Covid male sterility papers + HPV, herpes

as previously discussed:

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/andr.12859

A recent report published in JAMA Network Open revealed that in an analysis 38 semen samples from COVID-19 patients, 6 (four at the acute stage of infection and, alarmingly, two who were recovering) tested positive for the virus by RT-PCR.1 Importantly, at this point, we have no idea whether the actual virus was viable and infectious. Nevertheless, the possibility that this coronavirus could have a pathophysiological impact on the testes was suggested by additional data indicating that active COVID-19 infection dramatically reduced the testosterone-to-LH ratio, suggesting a significant impact on the responsiveness of Leydig cells to LH stimulation.2 In many ways, we should not be surprised by these observations because the blood-testes barrier is known to offer little defense against viral invasion, given the wide range of pathogenic viruses (HIV, hepatitis, mumps, papilloma) that are known to be capable of damaging the testes and rendering the host infertile.

Furthermore, the spike protein that gives the COVID-19 virus its corona is known to target ACE2 (angiotensin-converting enzyme 2), which is highly expressed by several cell types in the testes including Leydig cells, Sertoli cells, and the germ line. As a result of these factors, several opinion pieces have been published already, raising the possibility of testicular damage and infertility consequent to COVID-19 infection.24 

However, it is also possible that the virus could gain access to male germ cells once they leave the testes, either in the epididymis or following ejaculation. In this Opinion Article, I shall be focusing on this post-testicular route of infection pointing out, for the first time, that the mature spermatozoon has all of the machinery needed to bind this virus, fuse with it, and even achieve reverse transcription of the viral RNA into proviral DNA. Such considerations raise the possibility that spermatozoa could act as potential vectors of this highly infectious disease. This happens in insects5—why not us?

IN ADDITION TO-

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/jmv.26667

The other side of COVID-19 pandemic: Effects on male fertility

RECONCILE ABOVE WITH

The outbreak of novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a major pandemic threat worldwide. According to the existing clinical data, this virus not only causes respiratory diseases and affects the lungs but also induces histopathological or functional changes in various organs like the testis and also the male genital tract. The renin-angiotensin system (RAS), also ACE 2 and TMPRSS2 play an important role in the cellular entry for SARS-CoV-2.

Because the male genital system presents high ACE 2 expression, the importance of this pathway increases in COVID-19 cases. As the COVID-19 pandemic has affected the male genital system in direct or indirect ways and showed a negative impact on male reproduction, this paper focuses on the possible mechanisms underlying the damage caused by COVID-19 to the testis and also other components of the male genital tract.

SO THE SPIKE PROTEIN ALONE TARGETS ACE2, FOUND IN THE BALLS, LIKE URINE* (*THAT PART WAS A JOKE)

and they wanna force all young men to get it

college age men too

and all young women

when other papers cite it might act like an STD?

Huh.

Highlight:

  • The male genital system presents high ACE 2 expression therefore, it will be highly important to investigate and clarify the relationship between COVID-19 and the male genital tract.

I’m not even a man but I can feel my lady balls shrink reading that.

If we look at the mechanisms of these changes caused by SARS-CoV-2 in the testis, as mentioned above, this virus uses ACE 2 for entry into the cells through its surface spike (S) proteins. S proteins have two subunits, S1 and S2, which are responsible for receptor recognition and membrane fusion. Studies have shown that SARS-CoV-2 enters into the host cell through the binding of its C-terminal domain of the S1 subunit to ACE 2. Additionally, some studies have reported that the level of autophagy receptor SQSTM1/p62 in SARS-CoV-2 infected cells has increased, suggesting a decrease in autophagy flux.

So, SARS-CoV-2 itself or via ACE 2 can directly induce or inhibit the autophagy pathway to achieve virus survival.

As a result, SARS-CoV-2 may cause male reproductive disorders by regulating the level of autophagy in male germ cells.4 On the contrary, another hypothesis is that testis degeneration in the COVID-19 cases is attributed to an increase in testicular temperature as an indirect effect of the inflammation.5

or :-

Do the jabs cause inflammation?

Can spike proteins microwave your balls? Do they nuke your little swimmers?

BUT WAIT. THERE’S MORE.

Another molecule effective at entering the cell of the SARS-CoV-2 is host proteases like transmembrane serine protease 2 (TMPRSS2), which cleaves the viral S protein to induce a conformational change that allows to a fusion of the virus and host cell membranes.34 TMPRSS2 is the key molecule for the successful infection process.35 

This protease is more expressed in human tissues than ACE 2; co-expression of ACE 2 and TMPRSS2 has been shown in the testis, endometrium, and placenta. Researchers investigated the coexpression of these two molecules in the testis and accordingly, they found that ACE 2 is predominantly expressed in myoid cells, spermatogonia, Leydig, and Sertoli cells, while TMPRSS2 is expressed in spermatogonia and (elongated) spermatids of the testicular tissue34 (Figure 3).

I warned you about endometriosis-like function. Maybe naturally having endo is protection?

It’s lifelong inflammation. Kinda like cancer. You literally have to cut the tissues out.

Like Fight Club, they’d have to take your balls.

Shocked men aren’t more protective of their bollocks and demanding ONE safety study.

ModRNA has owners. Repossession is plausible, legally.

STD angle:

“Recent studies have reported that SARS-CoV-2 is easily found in human bodily fluids.35 The presence of a virus in a semen sample is still a topic of discussion and research due to the small number of studies. For example, two different studies have analyzed SARS-CoV-2 presence in semen samples and according to these studies, SARS-CoV-2 (+) semen samples were found in two patients from 23 cured patients and four patients from 15 patients in the acute phase. Another study reported that SARS-CoV-2 was not detected in the semen samples of 34 COVID-19 patients.31

“It is also known that the prostate gland secretes prostate fluid, one of the main seminal components, and muscles of the gland help in pushing the seminal fluid through the urethra during ejaculation.31 The critical point is that, as we mentioned above, a small percentage of the prostate hillock and club cells express ACE 220 and also TMPRSS2 is highly expressed by the epithelium of the human prostate;37 so it is more likely to get SARS-CoV-2 infection, which may affect its secretions.31 

These mechanisms could explain  the SARS-CoV-2 (+) semen samples of the studies.23

“If the presence of the virus in semen is definitively proved by studies, assisted reproduction techniques will also be affected. For instance, testing all male patients like HIV or Hepatitis B/C cases, and using appropriate sperm washing techniques, or paying extra attention to sperm freezing for COVID-19 positive patients.35

“Like SARS-CoV-2, most viruses enter the human body through nasal and oral routes, and viral particles may break the blood-brain barrier.” but don’t worry about shedding?

“It has been reported that the brain cells (glial cells and neurons) also express ACE 2 receptors, making them a possible target to induce neuronal death for SARS-CoV-2. Importantly, the central nervous system plays a critical role in endocrine control and spermatogenesis.31 

The Hypothalamic-Pituitary-Gonadal Axis (HPGa) exerts a vital role in reproduction; in other words, HPGa can inhibit the body’s reproductive functions via hormones.3138

We have our mechanism for sterility, people.

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) expressing neurons from the hypothalamus secretes GnRH and it activates the release of the follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) and luteinizing hormone (LH) from the pituitary gland. A low level of GnRH causes a decrease in FSH and LH, resulting in impaired function of the Sertoli and Leydig cells.31 Ma et al.39 showed that COVID-19 patients had significantly higher serum LH levels but decreased testosterone/LH and FSH levels than healthy men, suggesting potential hypogonadism. Taken together, patients with COVID-19 have been found to present a reduced testosterone/LH ratio, indicating possible subclinical damage to male gonadal function.5 Additionally, activation of the HPGa and subsequent alterations in hormone concentrations play a critical role in poor sperm quality.38

Therefore, besides its direct effects on testis, SARS-CoV-2 may affect fertility indirectly via the central nervous system.31

Like a remote control, for your balls.

In conclusion, all preliminary findings mentioned above suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic affects the male genital system in direct or indirect ways and shows a negative impact on male reproductive health, inducing spermatogenic failure. Additional studies are necessary to answer all the questions and further investigations are warranted, but ACE 2 and TMPRSS2 play an important role in the cellular entry for SARS-CoV-2. As the male genital system presents high ACE 2 expression, the importance of this pathway increases in COVID-19 cases.

SPERMATOGENIC FAILURE

and onward

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/and.13654

Could COVID-19 have an impact on male fertility?

duh

The pandemic caused by Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has led to several hypotheses of functional alteration of different organs. The direct influence of this virus on the male urogenital organs is still to be evaluated. However some hypotheses can already be made, especially in the andrological field, for the biological similarity of the SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV2. As well as SARS-CoV, SARS CoV-2 uses the ‘Angiotensin Converting Enzyme-2’ (ACE2) as a receptor to enter human cells. It was found that ACE2, Angiotensin (1-7) and its MAS receptors are present, over in the lung, also in the testicles, in particular in Leydig and Sertoli cells. A first hypothesis is that the virus could enter the testicle and lead to alterations in testicular functionality. A second hypothesis is that the binding of the virus to the ACE2 receptor, could cause an excess of ACE2 and give rise to a typical inflammatory response. The inflammatory cells could interfere with the function of Leydig and Sertoli cells. Both hypotheses should be evaluated and confirmed, in order to possibly monitor fertility in patients COVID-19+.

Specific genes relating to male fertility have already been found e.g.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/mrd.23314

oddly recommended with covid papers?

Male infertility is a rising problem around the world. Often the cause of male infertility is unclear, and this hampers diagnosis and treatment. Spermatogenesis is a complex process under sophisticated regulation by many testis-specific genes. Here, we report the testis-specific gene 1700102P08Rik is conserved in both the human and mouse and highly expressed in spermatocytes. To investigate the role of 1700102P08Rik in male fertility, knockout mice were generated by CRISPR-Cas9. 1700102P08Rik knockout male mice were infertile with smaller testis and epididymis, but female knockout mice retained normal fertility. Spermatogenesis in the 1700102P08Rik knockout male mouse was arrested at the spermatocyte stage, and no sperm were found in the epididymis. The deletion of 1700102P08Rik causes apoptosis in the testis but did not affect the serum concentration of testosterone, luteinizing hormone, and follicle-stimulating hormone or the synapsis and recombination of homologous chromosomes. We also found that 1700102P08Rik is downregulated in spermatocyte arrest in men.

Together, these results indicate that the 1700102P08Rik gene is essential for spermatogenesis and its dysfunction leads to male infertility.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/and.13712

As the incidence and severity of SARS-CoV-2 are reported to be higher in males than females, Shastri et al. performed a study to determine the time to viral clearance after infection in a total of 68 individuals (48 males and 20 females) with median age of 37 years (Shastri et al., 2020).

They observed that females were able to achieve viral clearance significantly earlier than males.

Furthermore, a serial follow-up evaluation of three families with both male and female patients demonstrated that female members of the same household cleared the SARS-CoV-2 infection earlier in each family (Shastri et al., 2020). In order to determine the reason for delayed clearance in males, they also checked the expression of ACE2 in tissue-specific repositories.

It was found that testicular tissues were one of the tissues showing ACE2 expression in 3 independent RNA expression databases (Human Protein Atlas, FAMTOM5 and GETx). Interestingly, the ovarian tissue showed very low expression of ACE2 (Shastri et al., 2020).

so women may be the red herring here

ACE2 and fat study, so expect fatty side effects

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/dth.13989

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/and.13791

Impact of COVID-19 and other viruses on reproductive health

They admit the male HPV link I posted about previously.

Male infertility is linked to some viral infections including human papillomavirus (HPV), herpes simplex viruses (HSV) and human immunodeficiency viruses (HIVs). Almost nothing is known about severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) effect on fertility. The possible risk factors of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection on fertility comes from the abundance of angiotensin-Converting Enzyme-2 (ACE2), receptor entry of the virus, on testes, a reduction in important sex hormone ratios and COVID-19-associated fever. Recent studies have shown a gender difference for COVID-19 rates and comorbidity. In this review, we will discuss the potential effect of COVID-19 on male fertility and talk about what needs to be done by the scientific community to tackle our limited understanding of the disease. On the other side, we will focus on what is known so far about the risk of COVID-19 on pregnancy, neonatal health and the vertical transfer of the virus between mothers and their neonates. Finally, because reproduction is a human right and infertility is considered a health disease, we will discuss how assisted reproductive clinics can cope with the pandemic and what guidelines they should follow to minimise the risk of viral transmission.

Remember, viral entry via SPs cause inflammation that might cause sterility? WELL-

Virus entry begins when the virus surface enzyme called Spike (S) glycoprotein binds to the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) located on the host cell membrane (Hoffmann et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2020). S protein contains two different domain regions: S1 and S2, each one has its own role in virus entry. S1 domain is the part that binds directly to the host ACE2 receptor while the S2 domain helps the virus to fuse with the target cell membrane using its functional elements (Glowacka et al., 2011; Hoffmann et al., 2020). This process is also mediated by a Transmembrane Serine Protease 2 (TMPRSS2) located on the surface of the target cell membrane used for the priming of the S protein causing the virus entry (Hoffmann et al., 2020; Shen, Mao, Wu, Tanaka, & Zhang, 2017; Wang et al., 2020).

When the fusion of the virus with the target cell membrane occurs, the virus releases its genome and using the host cell organelles to replicates its RNA and releases new mature virion to target other cells (Boopathi, Poma, & Kolandaivel, 2020; Jiang, Hillyer, & Du, 2020) Figure 1.

wait wait wait the wild virus replicates its RNA too?

minor flex –

3.1 Human papillomavirus (HPV) and its impact on male fertility

Human papillomavirus (HPV) is a non-enveloped DNA virus and sexually transmitted worldwide. In some cases, it causes either warts or precancerous lesions (Ljubojevic & Skerlev, 2014). More than 170 HPV types have been identified and completely sequenced (Chouhy, Bolatti, Pérez, & Giri, 2013). Recent studies suggest that HPV infection affects male fertility. In cases of idiopathic asthenozoospermia, HPV DNA was observed in the sperm cells of infertile patients (Foresta et al., 2010; Lee, Huang, King, & Chan, 2002) confirming its role of infertility. Strong association between HPV infection and impairment of sperm parameters, especially a reduction in sperm motility and concentration, was observed in HPV-infected men (Garolla et al., 2012; Jeršovienė, Gudlevičienė, Rimienė, & Butkauskas, 2019). Garolla and coworkers (Garolla et al., 2012) reported that HPV can bind to the head of a spermatozoon and impair sperm motility in men. Certain sperm DNA exons undergo apoptotic fragmentation on HPV-infected men suggesting that HPV types degrade different exons of important genes (Lee et al., 2002). Collectively, these evidences suggest that HPV plays a role in male factor infertility.

3.2 Herpes simplex viruses (HSVs) and their impact on male fertility

Herpes simplex viruses (HSVs) are enveloped DNA viruses of the family Herpesviridae. HSVs include two distinct viruses HSV-1 and HSV-2 (Whitley & Roizman, 2017). HSVs are sexually transmitted and targets reproductive system. HSV-1 causes oral and, occasionally, genital sores while HSV-2 is common cause of genital herpes which may lead to infertility problems in both males and females. HSV DNA was detected in semen from about 50% asymptomatic infertile males (Amirjannati et al., 2014; Bezold et al., 2007; Monavari et al., 2013; Neofytou, Sourvinos, Asmarianaki, Spandidos, & Makrigiannakis, 2009). A strong association of HSV infection and low sperm count, poor motility, and increased apoptotic cells were reported (Monavari et al., 2013). Haematospermia and a lower seminal volume and abnormal viscosity were found in HSV-2-infected males which indicate prostate dysfunction (Kurscheidt et al., 2018). Bezold et al. (2007) reported significantly reduced sperm concentration and motility as well as reduced citrate concentrations and neutral α-glucosidase in HSV-infected males, suggested impaired epididymal and prostate function.

The manwhore diseases are listed alongside HIV, lol.
The wages of sin is death, in men as well as women.
How will PUAs recover? They won’t. God Willing.

The concern show that SARS-CoV-2 may affect male reproductive organ and thus results in male infertility stems from several observations. Early studies both in China and Italy showed that males are more susceptible to COVID-19 compared to females (Guan et al., 2020; Livingston & Bucher, 2020).

A recent large cohort observational study from United Kingdom featuring around 20 thousands COVID-19 patients reported that males represented 60% of cases and considered the male sex as one of the risk factors for COVID-19 (Docherty et al., 2020).

DS: MRAs: crickets

More alarming is the result of a new systematic review—included 48 recently published articles and 16 databases—where it found that men are more likely to suffer or to die from the complications of COVID-19 compared to women (Serge, Vandromme, & Charlotte, 2020).

DS: suffer or die? Binary?

Large proportion of these vulnerable males is in their childbearing age, and thus their reproductive ability can be affected.

Finally, like influenza, COVID-19 patients suffer from fever, which may affect sperm production. It was reported that febrile illnesses had an impact on semen parameters (Sergerie, Mieusset, Croute, Daudin, & Bujan, 2007). Total sperm count and motility percentage were reduced significantly at days 15, 37 after fever episode before going back to normal after several weeks (Sergerie et al., 2007). Increase of sperm DNA fragmentation index and alteration in the nuclear protein composition of ejaculated spermatozoon were reported after fever episode (Evenson, Jost, Corzett, & Balhorn, 2000).

Different viruses use different routes to enter into the host cells. SARS-CoV-2 uses the same ACE2 receptor used by its cousin, the SARS-CoV virus, with the help of TMPRSS2 (see Figure 1). Single cell expression analysis has detected the expression of ACE2 RNA not only in the lung epithelial cells, but also in several other organs, among them are the kidneys and the bladder (Fan et al., 2020; Lin et al., 2020; Tipnis et al., 2000). Protein expression analysis also confirmed the presence of ACE2 protein in multiple tissues (Hamming et al., 2004).

Interestingly, the highest expression of ACE2 was found in the testes (Fan et al., 2020). The high expression of the ACE2 receptor in the testes raises a concern that the SARS-CoV-2 has the route to enter some if not all testicular cells and thus could cause damage.

To further analyse the types of testicular cells vulnerable for SARS-CoV viruses, Wang et al. studied single-celled ACE2 expression in the human testes (Wang & Xu, 2020). They found that ACE2 is mainly expressed in spermatogonia, leyding and Sertoli cell, while spermatocytes and spermatids had very low expression (Wang & Xu, 2020). Interestingly, TMPRSS2 expression is similar to ACE2, where TMPRSS2 was also enriched in spermatogonia and spermatids. It has been also shown that ACE2 positive spermatogonia cells express genes that are important for virus reproduction and transmission, while ACE2 positive leyding and Sertoli cells express genes that are required for cell–cell junctions and immunity.

Collectively, these results highlight the risk of COVID-19 on testicular cells and on the spermatogenesis process.

The only direct evidence for the effect of COVID-19 on male reproductive function comes from a study where sex hormones namely testosterone (T), luteinising hormone (LH) and follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) among others were compared between COVID-19 patients and healthy controls. While the T level was not different between the two groups, the ratio of T to LH and the ratio of FSH to LH were significantly decreased in COVID-19 patients (Ma et al., 2020).

This might be the first direct evidence for the influence of COVID-19 on testicles’ ability to produce sex hormones; however, the results of this study should be followed by a more direct analysis of the seminal fluid of COVID-19 patients to evaluate the effect—if any—on sperm count, volume, morphology or motility. It has been reported that SARS-CoV causes orchitis in addition to other complications (Xu et al., 2006), so it is also possible that SARS-CoV-2 may cause the same complication in males.

