Web Site Claims To List People With STDs
Alternative content
STDcarriers.com
An Oregon-based website claims to maintain an international list of people with sexually-transmitted diseases.Published: July 20, 2009
Updated: July 21, 2009
COLUMBUS, Ohio—STDCarriers.com claims to be an international list of people with STDs, sexuallytransmitted diseases. It was launched in October 2008 by a recent college grad whose ex-girlfriend gave him herpes.
“I’m actually listed on there myself,“ says site creator and administrator Cyrus Sullivan. He didn’t put himself on the list. He waited for someone else to put his name in the database.
The site says its list includes people infected with one or more diseases, including HIV, from at least five countries. The list is not just porn stars, movie stars and athletes whose stories have been
reported in the mainstream media, but average people who have been reported to the site by friends, ex’s and people who claim to have some knowledge of person’s health status.
He says he created the list to warn others.
“If this site had existed in its current state a little over a year ago,“ he says, “I would have been able to look this girl up and I wouldn’t be having to shell out money for Valtrex every month.“
“I think for prevention messages alone this is a really bad idea,“ warns Columbus AIDS Task Force Executive Director Peggy Anderson. She says the site can’t be successful even if all the information in its database is true.
“Primarily it doesn’t work because it can never be an all-inclusive list,“ she says. “If people don’t know their own status, you’re still not going to know. So you’re going to trust a faulty mechanism to tell
you who’s safe and who’s not.“
The site’s database is built solely on reports from users and is far from comprehensive. It lists a total of 15 people in Ohio including two in Columbus, five in Cleveland and one in Galion. Anderson says that may give users a false impression of safety. People may not practice safe sex because their partner does not appear on the list.
Anyone who signs up for the site’s free membership can post information and the administrators take no responsibility for the accuracy of the posts. According to the site’s Legal Section, “Information is published by users who agree to the Terms of Use and then insert information into our database. As part of this agreement users assume full responsibility for the information that they publish.“ The data is then immediately visible on several of the site’s pages.
One of the Ohio listings is for a Cincinnati-area woman who, according to police records, hit her boyfriend in the face with a bottle then, knowing her HIV status, spit in his face hoping to infect him. Hamilton County Jail records say she is charged with felony domestic violence. The information in her STDCarriers.com listing is based on an article from the Cincinnati Enquirer. Her condition is part of police record and is, therefore, a verifiable public record.
Some of the postings even include photos, like a 19-year-old from Amherst, Ohio, who is alleged to have at least two STD’s.
That is not the case for many of the items in the database which are unsubstantiated. Sullivan says he audits the database occasionally but it’s up to the posters to be honest.
“They assume responsibility for what they post,“ he says. “They also agree to compensate victims once found.“
The site’s Terms of Use say misrepresenting your affiliation to a person will incur a $1,000 fine, posting content that violates the TOU costs $7,500 for each item, and “if you are found to have violated this section you agree to compensate the victim a monetary amount not less than $5,000 United Staes [sic] Dollars plus all legal expenses.“
Sullivan says he has never collected the money on a TOU violation or misuse.
CATF’s Anderson is concerned about the ramifications for people who’s names end up on the list, no matter whether the information is true or false.
“I’ve seen people lose their jobs, lose their housing, be kicked out of their families, their churches,“ she says of her years working with the HIV community. “And I just think putting any information out there, even if it is real, you are hurting people.“
“That’s ridiculous,“ says Sullivan, the site’s owner. “That is a flaw in the people that do those types of things to people. You should never throw someone out of their house or disown them just because they have HIV or any medical condition.“ He says he does not feel responsible for the fallout of posting the information.
Every “Carrier Profile” page includes a legal disclaimer that acknowledges the possibility of false postings and says the “site does not assert that any person listed does in fact have a sexually
transmitted disease or that statements made about them are true.“
The site claims it is not legally liable for the information published by its users because it is protected by the First Amendment which would, according to the site’s Legal Section, “protect our right to report what someone else said even if what that person said was false because that fact that the statement was made would be true.“
“The fact that he’s merely republishing something somebody else told him does not give him a defense,“ says Kathleen Trafford, an attorney at Porter Wright Morris & Arthur LLP who handles many First Amendment Cases.
She says, depending on the website’s statements, the owner could be sued for defamation, libel or slander. “If there is nothing being done to check the fact that these would be true statements, I think that person is at real risk,“ she says. “While the first amendment gives you a right to make statements publicly, it doesn’t give you an unlimited right to say anything about anybody else.“
Sullivan says he believes he is fully protected but his members and users may find themselves in legal trouble. “I’m in a pretty good legal position, on my end,“ he says. He says he has heard from several attorneys but has never actually been sued.
