Investigation of HIV in porn industry hurt by 'limited cooperation' from filmmakers, report says

Health officials say two male porn actors were HIV-positive when they had sex with Derrick Burts, an adult film performer whose HIV diagnosis in October caused several large production companies to suspend filming.

The report indicated that adult film companies were stymieing the public health investigation into the HIV infection. “Limited cooperation from many adult film industry companies restricted this contact investigation. Rarely did industry legal counsel give information for investigation,” the report said.

The report, written by Dr. Francisco Meza, a physician with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Epidemic Intelligence Service on loan to the California Department of Public Health, illustrated how public health officials have been unable to conduct an extensive, thorough investigation quickly.

The slow progress of the probe is a stark contrast to how health officials normally handle disease outbreaks. Usually health officials are able to swiftly identify anyone who was potentially exposed to an  illness. They quickly attempt to determine the origin of the disease and take measures to prevent the disease from spreading.

Making the investigation difficult is the refusal of adult film companies to cooperate and the prolific use of pseudonyms by performers, which can make it difficult to know the real names of sex partners. Burts told authorities that he had sex with six men and 10 women in the two months before his HIV diagnosis, but officials have been able to contact only five of them, and none wanted to cooperate with the investgiation, the report said.

Of his 16 sexual partners, 15 were on the set, and involved 12 filming locations and 10 production companies, the report said. Burts said he used condoms during scenes involving anal sex, but did not use them during vaginal or oral scenes.

The report said Burts began working in the adult film industry on Aug. 5 and had sex with four women and one man during that month; Burts said he was unaware that the male actor he worked with had been infected with HIV and was not being treated.

Burts then had sex with four men and two women in September; one of those men was also found to be HIV positive. Burts tested negative for HIV on Sept. 3 but tested positive on Oct. 6. Because it can take a couple of weeks for HIV infection to show up in a test, health officials concluded that he probably was infected some time between mid-August and mid-September.

Meza urged in his report that production companies provide health officials the names of these actors, and noted that federal law requires firms to keep records of actors' real names to prove they are of legal age. He also urged the use of condoms during all sex acts.

The manner of the report’s release also seemed to indicate the sensitive nature of the issue. The report was scheduled to be presented at a CDC conference in Atlanta on Friday, but the presentation was abruptly canceled at the last moment. No explanation was given, and the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health, the lead agency in this probe, declined to answer questions, saying it does not comment on specific HIV cases or pending investigations.

Although the report was not presented Friday, The Times was able to review a copy of the report.
Meza did not return a call requesting comment.

The cancelation of the presentation was highly unusual because the same report was given at a regional CDC conference in March at San Diego State University.

Michael Weinstein, president of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, said the county should subpoena the companies that are not providing public health officials with information.

“They should not be in a position where they can debate giving this information” to the authorities, Weinstein said.

RELATED:

HIV-positive porn actor was told: 'You're not going to make any money if you wear a condom'

Porn performer who tested positives speaks for the first time

Porn actor with HIV didn't infect any other adult performer, clinic says

Porn industry clinic comes under fire for its handling of HIV case

-- Rong-Gong Lin II

Photo: Derrick Burts, 24, said he tested HIV-positive in October at the Adult Industry Medical Healthcare Foundation in Sherman Oaks after working in both gay and straight porn films for a few months. He had previously been identified only as Patient Zeta. Credit: Luis Sinco / Los Angeles Times

Comments

[Sean Chen]

I'm not a porn star and I don't know the industry.

I do know that these people have rights.

Just because we don't agree with what they do for a living does not mean we get to trample on their individual rights as people.

[hap]

they all need to assume a new position now. perhaps way way offshore, in lala land...

[Monarch]

Another instance where the government needs to mind its own business and
stop wasting taxpayer money.

[Watchit]

Dr. Jonathan Fielding, (L A County Public Heath) inexplicably refused use the county's full powers of investigation, such as subpoena power on this. This has caused unflattering assessments by an increasing number of public health officials around the country. Fielding apparently pulled the plug at the last minute- asking Meza, who is a CDC employee assigned to the county, to cancel it. Fielding may have dreaded the pointed questions it was rumored would be asked about his reluctance to fully investigate this outbreak. In doing this, he has succeeded in calling attention to what some insiders have characterized as a "pornophobic" lack of response.

[Good Health Rules]

"Lay down with dogs,
You wake up with fleas."

[Anonymous]

typo: investgiation

[Darklady]

I'm a little confused here... once again.

Burts is believed to have contracted HIV on a condom-only set. Meza is urging sets to use condoms. Which this set did...

He was diagnosed due to the AIM testing center, which is being attacked by AHF in an attempt to force performers to use inferior testing methods.

Is it legal to turn over medical records or force employers to release personal information in a situation like this?

