Originally Posted by crosvs
that doesn't sound biologically ... safe or normal.
for example, what about the huge study(s) conducted lately finding a VERY strong inversely proportional link between ejaculation and prostate cancer?
turns out that men with fewer than 2 ejaculations per week are at least 1/3 more likely -- if i remember correctly -- than men with at last 4 or 5 per week. casual observation finds correllation to support this theory by monks, for example, who apparently have a particularly high incidence of prostate cancer, as men of older generations for whom ejaculation outside of sex was generally discouraged.
apparently the compounds in the prostate -- particularly the high concentration of zinc -- begins to "stagnate" as one report described it, and it is believed that this stagnation leads to cancerous cells and eventually full-blown prostate cancer.
google something to the effect of: "frequent orgasm prostate cancer study" -- the study, if i remember correctly, was conducted by either or both of an austrlian and/or british research institute.
so my point is- whereas you may be solving ONE problem by this pill, seems as though, if used regularly, you'd be causing a whole slew of DIFFERENT problems.
interestingly, the prostate/ejaculation theory seems relatively unwritten about. i have a feeling its ultimate implications -- have sex or masturbate -- are just a little too taboo for the general medical society to broadcast to the public.
aside: if memory serves, there was a study that suggested a factor leading to breast cancer in women was *NOT* breastfeeding children, for analogous reasons.
simply put: if the body is not allowed to function as it was designed to do, something is bound to go wrong.
that said, if they ARE able to produce a good, safe birth control for men, i think that would be fantastic: ironically, *I* have a hard time trusting girls with that stuff ... I'd rather be in control.
|
