Oral sex is leading cause of increasing cancer rates...

[mikey3000]

Hmmm, interesting article I found today:

Oral sex is leading cause of increasing U.S. cancer rates, compared to tobacco use in other nations
BY Lindsay Goldwert
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Tuesday, February 22nd 2011, 4:00 AM


Hepp/GettyOral sex now leads the cause of oral cancer in America, according to a study.
Oral sex could be hazardous to your health.

So say researchers who note that oral cancer stemming from the human papilloma virus is more common in the U.S. than oral cancer caused by abusing tobacco.

Researchers found a 225% increase in oral cancer cases in the U.S. from 1974 to 2007, mainly among white men, said Maura Gillison, a cancer researcher at Ohio State University.

The more oral-sex partners a man had, the greater his cancer risk, Gillison told a meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Tobacco use remains the leading cause of oral cancer in the rest of the world.

There as many as 150 different types of human papilloma viruses, and about 40 of those can be sexually transmitted, according to the National Cancer Institute.

HPV infections often go undetected and are the main cause of cervical cancer in women.

Scientists are examining whether Gardasil and Cervarix, the HPV vaccines approved to prevent genital warts and cervical cancer, could have a significant impact on oral cancer.

In the meantime, researchers are urging doctors and educators to start talking to teens in particular about the risks of oral sex.

lgoldwert@nydailynews.com

[djones]

This really bums my high.

[Cherokee_Mountaincat]

Uhmmm, Thanks Mikey. Left a really bad taste in my mouth....(Pun intended)
Cat

[gooniegoogoo]

Oral sex wasn't dangerous without a condom eh?

[Hephaestion]

From a previous posting

http://main.bisexual.com/forum/showthread.php?p=191769#post191769

[mikey3000]

So just maybe male circumcision does serve a purpose? -

"Male circumcision helps stop HPV, which is linked to cervical cancer: study Maggie Fox
Washington— Reuters
Published Friday, Jan. 07, 2011 8:27AM EST
Last updated Friday, Jan. 07, 2011 8:29AM EST

Researchers have documented yet another health benefit for circumcision, which can protect men against the AIDS virus, saying it can protect their wives and girlfriends from a virus that causes cervical cancer.

Wives and girlfriends of circumcised men had a 28 per cent lower rate of infection over two years with the human papilloma virus or HPV, which causes warts and cervical cancer, they reported in the Lancet medical journal on Thursday.

“Our findings indicate that male circumcision should now be accepted as an efficacious intervention for reducing the prevalence and incidence of HPV infections in female partners. However, protection is only partial; the promotion of safe sex practices is also important,” Dr. Maria Wawer and colleagues at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore wrote.

Dr. Wawer’s team piggybacked the HPV study onto a larger study that has shown circumcised men are less likely to be infected with the human immunodeficiency virus that causes AIDS.

“We enrolled HIV-negative men and their female partners between 2003 and 2006, in Rakai, Uganda,” they wrote in their report in the Lancet medical journal.

They were able to get details on HPV infections for nearly 1,000 of the women, all identified by men as long-term sex partners such as wives. After two years, 27.8 per cent of the steady partners of circumcised men had HPV infections, compared to 38.7 per cent of the partners of uncircumcised men.

HPV infection is best known as the primary cause of cervical cancer, but it causes genital warts and can also lead to cancers of the anus, penis, head and neck.

There are dozens of strains of HPV, which are highly contagious and which infect the majority of the population within a few years of beginning sexual activity. Most people clear the virus but in some, it can cause changes that lead to cancer.

Cervical cancer is the second most common cancer in women worldwide and is expected to kill 328,000 this year, mostly in developing countries.

GlaxoSmithKline and Merck make vaccines against HPV but they are not available to most women in developing countries.

Circumcision removes the foreskin of the penis, which is rich in immune system cells targeted by HIV and perhaps other viruses. Taking off the foreskin likely makes the penis less likely to carry a range of microbes, Dr. Wawer’s team said.