Burts only worked with 16 people... and doesn't remember who they are? Does that count any clients that hired him as an escort?

[Captain Obvious]

That's wierd. A guy that has sex with 16 people in two months caught HIV. Who would've guessed?

[Keith]

I'm sorry, but when you have sex with numerous partners for any reason you take the chance of receiving a STD. While HIV is in incubation it is not detectable, but can still be transferred from one sex partner to the next.

[Jim Townes]

Can't they just pass a law that requires them to use condoms?
Why is this so complicated there are plenty of safety laws like you have to wear a helmet in a construction area - isn't this the same thing????

[mediamaniac]

The CDC couldn't possibly have expected anything else from these sleazebag companies. I mean really.

[lc]

Oh well. Another form of you play you pay. Sorry folks, God will not be made a liar nor will his word return back to HIM void. Male to Male sexual contact is an and will forever be an abomination with the outcome ending in embarrassment and/or tragedy.

[Michael Whiteacre]

I find it quite telling that Mr. Meza's recommendation, if enacted, would constitute a violation of both federal (vis-a-vis the use of 2257 proof of age records) and California state law.

The reason I find it so telling is that AIDS Healthcare Foundation, the primary entity pushing to force its agenda of AIDS fear and hysteria into the porn industry, had a HUGE medical privacy scandal a couple of years ago right here in California. Although the law forbids unauthorized disclosures about a person's HIV status, in 2009, AHF was illegally provided the names, and addresses of some 5,000 HIV-positive Medi-Cal recipients from The California Department of Health Care Services.

AHF's Michael Weinstein believes that it’s perfectly acceptable for the government to covertly funnel extremely private information about the HIV status of patients of public clinics in order to bolster the client-list of AHF. Control trumps privacy for the "good" gay, it would seem.

To quote Clark Baker of The Office of Medical & Scientific Justice, "AHF pushes condoms because they are an intrinsic part of AIDS marketing and hysteria.  If AHF can compel the adult industry to incorporate their condoms into a spontaneous sexual fantasy (Hey Baby… here we are in paradise… just you, me and this AHF condom), they will get the best product placement money can buy.  In this way, AHF is a pharmaceutical shill that pushes fear and hysteria to sell tests, drugs and condoms all over the world."

[Joe]

Do you folks have any editors anymore. Cancelation? Really? The spelling in online editions of NATIONALLY KNOWN NEWSPAPERS IS PATHETIC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! No wonder the phrase "stupid american" is used over and over again. As for HIV, the actors who participate in porn should probably expect some sort of disease. I don't feel sorry for them at all....

[vickie]

I'm truly sorry for the guy but all porn stars as well as everyone else knows that they are risking an HIV infection anytime they have unprotected sex. That's just the reality of the world we live in. He had a choice! Now he has to deal with the consequences.

[Anthony Kennerson]

Along with the comment of Michael Whiteacre on the hypocrisy of AHF (and their associates at LACDPH, who have been staunch activists for imposing the condom mandate, there is also the direct policy of intimidation by some acting on the behalf of AHF, LACDPH, and Cal-OSHA, on assaulting the rights of porn performers.

There is, for example, the incident in December where people posing as "medical agents" went to the private homes of performers with syringes seeking involuntary blood samples for their "investigation", all without any hint of a court warrant or any other form of legal approval.

Then there is the lawsuit that was filed in 2009 by AHF on behalf of LACDPH against AIM (Adult Industry Medical), seeking release of the medical records of all performers allegedly involved in an earlier HIV scare in August of that year. (It was discovered that the "Patient Zero" of that scare was simply a former performer attempting to get back in who was already infected; and no one else was impacted.)

Finally, there is the current Pornwikileaks.com scare, where the real identities of many present and current performers were stolen from the AIM database and released to the public.

Given all that, and the aggressiveness of LACDPH and AHF in their pursuit of the condom mandate, it's really not as surprising after all that many performers have refused to cooperate. Maybe it's not stonewalling..it just might be self-defense.

Anthony Kennerson
Lafayette, LA

[Andrw]

I'd like to know what the source is for the health officials' affirmation that two male actors were HIV-positive when they had sex with Burts.

Shouldn't the LA Times' writer/journalist have provided us with that crucial bit of information?

The initial source for that allegation was Burts himself, who claimed that he must have gotten infected while acting in porn. For when not having sex with guys (**all kinds of sex**) and women, he only fooled around with his girlfriend who remains HIV-negative. Never mind that in truth he was known to have been a sex escort. (Check out the more thorough LA Weekly article on the issue.)

Also, if condom-less oral sex is so dangerous (as Burts claims) when it comes to HIV transmission, why has there NEVER been a huge outbreak of the disease in the porn business? Or even a small one caused by oral sex? Just think about it. Or is that too much to ask of a journalist?