My belief happens to be backed up by spending over a year on placement in a clinic where I came into contact and had discussions with many many Street-Based Sex Workers. I only encountered 2 SW out of 100s who were not hard drug-users, but were homeless.
I am not surprised - I immediately backed up GG as it was clear to me she was coming from a point of view of some personal knowledge. But let's quantify that - not in any way to take away from what you said GG but because by defining it more clearly it becomes more valuable IMO.
Clients (in this case, street prostitutes mostly using drugs) who contact clinics, support groups and social workers are a self-selecting group. The degree to which they are indicative of the whole group is generally belief-based, or based on other things, so extrapolation is only 'guesstimate.' I think GG may well be aware of this as she is at pains to distinguish reasonable belief from proven fact.
Additionally, if I can offer friendly critique (as my knowledge/experience will be different to any other individual), the fact that most girls are sufficiently Internet-savvy to set up a profile doesn't mean everyone can do that. I know several girls that struggle to get a profile up and them struggle to access it - whether because they have no Internet access, have zero knowledge beyond emails and social networking sites like Bebo, live miles from a cybercafe, or have uber-watchful boyfriends. I am just thankful that these ladies do not
end upon the street. Another example. When I used to hang out with some guys and girls from an agency (socially, through mutual non-business friends), there was a guy on their books who regularly supplemented his (bi-) income by going down to the 'street.' None of these people are on drugs.
These are small concerns perhaps - and much as I might be at pains to qualify what GG is saying, I'd suggest listening to what she has to say. Hard suggestions based on field work and observation are among the best thing we've got when it comes to reform. Plus a lot of money of course.