"I find it amazing that you dont even know that AIM tests about 1000 performers a month."
Just because there are official looking documents for something does not make them true. I am skeptical of the assertion that AIM tests 1000 performers a month.
"YOU say the percentage of condom useres vary depending on thingsd like a recent hiv outbreak. There has only been one outbreak in lthe last seven years."
There were four people in the Spring of 2004. Tony Montana in 1999. Five people in 1998. Four people in 1997.
"Is it possible that at times there are spikes in the number of positives? Of course, but to try to blame a spike like this on one person like you did is ridiculous."
I didn't blame anyone. I published the concerns of one industry person.
When someone is a "real" or not real journalist may be an interesting discussion but not one I'm going to plunge into it. It is too tiresome and there's not likely to be a clear conclusion.
"The facts about AIM testing are availabel to companies online. ALL the results are there to see. Dont tell me a JOURNALIST like yourself cant verify these facts."
Official looking documents do not necessarily equal truth. Some journos are great with documents. My skills lie elsewhere, with getting people to reveal themselves through their words.
"And its hard to take you seriously too luke, when alot of what you write is outright bullshit, especially regarding AIM."
For instance?
"So what about that 'junkie phleb thing you wrote LUke. WHERE DID YOU GET THAT INFOR FROM? OR DID YOU JUST MAKE IT UP?"
I don't make anything up unless an item is clearly identifiable as satire. I know from first-hand reports from AIM employees that some, perhaps many, of them have had histories as intravenous drug users.
"I am referring to the short post a few months ago where you speculated that the reason they are so good with needles is because they are probably all ex junkies."
I am positive I did not write it like that. I would never say "all."
Previous Topic
Index