Y NO DO THIS ON JABBEES?

And it may kill pregnant women only:

Pregnant women have been shown to be at high risk of comorbidity and mortality related to influenza infections (Rasmussen, Jamieson, & Bresee, 2008; Rasmussen, Jamieson, & Uyeki, 2012). The previous SARS infection showed that pregnant women had higher fatality rate (25%) compared to the general population (10%; Wong et al., 2004). With the rise of numbers of pregnant women and children affected by COVID-19, it is worth to know if pregnant women are a high-risk group for COVID-19 death or increased hospitalisation and also to evaluate the risk of vertical transfer either from the mother to the foetus or from the neonates to the mother.

Neonatal health is another important concern in the COVID-19-infected mothers. In a study from Wuhan, 33 neonates were born to mothers with COVID-19, and no health complications were reported except for shortness in breath in four cases (Zeng et al., 2020). Other studies, including less number of cases, did not report any neonatal health issues except for low birthweight (<2,500 g) and premature delivery (Cao et al., 2020; Chen & Lou, 2020). Two other studies from China and Iran reported two neonatal deaths out of 19 cases studied (Hantoushzadeh et al., 2020; Zhu, Wang, et al., 2020). No cases of miscarriages have been reported in the first trimester of COVID-19 pregnancies. Overall, it seems that neonates delivered by COVID-19 pregnant mothers have no increased risk of clinical complications compared to normal pregnancies and some of the reported neonatal complications could be related to mothers’ overall health status rather than a consequence of COVID-19 infection.

Then why jab them?

The risk of vertical transfer of SARS-CoV-2 between the mother and the foetus is possible knowing that the ACE2 receptor is expressed in the placenta and uterus (Levy et al., 2008); however, most published data do not support this predication as most neonates born for mothers affected by COVID-19 tested negative (Chen et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2020; Yu et al., 2020). A few studies have reported a vertical transfer of SARS-CoV-2 from the mother to the neonates (Hantoushzadeh et al., 2020; Yu et al., 2020), but these studies should be carefully interpreted as they occur less frequently and possibly resulted because of the neonatal exposure to SARS-CoV-2 after delivery.

One way to get you on the hook financially is reproductive tech.

Risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome should be taken very seriously during COVID-19 pandemic crisis and all guidelines clearly stated that reproductive endocrinologists should adopt gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist as a default protocol for ovarian stimulation with GnRH-agonist trigger to minimise the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS), hospital admissions and intensive care unit (ICU) occupancy (ASRM; Carugno et al., 2020ESHREJSF).

Isn’t that an endometriosis fertility treatment? Odd. So you’re saying it works?

Many health issues related to COVID-19 have been addressed in this review. Pregnancy and maternal health have been discussed. Many reports have evidences against a direct link between COVID-19 and maternal death. Neonates born to a COVID-19 mothers are not at increased risk of adverse health consequence compared to the ones born for COVID-19-unaffected mothers, and the possibility of viral vertical transfer has not been confirmed. Large cohort studies should be followed to confirm these results; additionally, first-trimester COVID-19 cases should be included and be evaluated for the risk of miscarriages.

The gender difference in COVID-19 incidence, comorbidity and death rates—males are at higher risk—requires prompt actions to understand the source of difference biologically and behaviourally. Viral infection by HPV, HSV, HIVs, HBV, HCV and MuV challenges reproductive health and can be considered as a risk factor for male infertility. These viruses have been detected in semen and can impair testicular function. Some viruses such as HIV, MuV and SARS-CoV are associated with orchitis resulting in male infertility, so it would be interesting to study if SARS-CoV-2 can cause the same problem. Because many males at childbearing age are affected by COVID-19, the high expression of ACE2 receptor in the testes and the association of COVID-19 with fever; a multidimensional andrological translational research project was suggested (Salonia et al., 2020). This project aims to develop international collaboration for data registry, hormonal studies and genomic studies to better understand the sex difference for COVID-19 health-related consequences.

re the endo treatment


GnRH agonists are a group of drugs that have been used to treat women with endometriosis for over 20 years [1]. They are modified versions of a naturally occurring hormone known as gonadotropin releasing hormone, which helps to control the menstrual cycle.

At present, the usual length of treatment with a GnRH agonist is 3–6 months. However, in Germany, 12 months treatment with add-back therapy (5 mg of norethisterone per day) has been approved, and other countries may do the same in the future.

The wages of sin – HPV in men and sperm infertility

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32386620/

TLDR – NOT HARMLESS

Evaluation of human papilloma virus in semen as a risk factor for low sperm quality and poor in vitro fertilization outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

A review of the literature regarding ART outcomes showed an association between HPV infection and decreased PR, and an even stronger association between HPV infection and increased MR.

-increased miscarriage rate, lower odds of conceiving

Conclusion: Our meta-analysis shows a negative effect of HPV on sperm concentration, motility, and morphology. Further subgroup and categorical analysis confirmed the clinical significance of impaired sperm motility in HPV-infected sperm, although the sperm count and morphology must be carefully analyzed. The studies reviewed reported lower PR and increased MR in couples with HPV-infected sperm. As most studies had a moderate risk of bias, these observations warrant further large, well-designed studies before introducing clinical management recommendations.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32279923/

Yes, this is a dealbreaker to sane women.

Human papilloma virus: to what degree does this sexually transmitted infection affect male fertility?

No abstract available

irony

MRAs: crickets

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25992782/

Human papillomavirus infection and fertility alteration: a systematic review

Results: HPV infections are shown to be significantly associated to many adverse effects in the reproductive function. These adverse effects were reported in different levels from cells production to pregnancy and may be related to the infecting genotype.

Conclusions: It appears from this study that HPV detection and genotyping could be of great value in infertility diagnosis at least in idiopathic infertility cases. Like for the risk of carcinogenesis, another classification of HPV regarding the risk of fertility alteration may be considered after deep investigations.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30344281/

Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) and Fertilization: A Mini Review

Sorry but if something makes you less virile, you’re less of a man.

Human papilloma virus (HPV) is one of the most prevalent viral sexually transmitted diseases. The ability of HPV to induce malignancy in the anogenital tract and stomato-pharyngeal cavity is well documented. Moreover, HPV infection may also affect reproductive health and fertility. Although, the impact of HPV on female fertility has not been thoroughly studied it has been found also to have an impact on semen parameters. Relative information can be obtained from studies investigating the relationship between HPV and pregnancy success. Furthermore, there is an ongoing debate whether HPV alters the efficacy of assisted reproductive technologies. An association between HPV and assisted reproductive technologies (ART) programs has been reported. Nevertheless, due to conflicting data and the small number of existing studies further research is required. It remains to be clarified whether HPV detection and genotyping could be included in the diagnostic procedures in couples undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intrauterine insemination (IUI) treatments. Vaccination of both genders against HPV can reduce the prevalence of HPV infection and eliminate its implications on human fertility. The aim of the present mini-review is to reiterate the association between HPV and human fertility through a systematic literature review.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21666465/

The role of human papillomavirus on sperm function

I love how many yanks pull a Henry 8th and blame women for their own infertility, in this century.

Recent findings: HPVs are agents of the most common sexually transmitted disease and can lead to warts and cancers both in men and women. A high incidence of HPV infection has been demonstrated in sperm from sexually active men with and without risk factors for HPV and from infertile patients.

Semen infection is associated to an impairment of sperm parameters suggesting a possible role in male infertility. – really???

Interestingly, it has been demonstrated that when HPV is present in semen only a percentage of total cells are infected

-only? a? 100% is a percentage too…

and the virus can be localized in sperm or in exfoliated cells with different impact on sperm motility. Moreover, infected sperm are able to penetrate the oocyte, to deliver HPV genome in the oocyte and HPV genes can be actively transcribed by the fertilized oocyte.

-wouldn’t it be ironic if it made the kids or grandkids infertile instead? because they were conceived with it, a polluted germline

Recently an increased risk of pregnancy loss has been demonstrated in couples undergoing in-vitro fertilization and particularly when HPV DNA was present in semen samples of male partners.

– no blaming women this time, unless women haz sperm?

Summary: To date, no effective treatment, control strategy and prevention is provided for men despite the reported high incidence of HPV semen infection.

– no hurt their feefees? NAW

Because this infection in men is also a problem for partners, and because growing evidence suggests that semen infection may cause infertility and early miscarriage, more attention should be paid to male HPV infection. This study reviews the more recent literature about the role of HPV infection on sperm function and human reproduction.

– Manosphere fears this topic and all male degenerate accountability.

semen infection may cause infertility and early miscarriage

it’s the sins of the FATHER, you see…

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30517657/

High-risk human papillomavirus in semen is associated with poor sperm progressive motility and a high sperm DNA fragmentation index in infertile men

Does the presence of human papillomavirus (HPV) in semen impact seminal parameters and sperm DNA quality in white European men seeking medical help for primary couple’s infertility?

>STD
>DNA quality
>in the germline of
>white men

Never talk about it, I’m sure it’ll be fine.

 HPV seminal infections involving high-risk (HR) genotypes are associated with impaired sperm progressive motility and sperm DNA fragmentation (SDF) values.

TLDR: yes.

HPV is commonly present in semen samples. 

No? F no it’s not. Stop sparing slutty blushes.

The overall rate of HPV positivity was 15.5%

so 1 in 7, uncommon at best. No normalizing pathology please.

And it varies majorly by race and sexuality. Not sex because it’s sexual, obviously.

 Sperm progressive motility was significantly lower (P = 0.01) while SDF values were higher (P = 0.005) in HPV+ men compared to those with no HPV. In particular, HR HPV+ men had lower sperm progressive motility (P = 0.007) and higher SDF values (P = 0.003) than those with a negative HPV test. Univariable analysis showed that HR HPV+ was associated with impaired sperm progressive motility (P = 0.002) and SDF values (P = 0.003). In the multivariable analysis, age, FSH levels and testicular volume were significantly associated with impaired sperm progressive motility (all P ≤ 0.04). Conversely BMI, CCI, smoking habits and HPV status were not. Only age (P = 0.02) and FSH (P = 0.01) were significantly associated with SDF, after accounting for BMI, CCI, testicular volume, smoking habits and HPV status.

It’s worse for the older men.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32381092/

Impact of human papillomavirus infection in semen on sperm progressive motility in infertile men: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Human papillomavirus (HPV) has been considered as one of the most common sexually transmitted viruses that may be linked to unexplained infertility in men. The possible mechanisms underlying correlation between HPV infection and infertility could be related to the altered sperm parameters. Current studies have investigated the effect of HPV seminal infection on sperm quality in infertile men, but have shown inconsistent results.

Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and CNKI for studies that examined the association between HPV seminal infection and sperm progressive motility. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. Outcomes were the sperm progressive motility rate. Results are expressed as standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity was evaluated by the I-square (I2) statistic.

Results: Ten studies were identified, including 616 infertile patients with HPV seminal infection and 2029 infertile controls without HPV seminal infection. Our meta-analysis results indicated that sperm progressive motility was significantly reduced in HPV-infected semen samples compared with non-infected groups [SMD:-0.88, 95% CI:-1.17 ~ – 0.59]. There existed statistical heterogeneity (I2 value: 86%) and the subgroup analysis suggested that study region might be the causes of heterogeneity.

Conclusions: HPV semen infection could significantly reduce sperm progressive motility in infertile individuals. There were some limitations in the study such as the differences in age, sample sizes and the number of HPV genotypes detected. Further evidences are needed to better elucidate the relationship between HPV seminal infection and sperm quality.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25659295/

Antisperm antibodies in infertile men and their effect on semen parameters: a systematic review and meta-analysis

what a mystery

The mechanism of ASA cause male infertility is not clear

does it look like HPV?

The present study illustrates that there was a significant negative effect of ASA on sperm concentration, sperm motility (a+b) and sperm liquefaction.

yes

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26793663/

The prevalence of Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) infection in the oligospermic and azoospermic men

The current study shows that HPV infection can affect on sperm count and motility and decrease count of sperm cell and decrease motility capability of these cells.

duh?

Among 50 confirmed oligospermic male, 15 were HPV DNA positive (30%).

In azoospemic group we had 8 HPV DNA positive (40%) and in normal group just 3 of 20(15%) samples were positive.

-what r the odds?

we found statistical significant relationship for sperm count (p<0.05) and sperm motility (slow) (p<0.05) in oligospermic group positive samples compared with negative. In the present study, 13 HPV genotypes were detected among positive samples. HPV genotypes 16, 45 in the high risk group and 6,11,42 in the low risk group were more frequent than the others.

Medicine can’t spare you.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21536283/

Semen washing procedures do not eliminate human papilloma virus sperm infection in infertile patients

 Fifteen samples

-aka HALF

had HPV DNA on sperm and exfoliated cells. Sperm washing centrifugation showed no changes in the number of infected samples and in the percentage of infected cells. Ficoll and swim-up protocols induced a slight reduction in the number of infected samples (30 and 26, respectively).

no muh scientism and IVF cope

This study demonstrated that conventional sperm selection rarely eliminates HPV sperm infection. More attention should be paid to the reproductive health of infected patients because, not only can HPV be transmitted, but it may also have a negative effect on development of the fetus.

-may, LOL

a negative effect on development of the fetus

so even if they all married a virgin waifu, they’d infect her and have defective babies
comedy GOLD, 24K.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33763033/

Is HPV the Novel Target in Male Idiopathic Infertility? A Systematic Review of the Literature

Infertility is an important health problem that affects up to 16% of couples worldwide.

1 in 7, where have I heard THAT before….? [scroll up]

Male infertility is responsible for about 50% of the cases,

NAY, men are never responsible for their own in/fertility, have you been online recently?

and the various causes of male infertility may be classified in pre-testicular (for example hypothalamic diseases), testicular, and post-testicular (for example obstructive pathologies of seminal ducts) causes. Sexually transmitted infections (STI) are increasingly widely accepted by researchers and clinicians as etiological factors of male infertility. In particular, several recent reports have documented the presence of HPV in seminal fluid and observed that sperm infection can also be present in sexually active asymptomatic male and infertile patients.

In this review, we aimed to perform a systematic review of the whole body of literature exploring the impact of HPV infection in natural and assisted fertility outcomes, from both an experimental and a clinical point of view. Starting from in-vitro studies in animals up to in-vivo studies in humans, we aimed to study and evaluate the weight of this infection as a possible cause of idiopathic infertility in males with any known cause of conception failure.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30291691/

Significant Correlation between High-Risk HPV DNA in Semen and Impairment of Sperm Quality in Infertile Men

brace yourselves

guess the result

c’mon

go on
think

just guess

….

ready?

A total of 140 subjects participated in the current study. Among 70 confirmed infertile males, only 8 (11.43%) cases tested positive for high-risk HPV and all fertile men were HPV-negative. This data revealed a significant association between high-risk HPV and male infertility (P=0.03). The percentage of normal sperm morphology and sperm motility rate significantly declined in men infected with HPV (P<0.001).

and all fertile men were HPV-negative

oof and the sluts of both sexes are dying out, I am distraught.
The genetics of the future are fairing brighter than you’d think.

Conclusion: There was a significantly higher prevalence of high-risk HPV in infertile men than fertile men. HPV infection seemed to be a risk factor for male infertility. Additional, larger studies should be conducted to confirm the impact of HPV on male infertility.

Player burnout shall henceforth be dubbed HPV-driven infertility?

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33666259/

2021

Association between human papillomavirus infection and sperm quality: A systematic review and a meta-analysis

Human papillomavirus (HPV) has a high incidence rate in both males and females.

-maybe where you live

HPV infection in women has been shown to affect fertility and lead to foetal death and pregnancy loss. However, research on HPV infection in men is limited.

-well the husbands are freshly infecting the wives so

-Ashley Madison wasn’t full of women stepping out, was it?

The aim of this study was to study the effect of HPV infection in semen on sperm quality and present the findings of previous studies through a meta-analysis. Databases including PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, WanFang data and China National Knowledge Infrastructure were searched for relevant studies. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed, and 17 studies were included for analyses based on a set criterion. Meta-analyses indicated that HPV infection in semen significantly reduced sperm concentration (SMD = -0.12, 95% CI: -0.21 to -0.03, p = .009), sperm motility (SMD = -0.55, 95% CI: -0.780 to -0.33, p = .000), sperm viability (SMD = -0.55, 95% CI: -0.780 to -0.33, p = .000) and sperm morphology (SMD = -0.34, 95% CI: -0.61 to -0.07, p = .015). The high-risk HPV (HrHPV) infection could significantly reduce sperm count (SMD = -0.65, 95% CI: -1.11 to -0.18, p = .007) compared with high-risk HPV (LrHPV) infection.

In conclusion, HPV infection in semen significantly reduced sperm quality, and the HrHPV infection could significantly reduce sperm count compared with LrHPV.

b-b-but what does that matter? – bluepills

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33725837/

tick tock goes your biological clock, nobody can wait as long as they want
NOBODY

Male sperm quality and risk of recurrent spontaneous abortion in Chinese couples: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Conclusions: The results of this analysis support an association of sperm density, sperm viability, sperm progressive motility rate, normal sperm morphology rate, sperm deformity rate, as well as sperm DFI with RSA. 

IF you conceived, magically, it would kill your baby. REPEATEDLY.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8671172/

Semen parameters and sperm morphology in men in unexplained recurrent spontaneous abortion, before and during a 3 year follow-up period

Baby death aborts the defective DNA, HPV fucks with your sperm’s DNA. Water is wet.

HPV makes you biologically unfit. According to the ultimate test, the womb.

To investigate the role of the ‘male factor’ in the pathogenesis of recurrent spontaneous abortion (RSA), especially sperm morphology abnormalities, 120 previously selected couples with unexplained RSA were studied for sperm parameters retrospectively and prospectively. The patients were subdivided into three subgroups, depending on their reproductive outcome during the 3 years of follow-up study: (i) 48 RSA couples who achieved a successful pregnancy; (ii) 39 RSA couples who experienced further abortions, and (iii) 33 RSA couples who experienced infertility during the follow-up period. A semen analysis was performed twice at the time of inclusion in this study, and twice again during the 3 year follow-up period. No significant differences in semen parameters were observed between RSA males and fertile controls. Instead, significant differences were observed between the group of RSA couples who experienced infertility during the follow-up and the other two groups (RSA couples who achieved successful pregnancy and RSA couples who experienced miscarriages and no live birth during the follow-up) for sperm concentration (P < 0.01 and P < 0.01 respectively), sperm motility (P < 0.01 and P < 0.01 respectively) and sperm morphology abnormalities (P < 0.01 and P < 0.01 respectively).

dat p-value

MORE STUDIES

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23278374

Sperm DNA fragmentation in couples with unexplained recurrent spontaneous abortions

(((((“”unexplained“”)))))

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the degree of sperm DNA fragmentation in couples with idiopathic recurrent spontaneous abortion (RSA) and in those with no history of infertility or abortion. In this cohort study, 30 couples with RSA and 30 fertile couples as control group completed the demographic data questionnaires, and their semen samples were analysed according to World Health Organization (WHO) standards (September 2009-March 2010) for evaluation of sperm DNA fragmentation, using sperm chromatin dispersion (SCD) technique. The percentage of morphologically normal sperm was significantly lower in RSA patients compared with control group (51.50 ± 11.60 versus 58.00 ± 9.05, P = 0.019), but not in other parameters. Additionally, the level of abnormal DNA fragmentation in the RSA group was significantly higher than in the control group (43.3% versus 16.7%, P = 0.024). Our results indicated a negative correlation between the number of sperm with progressive motility and DNA fragmentation (r = -0.613; P < 0.001). The sperm from men with a history of RSA had a higher incidence of DNA fragmentation and poor motility than those of the control group, indicating a possible relationship between idiopathic RSA and DNA fragmentation.