“Male circumcision has now been shown to decrease HIV, herpes simplex virus-2, and HPV infections and genital ulcer disease in men, and also HPV infection, trichomoniasis, and bacterial vaginosis and genital ulcer disease in their female partners,” Dr. Wawer’s team wrote.

“Thus, male circumcision reduces the risk of several sexually transmitted infections in both sexes, and these benefits should guide public health policies for neonatal, adolescent, and adult male circumcision programs.”

[jem_is_bi]

But, I am already way too addicted to oral sex to quit!
So, I will likely never live to be 90 yrs old.

[mikey3000]

You are right. There has to be a balance between safety and personal satisfaction. I couldn't do oral with a condom, so I just won't do oral unless I take the time to get to know and trust the guy (thus my lack of interest in random hook ups). There is just too much to loose in this day and age. But those are just my personal feelings.

[gooniegoogoo]

Circumcision. Yeah. Maybe cutting off the whole penis will bring down those risks even more!

[darkeyes]

The odd thing about the human body and its relationship to other human bodies.. is that it is always likely to dispatch and deliver to or receive some nasty shitty disease from another human body.. not always through contact sexual or any other form of contact either.. but I do see your point.. and if, as a result of information to hand, people feel it right for them to have bits of their bodies lopped off and discarded then I have no objection whatsover to that.. as long as it is them making the decision for themselves considering the facts and medical advice given to them about their body when mature enough to do so.. if we were to decide to have precautionary preventative surgery to combat all nasty shitty and potentially fatal diseases, we would need to discard literally the entire human body.. doesnt leave us much does it?

I'll hang on to my bits ta Mikey.. even the poor lil things, one of which, just a few short years ago threatened my own life when I developed a cancer in my breast.. but if at some stage, based on the best available information and advice it is necessary to lose one or both because of a recurrence.. statisically all too possible, I will make that decision.. as a mature adult..my decision.. no one elses.. :)

[Hephaestion]

There was a programme on Radio 4 UK in which one of the guests suggested that there ought to be more arranged marriages. This came came across as a little wierd. However the context was in a discussion about Royal marriages and that prompted a comment that arranged marriages for all classes / strata in the British used to be much more common in yesteryear. Matchmakers were an accepted profession.

Having eavesdropped on arragements within the newer immigrant communities where arranged marriages are still indulged, it was discovered that the match making involved a fairly forthright questioning and investigation into the genetic health of the lineage of the parties along with their purity (virginity). The genetic component stands for itself. The virginity seemd to be also a health safeguard aginst communicable dieases. Understandably, the claim to circumcision reinforced this.

Have we got it wrong?

[goldenfinger]

Glad I don't live in America, and I don't smoke, so I'll be just fine.
Circumcision seems to be an accepted way to prevent some disease in the US, but to take guns away to prevent people from being killed is not accepted.
Anyway, I take little notice of US studies which many seems be backed by some religious groups for their own agenda. :eek:

[sammie19]

There was a programme on Radio 4 UK in which one of the guests suggested that there ought to be more arranged marriages. This came came across as a little wierd. However the context was in a discussion about Royal marriages and that prompted a comment that arranged marriages for all classes / strata in the British used to be much more common in yesteryear. Matchmakers were an accepted profession.

Having eavesdropped on arragements within the newer immigrant communities where arranged marriages are still indulged, it was discovered that the match making involved a fairly forthright questioning and investigation into the genetic health of the lineage of the parties along with their purity (virginity). The genetic component stands for itself. The virginity seemd to be also a health safeguard aginst communicable dieases. Understandably, the claim to circumcision reinforced this.

Have we got it wrong?

No :disgust:

[chuck1124]

I don't know who backed this study, but to show cause and effect of oral sex and cancer is a little bit of a stretch. There are far too many factors to consider. Could it also be that, because homosexuality is more accepted, that more men are willing to admit to having performed oral sex? Could it also be, because smoking is less acceptable, the rates of oral cancer among smokers is dropping? Or is it that, oral sex among males and females is more common than it used to be. What kind of oral sex, fellatio or cunnilingus or both? Or is it that more men are using condoms when they are receiving oral sex as a way of preventing disease to their partner? Wow, wouldn't that be a trade off.

