Topic: Oral sex may cause more throat cancer than smoking in men
marvin !H0G.H/BnJg started this discussion 15 years ago #12,631
http://webfarm.bloomberg.com/news/2011-10-03/oral-sex-may-cause-virus-linked-throat-cancer-in-men-study.htmlA virus spread by oral sex may cause more cases of throat cancer in men than smoking, a finding that spurred calls for a new large-scale test of a drug used against the infection.
Researchers examined 271 throat-tumor samples collected over 20 years ending in 2004 and found that the percentage of oral cancer linked to the human papillomavirus, or HPV, surged to 72 percent from about 16 percent, according to a report released yesterday in the Journal of Clinical Oncology. By 2020, the virus-linked throat tumors - which mostly affected men - will become more common than HPV-caused cervical cancer, the report found.
HPV is known for infecting genitals. The finding that it can spread to the throat and cause cancer may increase pressure on Merck & Co., the second-largest U.S. drugmaker, to conduct large-scale trials to see if its vaccine Gardasil, which wards off cervical cancer in women, also prevents HPV throat infections.
“The burden of cancer caused by HPV is going to shift from women to men in this decade,†Maura Gillison, an oncologist at Ohio State University and study senior author, said in a telephone interview. “What we believe is happening is that the number of sexual partners and exposure to HPV has risen over that same time period.â€
Researchers examined 271 throat-tumor samples collected over 20 years ending in 2004 and found that the percentage of oral cancer linked to the human papillomavirus, or HPV, surged to 72 percent from about 16 percent, according to a report released yesterday in the Journal of Clinical Oncology. By 2020, the virus-linked throat tumors - which mostly affected men - will become more common than HPV-caused cervical cancer, the report found.
HPV is known for infecting genitals. The finding that it can spread to the throat and cause cancer may increase pressure on Merck & Co., the second-largest U.S. drugmaker, to conduct large-scale trials to see if its vaccine Gardasil, which wards off cervical cancer in women, also prevents HPV throat infections.
“The burden of cancer caused by HPV is going to shift from women to men in this decade,†Maura Gillison, an oncologist at Ohio State University and study senior author, said in a telephone interview. “What we believe is happening is that the number of sexual partners and exposure to HPV has risen over that same time period.â€
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Falco !PZmcClOUDk joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later[^] [v] #226,948
first
inb4 hugh
inb4 hugh
sluggy joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #226,949
Women: killing men however they can.
Freecode !!4IKKtS9GG joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 5 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #226,951
Fuck.
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 8 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #226,952
I don't really have time to read the full article, but they are suggesting that this is happening to men because of performance of oral sex on women with HPV? While that sounds believable, I would be curious to know what the age ranges for these "victims" are.
swamplights !!V3J448+/B joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 39 seconds later, 8 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #226,953
I guess that everyone should be vaccinated.
marvin !H0G.H/BnJg (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 14 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #226,957
@226,952 (E)
> The HPV-linked head and neck cancers, usually of the tonsils, palate or tongue, hit men in their 30s, 40s, and 50s, Gillison said. It is unclear why women are affected much less often than men, she said.
Doesn't say anything about sexual orientation, surprisingly.
> The HPV-linked head and neck cancers, usually of the tonsils, palate or tongue, hit men in their 30s, 40s, and 50s, Gillison said. It is unclear why women are affected much less often than men, she said.
Doesn't say anything about sexual orientation, surprisingly.
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 18 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #226,958
@previous (marvin !H0G.H/BnJg)
I think further investigation really needs to be conducted because this article really leaves out a lot of important details. I think any kind of health assessment towards "men" vs. "women" and how oral sex is affecting the issue is sort of vaguely mentioned here. I mean, when you say oral sex you implicitly say that it is mouth-to-genitals, but are they also suggesting it's mouth-to-mouth, or crossing between sex, or even with sexual orientation? I would also like to see the raw numbers. I didn't really "get the facts" from this article so I'm somewhat skeptical, but maybe that is just me.
I think further investigation really needs to be conducted because this article really leaves out a lot of important details. I think any kind of health assessment towards "men" vs. "women" and how oral sex is affecting the issue is sort of vaguely mentioned here. I mean, when you say oral sex you implicitly say that it is mouth-to-genitals, but are they also suggesting it's mouth-to-mouth, or crossing between sex, or even with sexual orientation? I would also like to see the raw numbers. I didn't really "get the facts" from this article so I'm somewhat skeptical, but maybe that is just me.
(Edited 41 seconds later.)
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 18 minutes later, 36 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #226,961
and yet another reason not to be a faggot
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 38 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #226,963
Oh shit, to4str is going to die from massive, massive, deep throat cancer (from some dude's penis.) That is so funny.
marvin !H0G.H/BnJg (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 48 seconds later, 38 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #226,964
@226,958 (E)
Hmm, doesn't sound like the study even attempted to address these things at all. No behavioral history connected to the samples they looked at.
http://jco.ascopubs.org/content/early/2011/10/03/JCO.2011.36.4596.abstract
http://jco.ascopubs.org/content/suppl/2011/10/03/JCO.2011.36.4596.DC1/364596-Chaturvedi.pdf
Hmm, doesn't sound like the study even attempted to address these things at all. No behavioral history connected to the samples they looked at.
http://jco.ascopubs.org/content/early/2011/10/03/JCO.2011.36.4596.abstract
http://jco.ascopubs.org/content/suppl/2011/10/03/JCO.2011.36.4596.DC1/364596-Chaturvedi.pdf
sluggy replied with this 15 years ago, 6 minutes later, 45 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #226,965
@previous (marvin !H0G.H/BnJg)
Were these studies backed by the vaccine manufacturer? I wouldn't be surprised.