– idiopathic? Are you shitting me?

(((idiopathic)))

sure it is

sure

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23042403/

Correlation of recurrent pregnancy loss with sperm parameters and sperm DNA fragmentation

This study has indicated that sperm from men with a history of RPL have a higher incidence of DNA damage and poor motility compared with fertile males.

Water is wet. Miscarriage is meant to happen to dodgy DNA.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22519675/

Sperm chromatin integrity may predict future fertility for unexplained recurrent spontaneous abortion patients

“unexplained” – just assume the echo for comedic effect by now

The RSA group was further separated into three subgroups, depending on their reproductive outcome during the 12 months after they were enrolled in the study: the pregnancy subgroup consisted of 43 men whose partners achieved a successful pregnancy up to at least the 24th week of gestation; the abortion subgroup included 31 men whose partners experienced further abortions; and the infertile subgroup had 37 men whose partners did not have any positive pregnancy test after regular, unprotected intercourse. Significantly lower proportion of sperm with normal morphology was found in the abortion subgroup (14.7 ± 4.3%) than in the control group (17.5 ± 5.0%). Sperm concentrations were significantly lower in the infertile subgroup (55.7 ± 24.1%) than in the controls (68.6 ± 27.8%). The rates of abnormal sperm chromatin integrity were significantly higher in the abortion (16.7 ± 7.7%) and infertile (16.3 ± 6.6%) subgroups, compared to the control group (13.0 ± 4.4%). Logistic regression analysis showed that the subsequent reproductive outcome of the 111 RSA patients was negatively correlated to the rates of abnormal sperm chromatin integrity. In conclusion, sperm chromatin integrity, sperm morphology, and sperm concentration were associated with future reproductive outcome of RSA patients. The sperm chromatin integrity was a significant predictor for future abortion and infertility.

But men are never responsible for miscarriage, perish the THOUGHT.

I mean – where are the STUDIES?!

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21806662/

Cytochemical evaluation of sperm chromatin and DNA integrity in couples with unexplained recurrent spontaneous abortions

unexplained….. sigh, ok.

Our study showed that in the cases of RSA, slow motility had a significant reduction in comparison with controls and also spermatozoa of men from RSA group had less chromatin condensation and poorer DNA integrity than spermatozoa that obtained from fertile men with no history of RSA.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S000293780133898X

Known for 20 years.

Human sperm deoxyribonucleic acid fragmentation by specific types of papillomavirus

Conclusion: Human papillomavirus type 16 and 31 deoxyribonucleic acid caused deoxyribonucleic acid breakages characteristic of apoptotic but not necrotic sperm.

CAUSED

The data suggest that these human papillomavirus types may adversely affect subsequent embryonic development after fertilization. Sperm deoxyribonucleic acid appears to resist human papillomavirus types 18, 33, and 6/11 or repairing mechanisms occurred. Although enhanced motility was found in human papillomavirus–exposed sperm, important velocity parameters were decreased, suggesting impaired sperm function.

-swimming in circles isn’t motility, really

damages your baby DNA, kills babies =/= harmless!

it’s a viral abortion, really

https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/4/717

Negative Impact of Elevated DNA Fragmentation and Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Presence in Sperm on the Outcome of Intra-Uterine Insemination (IUI)

i.e. no, you won’t just get IVF

We wanted to determine the sperm DNA fragmentation index (DFI) cutoff for clinical pregnancies in women receiving intra-uterine insemination (IUI) with this sperm and to assess the contribution of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) infection on sperm DNA damage and its impact on clinical pregnancies. Prospective non-interventional multi-center study with 161 infertile couples going through 209 cycles of IUI in hospital fertility centers in Flanders, Belgium. Measurement of DFI and HPV DNA with type specific quantitative PCRs (HPV 6, 11, 16, 18, 31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 51, 52, 53, 56, 58, 59, 66 and 68) in sperm before its use in IUI. Clinical pregnancy (CP) rate was used as the outcome to analyze the impact on fertility outcome and to calculated the clinical cutoff value for DFI. A DFI criterion value of 26% was obtained by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. Couples with a male DFI > 26% had significantly less CPs than couples with DFI below 26% (OR 0.0326; 95% CI 0.0019 to 0.5400; p = 0.017). In sperm, HPV prevalence was 14.8%/IUI cycle. Sperm samples containing HPV had a significantly higher DFI compared to HPV negative sperm samples (29.8% vs. 20.9%; p = 0.011). When HPV-virions were present in sperm, no clinical pregnancies were observed. More than 1 in 5 of samples with normal semen parameters (17/78; 21.8%) had an elevated DFI or was HPV positive. Sperm DFI is a robust predictor of clinical pregnancies in women receiving IUI with this sperm. When DFI exceeds 26%, clinical pregnancies are less likely and in vitro fertilization techniques should be considered

When HPV-virions were present in sperm, no clinical pregnancies were observed.

but CLEARLY this is just my OPINION – misogynists reee-ing

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165037813000508

Sperm viral infection and male infertility: focus on HBV, HCV, HIV, HPV, HSV, HCMV, and AAV

Chronic viral infections can infect sperm and are considered a risk factor in male infertility. Recent studies have shown that the presence of HIV, HBV or HCV in semen impairs sperm parameters, DNA integrity, and in particular reduces forward motility. In contrast, very little is known about semen infection with human papillomaviruses (HPV), herpesviruses (HSV), cytomegalovirus (HCMV), and adeno-associated virus (AAV). At present, EU directives for the viral screening of couples undergoing assisted reproduction techniques require only the evaluation of HIV, HBV, and HCV.

-all trust the EU guys

However, growing evidence suggests that HPV, HSV, and HCMV might play a major role in male infertility and it has been demonstrated that HPV semen infection has a negative influence on sperm parameters, fertilization, and the abortion rate.

-somebody else look up herpes, I’m lazy

Besides the risk of horizontal or vertical transmission, the negative impact of any viral sperm infection on male reproductive function seems to be dramatic.

-Really, f-ing fascinating!

In addition, treatment with antiviral and antiretroviral therapies may further affect sperm parameters. In this review we attempted to focus on the interactions between defined sperm viral infections and their association with male fertility disorders. All viruses considered in this article have a potentially negative effect on male reproductive function and dangerous infections can be transmitted to partners and newborns. In light of this evidence, we suggest performing targeted sperm washing procedures for each sperm infection and to strongly consider screening male patients seeking fertility for HPV, HSV, and HCMV, both to avoid viral transmission and to improve assisted or even spontaneous fertility outcome

>male fertility disorders

k.

Oh, I’m not done yet.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/epidemiology-and-infection/article/hpv-infection-in-semen-results-from-a-new-molecular-approach/B0B63D2A2760A03FCFF243F1DD5E9A7F

HPV infection in semen: results from a new molecular approach

Let’s get molecular.

Human papillomavirus (HPV) is the agent of the most common sexually transmitted diseases causing a variety of clinical manifestations ranging from warts to cancer. Oncogenic HPV infection is the major cause of cervical cancer and less frequently of penile cancers. Its presence in semen is widely known, but the effects on fertility are still controversial. – how? allergic to facts?

We developed a new approach to evaluate virus localisation in the different semen components. We analysed also the specific genotype localisation and viral DNA quantity by qPCR. Results show that HPV DNA can be identified in every fraction of semen: spermatozoa, somatic cells and seminal plasma. Different samples can contain the HPV DNA in different fractions and several HPV genotypes can be found in the same fraction. Additionally, different fractions may contain multiple HPV genotypes in different relative quantity. We analysed the wholeness of HPV DNA in sperm cells by qPCR. In one sample more than half of viral genomes were defective, suggesting a possible recombination event. The new method allows to easily distinguish different sperm infections and to observe the possible effects on semen. The data support the proposed role of HPV in decreased fertility and prompt new possible consequences of the infection in semen.

>HPV DNA can be identified in every fraction of semen: spermatozoa, somatic cells and seminal plasma

If you’re wondering why your nation is infertile, look in the mirror. Mutant sperm.

Your superpower is probably autism.

The buried risk factor in colon cancer

I hate the need for gross posts, the syphilis rates in Asia one was bad enough.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2917541/
“Among both men and women, rectal sex was commonly associated with increased colorectal cancer risk. Some Latinos may hold misperceptions about colorectal cancer risks, including an association between rectal sex and colon cancer, that may impact their screening behaviors. Clinicians and public health officials should consider these potential risk misperceptions and explore for other risk misperceptions when counseling and educating patients about colorectal cancer screening.”
How is that a misperception?

HOW?

“Sexual activity, specifically rectal sex, was also commonly identified as a risk factor for colorectal cancer. While this theme was more prominent in the focus group discussions among men,”

Anal with a woman also counts, guys, sexually they are gay. You should desire the female parts only. The germs can still see you.

It’s funny to see PUAs bitch about muh male cancer rates when they’re endorsing the cause of them.

Is penile cancer da wimminz fault too?

ANY Victorian short of Oscar Wilde would look at those guys and call them homosexual. Sexuality is a preference for body parts in Darwinian classification, not the people owning them. It’s a vital distinction. Even Wilde was averse to anal, he almost exclusively did oral with men. He was icked out by anal. So modern ‘straight’ men are probably more gay than Oscar Wilde. Fact.

btw Boomers are Freudians (pleasure as normal human motive, no deviancy permitted as concept).

Previously living for lust was considered part of savage cultures that people like Burton ‘explored’, mostly with his dick.

“the theme also emerged from female groups. Participants generally referred to increased risk of colorectal cancer among men who have sex with men and some participants made pejorative statements while connecting rectal sex with colorectal cancer risk. However, when questioned further, many participants noted that there is a similar risk among men and women.

No. Not until old age. When the whole body breaks down anyway.

A number of participants provided explanations for their beliefs, including presumed pathophysiologic rationale.”

“Given that anal sex has been linked to anal cancer via human papilloma virus (HPV) [11], it is possible, but unlikely, that participants erroneously made a connection between rectal sex and colorectal cancer instead of anal cancer. The belief that rectal sex is a risk factor for colorectal cancer is concerning, even if participants did confuse colorectal cancer with anal cancer, given the much lower rates of anal cancer relative to colorectal cancer. By extending the association from anal cancer to colorectal cancer, some may falsely underestimate their risk for colorectal cancer based on their sexual behavior.”

They’re not confused, there’s a link.
The rectum is a name for the end of the colon, this is linguistic hair-splitting.

Colo-rectal – it’s the same thing.

11 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2729501/

There’s a known colon cancer connection to Type 2 diabetes.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-71456-2
So it’s probably also preservatives. Just throwing that in.

Like nitrates used on cheap meats, not the actual meat. Ban nitrates. Really.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1856114/
“Inflammatory benign anal lesions are associated with a significantly increased long term risk of anal cancer. In contrast, haemorrhoids appear not to be a risk factor for this malignancy.”

K.

“Anal cancer is an uncommon disease in the heterosexual population, with an incidence of 1 per 100 000. However, the incidence is much higher in men who regularly practice anal receptive intercourse (approximately 35 per 100 000).1 Apart from a strong link to sexual promiscuity and human papillomavirus (HPV) infection, suspected risk factors include genital warts, herpes simplex virus type 2, and smoking.2,3,4,5,6″

35x more likely

We need to ban porn, basically. It normalises it. Perversion is less a judgement and more a description. As covered previously, circumcised men have more sexual difficulties, including porn addiction and are more …oriented toward anal sex to achieve a comparable amount of stimulation as a normal, un-mutilated man. Compare circumcision rates to rape data of that country and also homosexuality. It’s a wild ride.

“In 1863 the first connection between inflammation and cancer was made by Rudolf Virchow.7 Since then several types of cancer have been associated with infection and inflammation,7 and different mechanisms have been hypothesised. Local inflammation may contribute to ovarian cancer8; ulcerative colitis increases the risk of colorectal cancer9,10; infection by Helicobacter pylori increases the risk of distal stomach cancer11; hepatitis B virus and hepatitis B virus infection are well recognised risk factors for hepatocellular carcinoma12; and tumour necrosis factor, a protein mediating inflammation, has been suggested to be involved in the progression and spread of cancer.13

The possible association of benign anal lesions, including fissures, fistulas, perianal abscesses, and haemorrhoids, with anal cancer has long been debated.2,3,14,15 In a case control study, a significantly increased risk of anal cancer was found in patients treated for anal fissures, fistulas, or with more than 12 episodes of haemorrhoids.2 Constant irritation, chronic inflammatory changes, and repeated epithelial regeneration were hypothesised as explanations for the association.2 This was supported by another case control study in which a significantly increased risk of anal cancer was reported in patients with severe haemorrhoids, and a weak association was also observed between anal cancer and other infections and inflammations in the anogenital area.15 A third case control study found an association with haemorrhoids and non‐specific anal irritation among men but not among women.16 Case control studies may be subject to recall bias and thus a cohort study design is favourable although few cohort studies are available due to the rarity of anal cancer. In the only two cohort studies, a null association was reported.14,17″

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4745930/

https://www.hindawi.com/journals/grp/2016/7896716/
Ban Tinder.
“HPV-16 genotyping was performed in HPV-positive tissues and the physical status of the HPV-16 genome was determined by E2 detection. HPV was detected in 19 of 45 (42.2%) CRC cases (mean age 61.1 ± 10.7 years, 24 males) and in 1 of 36 (2.8%) controls (mean age 60.9 ± 9.6 years, 24 males) with an OR = 25.58 (95% CI 3.21 to 203.49). HPV-16 was detected in 63.2% of the HPV-positive colorectal tumors; genome integration was observed in all HPV-16 positive cases. This is the first report showing the high prevalence of HPV infections in Caribbean Hispanic colorectal tumors. Despite evidence of HPV integration into the host genome, further mechanistic analysis examining HPV oncoprotein expression and the putative role of these oncoproteins in colorectal carcinogenesis is warranted.”

HPV in 42% of colon cancers, 2.8% in controls.

“genome integration was observed in all HPV-16 positive cases.”

Yup. What it sounds like.

https://clincancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/11/8/2862
“Results: We found that colorectal tissues from 28 of 55 (51%) patients with colorectal cancer were positive for HPV DNA. Colorectal tissues from all 10 control individuals were negative for HPV DNA (P = 0.0034). Of the 107 usable (GAPDH+) samples collected as paired colorectal tissues (tumor and tumor-adjacent tissues) from the patients, 38 (36%) had HPV16 (n = 31), HPV18 (n = 5), or HPV45 (n = 2), with HPV DNA in both tumor and tumor-adjacent tissues of 10 paired samples, 13 in only the tumor, and 5 in only tumor-adjacent tissues. In situ PCR detection of the tumor tissues confirmed the presence of HPV DNA in tumor cells.

Dat p-value.

All 10 controls negative.

Conclusion: Our results suggest that colorectal HPV infection is common in patients with colorectal cancer, albeit at a low DNA copy number, with HPV16 being the most prevalent type. HPV infection may play a role in colorectal carcinogenesis.

May?

Smoking may cause lung cancer.

Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection of epidermal or mucosal epithelial cells causes benign and sometimes malignant neoplasms. Certain types of HPVs, such as HPV16, 18, 31, and 45, are detected frequently in anogenital cancers, particularly cancer of the cervix and anus, and are thus considered to be high-risk or oncogenic. Integration of the viral genome into the cancer cell genome is characteristic of infection by these HPVs. Other types of HPV, such as low-risk or nononcogenic HPV6 and HPV11, induce benign anogenital warts and are rarely found in anogenital malignancies (1, 2).

HPV DNA has been detected in tumor tissues of head and neck cancer (3, 4), oral cancer (5), esophageal cancer (6, 7), and some skin cancers (8, 9), as well as lung cancer (10, 11). Detection of HPV DNA in colorectal cancer tissues by in situ hybridization (12) and PCR (13–17) has suggested that HPV infection might be associated with the carcinogenesis of colorectal cancer. However, HPV DNA was not detectable by regular PCR in one earlier study (18) and a survey of HPV16 virus-like particle antibodies in patients with epithelial cancers also failed to provide an association between HPV and colorectal cancer (19), challenging the association of colorectal cancers with HPVs. As a result, we felt that a well-controlled study would be more informative. In the present report, we did a retrospective, controlled study, in which colorectal cancers and tissues adjacent to the cancers were surgically collected from patients with colorectal cancer and subjected to nested PCR and in situ PCR detection of HPV DNAs.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20528894

HPV 6 and 11 Finland
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19408160/
“In addition to cancer of the lower female genital tract, human papillomaviruses (HPV) are associated with a large number of benign, precancer and cancer lesions at different anatomic sites in both genders. Malignant tumours and their precursors are usually attributed to the oncogenic (high-risk, HR) HPV types, whereas benign lesions (papillomas) are associated with the low-risk (LR) HPV types, most notably with HPV6 and HPV11. Until recently, the main interest in HPV research has been focused on HR-HPV types and their associated pathology, and much less attention has been paid to the lesions caused by the LR-HPV types. With the recent licensing of an effective prophylactic vaccine against the 2 most important LR-HPV types (HPV6 and HPV11)”

the ‘low risk’? then why get it?

they said cancer, people assumed high risk

“, it has become timely to make a systematic survey on the annual disease burden due to these 2 HPV genotypes in our country.”

Why not BEFORE?

“These types of data should form the foundation for all calculations of the annual costs needed to treat these diseases by conventional means. Accurate estimates of disease burden are also mandatory for all modelling of the cost-effectiveness of prophylactic HPV6 and HPV11 vaccines. If proven useful for any of these purposes, this document will have fulfilled its purpose. In the first step, published HPV literature was used to create a list of benign, premalignant and malignant lesions associated with this virus at different anatomic sites. GLOBOCAN 2004 (IARC) database was used to derive the global numbers of incident cases for each of these malignancies in 2002, and the Finnish Cancer Registry (FCR) website for obtaining these (y 2005) numbers in Finland. The evidence linking HPV to each individual tumour category was classified as: 1) established, 2) emerging, and 3) controversial. All published evidence was weighted for each individual malignant, premalignant and benign lesion, anatomic region by region, while assessing the attributable fraction of HPV6/11 genotypes in each lesion. Because benign and most of the precancer lesions are not registered by FCR or GLOBOCAN, different approaches had to be used to derive the best estimates for their incidence, based on published literature or other registries (e.g. genital wart registry of the UK and Wales, and mass screening registry of FCR). With a lack of reasonable consensus, a lower and an upper limit was set for the range of estimates. In cases with different age-specific incidence (e.g. genital warts), the population pyramid of Finland was used to calculate the incident cases. Where well established, the different incidence rates among males and females were used to calculate the numbers of incident cases by gender. The malignant neoplasms with established or emerging evidence on the causal role of HPV are listed by their ICD-10 codes in Table I. Included in this list are also 2 controversial malignancies (colorectal cancer and endometrial cancer), of which the contradictory HPV data are critically discussed. The third major cancer in this same category (prostate cancer) was not included in the list, because the data are clearly insufficient to categorize this entity even among the emerging HPV associated malignancies. Estimated disease burden due to HPV6/11 in Finland, calculated as numbers of annual new cases by anatomic region and tumour type is given in Table II, and summarized in Figure 1. The present analysis implicates that a minimum of 12,666 to 13,066 new cases of HPV6- or HPV11-associated clinical lesions would be detected each y in Finland, if all were registered. Notably, these numbers represent the disease burden due to these 2 HPV types. However, these clinical lesions only represent a small minority of the total viral burden due to the infections by these 2 HPV genotypes. This is because the vast majority* of all infections by these ubiquitous viruses are latent, being transient in nature and spontaneously resolving within a few months (up to 1 y*), without ever developing a clinically detectable disease.

