for HIV by looking for antibodies in the blood. The various types look for slightly different combinations of factors which I'm not going to repeat here and have slightly different "windows". Read about it at the web sites quoted above (have your college microbiology textbooks handy). However all ELISA tests are highly sensitive and have a very low rate of false negatives so much so that the hivinsite says:
"A negative antibody test result, whether it is from a rapid HIV test or an EIA, does not require a confirmatory test."
I.e., provided the window period is taken to account, EIA tests will tell you you're not HIV+. The rapid HIV test (presumably what Mitchell is referring to when she talks about "10 minutes" is, according to the CDC, equally accurate.
The window period is the time between infection and when you show up on a test as HIV+ and for the Elisa test (depending on type) the CDC states an average of 25 days. There are a whole series of tests (primarily looking for specific antigens) between Elisa and the porno industry's holy grail, the PCR-DNA test. Some of these MAY shorten the window but under some circumstances (not rare) may fail to detect a HIV+ person. In particular the PCR-DNA test which the industry seems to put all its faith in and is also used for viral load testing is not recommended for screening by the CDC.
So, Miss Mitchell, I don't think I'll be trusting you!
[I'm skipping a lot of hogwash about how Mitchell made an "error" and forgot about checking on Wallice at the time of the last scare.]
Wallice"s May 6 Western Blot test revealed six positive bands and a viral load in excess of 100,000, the upper limit of the test's capability. By comparison, Mitchell noted that one case that was "caught early"--the victim was tested within one month after being infected--had only two positive bands and a viral load of 5970, while Tricia Devereaux"s load was measured at about 8000.
The comment on bands is related to the WB; the coment on copies is related to the PCR-DNA. PCR results could be expresed either as the number of copies (100,000 is a reasonable number) or as the logarithm of the count (5 would be the log of 100,000). and [to a question as to the reasonableness of the other viral loads above]
They are low and bear no relation to the time of infection.
Again Kernes confuses the two tests (deliberately?). Further the hivinsite mentions no limitation on the upper range of viral load and the question is irrelevant for WB testing. Actually why are Tricia and the unnamed person's (Brooke?) viral loads so low? Maybe if Kernes was talking to a real epidemiologist he would think to ask. Sure!
Mitchell also noted that Wallice"s Eliza tests--he had never had a PCR-DNA test prior to April 29--all come from a clinic which she refused to name "on San Fernando Road in Burbank, California,".... An inspection of the test carrying Wallice's name, dated March 30, 1998, lists his age as 49. "If he's 49, I'm 65," Mitchell snorted. When contacted by AVN, Wallice refused to discuss his HIV status or anything relating to it.
None. We can all surmise what happened.
Unfortunately, even with a sample of Wallice"s blood, it is impossible to determine scientifically if Wallice is indeed the person who transmitted the HIV virus to anyone else in the industry. "There are only three strains of the virus known in the world," said Mitchell.
"We"d be spending $5000 of the industry"s money to find out that everybody probably caught it in the United States.
This is utter bullshit.
There are two viruses out there: HIV-1 and HIV-2. HIV-2 is primarily seen in West Africa and occasionally in Asia. There are about 100 known cases in the US, all concerning people who had some African connection. Within HIV-1, the main US virus, there are a series of subtypes or clades which are variants of the virus. The main clade in the US is type B. (In Thailand it's type E etc)
However, HIV constantly mutates meaning that the sequence within the viral DNA is not identical in every person (even children infected in utero by their mother do not have an identical viral DNA pattern). If the variation in the genetic sequences is small, the likelihood is that those two people got it from the same source or one infected the other. (I can't quote a web site here. This information comes from the explanation of the DNA sequencing carried out on the Florida dentist and his infection of six of his patients as reported in Fatal Extraction by Mark Carl Rom 1997 Josey- Bass.) The process of comparing the two or more genetic sequences is known as strain-matching.
It is most certainly possible to determine if Marc, Brooke, and Tricia share the same (or close to) viral DNA sequence. Does that prove that one infected the other beyond a shadow of a doubt? No. Beyond reasonable doubt. Probably. If it shows a totally different genetic sequence, however, we can rule out Marc as being the cause of the others' infection.
There are two different viruses known to cause immunodeficiency in humans: HIV-1 and HIV-2. HIV-1 is present all over the world. HIV-2 is mainly confined to western Africa, but is spreading, notably into India. HIV-1 is subdivided (based on DNA sequence analysis and serology) into two main groups, the M (for main) group and the O (for outlier) group. O group HIV-1 is much less common than M group, and is mainly found in Africa. HIV-1 M group is further subdivided into subtypes A through J (so far). Subtype B is common in the United States and Europe. Other subtypes are becoming more common in Europe and the USA, as people fly around the world. Subtypes E and B are common in Thailand. Subtype C is common in India.
[to my question about strain matching: "> Do you agree > there is some degree of reliability or is this hogwash?" he replied:
The DNA sequences are very reliable IF the lab work is done correctly.
On top of this, you have to consider other evidence, and be sure that the samples are from the people they are supposed to be from. For example, it does not matter if the blood at the crime scene matches OJ Simpson's if you are not sure how the blood got there. If it was planted by someone else, then it is not good evidence.
Similar to "reasonable doubt" if the strains do match, there is also some doubt in the case where they don't match. Your statement is pretty good, I agree with it. But if only a single sequence is done from each person, the possibility exists that for example Marc is infected with 2 or 3 very different strains and he only pased one on to the next person and it is not the one that got sequenced. In the Florida dentist cases, Dr. Acer carried two related but different strains and he passed both on to Kimberly Bergalis "patient A" but only one of the two to the other 5 patients (at least we only detected one of the 2 in them).
In my opinion, it would be worth spending the $5,000 or so to "DNA fingerprint" the virus from these actors, not only to see if they got it from one another, but also to see if future cases come up that are linked to any of them. I suspect the film industry does not want the test done, because if it did happen to indicate that any of them were infected by any other, it would open them up to lawsuits. It would indicate that one or more of the people was infected "on the job". If I were any of these infected people, I would not trust the film industry or anyone else with a stake in the matter to do the testing.
I would have two different university or hospital labs do independent typing on independent samples (take two samples from each person using two different needles, maybe even on two different days). One lab can make a mistake. Even both labs can make mistakes. But two labs making the SAME mistake is highly unlikely. So if both result agree, then the results are very trustworthy. If such testing costs $10,000 it is a small price to pay if you want the truth about this. One year of anti-HIV drug therapy can cost $15,000 to $20,000, not to mention the fact that these people are no longer employable by the industry they were working in.
But despite gossip in the Internet newsgroup rec.arts.movies.erotica, most rumors of certain actors" HIV+ status are false.
"Mila is fine," replied Mitchell to questions about specific performers. "We get Mila rumors every month. We get Dave Hardman rumors every month. We get Earl Slate rumors every month. We get the jilted-husband-of-the-month who insists he's HIV+ and wants to terrorize us. We tell him very nicely to come in and we"ll help him with his genealogy and we'll help him find after-care, and they never come in."
Does the juxtaposition of the gossip statement and the comments about Mila, Hardman, and Slate indicate that Kernes is saying we said those three were infected? Funny, I don't remember any postings even suggesting that any of the three were HIV+.
Or maybe it's a "When did you stop beating your wife"-type dishonest argument writers at the industry advertising magazine have been trained in. As anyone who reads this group knows most disclosures of performers' HIV status on this group have been factual. Sour grapes again eh, Kernes.