The web site expects that it will be fed bad information by users with a grudge and even acknowledges that it has happened. The Fraud Policy says, “Due to the predictability of human behavior its [sic] inevitable that people will (like they already have) use this potentially life saving [sic] resource to hurt others for any number of personal reasons by posting false information on this site.“
Removing a name from the database is solely at Sullivan’s discretion. And he admits the site runs on a guilty-until-proven-innocent method. “I feel the government should have been doing this years ago,“ he says.
To be taken off the list, Sullivan requires written test results from a doctor. “Have your doctor send your clean test results in an official sealed envelope,“ says the site’s Fraud Policy. It lists a Portland, Oregon, Post Office box as an address and says, in October 2009, it will be switching to a “non-USPS box service that forwards mail.“
NBC 4 attempted to make contact with several of the Ohioans on the list but was unsuccessful in getting reaction or comments from them.
For additional information, stay with nbc4i.com and NBC 4 and refresh nbc4i.com—Where Accuracy Matters.
To submit a story idea or news tip, e-mail us at
.
NBC 4 POLITICS: Headlines, Interactives & Video
MORE: NBC 4 Local News | Local Crime News
NBC 4 SPORTS: Sports News, Video
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
My new responses, sorry for not getting around to this sooner, but I had to make some technical changes to account for all the additional bandwidth the site has been using lately.
jen157 – It is not possible to list everyone with a STD which is why my site focuses on the people who expose others without their knowledge first with the rest as a secondary objective.
OhioVoter72 – One more thing – In some cases you can use test results to determine who you got it from if you take into account things such as disease incubation periods, previous test results, and other places you may have been infected. This is also one reason why you do not need medical records to know if someone is infected. Requiring someone to provide medical documents would make it difficult to warn others of infected people and the checking of any such documents would be an inefficient use of resources. Users do have to register and other members can view their contact email so disputes can be resolved between users. This site is not a forum for revenge, but a forum for sharing information to promote good health by protecting the purity and essence of our precious bodily fluids. Lastly this site is newsworthy. If it were not it you would not have seen it on the news.
OhioVoter72 – God bless NBC 4 and specifically Marshall McPeek for perpetuating this public service. It’s great that they recognized the newsworthiness of this well designed, helpful website. They even had the courtesy of linking directly to individual sections of the website to help readers find examples of the service in question. They don’t even have to click on the link to see the names in the query string and get a taste of what they may find on the site itself. Mr. McPeek obviously sees the necessity to link directly to what his story is talking about. Including as much information relevant to the story as possible is called good journalism. Unfortunately they could not get the input of anyone listed in the story. God bless NBC 4 for trying to get both sides of the story before reporting on it and McPeek’s editor for employing a “journliast” with such a high standard of ethics. On top of all that by linking to a site (STDCarriers.com) with many links to “legitimate” STD information they were able to both link to what they were talking about and “legitimate” STD information at the same time and thus to page space efficiently. You said that as a medical professional you have encountered people who won’t get tested out of fear of a stigma or whatever. These cry babies need to suck it up, get tested, and tell people about it who they have exposed or are thinking of exposing to the disease. Hopefully someday the government will require you to inform the public about these people and require them to undergo mandatory testing so they don’t have the opportunity to avoid a diagnosis, spread disease, and postpone their own treatment. I don’t think I have ever seen an article in such good taste, high integrity, and ethics outside of the New York Times. Keep up the good work NBC 4
Landru – hotness76’s definition of clean is the same as mine when it comes to not having a Sexually Transmitted Disease, this is not to say that anyone without STDs are clean in general. Someone could be living a filthy apartment that stinks from the urine of their 30 cats from all I know. I also agree with you about accepting the risks of any activity you engage in and taking the proper precautions. My site is designed to help you be aware of as many risks as possible, so that you have information to help you know what risks you are facing before trying to accept them. About the grammar, minor errors are irrelevant to the main issue. As for the hair and makeup I cannot voice an opinion on that since I have only seen the NBC 4 broadcast about my website and no others. Is NBC 4 the Fox and Friends of Columbus, Ohio?
hotness76 – I did not mean to say that you were encouraging the posting of false information. I just thought the post I was commenting on had an attitude towards fake postings that was a little too casual.
hgirlcala – My account is currently awaiting “approval” to respond to any forum postings on STDpal.com. They would have been responded to already if the site creator had enough sense to automate the membership process. From the looks of it STDpal.com is just another spam STD dating site set up by sites like positive singles who try to get as many webmasters as possible to set up STD dating sites. I have received several emails trying to convince me to set up a dating site for commission.