[imaphuqer2]

I believe the article only indicates higher rates of cancer in males due to performing cunnilingus on females. So basically, eating pussy gives you cancer.

[Hephaestion]

I believe the article only indicates higher rates of cancer in males due to performing cunnilingus on females. So basically, eating pussy gives you cancer.

Above taken as a little jest.

However, apparently there are also increases in 'oral' (buccal and pharyngeal) and anal cancers induced by HPV's in both the male homosexual population and straight women.

[_Joe_]

I think this study was funded by the people against giving blowjobs.

[NotLostJustWandering]

I note that the article fails to disclose just how common oral cancer is, only mentioning that incidence has increased over 200% and that smoking is no longer the #1 cause of it in the USA, which is no surprise if fewer Americans are smoking.

If odds of contracting oral cancer from oral sex has gone from 1 in a million to 1 in 500,000, there's your 200% increase, but it's still nothing to lose sleep over.

[NotLostJustWandering]

Anyway, I take little notice of US studies which many seems be backed by some religious groups for their own agenda. :eek:

Well, you sure are indiscriminately screening out a lot, then. I suppose there's no corruption in Australian science?

[NotLostJustWandering]

Having eavesdropped on arragements within the newer immigrant communities where arranged marriages are still indulged, it was discovered that the match making involved a fairly forthright questioning and investigation into the genetic health of the lineage of the parties along with their purity (virginity).

Really? What immigrant communities were these? My Paki friends in the USA tell me that families into arranged marriages are so concerned with intimately knowing the other family that often the families live on the same block, or are in fact the same family, ye olde kissin' cousins deal. Hardly a recipe for good genetics!

[NotLostJustWandering]

and if, as a result of information to hand, people feel it right for them to have bits of their bodies lopped off and discarded then I have no objection whatsover to that.. as long as it is them making the decision for themselves considering the facts and medical advice given to them about their body when mature enough to do so..

Well, yeah, that's why we circumcise helpless babies. Who would actually consent to having it done to them?

Personally, I wonder if all these cases of intact men getting diseases are attributable to poor hygiene.

[Hephaestion]

Really? What immigrant communities were these? My Paki friends in the USA tell me that families into arranged marriages are so concerned with intimately knowing the other family that often the families live on the same block, or are in fact the same family, ye olde kissin' cousins deal. Hardly a recipe for good genetics!

Orientals and Europeans and Latins from elsewhere

It is patently obvious that some communities have not got to grips with inbreeding. Some do change, hence the established blood tests in the NY jewish communities.

I accept what you say prevails in parts of the Islamic community. My Turkish neighbours have mated with close cousins and there are tell tale signes of malformed neural systems in the offspring.

At least, the European Royals have been outbreeding e.g. the late Princess Grace of Monaco; Ferggie, Diana, and the soon to be Kate.

.

[darkeyes]

Orientals and Europeans and Latins from elsewhere

It is patently obvious that some communities have not got to grips with inbreeding. Some do change, hence the established blood tests in the NY jewish communities.

I accept what you say prevails in parts of the Islamic community. My Turkish neighbours have mated with close cousins and there are tell tale signes of malformed neural systems in the offspring.

At least, the European Royals have been outbreeding e.g. the late Princess Grace of Monaco; Ferggie, Diana, and the soon to be Kate.

.

It is not unknown Heph me luffly, for 1st cousins to marry and have children in this country.. not people from immigrant communities, nor are they necessarily nobs.. I mean ordinary everyday middle and working class people from the native inigenious population.. it can cause internal familial strife, but not always, and in such cases problems with children are as rare as for any who are not resulted in any way.. problems are more likely to occur where this has gone on over generations..

