Quote:

---

Exactly. There would be less over saturation of the market like there was in the 80's and producers could sell tier dvd's for a hell of a lot more. Talent would be safer. We did very well with fewer talent back then. A handful of
guys. You hardly ever saw people show up unable to get hard or cum because we used the trusted few. Do we really need 90% of the male talent that are unable to preform? The industry thrived and the talent lived well.

If you could learn to read you will see that I posted scientific fact (research) from a trusted medical website. I guess you know more than they do, huh?

---

You do realize that even back in the old days the guys used to work multiple scenes a day... I used to work with and spend hours every day talking about those old days with Tom Byron. If you used just the trusted few you would have more guys working more scenes in a row and would defeat your previous argument.


You posted scientific fact from a trusted medical source about ANTIBODY tests. PCR-DNA (RNA) testing is quite different. Most places do not reference it as a test because it is much more expensive and not necessary for the general populace. However it is much more sensitive and can detect the presence of the virus instead of the antibodies.

Antibody tests detect the presence of antibodies your body creates to fight off the virus. It takes your body time to develop these antibodies in sufficient quantities hence the 3-6 month window.

PCR testing looks for the presence of the virus itself by looking for its reverse-transcriptase RNA signature that it creates as it replicates. It is used to test Viral Load in people who are HIV+ and can detect HIV much sooner after infection down to a 7-14 day window with an average of 12 days. It is a very sensitive test and is usually the main test used to test donated blood (along with the p24 antigen test.

And the best part was i didn't need to pull that from a website
Do some research and you will find i am quite right.

The only problem with the PCR test is it is likely to produce a false.... POSITIVE. It can be that sensitive. I would rather have a test like the PCR that can produce false positives than an ELISA antibody test that can produce many false negatives.