Blind but healthyFollow

Out of curiosity, how can frequent ************ increase the risk, but not intercourse?

But didn't you also ********** while you were married?

You don't have to answer that I suppose, it was semi-rethorical.

When i was a teenager, I could ********** 5-6 times a day without any problem. Except for stuff like school and Uni I guess, but even then it was not that hard difficult.

**** **** ****.

Golly, I hope I don't get prostate cancer.

My dad had prostate cancer. I really don't want to think about what that may imply about his sexual history.

I skimmed the actual publication. What they are saying is that total sex in 20's and 30's is correlated to higher risk of prostate cancer. And also - independently - ************ in the 20's and 30's alone correlates to higher risk of cancer. Most of the results are just tiny effects compared to the controls they also measured such as baldness and weight (baldies and fatties more likely to get cancer, apparently).

I could make an alternative headline from their data, but since it is totally illogical, they didn't play it up: their data indicate if your first intercourse is between the ages of 20-24, you have the lowest risk of prostate cancer. Earlier or later your risk is much greater. By much greater, I mean almost as much as being obese (or bald) and vastly more then *any* effect due to frequency of intercourse or ************* I will say they reference other studies which also find that early intercourse increases risk of prostate cancer (although the authors fail to mention if the earlier studies manage to find that early or later then age 24 first intercourse have similar risks).

Edited, Jan 27th 2009 1:53pm by yossarian

Let's just say I should probably skip the physical and head straight to chemo.

You and half the population.