1st cousins are not a proscribed relationship and is not considered incestous in this country.. there are pockets in the uk, in our towns and cities where there is anecdotal evidence of inbreeding, where there are higher than usual instances of malformations in people which are alleged to be the result of inbreeding and this may be the case.. no studies that I know of have yet been done to prove this or otherwise. It is possible nowadays with DNA evidence to show this much more easily than in the past, and indeed this is likely to occur, but not without some hoohah about civil liberties and privacy I would have thought.

I have never had a relationship with a male cousin, but there were several I had the hots for when young, and would not have resisted their advances and did flirt like hell with them in those bygone days. I also know two couples who are 1st cousins who are happy, have children and these kids are as healthy as any from much more distant realtionships.. indeed.. more healthy than many. I do not demur from the view that too much mixing of familial genes is not a good thing.. yet the evidence of what affect single generational mixing of the genes of 1st cousin has is scant..

[darkeyes]

And Not me luffly.. calling a person of Pakistani origin a "paki" is considered demeaning and inflammatory language in this country.. on a par with calling a Chinese a "chink" or a French person a "frog"....careful hun..;)

[JP1986UM]

Circumcision seems to be an accepted way to prevent some disease in the US, but to take guns away to prevent people from being killed is not accepted.
Anyway, I take little notice of US studies which many seems be backed by some religious groups for their own agenda. :eek:

That's because when you take firearms away from LAW ABIDING citizens, then only the criminals have them. Funny how that works. Then crime rates go up, people die more frequently because they have no way of protecting themselves, and fear and terror live in the lives of people who before, were relatively placid and calm. Funny how that works eh? I take little notice of those European studies, many of which seem to be backed by far left fringe groups intent on disarming then subjugating the masses. :eek:

[darkeyes]

Well, yeah, that's why we circumcise helpless babies. Who would actually consent to having it done to them?

Personally, I wonder if all these cases of intact men getting diseases are attributable to poor hygiene.

Good personal hygiene Not hun, is essential for us all... and is much of the reason that disease rates are as low as they are.. too high, but both men and women keeping themselves genitally clean without doubt is a responsible thing to do for more than just a nice sex life..:)

[darkeyes]

I take little notice of those European studies, many of which seem to be backed by far left fringe groups intent on disarming then subjugating the masses. :eek:

Not so.. but we'll let that pass...:)

[Hephaestion]

1) Darkeyes ".....yet the evidence of what affect single generational mixing of the genes of 1st cousin has is scant....."

The first generations usually get away with it but when it is repeated frequently then it begins to show. That is the case reported.



2) isuck and swallow ".....Circumcision or male genital mutilation does nothing to prevent HPV...."

Is the term 'male genital mutilation' a tautology for circumcision?

Recently released study, reported on the radio, emphasised that HPV was of reduced incidence in the circumcised population attributed to a drier evironment and thickened skin.

That said I would prefer to have a foreskin than not.

[darkeyes]

1) Darkeyes ".....yet the evidence of what affect single generational mixing of the genes of 1st cousin has is scant....."

The first generations usually get away with it but when it is repeated frequently then it begins to show. That is the case reported.



2) isuck and swallow ".....Circumcision or male genital mutilation does nothing to prevent HPV...."

Is the term 'male genital mutilation' a tautology for circumcision?

Recently released study, reported on the radio, emphasised that HPV was of reduced incidence in the circumcised population attributed to a drier evironment and thickened skin.

That said I would prefer to have a foreskin than not.

1)Which is why I said what I said Heph..

2) The study referred to was done in Uganda where different conditions prevail from western countries.. this is not to say that the study is not relevant.. it is to say that as yet the jury is out since as yet there is sufficient evidence that in for instance a European context, the same results will be seen because of differing conditions in the sexual environment.

Without trying to minimise the import or relevance of the study do we wish to go down the road of wholesale MGM as a preventative measure.. more, do we have the right to without the informed consent of the half the population of the land most directly affected? Does the incidence of HPV and cervical cancer justify such a measure? There are many diseases which preventative mutilation of the body, both male and female, could prevent.. does that give us the right to insist in such procedures being inflicted on people when other much less intrusive preventative measures exist (such as HPV vaccination offered free on the NHS to all eligible girls), or even if they do not.. informed consent by the individual is the word, not of parents or guardian or anyone else.. of those whose bits are threatened with removal..