*it’s ‘assumed’ but doesn’t always happen, especially with multiple infections of different types

A just-so story for sluts, same with clap.

This spontaneous clearance does not make these latent infections less important, however, because as long as the virus reservoir exists, it serves as the source of viral transmission to susceptible individuals, with a multitude of HPV6/11 associated pathologies as a potential outcome, as described in this document. The implications of these data in the era of effective prophylactic HPV vaccination against HPV6 and HPV11 should be clear.”

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19939209/
16, 18 Finland

https://www.webmd.com/sexual-conditions/hpv-genital-warts/news/20191120/hpv-blamed-for-rising-rates-of-anal-cancer
Is that new?

Young people at higher risk, why?
https://www.cancer.org/latest-news/study-finds-sharp-rise-in-colon-cancer-and-rectal-cancer-rates-among-young-adults.html
“A study led by American Cancer Society researchers finds that new cases of colon cancer and rectal cancer are occurring at an increasing rate among young and middle-aged adults in the US. Once age is taken into account, those born in 1990 have double the risk of colon cancer and quadruple the risk of rectal cancer compared to people born around 1950, when risk was lowest.”

I wonder what ‘young people’ are doing now (define ‘young’) that people in the 50s did NOT?

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/codi.12257
“The HPV overall prevalence was 31.9% (95% CI: 19.3–47.9). It was lowest in Europe (14.1%, 95% CI: 4.9–34.1) and highest in South America (60.8%, 95% CI: 42.7–76.4).”
Lowest among native white people. No you’re not normal, America. Neither is your herpes.

Is this that magical white privilege I’ve been hearing about?

Thot culture kills. The Bible called it whoredom, you’re not doing anything new. Sodom was famous for….?

Spoiler: sodomy can occur with either sex. It’s the act, not the participants.

“Eight studies presented the results of HPV typing in 302 HPV‐positive colorectal carcinomas. HPV 18 was the virus more frequently found in colorectal cancer cases from Asia (73.34%, 95% CI: 44.9–90.7) and Europe (47.3%, 95% CI: 34.5–60.4). In contrast, HPV 16 was more prevalent in colorectal tumours from South America (58.3%, 95% CI: 45.5–69.9). The analysis of five case–control studies showed an increase in colorectal carcinoma risk with HPV positivity (OR = 10.04; 95% CI: 3.7–27.5).

Conclusion
The results provide quantitative evidence for an association between HPV infection and colorectal cancer risk.”

q u a n t i t a t i v e    e v i d e n c e

q u a n t i t a t i v e    e v i d e n c e

q u a n t i t a t i v e    e v i d e n c e

inspired by this meme

Adolescent Premature Ovarian Insufficiency Following Human Papillomavirus Vaccination

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4528880/

choice quote:

Vaccine research does not present an ovary histology report of tested rats but does present a testicular histology report. 

Another;

Enduring ovarian capacity and duration of function following vaccination is unresearched in preclinical studies, clinical and postlicensure studies.

Unresearched. Injecting it into all the little girls with thick parents, unresearched whether the ovaries still operate or the ORGANS shut down. aka partial organ failure

Since this group includes all prepubertal and pubertal young women, demonstration of ongoing, uncompromised safety for the ovary is urgently required. This matter needs to be resolved for the purposes of population health and public vaccine confidence.

2014

Feminists pushing this shit hate women.

Timely reminder for when they try to force these things on you/r loved ones.

UT Austin Researchers File SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Patent

LIKE. CLOCKWORK.

“February 19, 2020 – Researchers from The University of Texas at Austin (UT Austin) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) announced a critical breakthrough toward developing a vaccine for the novel coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19).”

Why DO they want so many immigrants?

case study of a 16yo girl:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23035167

and Human papilloma virus vaccine and primary ovarian failure: another facet of the autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23902317

CONCLUSION:

We documented here the evidence of the potential of the HPV vaccine to trigger a life-disabling autoimmune condition. The increasing number of similar reports of post HPV vaccine-linked autoimmunity and the uncertainty of long-term clinical benefits of HPV vaccination are a matter of public health that warrants further rigorous inquiry.

Great news for misogynists everywhere. Real ones.

All three patients experienced a range of common non-specific post-vaccine symptoms including nausea, headache, sleep disturbances, arthralgia and a range of cognitive and psychiatric disturbances. According to these clinical features, a diagnosis of primary ovarian failure (POF) was determined which also fulfilled the required criteria for the ASIA syndrome.

Explains some women I’ve met.

ASIA = autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants (ASIA) 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26125978

A link between human papilloma virus vaccination and primary ovarian insufficiency: current analysis.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW:

Reviews are good.

The cause of primary ovarian insufficiency (POI) is multifactorial. Known causes include external factors such as chemotherapy, radiotherapy, exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals, infections that lead to a permanent insult to the ovary, autoimmune conditions, and genetic causes. An association between the quadrivalent antihuman papilloma vaccine (HPV4) and POI was recently suggested.

“antihuman”

The birth rate cult ought not to get their hopes up.

Q is, if the vaccine is so bad, what about the manwhores spreading the ‘organic’ version?

Credit: Master Brew

When do we outlaw sluts on population threat grounds?

RECENT FINDINGS:

An increasing number of cases of POI post-HPV4 are being reported. Possible mechanisms for the suspected effect of HPV on female reproductive function are a toxic effect or an autoimmune response. The trigger could be the vaccine immunogen contents or the adjuvants, the latter are used to increase the immune reaction.

increase, not produce

The adjuvant in HPV4 contains aluminum.

Yeah, still using it. Despite claims.

Animal models have shown aluminum exposure to inhibit expression of female reproductive hormones and to induce histologic changes in the ovaries.

I haz reasons for my quotes.

Specific genetic compositions may be more susceptible to developing an autoinflammatory syndrome after exposure to an environmental factor.

Bioweapon, by any other name.

SUMMARY:

The mechanisms responsible for POI are not yet fully understood. Although case reports cannot establish causation, awareness of a possible link between HPV4 and POI will help to identify and manage future cases that may arise.

They want people scared right now but don’t lose sight of the facts.

Don’t take any NWO shit. It’s going to be forced anyway. Rape with an object, legally.

They can claim e.g. one single paper from 2018 was “retracted” (impossible once peer-reviewed)

https://www.precisionvaccinations.com/impact-hpv-vaccination-women-fertility-study-retracted

but that doesn’t change the hundreds of other studies documenting the same thing.

This study written by Gayle DeLong,  an associate professor at Baruch College, concluded that ‘Results suggest that females who received the HPV shot were less likely to have ever been pregnant than women in the same age group who did not receive the shot.’ 

Scientism people are stupid. You should want a follow-up.

YES. I AM ALWAYS THE ONLY ONE WHO DOES THE BLOODY READING.

Hospital clothing contaminated

https://www.ajicjournal.org/article/S0196-6553(11)00117-9/abstract

Hang on, aren’t women forced into gowns without underwear? Then told to sit down? Same gowns worn by other women before?

Could that source of fomite explain previous studies of HPV infection, among virgins?

For example,  a small study published in 2009 indicated that not only were 15% of all stethoscopes tested contaminated with MRSA, but also that the MRSA on the stethoscopes had survived there for upwards of 60 days!

Also, most hospitals do not allow artifical fingernails or nail enhancement on health care workers because the false nails (fomites) consistently have higher bacterial loads than natural nails. Also, there have been a number of studies (example) where doctor’s neckties were found to be commonly contaminated with bacteria. Not all that shocking when you think about how often men wash their ties?

Why are doctors wearing ties?

But most recently, a new  study published in the American Journal of Infection Control, 60-65% of scrubs and lab coats of health care workers tested in the report were contaminated with potentially dangerous bacteria.  The pockets, sleeves, and abdominal areas were tested. Additionally, 21 of nurse’s samples and 6 from the doctor’s samples taken were drug resistant.  Eight of the samples were identified as MRSA (methicillin resistant Staph aureus ).

This is not exactly news, as there are several previous articles detailing how bacteria can survive on various cloth and plastic surfaces, as well as on lab coats in general.

Imagine how gross plastic Ikea furniture is…

eww…

Hospitals  and doctors are struggling to get it right, though. Just announced in 2010, the  DocFroc:

lab coats and scrubs that are embedded with Tri-Active, an FDA approved silver-based antimicrobial compound that can kill resistant micro-organisms such as MRSA, ECOLI and Salmonella.

It appears that the most important factor in prevention of disease is to simply better identify what has been transferring disease in the first place.

If they believed in germ theory they wouldn’t avoid disposable specula to save a few cents.

How much is half the population’s life worth? Plenty of baby health and defect issues could be avoided with proper female health care. This is part of the reason women are scared to have kids, so called trad men instantly stop giving a shit after conception. If she dies prematurely of cervical cancer though, they hand wave it away because while they pretend to care about forced vaccination, they don’t even pretend to care about forced, dangerous ‘pelvic exams’.

from

Fomites, fomites, fomites!

HPV contaminating gyms, doctor’s tables and virgins

Figured I’d linked this. Not clickbait.

What happens when you let the sluts run rampant.

https://theluxuryspot.com/new-hpv-warnings-you-can-get-it-at-the-gym/
https://www.thehealthsciencejournal.com/germs-in-the-gym/
https://www.womenshealthmag.com/health/a19929167/hpv-without-having-sex/

School gyms too, health hazard. It can even be on the floor.

Study link from women’s health:

http://www.publish.csiro.au/nid/164.htm

“Researchers analyzed 51 studies on HPV transmission, and they noticed that the virus was found in the genital tracts of 51 percent of female virgins. This left them asking: If not through sex, how are people contracting it?”

VIRUS.

Plus the speculums they can’t actually clean?

“The second possibility makes us even more squeamish. You might be able pick up HPV by coming into contact with an infected surface at the doctor’s office or in public places like the gym. If the examining table or bike seat you sit down on in your booty shorts hasn’t been properly cleaned, you could be at risk.”

Why did people wear so many layers of clothing in public?

History was so weird. And gloves! How absurd!

Who wears gloves, the Queen? She isn’t long-lived, is she?

I’m just picturing the HPV strains of Hollywood and its forced kissing, on and off screen.

Circumcision, risky behaviours studies

Almost 7000 words. That was more than I expected to type. Circumcision studies generally. A post for men.

https://journals.lww.com/jaids/Abstract/1999/11010/Sexual_Behaviors_and_Other_HIV_Risk_Factors_in.12.aspx
“Circumcised men also reported a preference for nonwet sex. “

Men concerned about HPV-cancer link:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ijc.24097

“In multivariable analyses, detection of any HPV infection was significantly associated with reported race of Asian/Pacific Islander…
NonOncogenic HPV infection was independently associated with lifetime number of sexual partners. Circumcision, assessed by clinical examination, was associated with reduced risk of HPV detection across all categories of HPV evaluated. HPV detection in men in the current study was strongly related to sexual behavior and circumcision status. Interventions such as circumcision may provide a low‐cost method to reduce HPV infection.”

Really?

Hey, just in case you get a broken leg, get them amputated!

Significantly higher risk of HPV detection was associated with increasing numbers of lifetime female sexual partners (OR 6.96–9.01 for nononcogenic, any HPV, and oncogenic HPV infections among men reporting ≥50 partners compared to 1 partner), number of female partners in the past 3 months (OR 2.31–3.43 for nononcogenic, any HPV, oncogenic HPV infections among men reporting 3–30 partners compared to no female partners), number of new female partners in the past 3 months (OR 2.64–2.85 for nononcogenic, oncogenic and any HPV type among men with ≥3 new female partners compared to no new partner), and anal sex with either a male or female (OR 1.40–1.45 for any HPV, and oncogenic HPV infections).”

Good luck trying to find studies brave enough to look at anal sex frequency alone!
They wouldn’t DARE.

What do they care if men get cancer, right?
Penile cancer is on the rise but do anal and never use a condom because a TV told you to!

Slut shaming also applies to men. Manwhores are disease-ridden.

“For example, the odds ratios for any HPV increased with increasing number of lifetime sexual partners peaking at an odds ratio of 6.65 among men who reported 20–49 partners.”

Er…. that’s well above average.

Here the lifetime partner rate is 4 and likely lower.

“However, the few published studies reporting HPV antibody status among men suggest that a smaller proportion of men than women are HPV antibody positive, despite a high HPV DNA prevalence among men.15″

Men are spreading it.

If I had to mock this, I’d get a tranny to dress up as Lady Gaga and sing “let’s have some fun this beat is sick, I wanna touch you with my cancer stick”… if only people had a sense of humour anymore.

“Don’t think too much, no condom bitch, ’cause porn is God and anal’s quick”

If I had to write the most unPC comedy show ever. No more jokes in this piece, it takes a serious turn.

Finally, Castellsague et al.8 demonstrated a profound and significant reduction in invasive cervical cancer risk among women whose male partners were circumcised.8″

So… what about male cancer risk? Shouldn’t you study that too?
And they wouldn’t spread HPV if they didn’t catch it being sluts.

Prevention > whatever this is.
They’re basically operating on baby boys, assuming they’ll be manwhores when they’re older.
No?

http://www.bioline.org.br/pdf?hs16015

” Policies and programmes should thus focus on the attitudes underlying sexual behaviour. “

Normally, studies of intact men are confounded by poverty and drinking.

And being promiscuous, obviously.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3700546/

HPV16, the most prevalent HPV type in this population (9.9%), also had the highest incidence (10.9/1000 person-months). A high incidence of HPV16 has been similarly reported in other studies among both men6, 7, 9, 14 and women.26 The high rate of acquisition of HPV16 has a clear implication for increasing cancer risk among men and their sexual partners, as HPV16 is the most common HPV type found in penile cancer among men;2 cervical, vulvar and vaginal cancers among women;1, 27 and in anal and oropharyngeal cancers in both sexes.3, 4

Finally!

If you’re avoiding performing oral on a woman, what makes you think she doesn’t have it in her mouth too and second, you’d better not be doing anal in that case….

Penile HPV IRs in our study were higher in the glans specimen, including the inner foreskin, compared with the shaft (HR=2.1; 95% CI 1.7 to 2.4). Our results are in contrast to the findings of a US study of 240 men.7 In this highly circumcised US population, the cumulative probability of incident HPV infection did not differ by anatomical site (44.3% in glans vs 45.4% in shaft). Among uncircumcised men, there may be a larger disparity in HPV acquisition by penile site, potentially attributable to keratinisation of the glans epithelium and removal of the inner foreskin after circumcision.”

Circumcised men aren’t less likely to catch it.

They’ll catch it somewhere more fatal. Increasing the rate of penile cancer.

Because you literally cannot catch it in a foreskin you NO LONGER HAVE.

So it’s a trick of linguistics. There’s less disease – of the foreskin. That you lack.

Click to access SRBs%20and%20circumcision%20in%20Uganda_1652_fullpaper_PAA2016.pdf

“Conclusions
This study indicates higher prevalence of sexual risk behaviours among circumcised men in each
survey and a reduction in use of condoms with non-marital sexual partners among circumcised
men from 2004 to 2011, suggesting that promotion of male circumcision could result in risk
compensation.

Considering the high levels of sexual risk behaviours among men who are already
circumcised observed in this study, the Ministry of Health and partners need to continue
sensitising the sexually active population to use condoms even when a man is circumcised. These
messages should target both circumcised men and their sexual partners. Educating men
10 undergoing circumcision also needs to be strengthened to avoid sexual risk taking post
circumcision”

If they weren’t lied to, they wouldn’t want it.

https://www.malecircumcision.org/research/social-and-behavioural-research

“Data on changes in the sexual performance or sexual satisfaction of adolescents or men following circumcision are limited and conflicting.

Not really. Sunk cost fallacy is strong.

One study conducted among 138 Korean men an unknown time (possibly years) after circumcision found that 20 percent reported decreased sexual pleasure and 8 percent reported increased sexual pleasure following the procedure.3″

“Sixty-four percent of the circumcised men who were available for follow-up at 24 months reported greater penile sensitivity after circumcision, and 54 percent reported enhanced ease in reaching orgasm.6”

That is physically impossible, nerve endings are removed and existing ones covered with scar tissue.
Scar tissue is numb.

Phantom foreskin sensation?

3 – Kim DS, Pang MG. The effect of male circumcision on sexuality. BJU Int 2007;99(3):619-622.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.06646.x

“Masturbatory pleasure decreased after circumcision in 48% of the respondents, while 8% reported increased pleasure. Masturbatory difficulty increased after circumcision in 63% of the respondents but was easier in 37%. About 6% answered that their sex lives improved, while 20% reported a worse sex life after circumcision.”

Men deserve to know this.
Sounds like surgical differences. Or maybe the men reporting more sensation had a thicker foreskin, limiting sensation?

“There was a decrease in masturbatory pleasure and sexual enjoyment after circumcision, indicating that adult circumcision adversely affects sexual function in many men, possibly because of complications of the surgery and a loss of nerve endings.”

Possibly? The surgery is intended to remove nerves and nerve endings. It REMOVES.

It’s literally taking away the thing that makes them a man, the crown of their manhood itself, the most important and sexually responsive organ to sexual pleasure.

http://www.thebodypro.com/content/art58409.html
https://www.poz.com/article/MSM-HIV-Circumcision-Study-Disregards-Roles-in-Anal-Sex-19575-6792
It is almost impossible to find them recording anal sex data, which harms men by omission.

http://cirp.org/library/anatomy/ohara/

Circumcision could be contributing to male fertility issues.

Laumann et al. [5] found that circumcised men had different sexual practices from genitally altered men. Circumcised men were more likely to masturbate, to engage in heterosexual anal and oral sex, and to engage in homosexual anal sex.

Why does the porn industry want all men circumcised, it’s a mystery.
Masturbation suggests dissatisfaction with normal, spousal sex, as do the others.

In the male rat, removal of the penile sheath markedly interferes with normal penile reflexes and copulation. When circumcised rats were paired with sexually experienced females, they had more difficulty obtaining an erection, more difficulty inserting the penis into the vagina, and required more mounts to inseminate than did unaltered males [6].

Unusual longevity is not good, it’s a common sign of impotence, porn lies.
Difficulty finishing, medically.

Preputial secretions in mice and rats are a strong attractant for female mice and rats [7-11], and may provoke the onset of oestrus in mature females [12].”

I’m not kidding, impotence issues in performance, it’s tragic.

In addition, if humans do secrete pheromones, I’d expect to see that impact circumcised male fertility especially.

“The study results may reflect the tendency of people to choose the familiar and shun the unfamiliar. In a survey conducted on the Internet, circumcised men were significantly more likely to use additional artificial lubricants during sexual activity (odds ratio, OR = 5.64, 95% CI = 3.65 – 8.71) [16].”

That’s abnormal you shouldn’t need those, but without a foreskin there’s more friction, the prepuce evolved in men to reduce penile friction. Without the existence of lube, which might cause problems by ingredients, that suggests circumcised men would find it too painful to have sex at all. 

Great profit margins for the lube companies though.

The 12th century physician and rabbi Moses Maimonides advocated male circumcision for its ability to curb a man’s sexual appetite [17].

Yep, it’s a punishment.

Further, he implied that it could also affect a woman’s sexuality, indicating that once a woman had taken a lover who was not circumcised, it was very hard for her to give him up.