Were these studies backed by the vaccine manufacturer? I wouldn't be surprised.
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 7 minutes later, 53 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #226,966
@226,964 (marvin !H0G.H/BnJg)
That's also very true. I would be very curious to see a better plot of these numbers overall, but those will suffice. I just think the original article sounds silly. I would address it more seriously if I had time but bleh for now.
I default that I have no strong opinion and so it's probably invalid without stronger examination.
That's also very true. I would be very curious to see a better plot of these numbers overall, but those will suffice. I just think the original article sounds silly. I would address it more seriously if I had time but bleh for now.
I default that I have no strong opinion and so it's probably invalid without stronger examination.
(Edited 19 seconds later.)
marvin !H0G.H/BnJg (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 26 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #226,972
@previous (E)
Yeah, it looks like there's a lot more on google scholar (from the same researcher) about the question of transmission, and the newswriters just kind of jumbled the conclusions together? Dunno, didn't look into it more than that.
@226,965 (sluggy)
I don't know, it sounds independent, although the article mentioned a drug trial that was abandoned.
Yeah, it looks like there's a lot more on google scholar (from the same researcher) about the question of transmission, and the newswriters just kind of jumbled the conclusions together? Dunno, didn't look into it more than that.
@226,965 (sluggy)
I don't know, it sounds independent, although the article mentioned a drug trial that was abandoned.
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 14 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #226,974
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 double-posted this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #226,975
sluggy replied with this 15 years ago, 23 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #226,977
@226,972 (marvin !H0G.H/BnJg)
The media has a habit of sensationalizing research. Cell phones cause cancer and all.
The media has a habit of sensationalizing research. Cell phones cause cancer and all.
hamfist !!snnYcROO9 joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 7 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #226,984
@previous (sluggy)
Time magazine is really bad with sensationalizing research. Plus out of touch trend pieces
Time magazine is really bad with sensationalizing research. Plus out of touch trend pieces
(Edited 1 minute later.)
marvin !H0G.H/BnJg (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 49 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #226,985
@previous (hamfist !!snnYcROO9)
What the fuck does time magazine have to do with anything you retard
What the fuck does time magazine have to do with anything you retard
Anonymous G replied with this 15 years ago, 2 days later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #228,350
@226,974 (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
yes, but faggots have a much higher chance of getting it than straights
yes, but faggots have a much higher chance of getting it than straights
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #228,352
@previous (G)
[citation needed]
Also, no, that's doubtful.
> In a 2007 epidemiology study published in the New England Journal of Medicine, Gillison and her colleagues found that having a high number of oral or vaginal sex partners are risk factors for HPV-associated throat cancer. The cancer may also be spread by open-mouth kissing, Gillison said in the interview.
Sounds to me like straight men are more likely to get it.
[citation needed]
Also, no, that's doubtful.
> In a 2007 epidemiology study published in the New England Journal of Medicine, Gillison and her colleagues found that having a high number of oral or vaginal sex partners are risk factors for HPV-associated throat cancer. The cancer may also be spread by open-mouth kissing, Gillison said in the interview.
Sounds to me like straight men are more likely to get it.
(Edited 3 minutes later.)
Anonymous G replied with this 15 years ago, 19 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #228,365
@previous (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
look it up fgt
not thirty seconds googling
http://health.usnews.com/health-news/family-health/cancer/articles/2011/05/09/gay-men-more-likely-to-have-had-cancer
http://home60515.com/4.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42960543/ns/health-cancer/t/gay-men-nearly-twice-likely-report-having-cancer/
look it up fgt
not thirty seconds googling
http://health.usnews.com/health-news/family-health/cancer/articles/2011/05/09/gay-men-more-likely-to-have-had-cancer
http://home60515.com/4.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42960543/ns/health-cancer/t/gay-men-nearly-twice-likely-report-having-cancer/
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #228,367
@previous (G)
Those articles show that they're more likely to have cancer in general. That doesn't necessarily apply to this type of cancer, and the article specifically states that it affects vaginal sex partners.
Those articles show that they're more likely to have cancer in general. That doesn't necessarily apply to this type of cancer, and the article specifically states that it affects vaginal sex partners.
(Edited 23 seconds later.)
sluggy replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #228,370
@previous (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
Gay men have vaginal sex with their wives and then spread HPV though oral sex with other men. It's possible, but im merely speculating.
Gay men have vaginal sex with their wives and then spread HPV though oral sex with other men. It's possible, but im merely speculating.
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #228,374
@previous (sluggy)
That's good speculation, but probably not the most common way it happens considering how common this type of cancer is becoming. Anon G is just being a moron, though.
That's good speculation, but probably not the most common way it happens considering how common this type of cancer is becoming. Anon G is just being a moron, though.
sluggy replied with this 15 years ago, 57 seconds later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #228,377
@previous (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
I know a model who is insecure cause she has HPV. Id still go down on her.
I know a model who is insecure cause she has HPV. Id still go down on her.
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #228,381
marvin !H0G.H/BnJg (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 6 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #228,390
This paper goes into more detail on various behaviors associated with throat cancer, if anyone's interested: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa065497#t=articleDiscussion
sluggy replied with this 15 years ago, 9 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #228,398
Anonymous G replied with this 15 years ago, 15 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #228,408
green joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 7 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #228,581
Is this mm or mf oral?