As an aside Heph darlin'.. I am glad you would rather keep your foreskin.. willies look far less horrid with than without.. and this little old lady's memory tells her they were far more fun and interesting..;)

[NotLostJustWandering]

1)Which is why I said what I said Heph..

2) The study referred to was done in Uganda where different conditions prevail from western countries.. this is not to say that the study is not relevant.. it is to say that as yet the jury is out since as yet there is sufficient evidence that in for instance a European context, the same results will be seen because of differing conditions in the sexual environment.


Not just the sexual environment, but the environment itself. Wherever sewage systems are primitive and ordinary homes may lack hot water, or running water at all, you can expect the spreading of diseases to be much higher. To go from the First to the Third World entails a lowering of standards of cleanliness. You just can't get away from the shit (and I do mean shit, literally) and you will, sooner or later, get sick.

Something to bear in mind whenever you read about studies in Third World countries. Never assume that the figures apply to you.

[maxtor]

guess i will be cancerous cause i love to suck a cock!!

[Hephaestion]

".......The study referred to was done in Uganda..... "

Thanks for that.


".....this is not to say that the study is not relevant.. it is to say that as yet the jury is out since as yet there is sufficient evidence that in for instance a European context, the same results will be seen because of differing conditions in the sexual environment......."

Point taken.

Also, when studies are released / published, by the time they get to the public the context and control criteria seem to be lost. This can also be true of 'science level' publication where rules on word count, editorial flair and territoriality come into play.


".....other much less intrusive preventative measures exist (such as HPV vaccination offered free on the NHS to all eligible girls)......"

There is credible argument that suggests a wider (i.e. the rest of the sexually active community) vaccination programme would be beneficial.



".....As an aside Heph darlin'.. I am glad you would rather keep your foreskin.. willies look far less horrid with than without.. and this little old lady's memory tells her they were far more fun and interesting..;)

Unfortunately a lost cause precipitated by medical requirement in my late 30's. 'The Greeks used to love gymnastics (gymnos = nude) because it served to show off their foreskins in contrast to the conquered peoples of the east' (not my words). Hephaestion would thus have been unlikely to have been circumcised.

There is a society which tries to regrow the foreskin with judicious application of weights. I think that these would likely compromise commuting and work itself; maybe when I retire?

[darkeyes]

There is a society which tries to regrow the foreskin with judicious application of weights. I think that these would likely compromise commuting and work itself; maybe when I retire?

Didntcha c the Channel4 documentary on it Heph? It dus work remarkably well.. but it wos also 1a the funniest hours me has spent wotchin telly in me life...

[NotLostJustWandering]

There is a society which tries to regrow the foreskin with judicious application of weights.

That's almost as horrifying as having it lopped off in the first place!

[darkeyes]

That's almost as horrifying as having it lopped off in the first place!

Sorry Not.. I shouldnt laugh... but watching all the weird and wonderful methods of these poor buggers trying to regrow their foreskin I just couldnt help meself!!! But it does work...:)

[baseboy]

Maybe it's due to oral sex by smokers with tobacco stained mouths.

[gen11]

In the United States we don't have a phenomenon of firearms going off by themselves and killing people. In all cases there is a finger on the trigger of the weapon; in almost all of those, it is the finger of a criminal. Politically-supressed studies have shown repeatedly that in communities were honest citizens own weapons, violent crime drops. It is also documented that the medical profession kills more people through malpractice than firearms do. So let's outlaw doctors.





Glad I don't live in America, and I don't smoke, so I'll be just fine.
Circumcision seems to be an accepted way to prevent some disease in the US, but to take guns away to prevent people from being killed is not accepted.
Anyway, I take little notice of US studies which many seems be backed by some religious groups for their own agenda. :eek:

[_Joe_]

If giving oral sex causes cancer, does that mean receiving oral sex cures it ?

