Page 1 of 2

too much sex

Posted: March 12th, 2008, 7:54 pm
by BrysOn_G
The first national study of four common sexually transmitted diseases among girls and young women has found that one in four are infected with at least one of the diseases, federal health officials reported Tuesday.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/12/scien ... d=facebook

not good.

Posted: March 12th, 2008, 9:33 pm
by JDUB
country full of ho's

Posted: March 12th, 2008, 9:41 pm
by Cider Jim
I can't do it, but somebody needs to tell a Radford joke. :cheerleader :welcome

Posted: March 12th, 2008, 10:14 pm
by matshark
what are the official snacks at RU?

Hoho's and Twinkie's!

(shameless joke made at Radford's expense...) Thank-you *bows*

Posted: March 12th, 2008, 10:16 pm
by matshark
But seriously, is anyone ELSE disappointed that 1/4 of the teen girls in the country have an STD? i mean SERIOUSLY! Just makes me want to slap somebody. Obviously, that sex-ed is working REAL WELL! now they not only have firsthand experience, they can play along when it comes to the pics of STD's. :x

Posted: March 12th, 2008, 11:40 pm
by "R" i "
:rofl

Posted: March 13th, 2008, 3:59 am
by Hold My Own
Bros before hoes. Why? Because your bros are always there for you. They got your back after your ho rips your heart out for no good reason. And you were nothing but great to your ho, and you told her that she was the only ho for you. And that she was better than all the other hoes in the world. And then suddenly...she's not yo' ho no mo'.

Posted: March 13th, 2008, 7:04 am
by Fumblerooskies
Hold My Own wrote:Bros before hoes. Why? Because your bros are always there for you. They got your back after your ho rips your heart out for no good reason. And you were nothing but great to your ho, and you told her that she was the only ho for you. And that she was better than all the other hoes in the world. And then suddenly...she's not yo' ho no mo'.
...and then you're left Holding Your Own.

Posted: March 13th, 2008, 8:07 am
by LUconn
Extrapolating from the findings, Dr. Forhan said 3.2 million teenage women were infected with at least one of the four diseases.

The 838 participants in the study were chosen at random with standard statistical techniques

So the sample size for 3,200,000 is 838? That's .000262%. I'm sure this guy probably just landed a big research grant with his "findings" though.

Posted: March 13th, 2008, 9:33 am
by cheerbren
You guys are pigs. I am very concerned that the kids of today are not realizing that even with condoms you can still get STD's. Most are being taught that with a condom you are 'safe'.

Posted: March 13th, 2008, 9:45 am
by jcmanson
cheerbren wrote:You guys are pigs.
:exactly

Posted: March 13th, 2008, 10:07 am
by FlameNForest
Fumblerooskies wrote:
Hold My Own wrote:Bros before hoes. Why? Because your bros are always there for you. They got your back after your ho rips your heart out for no good reason. And you were nothing but great to your ho, and you told her that she was the only ho for you. And that she was better than all the other hoes in the world. And then suddenly...she's not yo' ho no mo'.
...and then you're left Holding Your Own.
:lol: :lol:

Posted: March 13th, 2008, 10:26 am
by blwall1416
So....moral of the story.....STOP having sex with teenage girls....check. 8)

Posted: March 13th, 2008, 11:02 am
by RagingTireFire
Accurate study or not, I find it a little disturbing that the #1 STD for women is HPV. STD's were bad enough "in the good old days" when they were just infections and not cancer.

Posted: March 13th, 2008, 1:03 pm
by scuzdriver
STD=The gift that keeps on giving!

Posted: March 13th, 2008, 3:44 pm
by matshark
gift that keeps on giving... that means that the high school years are like christmas in july, and august... september... october... november...

i mean you would think they would mention that the cells that cause certain STD's are small enough to slip between the microscopic holes in chemical structure of latex... but then again, i guess that would require acknowledging that there are consequences for your actions... hmm...

Posted: March 13th, 2008, 4:15 pm
by blwall1416
"No doubt, love, but as long as people are still having promiscuous sex with many anonymous partners without protection while at the same time experimenting with mind-expanding drugs in a consequence-free environment, I'll be sound as a pound!"


or


"Only sailors use condoms, baby."
"Not in the nineties, Austin."
"Well they should, those filthy beggars, they go from port to port."

Posted: March 13th, 2008, 5:23 pm
by scuzdriver
I wonder what the ex gov of NY is carrying around with him?

Posted: March 13th, 2008, 9:14 pm
by Rocketfan
scuzdriver wrote:I wonder what the ex gov of NY is carrying around with him?
a passport, if he doesn't leave he will be carrying only handcuffs soon.

Posted: March 13th, 2008, 9:50 pm
by Realist
I used to work for a health agency and some of this stuff is misleading. A) HPV is found in just about 1 out of every 4 women. Possibly more. Only a certain few types out of 100's of viruses that comprise "HPV" actually can cause cancer, and if a girl gets a regular pap, the incidence of cancer is nearly zero. It usually takes 5-10 years for cancer to occur even with the cancer causing types and if you get a pap every year like most women do it will catch it before it even approaches cancer. Also, men carry the virus as well and in just as much of the population as women, however, it is latent in men (in most cases) so they never will know they have it, but can pass it on. Condoms do not protect against it but they do have a vaccine now for the cancer causing types. If you have a child approaching adolescence it is recommended to have them vaccinated (only for women).

Incidence of other STD's are much lower.


End of public service announcement.

Posted: March 13th, 2008, 9:55 pm
by RagingTireFire
Noted, Realist. I wonder if Merck funded this study.

Posted: March 13th, 2008, 10:14 pm
by kel varson
RagingTireFire wrote:Noted, Realist. I wonder if Merck funded this study.
Yes but if 50 percent of teenage girls are having sex, (and that is what the data says) the numbers are bound to continue to climb.

Posted: March 13th, 2008, 10:20 pm
by Realist
kel varson wrote:
RagingTireFire wrote:Noted, Realist. I wonder if Merck funded this study.
Yes but if 50 percent of teenage girls are having sex, (and that is what the data says) the numbers are bound to continue to climb.

This is true. I'm not saying it's something that shouldn't be addressed. I just thought there were things left out and not clarified. I also thought about it in terms of people on this site---most likely the people you know get paps, etc. Even if cervical cancer develops however, it's one of the most easily treated cancers. Obviously, you don't want cancer in the first place though.

Posted: March 14th, 2008, 4:19 pm
by Hold My Own
scuzdriver wrote:STD=The gift that keeps on giving!

And who will never leave your side 8)

Posted: March 14th, 2008, 4:23 pm
by RagingTireFire
Hold My Own wrote:
scuzdriver wrote:STD=The gift that keeps on giving!

And who will never leave your side 8)
It ain't my side I'd be worried about. I'm thinking more of the frontal region.