Data supports this, keep reading.
There is a HUGE improvement in sexual performance for intact men.
When you ask the people judging said performance.

The impact of male circumcision on the sexual pleasure experienced by both males and females is largely unstudied. While the brain is often cited as the primary ‘sexual’ organ, what impact does surgical alteration of the male genitalia have for both partners? Based on anecdotal reports, a survey was developed to determine the effect of male circumcision on a woman’s ability to achieve vaginal orgasm (both single and multiple), to maintain adequate vaginal secretions, to develop vaginal discomfort, to enjoy coitus and to develop an intimate relationship with her partner. This review presents the findings of a survey of women who have had sexual partners both with and without foreskins, and reports their experiences.”

“Of the women, 73% reported that circumcised men tend to thrust harder and deeper, using elongated strokes, while unaltered men by comparison tended to thrust more gently, to have shorter thrusts, and tended to be in contact with the mons pubis and clitoris more, according to 71% of the respondents.”

So… the circumcised are bad in bed. No wonder American women don’t orgasm.

Objectively, the only way circumcised men can sexually perform is badly.
None of their behavioral pattern is pleasurable. None of it. Performance is judged by the recipient.

Again, everything porn tells you to do in bed is wrong.
It’s all the stuff that makes men bad in bed – that’s kinda why men enjoy viewing it, psychologically it’s telling them they’re normal by making bad performance in bed appear common and pay women to act aroused, contrary to honest data, like lonely women reading tons of romance novels and telling themselves “there’s nothing wrong with me”!

It’d be easy to test.

Do circumcised men enjoy watching intact men in porn? I’d bet not.
I’d bet they’d feel inferior. You think the industry doesn’t know that?

“While some of the respondents commented that they thought the differences were in the men, not the type of penis, the consistency with which women felt more intimate with their unaltered partners is striking. Some respondents reported that the foreskin improved their sexual satisfaction, which improved the quality of the relationship. In addition to the observations of Maimonides in the 12th century, one survey found that marital longevity was increased when the male had a foreskin [21]. Why the presence of the foreskin enhances intimacy needs further exploration.”

Circumcision increases divorce risk.
Really.
The study mentioned is linked below, Hughes, but nobody followed up on it.

Too controversial, plus the timing of his death is ..interesting.

“During prolonged intercourse with their circumcised partners, women were less likely to ‘really get into it’ and more likely to ‘want to get it over with’ (23.32, 11.24-48.39). On the other hand, with their unaltered partners, the reverse was true, they were less likely to ‘want to get it over with’ and considerably more likely to ‘really get into it.'”

“When the women were divided into those with more or fewer than 10 lifetime partners, those with >10 were more likely to have orgasms with their circumcised partners than those with fewer partners, but still less frequent orgasms than they had with their unaltered partners. Women who preferred a circumcised partner overall were more likely to have had <10 partners (3.52, 0.92-13.50).”

i.e. Don’t trust the sluts.

“The women who preferred circumcised partners (as elicited in one of three questions, n=20) were more likely to have had their first orgasm with a circumcised partner (8.38, 2.88-24.35) than those who preferred unaltered partners. Although these women preferred circumcised partners, they still found unaltered partners to evoke more vaginal fluid production, a lower vaginal discomfort rating and fewer complaints (Sets 1 and 2, Table 3) during intercourse than their circumcised partners. In women who preferred circumcised men, there was no difference in their comparison of circumcised and unaltered men other than overall rating and a higher rate of premature ejaculation in their unaltered partners (4.63, 2.36-9.07)

That isn’t premature, that’s normal. The circumcised were demonstrating a sign of impotence.

These women had fewered unaltered partners (2.47 vs. 3.78, Z=-1.68, P=0.045), which suggests that their limited exposure to unaltered men may have been a consequence of ‘premature ejaculation’.

Note the quote marks, they’re actually the normal ones.

The inability to detect a difference in orgasm frequency, coital duration, coital complaints or satisfaction, and ‘yet to formulate a preference’, suggests that factors of conformity may be influential.

It’s… clear-cut.

“When women were grouped based on the preputial status of their most recent partner, women with unaltered partners had a higher rate of orgasms with them, at a mean (SEM) of 70 (31%)vs 56 (40%) (Z=2.28, P=0.01). They were more likely to rate circumcised partners lower (Z=-2.61, P0.0047) and unaltered partners higher (Z=2.83, P=0.002). When only women whose most recent partner was circumcised, the results were consistent with the results from the entire study population.”

Burn.

When women who preferred vaginal orgasm were compared with those preferring orally or manually induced orgasm, the former rated unaltered men higher (Z=2.12, P=0.016), had more positive post-coital feelings (Set 3; Z=2.68, P=0.003) with their unaltered partners, and rated these men higher overall (Z=2.12, P=0.016).”

It cannot be more obvious.

Biology lesson:

“When the penile shaft is withdrawn slightly from the vagina, the foreskin bunches up behind the corona in a manner that allows the tip of the foreskin which contains the highest density of fine-touch neuroreceptors in the penis [1] to contact the corona of the glans which has the highest concentration of fine-touch receptors on the glans [18]. This intense stimulation discourages the penile shaft from further withdrawal, explaining the short thrusting style that women noted in their unaltered partners.

The one they always preferred?

This juxtapostion of sensitive neuroreceptors is also seen in the clitoris and clitoral hood of the Rhesus monkey [19] and in the human clitoris [18].”

Men need to be told this nerve information in biology class.
Male is comparable to female circumcision. It causes blatant nerve damage.
It destroys the experience of sexual intensity and intimacy.

It removes neuroreceptors!

“Several respondents commented that the foreskin also makes a difference in foreplay and fellatio. Although this was not directly measured, some respondents commented that unaltered men appeared to enjoy coitus more than their circumcised couterparts. The lower rates of fellatio, masturbation and anal sex among unaltered men [5] suggests that unaltered men may find coitus more satisfying [20].

I try to warn you.

Clearly, the anatomically complete penis offers a more rewarding experience for the female partner during coitus. While this study has some obvious methodological flaws, all the differences cannot be attributed to them. It is important that these findings be confirmed by a prospective study of a randomly selected population of women with experience with both types of men. It would be useful to examine the role of the foreskin in other sexual activities. Because these findings are of interest, the negative effect of circumcision on the sexual enjoyment of the female partner needs to be part of any discussions providing ‘informed consent’ before circumcision.”

And male enjoyment too. I think they’d wanna know.

20 is Van Howe http://www.cirp.org/library/general/laumann/letters.html#vanhowe

Of course adult feelings are not so easily dismissed. A preliminary survey of 75 men suggests that the more men know about the important functions of the prepuce, the more likely they are to be dissatisfied about being circumcised.3 Now that an increasing number of men are learning about the prepuce and expressing this dis-satisfaction, clinicians must acknowledge that is impossible to predict how a male infant will feel when he is older. A prudent course of action would be to allow men to make the decision about circumcision themselves when they reach adulthood.”

Men need informed consent, it’s THEIR penis.

More biology!

A hypothesis is needed to explain the findings of Laumann et al in the light of the known neurohistology. We suggest that a penis with foreskin and its full complement of neuroreceptors may make heterosexual coitus more satisfying, thereby making the man less likely to seek out alternate forms of stimulation. The only portion of the prepuce remaining in a man with surgically altered genitals is the remnant between the corona and the scar. While there are some fine-touch receptors in this tissue, the most sensitive portion of the prepuce at the tip is removed in even the most moderate circumcision.2 The remaining prepuce and any remaining portions of the frenulum can be preferentially stimulated by masturbation and oral sex, whereas the sensation of deep pressure dominates during hetero- sexual coitus. The imbalance from not having the input from the missing fine touch receptors may make the experience less satisfying, causing a man with an incomplete penis to supplement his sexual experiences with other forms of stimulation.

Explaining the risky sexual behaviors e.g. objecting to condom use. It doesn’t numb them, they’re already numb.

The only reason they want more oral, anal etc is to stimulate the remaining, tiny area of foreskin!

I wonder if the number of bisexual and gay men is lower in prevalence in intact men.

To date the effect of circumcision on sexual function has not been carefully studied. In rodent studies, removal of the prepuce resulted in marked changes in the mechanics of copulation,4 the hormonal response of the female partner, and aggressive behavior. In humans, behavioral alterations have been demonstrated in the pain response of circumcised infants.5 Unfortunately, studies of men circumcised as adults have had too few subjects or differences in sensation were not well documented. Testing penile vibratory thresholds has demonstrated that men experience increasing thresholds with age,

the penis does not age well

while those with premature ejaculation have low thresholds regardless of age.5 Application of this technique could be used to demonstrate if a sensation differences exists between circumcised and uncircumcised men.”

Other studies do now.

http://cirp.org/library/sex_function/fink1/

“Our findings may help urologists better counsel men undergoing circumcision as adults. Prospective studies are needed to better understand the relationship between circumcision and sexual function.”

Men deserve to know, informed consent.
This is based on a medically necessary population, not a NORMAL one – note.

Adult circumcision appears to result in worsened erectile function (p = 0.01), decreased penile sensitivity (p = 0.08), no change in sexual activity (p = 0.22) and improved satisfaction (p = 0.04). Of the men 50% reported benefits and 38% reported harm. Overall, 62% of men were satisfied with having been circumcised.”

They note in bold: “There was no clear sample of normal, healthy, intact men for comparison. Even so, thirty-eight percent of the circumcised men were dissatisfied with the results of their circumcision.”

It isn’t surprising you couldn’t find healthy adult men willing to chop off the most sensitive part of their manhood.

Hard sell.

Hughes: http://www.cirp.org/library/general/hughes/

“John G. Swadey, MD (New England Journal of Medicine, 1987) states that circumcised men show a “somewhat higher incidence of genital warts, nongonococcal urethritis and scabies.“”

Risky behaviour.

“Our survey suggests that there is a difference between the sexuality of the circumcised and uncircumcised male during his lifetime. It also suggests that the uncircumcised male has a more favorable sexual compatibility in his marriage.

During my experiences in medicine and surgery, occasionally there arose the question of circumcision and sexual compatibility. It seemed to me that the uncircumcised male had less of a problem in sexual compatibility.”

Sadly, he died before we could see his data.
Someone else, do the study!

Do circumcised men around the world also have higher divorce rates?
Easy to observe.

The UK, latest from newspaper article:

“The latest divorce figures, released last year, revealed the divorce rate for heterosexual couples in the UK was at a 45-year low, with 101,669 divorces of heterosexual couples in England and Wales.”
And we have low circumcision rates, mostly religious.

https://circumcision.org/how-male-circumcision-harms-women/

“With circumcised partners, women were less likely to have one or multiple vaginal orgasms, and their circumcised partners were more likely to have a premature ejaculation.”

Explains why American men complain their wife doesn’t enjoy sex. It’s them.

ED is the modern PC term for impotence. 

https://www.livescience.com/15750-erectile-dysfunction-sexual-problems.html

Half of all American men 40-70 have trouble finishing (delayed orgasm), isn’t that oddly close to the circumcision rate?

http://www.cirp.org/library/statistics/USA/
That is hardly getting better with age.
2011 study year-55 study age median = 1956
80% circumcised, of those born in hospitals.

Some good news.

“The new statistics showed a steep drop in the number of circumcisions performed in the United States.
The CDC data, reported by the New York Times, showed that the incidence of circumcision declined from 56 percent in 2006 to 32.5 percent in 2009. According to these statistics, non-circumcision or genital integrity has become the normal condition among newborn boys in the United States.”

Current circumcision rate 2006: 56.1%

Good news for men.

Other news from 2018

https://www.circinfo.org/news_2018.html

“A Federal judge in Detroit, Michigan, has ruled that the Federal United States law criminalising any form of female genital mutilation (FGM) is unconstitutional.”
“Critics have since pointed out that these observations are equally applicable to circumcision of boys and that there were also grounds for finding the FGM law unconstitutional in the basis that it denied equal treatment to males.”

They’re pushing FGM because male is considered legal.
Two wrongs do make a right?

It is thus perfectly obvious that circumcision does not significantly reduce a male’s risk of contracting an STD, and that organisations (such as the American Academy of Pediatrics and Centers for Disease Control itself) who identify prevention of STDs as the most important “benefit” of circumcision, do not know what they are talking about. There is in fact evidence going back to the 1850s that circumcised men are at greater risk of gonorrhoea and other urethral infections than men with normal genitalia. It may be that the foreskin acts as a barrier to the entry of certain pathogens.”

I wonder if circumcised men are likelier to carry super gonorrhea.

Seems like it.

A study of a rural community in South Africa has found that circumcised men generally are more likely to be infected with HIV, and that males circumcised in hospitals are 20 per cent more likely to be HIV positive than those left intact. Where 24 per cent of uncut men were found to be HIV positive, the incidence of HIV among males circumcised in hospitals was 31 per cent. These findings have come as a shock to the South African Medical authorities who have been following the orders of US and WHO health officials and “rolling out” the provision of mass circumcision as a response to the nation’s AIDS crisis. As the authors of the report comment ruefully, it seems that when it comes to the spread of HIV, anatomy is less important than behaviour – exactly what critics of the circumcision programs have been arguing for years. In fact, many other studies have found that in the real world there are many regions in Africa where there is little or no difference in the incidence of HIV infection between cut and uncut men, and that in quite a few places cut men are more likely to be HIV positive.”
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0201445

Don’t trust the WHO, they lie to you.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326040454_Factors_associated_with_early_deaths_following_neonatal_male_circumcision_in_the_United_States_2001-2010
A new study finds that in the United States approximately 20 neonatal deaths per year can be attributed to circumcision. Neonatal here means within the first 30 days of life, so the study does not count deaths that occur after the first month. This might seem a small figure in relation to the overall number of births, but what death rate would be acceptable for a medically unnecessary operation performed without the consent of the subject? The abstract of the paper follows.

Ooh, salty.

We sought to quantify early deaths following neonatal circumcision (same hospital admission) and to identify factors associated with such mortality. We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent circumcision while hospitalized during the first 30 days of life from 2001-2010 using the National Inpatient Sample (NIS). Over 10 years, 200 early deaths were recorded among 9,899,110 subjects (1 death per 49,166 circumcisions). Note: this figure should not be interpreted as causal but correlational: it may include both under-counting and over-counting of deaths attributable to circumcision. Compared to survivors, subjects who died following newborn circumcision were more likely to have associated co-morbid conditions, such as cardiac disease (OR: 697.8 [378.5-1286.6] p<0.001), coagulopathy (OR: 159.6 [95.6-266.2] p<0.001), fluid and electrolyte disorders (OR: 68.2 [49.1-94.6] p<0.001), or pulmonary circulatory disorders (OR: 169.5 [69.7-412.5] p<0.001). Recognizing these factors could inform clinical and parental decisions, potentially reducing associated risks.”

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2985419
“Permanent physical change” is also called disfigurement, in English.

“A recent judgment by a lower court in Germany brought the problem of ritual male circumcision to the consciousness of the wider public and legal academia. This essay weighs in on this emerging discussion and argues that ritual male circumcision is not covered by parental authority because it violates the human rights of the boy on whom it is imposed. It first considers and dismisses the best interest test of parental authority which, by focusing on the well-being of the child as opposed to his (future) autonomy, fails to take the boy’s human rights sufficiently into account. Instead, the essay proposes what it terms the autonomy conception of parental authority, according to which parental authority must be exercised such as to ensure that the child will become an autonomous adult. While parents may raise their child in line with their ethical, including religious, convictions, respect for his autonomy requires that this be done in a way that allows the child to later distance himself from these values; this implies, among other things, that irreversible physical changes are impermissible. This conclusion holds even if it could be assumed that the child would later come to endorse his circumcision: a proper understanding of autonomy implies that the religious sacrifice of a body part can only be authorised by the person whose body it is. Thus, ritual male circumcision is outside the scope of parental authority because it usurps the child’s right and responsibility to become the author of his own life.”

http://www.cuaj.ca/index.php/journal/article/view/5033/3371
“The statement is at pains to point out that the evidence as to the benefits and risks of circumcision is contradictory and inconclusive, and that much of it is of poor quality, especially studies claiming to show that circumcision has little impact on sexual sensation and function. The final conclusion is that while circumcision does offer some advantages, they are small, can be achieved by other, non-surgical means, and are outweighed by the risks and harms. This being the case, routine circumcision is not justified as a health measure and cannot be recommended.”

Very good news, their bold title:

… circumcision advocates have nowhere left to hide

The terms of the debate about non-therapeutic circumcision of minors have changed. The issue is no longer whether the so-called “benefits” outweigh the risks, or even whether the benefits outweigh the risks and harms. (As for the troglodytes who still mutter about pros and cons …) Coming on top of the judgement of a German court that circumcision is bodily harm and that it violates the child’s right to religious freedom, a leading legal philosopher now argues that boys have an inherent right not to be circumcised without medical need. In a paper forthcoming in Health Matrix, Stephen Munzer argues that current norms of autonomy and bodily integrity give male minors “a moral, anticipatory right-in-trust not to be circumcised without a medical indication.” Even more remarkably, it is now conceded by a prominent defender of religious/cultural circumcision that the practise is harmful and does violate the rights of the child. Writing in the Journal of Applied Philosophy, Joseph Mazor acknowledges the physical and moral harms of circumcision and admits that the child has “a right of moderate strength” not to be subjected to “presumably harmful circumcision”.

Both Munzer and Mazor go on to argue that, given the importance of circumcision within the cultural/religious communities that follow this tradition, the practice should not be criminalised.

You admit it’s abuse, fuck you.

Religious rape isn’t legal either.

This is a fair point, far less important than the vital concession that circumcision is harmful and does violate the rights of the child to bodily integrity, personal autonomy and an open future. The argument about these points is over; the debate now is whether non-therapeutic circumcision is or should be illegal.

You’d have to re-write all abuse laws, NO.

No means NO.

Stephen Munzer. Examining nontherapeutic circumcision. Health Matrix 28 (1) 2018: 1-77 (in press). Full text at SSRN.

Joseph Mazor. On the Strength of Children’s Right to Bodily Integrity: The Case of Circumcision. Journal of Applied Philosophy, on-line first, 24 May 2018.

Mazor https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/japp.12275
Munzer https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3180209

http://www.thewholenetwork.org/twn-news/does-circumcision-cause-erectile-dysfunction

The United States, a nation with 4.5% of the world’s population, consumes 47% of the world’s Viagra (Pfizer’s own figures). Turns out the same nation has been circumcising the majority of its male infants for generations.”
“A new study in the International Journal of Men’s Health shows that circumcised men have a 4.5 times greater chance of suffering from erectile dysfunction (ED) than intact men, revealing what appears to be a significant acquisition vector. Other studies have previously observed that circumcision’s damage results in worsened erectile functioning, inability to maintain an erection, and reducing the glans sensitivity, including an overall penis sensitivity reduction by 75%. A recent study discovered that premature ejaculation is five times more likely when adjusted for erectile dysfunction and circumcision.”

Full links in that article. It’s sickening how people try to justify this.

If the kid won’t get it done at 18, why does the parent want it done against their will?
That’s assault.

75% reduction study: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17378847
5x ED more likely: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2011.02280.x/abstract

It also relates to alexithymia, a psychiatric condition
https://web.archive.org/web/20130831161657/http://www.mensstudies.com/content/2772r13175400432/?p=a7068101fbdd48819f10dd04dc1e19fb&pi=4

 Alexithymia in this population of adult men is statistically significant for having experienced circumcision trauma and for erectile dysfunction drug use.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/jul/24/male-circumcision-the-issue-that-ended-my-marriage
God doesn’t make mistakes, circumcision is offensive to God, if anything.