STUDY MUST BE CONDUCTED

[darkeyes]

In the United States we don't have a phenomenon of firearms going off by themselves and killing people. In all cases there is a finger on the trigger of the weapon; in almost all of those, it is the finger of a criminal. Politically-supressed studies have shown repeatedly that in communities were honest citizens own weapons, violent crime drops. It is also documented that the medical profession kills more people through malpractice than firearms do. So let's outlaw doctors.

Isnt it interesting that in every western country where firearms are not freely available has a much lesser violent crime rate than the US.. I don't know where you got the info about politically supressed studies but it could be that they were suppressed cos they were absolute bollox..

Of course people are responsible for the pulling of a trigger.. no one denies that.. but the easy availablity of firearms makes it the more likely that a society which accepts that availability so readily will be the more readily prepared to use them.. and I think the "almost all" is a bit of an exaggeration, for many normally law abiding citizens are desensitised by the acceptance and availability of firearms and because of a cultural practice and belief and that makes them the more likely to use them... in fact that readily availability often creates criminals out of those normally law abiding citizens because of their preparedness to use them at times when really they shouldnt..

'fraid so..just a lil deviation from the thread methinks.. but fun windin up haff of our transatlantic cousins..:bigrin:

[_Joe_]

Guns do not kill people.

Monkeys released from their experimental cages still under the influence with guns kill people.

[NotLostJustWandering]

I think Europeans take for granted the security they have in their high population density. Spend some time in any of the more remote places in the US, where the nearest police are hours away... preferably at night, when suddenly you hear a strange car pulling up your road, and I think you'd understand why American country folk don't want to be separated from their guns. If I wasn't a city slicker myself, I'd want one, too.

Of course, part of the problem is that we are such a violent culture that this is much more a concern than it is in most places in the world, where theft almost always happens behind the victim's back, and violence is usually domestic or political. But taking away our guns won't change that.

[tenni]

"Politically-supressed studies have shown repeatedly that in communities were honest citizens own weapons, violent crime drops. It is also documented that the medical profession kills more people through malpractice than firearms do. So let's outlaw doctors."

I've noticed lately on this site that there are some people from the US who tend to dismiss many types of scientific study. I can only guess because it doesn't support their belief system? Although a study may indicate whether X causes cancer or Y indicates a connection between a behaviour and an illness, these people deny it. These studies and experiments are done under scientific methods. If other studies do not support the conclusion, then one may chose to question the previous study.

However, to just deny and place yourself as a skeptic "who knows" better than a trained scientist is one dumb fuck behaviour. These people do not give their qualifications or reasons why they should be given any credibility. It is almost an anti scientific campaign? Is this the result of their former president's campaign to discredit science and scientific councils in the US?

[tenni]

"Of course, part of the problem is that we are such a violent culture that this is much more a concern than it is in most places in the world, where theft almost always happens behind the victim's back, and violence is usually domestic or political. But taking away our guns won't change that."

Notlost
Where is your proof that removing or severely restricting guns from a violent culture will not reduce murders? It may be a Catch 22 scenario as to why your culture is so violent?

[NotLostJustWandering]

"Of course, part of the problem is that we are such a violent culture that this is much more a concern than it is in most places in the world, where theft almost always happens behind the victim's back, and violence is usually domestic or political. But taking away our guns won't change that."

Notlost
Where is your proof that removing or severely restricting guns from a violent culture will not reduce murders? It may be a Catch 22 scenario as to why your culture is so violent?

I didn't say that banning guns would reduce the number of murders, just that it would not remove the violence woven into the fabric of our national character. Crimes now committed with guns would then be committed with knives and bare hands, and the strong would more easily victimize the weak. Guns at least level the playing field quite a bit; anyone who can aim and pull a trigger is on a more equal par with anyone else who can do the same.

The large number of guns we have is a symptom of our violence, not a cause. You can see our violence in our history, our politics, our films and TV shows, even our sports.