Jen157, that’s a good if ungrammatical point. Actually I think that something like 90% of the population gets herpes by age 50. If you have any kind of an interesting sex life at all, you’re probably going to get herpes at some point. Accept the risk or keep your pants zipped.
Thats pretty messed up. If you look at how many people have an <a >std</a> theirs no need to list them it’s a quarter of the population.
Marshall McPeek, “who’s” is a contraction, usually of “who is”.
The possessive case of “who” is “whose”.
The plural of STD is “STDs”. The plural of “ex” is “exes”. Better yet, just say ex-what; “ex-spouses”. For that matter, why not write out “graduate” instead of the lazy slangy “grad”?
I know NBC 4 is only TV news, where makeup and wardrobe rule the day, but surely there’s room in the budget for an editor to catch these constant errors.
One more thing-
People, if you had sexual contact with someone and then you test positive for an STD, that is a diagnosis of YOU, not the last person you slept with. You don’t know that person has the STD unless and until they have been tested.
If we are to go with this ridiculous idea of “guilt” and “innocence” used in so many of these posts, regarding having an STD (a model to which I completely object), that person you slept with shouldn’t have to “prove” their “innocence” (i.e. a doctor’s note or whatever) to get their name removed from the website. Instead, the person making the accusation should have to produce a medical record about the person in question in order to get that person listed on the website in the first place. Hmmm, which would pretty much mean there would be no listings on the website except for the kind souls who self-report in the interest of promoting public health and slowing the spread of disease.
And I do hope that the website requires that those making accusations list themselves on the website as well, as a person who has an STD. If the purpose of the website really is to help prevent the spread of disease, they would require this. Otherwise the website is nothing but a forum for revenge, an outlet for the anger felt by those who have just gotten a positive diagnosis of an STD. And, I might add, completely not newsworthy.
Shame on NBC4 and specifically on Marshall McPeek for perpetuating this witch-hunt. It’s bad enough that they think the existence of this cheap, fearmongering website is newsworthy, but they are actually linking directly to individuals’ names as listed on the website in question. You don’t even have to actually click to see the names - just accidentally rolling over them with your mouse, as I did, will show you the names in whatever portion of your browser where you see hyperlinks.
Mr. McPeek, why is it necessary to link directly to these individuals who MAY have a medical problem? How does that contribute to the story? How is this journalism?
Even worse, at the end of the article it says “NBC 4 attempted to make contact with several of the Ohioans on the list but was unsuccessful in getting reaction or comments from them.“ SHAME on you, NBC 4. And shame on McPeek’s editor for not immediately firing a “journliast” with such a low standard of ethics.
On top of all that, you did not even include information on legitimate STD screening, nor any hotlines to call if one is seeking information on STDs.
And no, I personally do not have an STD. I say that only because there are obviously those here who will comment after me and say “ha ha bet OhioVoter72 has 5 STDs,“ as if (even if it was true), that would effectively discount my disgust with NBC4 over this story.
Having worked in the medical profession I can tell you this kind of “reporting”, on top of the existence of the website in question, is one of the reasons so many people do not seek screening or treatment when they suspect an STD. This article is doing the public a disservice by perpetuating the sense of shame that surrounds a set of medical problems that happen to be spread through sexual contact.
I don’t think I have ever seen an article in such poor taste, with such a complete lack of journalistic integrity or ethics, outside the national enquirer.
Clean up your act, NBC 4.
“Clean” meaning without STD’s…
Hotness76, what is this ‘clean’ business you keep referring to? We’re not talking about personal hygiene here.
I am not in any way condoning adding false information to the website. I did not say..“let us all report inaccurate information”. I would not ever put someone through that personally, I am only stating that if your name was to appear on the site, and you are not guilty of having any “issues”, you are responsible to proving to the person you are with that you are clean.. I would fight like heck to have my name removed in the event that were to happen. As I stated in my original post, “If you want to stick an ex (or sex partner) on there because you contracted any gift that keeps on giving, fine.. IF THEY HAVE SOMETHING!! However, to be dishonest because you are upset and immature, not so much!“
You cannot control the actions of others was basically what I was saying at the end of my post..I apologize to anyone who thought I would condone falsifying information. I don’t, not at all.
Yes, I know there have been a lot of responses on many forums and other STD sites. Such as “STDpal.com” is also a best siteh for STD type people.
Post a Comment(Requires free registration)
- Please avoid offensive, vulgar, or hateful language.
- Respect others.
- Use the "Flag Comment" link when necessary.
- See the Terms and Conditions for details.
Advertisement