An idiot theorized in “Body Pleasure and the Origins of Violence”, that societal violence is caused by lack of pleasure, a theory so ridiculous if one only looks at Africa – highly sexual, high rape rate, high murder rate. It’s actually IQ. Sexual and violence behaviors differ according to standard IQ deviations, it is well known most violent criminals are less intelligent, yet highly promiscuous.

However, nations of high circumcision uptake do report more violence.

It’s also a proxy for low IQ, the practice of circumcision in countries predicts lower national IQ. I wonder if the circumcised are more likely to be low IQ, a correlation?

The UK used to circumcise more often until the NHS came along and didn’t allow doctors to charge for it, suddenly it ceased to be medically necessary!
The foreskin is the primary erogenous organ in men, the area in adults is 3×5 inches, with 50,000 nerve endings.
Minor circumcision is a human rights crisis.

http://www.salem-news.com/articles/august312012/circumcision-violence-rm.php

“In Norway, the only country that records the circumcision status of rapists, 2% of the population are circumcised and commit more than 80% of their rapes. And, since 1991 almost all wars involved one circumcised country with some conflicts between both factions being circumcised. This includes all USA conflicts since Vietnam.

Wouldn’t it be hilarious if religion had nothing to do with war, just circumcision?

No other statistical records are kept regarding the individual and social percentile circumcision status of serial killers or rapists. Yet, over 50% of rapes in Sweden are perpetrated by the minority of men who belong to circumcising cultures. Circumcision status may factor highly in the USA’s highest of all other country’s incarceration rate to population.”

“Original FBI’s Criminal Profilers who led the Behavioral Science Unit in Quantico, Virginia know circumcision is a factor in some serial killings and partly responsible for America’s generalized asocial violence.”
“It has been inferred Robert Ressler, in an off the record comment when interviewed by Mothering Magazine’s web-editor, related the fact that the FBI realizes circumcision is a factor in violence. He explained they do not mention this because they would be considered raving lunatics and lose their jobs. Robert Ressler coined the term Serial Killer.”

Same: http://www.academia.edu/7151881/Circumcision_Serial_Killing_and_Criminal_Behavior_in_American_Medical_Violence

“Serial killing as we know it today began in the last two decades of the 19th Century. – Robert Ressler, FBI.[2]”

Same time circumcision picked up. Complete coincidence.

Related: https://www.thelocal.no/20131112/norway-to-legislate-on-circumcision

I wonder why….

What about studies on white men?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21672947

Circumcision was associated with frequent orgasm difficulties in Danish men and with a range of frequent sexual difficulties in women, notably orgasm difficulties, dyspareunia and a sense of incomplete sexual needs fulfilment. Thorough examination of these matters in areas where male circumcision is more common is warranted.”

Crime and IQ

This is oddly missing but said
“In arguing that IQ is a significant cause of crime, the researchers cite studies to indicate that criminal populations generally have an average IQ of about 92, 8 points below the mean.”
https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/Abstract.aspx?id=183065

1929 paper:

https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2123&context=jclc

“Illustrative to a still further degree of the point made above concerning the ineffectualness of the present penal system are the results of a comparison of the percentages for recidivism with those for long-term sentences.

Losing the death penalty is a mistake.

As may be seen above, although 56.7% of offenders are recidivistic or habitual offenders and hence incorrigible in the main, as has been mentioned above, only 16% to 23% are serving long term sentences. This fact, then, signifies that the greater per cent of recidivists are serving terms of more or less brevity. That little benefit to society may be expected from such terms is not to be doubted since sentences of three to five and even ten years are without effect upon recidivistic offenders and possess value only by virtue of segregating the offender for a while and thus sparing society a greater or less number of crimes.3‘ At best, such sentences, in so far as recidivists are concerned, constitute nothing more than a flimsy makeshift in dealing with the problem of repeated criminality. In-deed, the statistics of crime as well as the teachings of history confirm the absolute inadequacy of the present system of punishments against crime.12

Especially is this so in regard to the feebleminded recidivists who are accountable for a full 25% of the entire problem of repeated criminality and whose deficiency of intelligence effectually and completely militates against any possibility of regeneration or correction. That penalties are established by statutes and are based wholly upon a consideration of the material act constitutes an actual social injury since society thereby derives a false sense of having adequately and securely provided against a danger.

Because men are NOT made equal, biologically.
They should study criminal’s children to be sure.

In reality, it has not, for the harm is merely postponed. Commitment to prison should be determined not by the nature of the offense but by the nature of the offender, 33 and with a view toward the causes of the delinquency, the effect upon the individual, and the moral prognosis.3 4 Only in this way may adequate social provision be made for the warped, deficient, defective, and unregenerate enemies of the social order.”

Prison doesn’t work.

We know now from MRI psychopaths and other types literally gain pleasure from other’s pain and experience no/less fear and a neutral response to appeals for mercy. Something biologically less humane requires other treatment.

page 14 on the pdf looks at crime type

Married men are less likely to be criminals (selected by women)?

“Accordingly, the assumption of the stabilizing influence of marriage appears well substantiated. Or, it may be that the fundamental constitution of the delinquent is of such a nature that he is frequently antagonistic toward the assumption and maintenance of marital duties and thus fails even to experience contact with any presumably stabilizing influences of marriage. At any rate, marriage, together with any of the beneficial influences it may exert upon the individual, is of markedly less frequent occurrence among criminal classes than among the general population”

R-types.

“That slightly over 50% of criminals, including even the low grade morons, are married with the consequently increased possibilities of the propagation of the species is somewhat disheartening.”

Er, why isn’t there a basic legal requirement of an IQ test to marry?
Low IQ people cannot consent. To prove they can consent.

“This equality of incidence is strongly suggestive that the criminally inclined nature, regardless of intellectual endowment, is fundamentally lacking in those personal and social requisites essential for the assumption and maintenance of marital duties. Or it may be that this marked prevalence of divorce indicates the failure of the stabilizing influences of marriage and home life because of the inherent instability of the criminal classes preventing the reception of any such benefits.”

Part of the reason bachelors are looked down on.

And divorced men.

“As it is, the percentages of actually disrupted marriages range from 29 for the low grade morons to 36% for the group of subnormal intelligence and 32% for the normal intelligence group. And when it is considered that 36% to 58% of the groups respectively are still within the age group of 21 to 30 years, it is reasonable to suppose that a contrasting of these percentages with figures for a like proportion of the geners1 population would render the above figures comparably much higher.
However, from a eugenical point of view as regards the propagation of the species, this high percentage of disrupted marriages is a most hopeful sign.”

Let idiots get divorced!

“It will be noted at once that the greater number of children and the greater number of families with children occur in the groups of deficient intelligence, particularly so in the low grade moron group. This is quite in accord with the findings of other investigators and the generally conceived opinion of the greater fecundity of the classes of deficient intelligence.61”

R-selection, lower quality per child.

And another investigation of the Harvard Graduates of 1894 revealed 20% without children, 13.1% with one child, 18.1% with two children, 22.5% with three children, and 25.5% with four or more children. 65
This makes an average of 2.44 children for each individual, a figure which gives the college bred man of Harvard the lead over even the low grade moron delinquent. Further, it has been estimated by Kehrer that the proportion of childless marriages for civilized countries ranges between 10% and 15%,”; which means that the ordinary middle-class citizen, taking the criminalistic and the college-bred classes as the extremes, bears the burden of restocking the population.”

I bet that isn’t true now, they think they’re too good to have kids!

And that explains dwindling IQ compared to the Victorians, the middle class were less intelligent and the upper class dropped the ball. The middle class only seem intelligent due to their education.

The above table shows clearly that the foreign-born stock does produce more than its due quota of our specified delinquents, especially so in regard to those of deficient intelligence. This is most marked regarding the low grade morons, where the foreign-born stock produces more than 235% of its due quota of offenders as determined by population ratios while the proportions for the other three groups ranges from 125% for the group of normal intelligence to 144% for the high grade feebleminded delinquents.

This finding is substantiated by the findings of the Immigration Commission of 1910.98 and also by Laughlin in his report to the Congressional Committee. 99 And similar findings have been reported by the Massachusetts Department of Corrections.'” In addition, Laughlin also found that the second generation of foreign stock had an increased crime incidence over and above that of foreign stock in general, probably because that generation represents the transitional stage between the discarding of the customs of the old country and the adopting of those of the new. Undoubtedly this fact accounts for a proportion of the increased percentages in the above table. Obviously then, there is an undeniable danger in the admission of unselected foreign stock, both from the aspect of their own undesirability and from the aspect of their reproduction of their kind. Hence, there is  an unquestionable and appealing need of a closer and more intelligent supervision of immigration, with more ample provision for the means of so doing.”

You lost the war.

You know you did.

A second consideration evident from the above table is the increase among offenders of individuals having one parent foreign-born and the other native-born. The percentages given above nearly double that for the general population. Various investigations have shown that there is a decided tendency for the home of mixed parental nativity to produce delinquents.”°

No, it’s because they’re mixed race.

That went off on a tangent but a potentially relevant one.

Unvaccinated mortality rate and scapegoating

Rhetoric: “If you don’t vaccinate, you’re much more likely to die.”
Fact: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2018.00079/full

Title: “Evidence of Increase in Mortality After the Introduction of Diphtheria–Tetanus–Pertussis Vaccine to Children Aged 6–35 Months in Guinea-Bissau: A Time for Reflection?” 2018

35 months? A decent study length, for once.

I could leave it at this but since “cherrypicked” is the next goalpost position they slide to, shamelessly, after claiming “no valid empirical studies”, this’ll be a slightly longish post. It’s a doozy. Bring tea. 8k words.

When studies are available, there is a range of errors in the method.
A range of “errors”. I also debunk the myth at the end of unvaccinated children being ‘dangerous’. It’s the biggest font, can’t miss it and also the “ahrp” link, if you text search.

You can ignore me, but not your loud conscience.

https://www.oatext.com/Pilot-comparative-study-on-the-health-of-vaccinated-and-unvaccinated-6-to-12-year-old-U-S-children.php

Mawson, published April 2017. STILL available, contrary to lies. Abstract:

Vaccinations have prevented millions of infectious illnesses, hospitalizations and deaths among U.S. children, yet the long-term health outcomes of the vaccination schedule remain uncertain. Studies have been recommended by the U.S. Institute of Medicine to address this question. This study aimed 1) to compare vaccinated and unvaccinated children on a broad range of health outcomes, and 2) to determine whether an association found between vaccination and neurodevelopmental disorders (NDD), if any, remained significant after adjustment for other measured factors. A cross-sectional study of mothers of children educated at home was carried out in collaboration with homeschool organizations in four U.S. states: Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi and Oregon. Mothers were asked to complete an anonymous online questionnaire on their 6- to 12-year-old biological children with respect to pregnancy-related factors, birth history, vaccinations, physician-diagnosed illnesses, medications used, and health services. NDD, a derived diagnostic measure, was defined as having one or more of the following three closely-related diagnoses: a learning disability, Attention Deficient Hyperactivity Disorder, and Autism Spectrum Disorder. A convenience sample of 666 children was obtained, of which 261 (39%) were unvaccinated. The vaccinated were less likely than the unvaccinated to have been diagnosed with chickenpox and pertussis, but more likely to have been diagnosed with pneumonia, otitis media, allergies and NDD. After adjustment, vaccination, male gender, and preterm birth remained significantly associated with NDD. However, in a final adjusted model with interaction, vaccination but not preterm birth remained associated with NDD, while the interaction of preterm birth and vaccination was associated with a 6.6-fold increased odds of NDD (95% CI: 2.8, 15.5). In conclusion, vaccinated homeschool children were found to have a higher rate of allergies and NDD than unvaccinated homeschool children. While vaccination remained significantly associated with NDD after controlling for other factors, preterm birth coupled with vaccination was associated with an apparent synergistic increase in the odds of NDD. Further research involving larger, independent samples and stronger research designs is needed to verify and understand these unexpected findings in order to optimize the impact of vaccines on children’s health.

Bravo.

Let’s quote, shall we? I didn’t list everything sig, just the big findings.

Under ‘results’, 92% of the children studied were white, as a liar tries to claim later, race cannot be a factor preventing such studies. 8.5% high school or less, no SES confound. 91.2% Christian, other categories unlisted. 93.7% married women.

Table 3 contains chronic conditions.
ADHD 4.7% vacc 1% NOT – p=0.013
ASD 4.7% vacc 1% NOT – p=0.013
Learning disability 5.7% vacc, 1.2% NOT – p=0.003
Neurodevelopment Disorder 10.5% vacc, 3.1% NOT – p=< 0.001
Any Chronic Condition (inc minor) 44% vacc, 24.9% NOT – p=< 0.001.

Table 6
Used antibiotics in the past 12 months p=< 0.001
Sick visit to doctor in the past year p=< 0.001
Seen doctor for checkup in past 12 months p=< 0.001

The figure shows that the single largest group of diagnoses was learning disability (n=15) followed by ASD (n=9), and ADHD (n=9), with smaller numbers comprising combinations of the three diagnoses.”

NDD “Two factors that almost reached statistical significance were vaccination during pregnancy (OR 2.5, 95% CI: 1.0, 6.3) and three or more fetal ultrasounds (OR 3.2, 95% CI: 0.92, 11.5).”

Table 7 NDD and vaccination status p=<0.001

Following a recommendation of the Institute of Medicine [19] for studies comparing the health outcomes of vaccinated and unvaccinated children, this study focused on homeschool children ages 6 to 12 years”
“Data from the survey were also used to determine whether vaccination was associated specifically with NDDs, a derived diagnostic category combining children with the diagnoses of learning disability, ASD and/or ADHD.”

Important.

“With regard to acute and chronic conditions, vaccinated children were significantly less likely than the unvaccinated to have had chickenpox and pertussis but, contrary to expectation, were significantly more likely to have been diagnosed with otitis media, pneumonia, allergic rhinitis, eczema, and NDD.”

The vaccinated were also more likely to have used antibiotics, allergy and fever medications; to have been fitted with ventilation ear tubes; visited a doctor for a health issue in the previous year, and been hospitalized.”

“The reason for hospitalization and the age of the child at the time were not determined, but the latter finding appears consistent with a study of 38,801 reports to the VAERS of infants who were hospitalized or had died after receiving vaccinations.

I don’t think they included deceased children (no) in this one so the numbers would go up.

The study reported a linear relationship between the number of vaccine doses administered at one time and the rate of hospitalization and death; moreover, the younger the infant at the time of vaccination, the higher was the rate of hospitalization and death [55]. The hospitalization rate increased from 11% for 2 vaccine doses to 23.5% for 8 doses (r2 = 0.91), while the case fatality rate increased significantly from 3.6% for those receiving from 1-4 doses to 5.4 % for those receiving from 5-8 doses.”

Informed consent?

“However, the ASD prevalence of 2.24% from a CDC parent survey is lower than the study rate of 3.3%. Vaccinated males were significantly more likely than vaccinated females to have been diagnosed with allergic rhinitis, and NDD. The percentage of vaccinated males with an NDD in this study (14.4%) is consistent with national findings based on parental responses to survey questions, indicating that 15% of U.S. children ages 3 to 17 years in the years 2006-2008 had an NDD [28].”

“Vaccination was strongly associated with both otitis media and pneumonia, which are among the most common complications of measles infection [56,57]. The odds of otitis media were almost four-fold higher among the vaccinated (OR 3.8, 95% CI: 2.1, 6.6) and the odds of myringotomy with tube placement were eight-fold higher than those of unvaccinated children (OR 8.0, 95% CI: 1.0, 66.1).”

“found an increased frequency of M. catarrhalis colonization in the vaccinated group compared to the partly immunized and control groups (76% vs. 62% and 56%, respectively). A high rate of Moraxella catarrhalis colonization is associated with an increased risk of AOM [65].”
“These observations have suggested that eradication of vaccine serotype pneumococci can be followed by colonization of other bacterial species in the vacant nasopharyngeal niche, leading to disequilibria of bacterial composition (dysbiosis) and increased risks of otitis media. Long-term monitoring has been recommended as essential for understanding the full implications of vaccination-induced changes in microbiota structure [67].”

After adjustment, the factors that remained significantly associated with NDD were vaccination, nonwhite race, male gender, and preterm birth.”

“The present study suggests that vaccination could be a contributing factor in the pathogenesis of NDD but also that preterm birth by itself may have a lesser or much reduced role in NDD (defined here as ASD, ADHD and/or a learning disability) than currently believed. The findings also suggest that vaccination coupled with preterm birth could increase the odds of NDD beyond that of vaccination alone.”

Conclusion:
Assessment of the long-term effects of the vaccination schedule on morbidity and mortality has been limited [71]. In this pilot study of vaccinated and unvaccinated homeschool children, reduced odds of chickenpox and whooping cough were found among the vaccinated, as expected, but unexpectedly increased odds were found for many other physician-diagnosed conditions. Although the cross-sectional design of the study limits causal interpretation, the strength and consistency of the findings, the apparent “dose-response” relationship between vaccination status and several forms of chronic illness, and the significant association between vaccination and NDDs all support the possibility that some aspect of the current vaccination program could be contributing to risks of childhood morbidity.

Vaccination also remained significantly associated with NDD after controlling for other factors, whereas preterm birth, long considered a major risk factor for NDD, was not associated with NDD after controlling for the interaction between preterm birth and vaccination. In addition, preterm birth coupled with vaccination was associated with an apparent synergistic increase in the odds of NDD above that of vaccination alone. Nevertheless, the study findings should be interpreted with caution. First, additional research is needed to replicate the findings in studies with larger samples and stronger research designs. Second, subject to replication, potentially detrimental factors associated with the vaccination schedule should be identified and addressed and underlying mechanisms better understood. Such studies are essential in order to optimize the impact of vaccination of children’s health.”

True. Tell Gorski that. Further reading.

55 Goldman GS, Miller NZ (2012) Relative trends in hospitalizations and mortality among infants by the number of vaccine doses and age, based on the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), 1990-2010. Hum Exp Toxicol 31: 1012-1021
71 Fisker AB, Hornshøj L, Rodrigues A, Balde I, Fernandes M, et al. (2014) Effects of the introduction of new vaccines in Guinea-Bissau on vaccine coverage, vaccine timeliness, and child survival: an observational study. Lancet Glob Health 2: e478-e487.

However, tetanus might be a good one to get, if you are likely to be exposed.
https://www.who.int/immunization/diseases/Article_2010.pdf?ua=1

Preferably before pregnancy.

The foreign death rate for rotavirus doesn’t actually check if vaccines decrease deaths?
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1473309911702535

Flu benefit lies
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/7578881_Influenza_Vaccination_and_Mortality_in_the_United_States

<10% elderly deaths from flu in USA, claimed benefit five-fold.

Infant mortality:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3170075/
In conclusion “These findings demonstrate a counter-intuitive relationship: nations that require more vaccine doses tend to have higher infant mortality rates.”
“A closer inspection of correlations between vaccine doses, biochemical or synergistic toxicity, and IMRs, is essential. All nations—rich and poor, advanced and developing—have an obligation to determine whether their immunization schedules are achieving their desired goals.”

