Ian

RIP Diane Keaton, you'll always be my first wife 🩷

Pride began as a protest, led by those who refused to stay silent in the face of state violence. That legacy lives on. 🏳️‍🌈 #PrideIsPolitical #AbolishICE #QueerResistance #KeepItFilthy #FilthyStudios #FreeExpression #SexWorkIsWork #ImmigrantRightsAreHumanRights #freedomofspeech

@thekiranoir Thank you so much ❤️

hey, I doubled checked info about PASS and the production hold, and I wanted to share it with you

@litsince @burbankmisfits @PornVoyeur @PASScertified That is who was retested - anyone who was exposed to (shot with) the person who tested positive.

@IanTOBrien @burbankmisfits @PornVoyeur @PASScertified What about everyone that person shot with?

Production hold lifted immediately. Thank you to all who observed the hold and for helping ensure the safety of all performers. ✅ Read PASS's latest update: passcertified.org/news/productio…

@burbankmisfits @PornVoyeur @PASScertified No one knew there were exposures 14 days ago, there hadn't been a diagnosis yet. Once we learned of a diagnosis, the people doing contact tracing reviewed history to see where exposure could have happened. Those folks were identified and re-tested.

@IanTOBrien @PornVoyeur @PASScertified I understand but I know persons who shot the day before the hold went on a few days ago. My point is I wonder why they weren't told 14 days ago is all

@burbankmisfits @PornVoyeur @PASScertified No. We called a production hold within a couple hours of learning there had been an HIV+ test and exposures. Those exposures took place over 14 days ago.

@IanTOBrien @PornVoyeur @PASScertified So you they waited 2 weeks before they told people that somebody had a fail

@loveleahgotti Absolutely! Breaking down the science of testing can be tricky, and even more so for our industry because most of the literature isn't considering our particular use cases. Our goal is to find the balance that keeps people as safe as possible as pragmatically as possible.

@IanTOBrien Thanks, it’s so confusing reading it but I appreciate your help

If y'all have any questions about PASS, the production hold, or our decision to lift it - please feel free to ask.

@loveleahgotti The information in that link is consistent (the 10-33 day for NAT). NAT detects HIV RNA directly. HIV RNA grows logarithmically - at 11 days it catches 50%, 14-days is 95%, and 33 days you're at 99%+.

@IanTOBrien I guess im just confused because the information I’m finding other than the link you shared states it sometimes doesn’t show that quickly hiv.gov/hiv-basics/hiv…

@ReyaLovenlight @PASScertified Fully understood! I said this to someone earlier, but risk is always present and we have to draw a line somewhere. We absolutely respect if your line is different and believe you have the information you need to make that decision.

@IanTOBrien @PASScertified Gotcha. Thank you. Appreciate you guys! I know you’re doing what you feel is right. I understand the reliability of the RNA tests and 95% is pretty darn good but if 1 clear test was all that was necessary to clear these individuals for work, that’s still way too risky for me.

@ReyaLovenlight @PASScertified #timing-laboratory-markers-following-hiv-infection" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">hiv.uw.edu/go/screening-d…

@ReyaLovenlight @PASScertified There are multiple different test types that are able to detect HIV at different parts of its lifecycle. The HIV RNA (also called PCR or NAT) test can reliably detect an early HIV infection in 95% of people at 14 days. Retested talent were exposed 14+ days ago.

@ChloeKreams @PASScertified You're very welcome!

@IanTOBrien @PASScertified thank you 😊

@loveleahgotti #timing-laboratory-markers-following-hiv-infection-early-hiv-test-reactivity-terminology" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">hiv.uw.edu/go/screening-d… is a bit more accessible, but uses the prior article as its citation as well.

@loveleahgotti #ContentAccessOptions" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">journals.lww.com/aidsonline/abs… is the source for the window/eclipse period number, though you might have trouble accessing the full text because academic journals can be ridiculous.

@xplizitpov @PASScertified @giaderza69 What you say is true, though the window period was taken into account. It had been 14+ days since the last known exposure, which is a 95% chance of detecting an early HIV infection. This is the threshold we use for the 14 day standard in general.

@PASScertified @giaderza69 Those people tested can test negative, a negative result does not definitively rule out HIV infection, especially if the test was taken during the window period, the time between exposure and when the test can detect the virus. Y'all be safe. ✌️

@ChloeKreams @PASScertified Yes - it had been 14+ days since the last known exposure, giving us a 95%+ chance of reliably detecting an early HIV infection. This is the threshold we use for 14-day standard in general as well.

@IanTOBrien @PASScertified this feels very fast given incubation periods, has that all been taken into account? I understand you can’t share anyone’s personal info, and I would never ask for this, but a general timeline of patient 0 and their partners would bring a little more peace of mind

@DoctorPov @PASScertified Thanks to the testing center, all known exposed talent were able to be contacted and retested very quickly. The most recent exposure occurred over 14 days ago, so the statistically significant window period was accounted for.

@PASScertified That was short lived. Why so fast? False positive?

@9inedoesitall It was actually over two weeks since the last known exposure, as explained in the full text. We accounted for window periods.