This is not to say that we shouldn't ban AK-47s and other heavy guns; these clearly go beyond the bounds of reasonable self-defense and upset the balance that ordinary handguns can provide.

Of course, this is just my point of view, and there is no proving it right or wrong. Gun-control arguments often point to the example of societies where access to guns is greatly restricted, but these are different cultures, so the arguments are all apples and oranges. The only way to know for sure the effect of banning guns in the US would be to try it and see what happens.

[NotLostJustWandering]

Umm... if you all want to keep talking about guns, maybe we should start a new thread. The association of guns and oral sex makes me queasy.

[_Joe_]

Umm... if you all want to keep talking about guns, maybe we should start a new thread. The association of guns and oral sex makes me queasy.

I see you have no problem talking about monkeys....

[NotLostJustWandering]

I see you have no problem talking about monkeys....

I may be in a semi-hallucinatory state of consciousness right now, _Joe_, but I'm quite sure it was you who mentioned the monkeys, not me.

[gen11]

An Irish natinoal chiding the United States for being violent? Haven't I head about some minor disturbances in Belfast over the past 20 to 40 years? Something about electric drills and kneecaps? Oh, well -- of course! with electric drills, the Irish had no need of pistols, did they? And yet . . . .

[darkeyes]

An Irish natinoal chiding the United States for being violent? Haven't I head about some minor disturbances in Belfast over the past 20 to 40 years? Something about electric drills and kneecaps? Oh, well -- of course! with electric drills, the Irish had no need of pistols, did they? And yet . . . .

Try hard as I might.. what Irish national? Enlighten me, pray...

[goldenfinger]

Umm... if you all want to keep talking about guns, maybe we should start a new thread. The association of guns and oral sex makes me queasy.

Something just vent off in my mouth,,,not sure what it was:eek::bigrin:

[Hephaestion]

The Iver Johnson - "Papa says it wont hurt us"

.

[darkeyes]

Something just vent off in my mouth,,,not sure what it was:eek::bigrin:

Dontcha mean "vot it vas?" *giggles*

[Neonaught]

Having just spent the last year being treated for a head and neck cancer specific to this study I feel moved to comment. I am a medical professional and have a degree in science and I can vouch that the studies involved and the conculsions drawn had nothing to do with trying to steer the public's moral choices. We're simply having more oral and anal sex in western societies than ever before and this seems to be driving the increase. You can have HPV in your nose and throat, as well as elsewhere and never even know it. The virus does not always cause genital warts and it is often defeated by the immune system without the victim ever being aware of it's presence. This virus is also believed to be the main cause of cervical cancer among the ladies. Keep in mind that any act of oral to genital contact can result in infection, no matter the sex of the individuals involved. It may even be possible to spread this lil bugger by kissing.

My experience was fairly typical. I developed squamous cell cancer in my right tonsil that then invaded the lymph nodes in my neck. I endured chemo and daily radiation treatments that did their best to kill me along with the cancer. I lost 15 pounds in a single week and 100 pounds total before it was all said and done. In other words I was simply starving to death slowly. You *really* don't want to go through this! The good news is that you can protect yourself. While there is no test to detect this virus in men yet, there are vaccinations available to both sexes. They are called Gardasil and Cervarix. Both are effective against multiple HPV viral types, seem to have negligible side effects and are not terribly expensive. I highly recommend speaking with you doctor and getting protected. I won't insert the usual "safe sex" lecture here; I quit giving that daily when I stopped being a Navy medic. I'm sure most of you are well aware of the risks of unprotected sexual contact anyway.

I hope my experience can be useful to you. Get vaccinated!

[tenni]

Excellent points Neonaught

Do you see your cancer as possibly connected to oral sex yourself?

This was on CTV Toronto news last night. They made reference to cancer in the tonsils and the back of the tongue as being other locations of cancers believed connected to oral sex. There was a woman who had cancer in her tonsils and she was discussing the points that you mentioned.