True.

https://academic.oup.com/aje/article/182/9/791/96333
Vaccination and All-Cause Child Mortality From 1985 to 2011: Global Evidence From the Demographic and Health Surveys
“Childhood vaccination, and in particular measles and tetanus vaccination, is associated with substantial reductions in childhood mortality.”
Nobody really dies from measles anymore.
Their estimations, not a real study.
“The results indicate that measles vaccination is associated with a relative risk of mortality of 0.83, whereas maternal tetanus vaccination is associated with a relative risk of 0.92
Really? So little. I retract the tetanus thing.
“Generally, it is not possible to estimate the association between vaccination status and mortality at the individual level in household survey data, such as the DHS, because the vaccination status of children who have died is not usually reported (36)”
Lying directly. So just get the data?
“An additional advantage of this aggregate analysis is that it allows us to capture potential herd immunity (37–39), which would not typically be observed in an individual-level analysis.”

36 Cutts FT, Izurieta HS, Rhoda DA. Measuring coverage in MNCH: design, implementation, and interpretation challenges associated with tracking vaccination coverage using household surveys. PLoS Med. 2013;105:e1001404.
I hope I’m including enough references, wouldn’t want to disappoint anyone.

https://academic.oup.com/aje/article-abstract/116/3/510/99513?redirectedFrom=fulltext
Measles study method issues.

Growing infertility epidemic, CDC:

https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/infertility/whitepaper-pg1.htm#tabs-793807-1

“Although some perceive infertility as a quality-of-life issue, the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) regards infertility as a disease (3). A U.S. Supreme Court opinion agreed with a lower court statement that reproduction is a major life activity and confirmed that conditions that interfere with reproduction should be regarded as disabilities, as defined in the Americans with Disabilities Act (4).”

And according to international law, deliberately bringing about impaired fertility is GENOCIDE, see d.

Wait, is preventing reproduction (a “major life activity”) by forced poverty, thanks to tax redistribution so others CAN have kids, illegal? Seems so.

“Although the focus of research and services has traditionally been on women (and, as a consequence, much of this article reflects it), fertility impairments may be just as common among men (6). The statistics cited above distinguish impaired fecundity from infertility. In this article we refer to infertility more broadly, including all fertility impairments. Recurrent pregnancy loss (miscarriage) is a component of impaired fecundity, distinct from infertility (ASRM, unpublished data) and is not included in this presentation.”

It started with Boomers, the free love generation, putting off reproduction. I wonder if STDs might be a cause?

“African American women had a twofold increase in odds of reporting a history of infertility (9).”

Mixed women? Is the same true in full African immigrants?

“Different subgroups may have infertility of different etiology.”

“In 2006, reported chlamydia rates were eight times higher among African Americans than among whites, highlighting the large disparities in this important risk factor for infertility (13).”

“Other modifiable factors contribute to the burden of infertility. Although the proportion of male factor infertility due to varicocele is unknown, this common condition is reported in approximately half of the inpatient surgery services and approximately two thirds of office visits for male factor infertility in the United States (14)”

“Although the proportion of infertility that is due to tobacco smoking is unknown, infertility specialists are increasingly aware that exposure to tobacco products can cause infertility”

Including secondhand?
The ban moaners have explaining to do.

“Obesity in men is associated with erectile dysfunction and decreased androgen production, but its effects on male fertility are not as clear (30).”

“A public health strategy focusing on primary prevention (e.g., through removal of risk factors for infertility such as those described above) would reduce the prevalence of infertility,”

Why do I mention that? Here.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15287394.2018.1477640?journalCode=uteh20
“A lowered probability of pregnancy in females in the USA aged 25–29 who received a human papillomavirus vaccine injection” 2018

“Shortly after the vaccine was licensed, several reports of recipients experiencing primary ovarian failure emerged.”

trans. Instant shutdown.

“Using logistic regression to analyze the data, the probability of having been pregnant was estimated for females who received an HPV vaccine compared with females who did not receive the shot. Results suggest that females who received the HPV shot were less likely to have ever been pregnant than women in the same age group who did not receive the shot. If 100% of females in this study had received the HPV vaccine, data suggest the number of women having ever conceived would have fallen by 2 million. Further study into the influence of HPV vaccine on fertility is thus warranted.”

h/t https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/vaccine-safety/vaccine-boom-population-bust-study-queries-the-link-between-hpv-vaccine-and-soaring-infertility/

“If the association is causation, however, DeLong’s math suggests that if all the females in this study had received the HPV vaccine, the number of women having ever conceived would have fallen by two million. That’s not two million missing children. That’s two million women who can’t conceive one, two, or any children.”

Less contraceptive use should translate to more babies among the vaccinated.”

“Male sperm counts have nosedived in recent decades – scientists published data last year showing that globally, they have dropped 50 percent in just the past 40 years – signalling serious unidentified environmental hazards.”

They should look at whether r or K-types have higher or lower than normal fertility.

HPV vaccination – as well as tetanus vaccination – has been linked in medical literature to a condition called anti-phospholipid syndrome which is a poorly defined disease caused when the immune system erroneously manufactures antibodies against certain lipid proteins found in membranes that are in a host of tissues — eyes, heart, brain, nerves, skin – and the reproductive system. One 2012 study by Serbian researchers at the Institute for Virology, Vaccines and Ser “Torlak” found that “hyperimmunisation” of the immune system with different adjuvants, including aluminum, in mice, resulted in induction of antiphospholipid syndrome and the tandem lowering of fertility.””

That study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22235053

You cannot discuss female fertility without male.

“Other research has implicated aluminum in conception problems. French infertility researcher Jean-Philippe Klein and his colleagues at the University of Lyon published the results of their 2014 study of the sperm of men seeking assistance at a French infertility clinic.”

That study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25461904

From it:

This study provided unequivocal evidence of high concentrations of aluminum in human semen and suggested possible implications for spermatogenesis and sperm count.

I recommend chelation therapy studies, for all concerned with what I think.

And back:

Merck’s HPV vaccine test ““placebos” contained both the high doses of aluminium as well as another scary ingredient, polysorbate 80. This chemical has exhibited delayed ovarian toxicity to rat ovaries at all injected doses tested over a tenfold range.”

I’m sure they aren’t planning to make you infertile. (Scroll down).

“None of the trials accurately assessed the long-term impact of the vaccine on the reproductive health of girls”

Actually many brought that up at the time it was pushed.

“Why make a vaccine for a disease that afflicts less than 0.3% of people in their lifetime?”

It’s now being pushed on men like they’re gay (anal cancer risk). Penile cancer may go up though thanks to anal sex.

[checked:

https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/statistics-by-cancer-type/penile-cancer/incidence

increase of 23% of this rare cancer alone since early 90s, when porn use was lower]

Actually, decided to look up anal cancer, look at this:

https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/statistics-by-cancer-type/anal-cancer#heading-Zero
“Since the early 1990s, anal cancer incidence rates have increased by almost two-thirds (63%) in the UK. Rates in males have increased by a fifth (20%), and rates in females have increased by almost two times (99%).”
What could possibly account for such a huge sex difference? I wonder…
https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/statistics-by-cancer-type/anal-cancer/risk-factors#heading-Two
“91% of anal cancer cases in the UK are caused by HPV infection.
Around 91% of anal cancers in women and 75% in men are HPV-positive, a meta-analysis showed.
Anal cancer risk may be higher in people participating in anal sexual behaviours (including but not limited to receptive anal intercourse)”

MAY BE?

https://www.medinstitute.org/2016/08/the-consequences-of-heterosexual-anal-sex-for-women/

“In the case of heterosexual anal intercourse it is the woman who is at risk to develop fecal incontinence.”
Lovely way to treat the wife.
http://www.nature.com/ajg/journal/v111/n2/full/ajg2015419a.html

“The American Cancer Society reports, “Receptive anal intercourse also increases the risk of anal cancer in both men and women, particularly in those younger than 30.” 7 HPV (human papillomavirus) is the main cause of anal cancer; but apparently, anal intercourse in particular increases the likelihood that the virus will attack the anus or rectum.”
http://www.cancer.org/cancer/analcancer/detailedguide/anal-cancer-risk-factors

Why does this remind me of the Pill?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2126920
Relevance of immuno-contraceptive vaccines for population control
sterilization!


Gates Foundation own vaccine stock
https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB1021577629748680000?ns=prod/accounts-wsj

High-titre measles vaccine and female mortality
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(03)14867-2/fulltext
“Hence, the new hypothesis has created increasing consistency in existing data, which suggest that causal processes might be involved. This consistency across different studies should reduce the likelihood of chance as an explanation.”

https://www.bmj.com/rapid-response/2011/11/02/underreporting-vaccine-adverse-events
Underreporting Vaccine Adverse Events
“How can they dismiss placebo-controlled trials that raise serious possibilities of vaccine-caused illness?”

https://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/health/pill-temporarily-diminish-fertility-study-article-1.1850643

No comment.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140673681925150

“Whatever their previous menstrual history women, especially the nulliparous, who are concerned about their future fertility should be recommended oral contraception in preference to an intrauterine device.”
Compared to?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5967601/#B15
2018 Discrepancies in the evaluation of the safety of the human papillomavirus vaccine
“In this article we bring the attention on certain adverse effects of the vaccine against HPV that have not been well studied as they are not well defined.”
It seems the WHO lied.
“We also compare the different approaches on HPV vaccine policies regarding its adverse reactions in countries like Japan and Colombia, vs. the recommendations issued by the WHO.”

https://systematicreviewsjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13643-018-0931-2
“Pandemic mortality rates in 1918 and in 2009 were highest among those with the lowest socioeconomic status (SES). Despite this, low SES groups are not included in the list of groups prioritized for pandemic vaccination, and the ambition to reduce social inequality in health does not feature in international and national pandemic preparedness plans. We describe plans for a systematic review and meta-analysis of the association between SES and pandemic outcomes during the last five pandemics.”
Interesting.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X18305607
Estimating the annual attack rate of seasonal influenza among unvaccinated individuals: A systematic review and meta-analysis
“Conclusion
Overall, we found that approximately 1 in 5 unvaccinated children and 1 in 10 unvaccinated adults were estimated to be infected by seasonal influenza annually, with rates of symptomatic influenza roughly half of these estimates. Our findings help to establish the background risk of seasonal influenza infection in unvaccinated individuals.”
Okay, compared to? Why not look at vaccinated?

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X18305462
2018 Does consecutive influenza vaccination reduce protection against influenza: A systematic review and meta-analysis
“Dose-response results (≥3 consecutive vaccinations) did show a reduction in effectiveness.
Certainty in the evidence is very low due to inconsistency and imprecision.
The findings do not rule out the possibility of reduced effectiveness.”

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X1830094X
2018 Influenza vaccine effectiveness in older adults compared with younger adults over five seasons
“Conclusions
Over 5 seasons, influenza vaccination provided similar levels of protection among older and younger adults, with lower levels of protection against influenza A(H3N2) in all ages.”

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X1631218X
Effectiveness of MF59-adjuvanted seasonal influenza vaccine in the elderly: A systematic review and meta-analysis
“Adjuvantation with MF59 may increase vaccine effectiveness among seniors.”

Lucky them.

http://ahrp.org/immunocompromised-children-what-are-their-infectious-risks-from-the-unvaccinated/
Read the whole thing for this link, it’s short. Quoting in case it gets taken down.

EXCUSE:

“In the last few days there have been multiple news articles and testimonies in the Maine and Vermont legislatures about the need to impose vaccine mandates to protect immunocompromised children.[1] [2] I attended the vaccine bills’ hearing in Augusta, Maine on May 11, which lasted into the night. I also attended the Vermont Senate hearing 3 weeks earlier. The Vermont Senate committee said it would only hear testimony from physicians, which is why I was invited. Not very many doctors are familiar with the vaccine literature. Vaccines are, surprisingly, an arcane area of medicine.

I feel safe.

Unfortunately, I heard not a single expert (at either hearing) provide any data about the magnitude of the problem that vaccine mandates are supposed to fix. In fact, I was quite surprised to learn that helping the immunocompromised seemed to be the major justification to remove vaccine exemptions.

I heard no one mention the fact that vaccine efficacies of 40%, 60%, 80% (approximately correct for influenza, diphtheria, mumps vaccines) might also pose some risk to the immunodeficient. (These are just examples; most other vaccines have efficacy in the 60-90% range.) Actually, any statistician could tell you that low efficacy poses considerably more risk than exemption rates of 1-5% in Maine (depending on which required vaccine we are discussing). Vaccines with low efficacy make the claim of herd immunity a joke–but did even one “expert” at the hearings know or care?

Herd immunity of 100% (impossible) wouldn’t prevent mortality.

Herd immunity is a myth. The extreme case’s claim is demonstrably false.

How much risk is actually posed by “vaccine-preventable” diseases to the immunocompromised? I reviewed the most common infections seen in those at highest risk: stem cell transplant recipients[3] and leukemia patients.[4]

Here is what I found….”

Shit, someone who cares.

“The limited data show that community acquired respiratory viruses (CARVs) and herpesviruses are the most common pathogens.”
“The reports on human herpes virus (HHV)-6 diseases are increasing…”
“Herpesvirus pneumonia is usually caused by reactivation of latent viruses which occurs in severe immunosuppression.”
“… viral encephalitis was mainly caused by human herpes virus (HHV)-6, followed by EBV, HSV, JC virus, CMV, VZV in the recipients of allo-HSCT. Our data showed that herpesvirus-associated encephalitis was mainly caused by EBV followed by HSV, CMV and VZV…
The most frequent pathogens of viral hepatitis are hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV). Besides these, other viruses such as CMV and HSV may also result in hepatitis. Hepatitis B and C can be caused by either virus reactivation or blood transmission…””

There are also many bacterial and fungal infections they may develop: too many to list. Of the many infections these patients tend to develop, the only 3 infections commonly seen, for which there exists a vaccine and which spread between children, are chickenpox (varicella zoster virus or VZV), influenza, and rotavirus.

Rotavirus is a relatively mild gastrointestinal virus and mortality, even in those with impaired immunity, is rare.[5]

Influenza is a real concern, but influenza vaccines are notoriously ineffective. This year, CDC said the vaccine had 19% efficacy.[6] (A Canadian study found no efficacy for this year’s flu vaccine.) Over the past ten years, CDC’s efficacy estimates for influenza vaccines averaged 40%.[7] So even if everyone in America was vaccinated, you could not generate herd immunity for influenza. You could not achieve the desired “cocoon” for those most vulnerable.

Remember the word cocoon, please.

Chickenpox is caused by a virus that, once you have been infected, will live forever in your nerve cells. The vaccine virus also does this. Immunocompromised patients developing chickenpox/VZV infections are usually reactivating latent virus long present in their own bodies. Only very rarely are they “catching” chickenpox virus from someone else. Fortunately, we have antiviral drugs and immune globulin to prevent and treat these common reactivations.”

Her bold in this paragraph:

“Let me repeat: vulnerable, immunodeficient children are susceptible to many viral, bacterial and fungal infections, but these are very rarely caused by child to child spread of microorganisms for which we have vaccines. They are listed in footnotes 3 and 4.

FYI

[3] http://www.jhoonline.org/content/pdf/1756-8722-6-94.pdf
[4] http://cdn.intechopen.com/pdfs-wm/39664.pdf

For those who want to waste my time digging up a never-ending stream of references.

It is troubling that vulnerable families have been encouraged to fear and stigmatize unvaccinated children, when the rates of primary and secondary vaccine failures (i.e., number of vaccinated kids who lack immunity despite their vaccinations) are far greater than the rates of children lacking vaccinations. [CDC’s 2012-13 kindergarten vaccine exemption rates by state ranged from a low of 0.1% to a high of 6.5%.]

In fact, the vaccine failures pose a much larger risk. But are the immunocompromised suffering and dying due to other childrens’ vaccine failures? We are not hearing about it.

KEY:

If the vulnerable are not being harmed by vaccinated children who lack immunity, then it follows they are not suffering from exposure to the unvaccinated, either.

LOGICALLY.

You have no right to forbid children their education on medical grounds, it is a right.

Low IQ is medical too, you heap those ghetto kids in. Being stabbed is a more prevalent danger.

Don’t vulnerable families have enough real problems, without adding unfounded and unjustified fears? Isn’t it time to drop this canard?

But then how will they emotionally blackmail us into buying their products?

The gaslighting of “you’re killing babies” – seldom levied at the aborting parents?

As I said in an earlier post, the last measles deaths in the United States (there were 2) occurred in 2003. One was elderly; the other was aged 13 and had had a bone marrow transplant. I was unable to learn if his infection was from a vaccine strain or wild-type measles virus. Not a single American has died from measles since.

We need to know if vulnerable, immunocompromised children are catching and dying from vaccine-preventable diseases, and from whom they are catching these diseases: from the vaccinated, from the unvaccinated, or from their own latent viruses? From vaccine strains or wild-type infections?

from WHOM indeed

test the genetics of what they come down with, check for a match to the vaccine genes

if they don’t match, they’d have something to brag about

How many children are affected? Where are they? Which diseases are killing them? I am not finding evidence of a problem in the medical literature.”

Listen and obey.

Fine, let’s look up the strawman victims being used to push this.

http://lymphosign.com/doi/10.14785/lymphosign-2016-0007

“In the above regard, vaccines play an important role in preventing infections in the immunocompromised host. Prevention can be achieved by a combination of strategies. Besides vaccination of the immunocompromised patient (in whom immune responses might be suboptimal), there is a recognition of the importance of the “cocoon strategy” that is widely used in protecting susceptible patients from specific vaccine-preventable diseases (Forsyth et al. 2015). In the context of immunocompromised patients, one vaccinates parents, caregivers, and other close contacts, which provides indirect protection by preventing disease in those in close proximity to the immunocompromised person.”

Parents are the primary disease vector (risk) to their immunocompromised children.
THE PARENTS.

Proven by the cocoon strategy designed specifically for compromised children.

Given the frequent physical interactions, this is quite obvious.

They don’t get to blame the world for their mistakes. If the kid catches something, they should immediately test the parent and drain some antibodies.

The latest data claims immunocompromised children MUST STILL BE VACCINATED.

https://www.cps.ca/en/documents/position/immunization-of-the-immunocompromised-child-key-principles

As in, no, your child is not exempt.

Highlights:

Indirect protection is provided by ensuring that all household members and other close contacts are immunized against infections that they may transmit to the immunocompromised child”

Inactivated vaccines may be given safely to immunocompromised patients, but responses may be diminished or absent, and increases in dose or in number of doses may be indicated (e.g., hepatitis B, conjugate pneumococcal vaccines) [1]–[4].”

Live vaccines may cause disease by uncontrolled replication and are usually contraindicated in immunocompromised individuals, with the exception of those with isolated IgA deficiency, IgG subclass deficiency, complement deficiency, or anatomical or functional asplenia. Another exception is that live viral vaccines are safe for most children with phagocyte or neutrophil disorders (including chronic granulomatous disease) but live bacterial vaccines (e.g., BGG, live typhoid vaccine) are contraindicated [1][3]. Live vaccines may be given to individuals with HIV infection who are not severely immunocompromised [1]–[3].”

EVEN THE HIV KIDS GET IT.

Who do you have to hide behind now?

Don’t blame the world for your kid getting sick, scapegoating doesn’t reduce your personal culpability.
Scapegoating is disgusting.
Sacrificing other people’s kids doesn’t make you exempt.

Additional vaccines: Immunocompromised children may require vaccines that are not routinely recommended for all children (e.g., 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide), or not routinely given beyond a certain age (e.g., Haemophilus influenzae type b).”

They need MORE, MORE VACCINES.

Assuming other people can do your job for you is ass-backwards wrong!

Even if everyone in the world got vaccinated, your child would still need vaccines, according to the authorities you appeal to!

“The duration of the immune response may be diminished, necessitating extra booster doses (e.g., children at ongoing risk of hepatitis B exposure should undergo annual testing for hepatitis B antibody and receive booster doses if indicated) [2].”
When long-term immunosuppression is required, inactivated vaccines are given when the patient is on the lowest anticipated dose of immunosuppressive agents. Also, if feasible, immunosuppression is held or reduced temporarily to maximize response.”

