Too much sex causes prostate cancer.....

#4
smudge67 said:
You mean gay sex?
Best stay away from my mrs tonight then :wink: :wink:
 
#8
Conflicting results.

Both studies are flawed although my initial reading of the second one (the one that suggests an increased risk of prostate cancer) makes me think it is a better conducted study than the first one, which relied on people's recollections as to how often they masturbated, etc., when they were younger.

One study does not necessarily the truth make though.

Also, it is probably of little importance: what are you going to do with the information? People have enough difficulty giving up smoking and we *know* that causes lung cancer, bladder cancer, etc. Are people going to give up sex (read "wanking" for most of you) because it *might* promote prostate cancer?

Not likely.

FF.
(urologist)
 
#9
Friendly_Fire said:
Conflicting results.

Both studies are flawed although my initial reading of the second one (the one that suggests an increased risk of prostate cancer) makes me think it is a better conducted study than the first one, which relied on people's recollections as to how often they masturbated, etc., when they were younger.

One study does not necessarily the truth make though.

Also, it is probably of little importance: what are you going to do with the information? People have enough difficulty giving up smoking and we *know* that causes lung cancer, bladder cancer, etc. Are people going to give up sex (read "wanking" for most of you) because it *might* promote prostate cancer?

Not likely.

FF.
(urologist)
I disagree with the bold. From the article saying it is bad.

"However, in relying on men to recall information from 20 or 30 years previously, it is likely that there will be some inaccuracy in the data collected as men either consciously or unconsciously forget some detail which could compromise their findings.

"The sample used in the study is also relatively small, making it difficult to draw any universal conclusions."
Also the other study only referred to wa.nking.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3072021.stm
 
#10
Friendly_Fire said:
Conflicting results.

Both studies are flawed although my initial reading of the second one (the one that suggests an increased risk of prostate cancer) makes me think it is a better conducted study than the first one, which relied on people's recollections as to how often they masturbated, etc., when they were younger.

One study does not necessarily the truth make though.

Also, it is probably of little importance: what are you going to do with the information? People have enough difficulty giving up smoking and we *know* that causes lung cancer, bladder cancer, etc. Are people going to give up sex (read "wanking" for most of you) because it *might* promote prostate cancer?

Not likely.

FF.
(urologist)

Well my God. Thank **** for that.
 
#12
Trick said:
Friendly_Fire said:
Conflicting results.

Both studies are flawed although my initial reading of the second one (the one that suggests an increased risk of prostate cancer) makes me think it is a better conducted study than the first one, which relied on people's recollections as to how often they masturbated, etc., when they were younger.

One study does not necessarily the truth make though.

Also, it is probably of little importance: what are you going to do with the information? People have enough difficulty giving up smoking and we *know* that causes lung cancer, bladder cancer, etc. Are people going to give up sex (read "wanking" for most of you) because it *might* promote prostate cancer?

Not likely.

FF.
(urologist)
I disagree with the bold. From the article saying it is bad.

"However, in relying on men to recall information from 20 or 30 years previously, it is likely that there will be some inaccuracy in the data collected as men either consciously or unconsciously forget some detail which could compromise their findings.

"The sample used in the study is also relatively small, making it difficult to draw any universal conclusions."
Also the other study only referred to wa.nking.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3072021.stm
I'm slightly confused by your post. You disagree with my assessment that the recent article is a better designed study?

I am aware the that the older paper demonstrating a benefit was only looking at masturbation. I don't really see the relevance of this, as the participants in the second paper were analysed by type of sexual behaviour as well.

Are you disagreeing because you've read the papers, or because of what you've heard from non-professionals about what they think they read?

FF.
 
#13
Sorry, and to be more clear, by "papers", I mean the actual journal articles (which are on my desk). Not the newpapers.
 
#14
Friendly_Fire said:
Trick said:
Friendly_Fire said:
Conflicting results.

Both studies are flawed although my initial reading of the second one (the one that suggests an increased risk of prostate cancer) makes me think it is a better conducted study than the first one, which relied on people's recollections as to how often they masturbated, etc., when they were younger.

One study does not necessarily the truth make though.

Also, it is probably of little importance: what are you going to do with the information? People have enough difficulty giving up smoking and we *know* that causes lung cancer, bladder cancer, etc. Are people going to give up sex (read "wanking" for most of you) because it *might* promote prostate cancer?

Not likely.

FF.
(urologist)
I disagree with the bold. From the article saying it is bad.

"However, in relying on men to recall information from 20 or 30 years previously, it is likely that there will be some inaccuracy in the data collected as men either consciously or unconsciously forget some detail which could compromise their findings.

"The sample used in the study is also relatively small, making it difficult to draw any universal conclusions."
Also the other study only referred to wa.nking.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3072021.stm
I'm slightly confused by your post. You disagree with my assessment that the recent article is a better designed study?

I am aware the that the older paper demonstrating a benefit was only looking at masturbation. I don't really see the relevance of this, as the participants in the second paper were analysed by type of sexual behaviour as well.

Are you disagreeing because you've read the papers, or because of what you've heard from non-professionals about what they think they read?

FF.
The relevance is that they are looking at different sexual activites and so may not contradict.
I have not read the papers, did they use large enough samples?
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
#15
FFS, we are all going to die at some point. Might as well be while on the job approaching the climax of your life.
 
#17
And looking on the bright side of things. This could possibly lead to many rather enjoyable prostate massages in later life.
 
#18
Doesn't cooked tomato and soy cancel it out? I saw soy beans in tomato sauce in Morrisons the other day - couldn't you just have (say) half a can a w*nk? (I appreciate that for some adolescent's this would mean that they would be eating little else :) )
 
#19
sex (wanking or with partner) is going to give you cancer !

great ! add to the list of shit that will kill us


booze
smokes
afghanistan
iraq
coffee

there goes my plan to replace smoking with wanking (20 a day would wear it out)
 
#20
longlivethequeen said:
damm this proves the frau is right she always says that sex would kill me one day
I think she was referring to adulterous sex. ;)
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
theoriginalphantom The NAAFI Bar 61
E The NAAFI Bar 23
Devil_Dog The NAAFI Bar 11

Similar threads

New Posts

Top