I think that the Gardisol vaccination may be a good route for anyone to consider if they are taking part in oral sex. This is something that was not available a decade ago. All young women 14 are offerred free Gardisol vaccinations in my province of Ontario on an on going basis. ( I think that it is 14 but it may be other ages too) Boys and men have not been offered free vaccinations but it would probably be a good idea with such studies showing that it is not only women who are threatened by this virus. It isn't just cervical cancer now to be concerned about.

[Neonaught]

Excellent points Neonaught

Do you see your cancer as possibly connected to oral sex yourself?

This was on CTV Toronto news last night. They made reference to cancer in the tonsils and the back of the tongue as being other locations of cancers believed connected to oral sex. There was a woman who had cancer in her tonsils and she was discussing the points that you mentioned.

I think that the Gardisol vaccination may be a good route for anyone to consider if they are taking part in oral sex. This is something that was not available a decade ago. All young women 14 are offerred free Gardisol vaccinations in my province of Ontario on an on going basis. ( I think that it is 14 but it may be other ages too) Boys and men have not been offered free vaccinations but it would probably be a good idea with such studies showing that it is not only women who are threatened by this virus. It isn't just cervical cancer now to be concerned about.

It is difficult to say wether my case was sexually transmitted or not. Prior to knowledge of the HPV link the major risk factor for head and neck cancers such as mine was smoking and drinking. I was a pack a day smoker and dearly love fine cognac. Who knew either could cause cancer? (Heh!) The only good differentiating factor would be if the virus could be isolated in my body and typed. It is known that type HPV16 seems to cause oral/head/neck cancers rather than cervical cancer. Also keep in mind that it is estimated that up to 50% of males in some western nations (North and South Americans specifically) may be already infected with HPV. You might as well consider anyone you have contact with to be infected or a carrier. Therefore the question becomes what do we do about it. Celibacy is certainly the only way to protect yourself completely. I can't speak for the rest of you but having endured a year of celibacy during chemo, I am *NOT* going to stop having sex! That leaves oral-genital barriers (dental dams/saran wrap/condoms) or vaccination as the only real alternatives if one wishes to play outside monogamy.

[sixthickcut]

i thank you for the post...i am moving to total top status now...luv getting sucked fuck hard or off :three:

[Hephaestion]

It is difficult to say wether my case was sexually transmitted or not. Prior to knowledge of the HPV link the major risk factor for head and neck cancers such as mine was smoking and drinking. I was a pack a day smoker and dearly love fine cognac. Who knew either could cause cancer? (Heh!) The only good differentiating factor would be if the virus could be isolated in my body and typed. It is known that type HPV16 seems to cause oral/head/neck cancers rather than cervical cancer. Also keep in mind that it is estimated that up to 50% of males in some western nations (North and South Americans specifically) may be already infected with HPV. You might as well consider anyone you have contact with to be infected or a carrier. Therefore the question becomes what do we do about it. Celibacy is certainly the only way to protect yourself completely. I can't speak for the rest of you but having endured a year of celibacy during chemo, I am *NOT* going to stop having sex! That leaves oral-genital barriers (dental dams/saran wrap/condoms) or vaccination as the only real alternatives if one wishes to play outside monogamy.

2 naughty assumptions:
a) Vaccination will always work (there are different strategies acknowledged)
b) HPV types are always limited in their distribtuion

The 'organisms' don't know the rules and there is always the probability of viable mutation under constant selection pressure and condtions promoting spread.

[gen11]

Neonaught -- THANK YOU for the most helpful, clear, non-hysterical, non-bullshit post I've ever seen on a forum! (And if your recovery is on-going, Godspeed!)

[tg Shannon]

Figures, everything I love to do, eat or drink causes cancer and now they put sucking cock and eating pussy on the list, I'm doomed

[Neonaught]

Neonaught -- THANK YOU for the most helpful, clear, non-hysterical, non-bullshit post I've ever seen on a forum! (And if your recovery is on-going, Godspeed!)

Thanks Gen11! As of last August I am in complete remission. I'll be closely monitored for the next 2 years and if I can make it to 5 years without a recurrance I'll be considered cured.