MUH Medication – NOT AN EXCUSE.

“Response to a vaccine should not be assumed”

Refusing to listen to these OFFICIAL MEDICAL GUIDELINES makes you an abusive parent, according to the Canadian government.
Lovely.

General antibody production problem?

“No delay is required for live oral or intranasal vaccines or for inactivated vaccines [5].”

u r WRONG, Karens. Mz ‘my kid can’t get any’. Not a barrier.

But, I hear you cry, what about the cancer patients?

Low, but K. I am willing…. to go there. This once.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3448241/

OT “reactivation infection with herpes group viruses”
where would children get that?
More evidence in favour of slut shaming.

You might notice something odd, a paper on managing infection risk in cancer patients doesn’t mention vaccines.
At all.

Conclusion “Infection in immunocompromised patients offers a particular clinical challenge because the pathogens are often unusual, and appropriate treatment must begin early in the course of the illness. These patients also must receive the highest tolerated dosages of antimicrobial agents and for maximum durations. Prophylactic antibiotics should also be given based on the pathogens likely to reactivate during the time of more severe immunosuppression.”

They’re commonly struck down by unusual microbes, not the ones we’re told to vaccinate for!

To close, here is a paranoid misogynistic shill telling us we’re evil for wanting the standard of proof in medicine, and anyway, it would cost money. Can’t put the breaks on the gravy train!

“The low vaccination rates in ultra-Orthodox neighborhoods have been attributed to a faulty perception that fervently religious Jews are protected from infection by the insulated nature of their communities, as well as discredited rumors that the life-saving practice is dangerous.”
https://www.timesofisrael.com/measles-vaccination-rates-in-anti-vaxxer-areas-of-jerusalem-leap-to-80/

(((Gorski))) has no conflict of interest at all, as you’ll see.

https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/the-perils-and-pitfalls-of-doing-a-vaccinated-versus-unvaccinated-study/

“However, there is one trait of the anti-vaccine movement that, however its camouflaging plumage may evolve, never, ever changes. It is as immutable as believers say that God is. That trait is that, whatever other claims, the anti-vaccine movement makes, at its core it is always about the vaccines. Always…
at its core the anti-vaccine movement is about fear and loathing of vaccines. Always. When inconvenient science doesn’t support their views, anti-vaccine activists either ignore the science, distort the science, or launch ad hominems against the people doing the science or citing the science. And, as I said before, the claims of the anti-vaccine movement evolve. Never again will the anti-vaccine movement make the horrific mistake of yoking itself to a hypothesis that is as easily testable”

Just do the studies, shill.
That bolded contradicts his conclusion. We noticed.

“Thimerosal was removed from nearly all childhood vaccines (the sole exception being some flu vaccines),”

Wait, mercury is in childhood vaccines still, known neurotoxin?
It’s also in the adult flu jab, which others? That explains why the elderly here pop their clogs after getting one.
We all know people.

“This “too many too soon” chant has lead to a demand by the anti-vaccine movement that the government conduct a large study of “unvaccinated” versus the “vaccinated” children to compare them for health outcomes and, especially, the prevalence of autism.”

They refuse despite that being the gold standard.

How queer.

“I don’t think that people like J.B. Handley realize how risky their gambit is.”

It isn’t just the gravy train, it’s the crazy train!

What echo chamber?

The Ivory Tower sure can echo!

“Such a study would have a very high risk of torpedoing virtually everything the anti-vaccine movement has been working toward in terms of promoting their message of fear about vaccines as being somehow credible (or at least not unreasonable) and based on science (more on that later).”

Then do it.

They want to be proven wrong, huh? Like… scientists?
Shit, if only that were your job. If you only received taxpayer money from these people too.
We live in a society – where you need to do what people pay you for.

Comparisons allowed on a single vaccine basis are clear (top link) so I’d expect a compounded, huge differential between the complete schedule and none whatsoever. The former is sufficient evidence to conduct the latter.

Of course, Ms. Tamaro is either ignorant or disingenuous herself in that some anti-vaccine advocates do indeed call for just such a study, even going so far as to demand a randomized, double-blinded study. J.B. Handley himself has attacked people who correctly call demands for such a study “unethical.””

Correctly? First harm none. Burden of proof.
Are you sure correctly is your word of choice?
He completely dismisses the woman on no grounds.

She says:

“Research studies are divided into two categories, observational studies and experimental studies. An observational study observes individuals and measures variables of interest but does not attempt to influence the responses. (The “epidemiological” studies to which Dr. Insel refers are actually observational studies.) An experimental study, on the other hand, deliberately imposes some treatment on individuals in order to observe their responses; the purpose of an experiment is to study whether the treatment causes a change in the response.”

True, you could find plenty of volunteers to submit data of what they were GOING TO DO ANYWAY.
Why not collect the evidence?

“This paragraph just goes to show how a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.”
Misogynist.

but no observational study has been done comparing the prevalence of autism diagnoses in a vaccinated human population compared to an unvaccinated human population. When Dan Olmsted points out that he has identified large populations of unvaccinated children in the United States and asks why a study has not been done on them, he is actually asking why an observational study has not been done.”

She is being perfectly reasonable.

He ignores this question.

“When Senator Harkin asks Dr. Insel why a study has not been done on vaccinated vs. unvaccinated American children, he too is actually asking why an observational study has not been done to date. Dr. Insel, however, chooses to respond by saying that an experimental study would be required in order to resolve the issue.”

Get someone else to do it and pull his funding.
This is fraud. They are refusing to do their job.

Playing shell games means you are not qualified.

“ignoring the fact that there have been calls from the anti-vaccine movement for experimental studies, which, of course, would be highly unethical because they would leave large numbers of children completely unvaccinated and thus vulnerable to vaccine-preventable diseases”

that is your hypothesis, NOT a fact
this is WHY we need studies
the vaccine failure children are vulnerable, not biologically bulletproof
these intellectually dishonest douches, e.g.

“In any case, here’s where Tamara goes right off the deep end:

He…. he literally says that. Go look.

“”I would like to point out the epidemiological similarity between smoking/lung cancer and vaccines/autism. Smoking has been proven to cause lung cancer, yet not a single experimental study on humans was ever done – all of the human studies proving that smoking causes lung cancer were observational. The experimental studies were performed on research animals only. Attached at the end of this letter is a lesson taken verbatim from an introductory course in college statistics describing how the connection between smoking and lung cancer was made.””

Proven fact?
Proven fact is ‘off the deep end’?

Introductory course on statistics – she has a sense of humour, this is basic.

“Both Prometheus and Autism Diva enumerated the numerous flaws and ethical lapses in that experiment.”

So what? Try to replicate it or STFU.
Ethical lapses – for data we ALREADY HAVE.

Does Gorski own a time machine?
Let’s all entrust the safety of American children to one ‘autism diva’.

“Then there was the more recent (and even more unethical) Laura Hewitson experiment looking at vaccinated and unvaccinated Macaque monkey infants. I was appalled at how badly designed and grossly unethical that experiment was, not to mention at the enormous undisclosed conflicts of interest of the investigators.”

In your opinion.
Screeching about ethics won’t change biology.

“The problem, of course, is that there is not yet a good animal model of autism”

In your opinion.

So all your method ‘flaws’ you spot make it impossible to meet your standard. Wow.

“Moreover, the history of such research (i.e., Hornig and Hewitson) is not exactly cause for optimism, given how badly done these studies were.”

In your opinion.
The weasel words in this should be studied.

So the gist of this ENTIRE LENGTHY POST is “don’t try, don’t note data that already exists, the method is always wrong, the models aren’t good enough and whatever you do, IT’S UNETHICAL” as if that’s ever stopped science before.
Didn’t the vaccination guy abuse his children?

https://curiosity.com/topics/thank-edward-jenner-and-cow-pus-for-vaccines-curiosity/

Yup.

Where’s the kitchen sink? Oh, it comes. At the end.

“While she is correct to say that an experimental (i.e., randomized, blinded) study is not always necessary to provide sufficient evidence of causation to conclude that there is causation, she’s picked the wrong example for a number of reasons.”

He’s beating his strawmen hard.

In any case, Ms. Tamara is also wrong when she says that a study of the vaccinated and unvaccinated has never been undertaken.”

She’s right but she’s wrong, guys!

The study he discusses blames RACIAL DIFFERENCES for why his comparison ‘didn’t count’.

But, you said about how it hasn’t been done earlier and later you say it hasn’t been done because statistics?

He doesn’t have the Mawson study above.

It’s this study he is referring to and weirdly, if you follow his link nothing comes up.
PAYWALL. I smelled bullshit before but linking the wrong URL?
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/114/1/187
Here it is, the right link.

Parts he didn’t quote:

“Unvaccinated children are at increased risk of acquiring and transmitting vaccine-preventable diseases.”

What bias? And as opposed to what? Increased compared to….?

The largest numbers of unvaccinated children lived in counties in California, Illinois, New York, Washington, Pennsylvania, Texas, Oklahoma, Colorado, Utah, and Michigan.”
“Unvaccinated children have characteristics that are distinctly different from those of undervaccinated children. Unvaccinated children are clustered geographically, increasing the risk of transmitting vaccine-preventable diseases to both unvaccinated and undervaccinated children.”

So it just says who they are (and Jews are white here) and nothing whatsoever about HEALTH OUTCOMES, as he implied it did.

He LIED. Please, check. I implore you.
Lie of omission is still a lie. Blatant intellectual dishonesty.

The topic is health outcomes, Gorski. We could compare the hair colour of the vaccinated/not (that study essentially does) and it’s irrelevant to the topic at hand. Clutching at straws, why?

I can only conclude that Ms. Tamara is also quite naive in that she clearly has no clue just how much money and how many children an observational study of the vaccinated versus unvaccinated would require to do properly, much less how tricky it would be to control for confounders, given that the unvaccinated vary in significant ways from the vaccinated.”

OH, THE SHILL WANTS MORE TAXPAYER MONEY.
Shocker. Sounds like he’s holding you to ransom.

But he knows there are huge differences. Huh.

“Skeptical blogger extraordinaire Prometheus tells the tale. First, he points out how few completely unvaccinated children there are to study, perhaps around 50,000 in the entire U.S., in the 3-6 year old age cohort that would be most fruitful to do a study looking at autism incidence in the vaccinated and unvaccinated.”

Perhaps?

What, so let’s not bother? Yes, let’s listen to a blogger.
A ‘skeptic’, no less. Saying no to everything isn’t hard.

Well, plugging those numbers in – along with the current 1 in 150 autism prevalence – we find that we need over 360,000 children in each group to detect a 10% difference (you can try it yourself here). Unfortunately, that is more than the total number of unvaccinated children in the US, so that’s not going to happen.”

Wait, numbers you literally just made up? And the highest, most unlikely prevalence?
84% of statistics are made up, including that one.
Again, don’t bother is the best you can come up with? Over time you’d get enough data.
A 1% increased risk is medically valid, their significance in medicine is 0.001%.

What can we get with our “sample” of 49,652 unvaccinated children? If we manage to include each and every unvaccinated child in the US in the study, we could detect a 26% or more difference in autism prevalence.”

Why not do it, the kids already exist in that condition?

The data is RIGHT THERE.

Of course, it’s not even remotely practical to expect to get 100% of the unvaccinated children in the country into a study.”

So don’t try?

“How more about a practical number – say, 10% of them?”

Bullshit artist literally making up “samples” with quote marks is the best argument they have.

“That would allow us to detect a 70% or greater difference – about a three-fold difference in autism prevalence between the fully vaccinated and unvaccinated groups.”

Okay, so at least conduct A study?
Why not?
Why say, oh, let’s not bother, we know the results?
That is not science, but faith. Fuck these baby-killers.
If you know it’s safe, why not check?

Shut your critics up?

Does anyone here think that parents who fervently believe that vaccines cause autism would accept negative results from a study that’s only powered to detect a three-fold difference in autism rates between the vaccinated and unvaccinated as sufficiently reassuring to accept the current vaccination as safe?”

Sure, you won’t do it because the people who want it wouldn’t like the results.
Not you. The people who want it.
You’d definitely accept results that show you’ve been encouraging child abuse for years?

Appeal to incredulity. Someone else’s.

“Given the religious fervor with which the anti-vaccine movement clings to the myth that vaccines cause autism, I doubt that it would accept a negative result from a study powered to detect a 1% difference in autism rates as sufficiently reassuring to abandon its fear.”

If it’s a myth, settle it with the study. It doesn’t have to be specific to autism. Health outcomes.

Any percentage is better than nothing!

“Moreover, as Prometheus tells us, even the study described above would be inordinately expensive and difficult to do.”

Who cares is we’re advocating the harm of children, it’s expensive to prove this thing is safe?

Wasn’t Prometheus tortured?

“Finally, let’s “run the numbers” on a more practical study – one where we are able to enroll 500 unvaccinated children and 5000 fully vaccinated controls”

Made up numbers, again.
You said there are thousands of unvaccinated in America.
Why not 5000/5000? Why not even groups? That would be ‘practical’.

“I can’t help but note that the study described by Prometheus would probably fail to find the well-known increased risk of lung cancer and heart disease due to smoking, the more so since the incidence of lung cancer in nonsmokers is considerably lower than 1 in 150, which is how many children are estimated to be autistic.”

So it’s let’s not ever look or bother because the made-up numbers of a blogger say it wouldn’t find anything?

“The only way to get around the problems inherent in designing a study …would be to expand the study to multiple nations. Of course, doing such a study would be even more enormously expensive, take several years, and, because funding for autism research is pretty much a zero sum game, would divert huge amounts of money from more promising research to chasing down a highly implausible hypothesis that has virtually no credible empirical support behind it, either from basic science, epidemiology, or other evidence, certainly nowhere near enough evidence to justify such a huge expenditure and effort.”

Yep. He’s lying.
DON’T LOOK AT THE MAN BEHIND THE CURTAIN.

Virtually no?

Nowhere near enough – in his opinion.

I hope these people go to prison for fraud, when this study is eventually conducted. Obstruction.

“Certainly the government does, hence its reluctance to spend all sorts of money chasing a highly improbable hypothesis….

Not Pharma Super PACs?

In reality, the “vaccinated versus unvaccinated” gambit is just that–a gambit. The leaders of the anti-vaccine movement probably know that doing a study with sufficient power and numbers to exclude even a modest risk of autism due to the current vaccine schedule is so expensive and impractical that it would probably never be done and that smaller studies that are feasible will have too little power to reassure those who believe that vaccines cause autism that vaccines are in fact safe. Why do it then?

So, conspiracy now?
The researchers won’t do their job and it ‘won’t’ be done, instead of can’t?

Here’s the kitchen sink:

In fact, I rather suspect that the smarter among the anti-vaccinationists know all the problems”

That’s an insane conspiracy. Everyone deserves to know the results. Public interest.

“On the other hand, antivaccinationists should be very careful what they ask for. They may just make enough of a pain of themselves to get it.”

….Good?

Worse, if the government ever did spend the money on such an enormous study and it was resoundingly negative, it’s easy to predict that it would make no difference.”

You don’t discuss what would happen if they’re right.
This article of yours was an old whore, windbagging about how impractical, expensive and unethical it is to hold you accountable. The projected paranoia is exquisite, it would be their worst nightmare – but they suggested it?

“As they have done before for other large studies, anti-vaccinationists would discount the results and cry bias.”

Would you accept it if you’re wrong?
If it’s a good study, solid statistically, that wouldn’t be an argument. And you couldn’t find fault with it either, if YOU didn’t like the result.

Kinda why it’s done? Objectivity?

not the dubious study

custom designed

to have the maximal chance of a false positive result,

which is

of course

what the anti-vaccine movement really wants.”

Conspiracy theorist. By all means, do the most accurate study, I’d love to write about it.

He’s literally attacking a study he says is impossible. Nothing to fear, nothing to hide.

HPV in the brain

Yes, in.

http://www.miriamgrossmanmd.com/say-its-not-so-hpv-in-the-brain/

“We know that HPV can cross the placenta and infect the fetus. In one study, this happened in over twelve per cent of women with HPV.”

As always it’s the innocent who suffer.
The sins of the father…

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+34%3A7&version=ESV

“keeping steadfast love for thousands,[a] forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children and the children’s children, to the third and the fourth generation.”

And before you think I’m man-hating, no.

It’s the data.

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/half-adult-males-carry-hpv
“The virus notorious for causing cervical cancer in women also turns up frequently in men and can hang on unnoticed for months or even years, researchers report online March 1 in Lancet. The study solidifies earlier research indicating that human papillomavirus is highly prevalent in men and strengthens the case for vaccinating men and boys against it, the report’s authors say.”

Imagine my shock.

“The study, in the Annals of Internal Medicine, found that 11 million men and 3.2 million women in the United States had oral HPV infections. Among them, 7 million men and 1.4 million women had strains that can cause cancers of the throat, tongue and other areas of the head and neck.”
“The rate was higher among men who also had genital HPV. (Almost half of men aged 18 to 60 have a genital HPV infection, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.)”

TLDR?

It’s a male-carried disease.
By far (that was a 5:1 male to female ratio, deny it).

7/1.4=5 for the illiterates at home.

https://www.cdc.gov/std/hpv/stdfact-hpv-and-men.htm
The penile cancer risk for men goes unmentioned. Some informed consent, right? Feel empowered yet?
No, there is currently no approved test for HPV in men.”
Routine testing (also called ‘screening’) to check for HPV or HPV-related disease before there are signs or symptom, is not recommended by the CDC”
They want the men to spread it.

Back to the original doctor.

This is major news, and I’m wondering – why no headlines about it? There were no press conferences with Dr Crino, and no statements from SIECUS or Planned Parenthood, our leaders in “comprehensive” sexuality education.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

There’s a double standard at work: if research suggested that sugary drinks cause fetal malformations, it surely would be announced with alarm by every media outlet.

Cover-up isn’t a double standard but okay.

With sexual health it’s always been different. The negative consequences of sexual license are often ignored or minimized. Young people are led to believe that with condoms and STI testing they’re safe, or safe enough. But it’s not so.

“Free lust” is anything but free of consequences. If only the Bible mentioned fornication and how sinning against oneself is different.

I believe that one day there will be congressional hearings about the persistent whitewashing of STIs, the exaggerated efficacy of condoms, and the endorsement by sex educators of high risk behaviors. Until then, the madness continues.”

One day there might be real science, we can all dream!

They make so much money off pelvic exams, which by the way, were pioneered in Nazi concentration camps!

And that’s just the tip of the hooker berg.
It was the same with syphilis and other diseases. Men would catch it, usually from hookers and infect their wife (or eventual wife) and their children would have medical issues (look up the syphilis skulls). Deliberate honeypots for this purpose would bring down an entire nation quickly via its leaders. Wouldn’t it, France?

We have DNA testing to trace precise strains of types but that’s small comfort.

If you can get it from a handshake or a peck on the cheek (children, Europeans) nobody is safe.

Reverse the Sexual Revolution

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/05/140520115514.htm

If you pointed at a random American man or woman on the street and shouted Whore! you’d probably be right.
Note the contradiction of ‘healthy’ ‘infected’. They know the cancer risk and doubtless others.
This is being pushed as healthy?

Meanwhile, there are probably psychiatric effects from HPV…

and this includes men, who retain STDs in their urethra (the area isn’t sterile), as well the inevitability of male birth control.

19225852_1418153738292010_274071024440347821_n