Drug of Choice

theacoustician said:
So you're saying that environmental factors play no role in determining if you get cancer or not.
Click to expand...


I fail to see how having extra (i.e. completely natural) amounts of skin on your penis causes your cells to reproduce abnormally.
 
theacoustician said:
Smegma
Click to expand...


:fly: That word makes me chuckle.

Yeah I saw that, but I find that difficult to comprehend. The amount of excretory build up of common fluids it must take to cause cancer must be astronomical. I'm not talking merely third-world hygiene, but a complete absence of it for like....decades.

I'm not a doctor, but to imagine that all of our ancestors were running around with dick cancer just because there were no Jews running around snipping them is hilarious. Likewise I can't imagine them not cleaning themselves ever. Even regular sexual activity would have been sufficient to remove the chunky debris they must be referring to. (Pardon me while I wipe the vomit off my thigh.)

My feelings are that these researchers (and we have no idea where they're from, what their qualifications are, or what their agendas might be) stumbled upon a completely vague and remote statistic and ran with it. Stats are always completely ambiguous.
 
Sarcasmo said:
:fly: That word makes me chuckle.

Yeah I saw that, but I find that difficult to comprehend. The amount of excretory build up of common fluids it must take to cause cancer must be astronomical. I'm not talking merely third-world hygiene, but a complete absence of it for like....decades.

I'm not a doctor, but to imagine that all of our ancestors were running around with dick cancer just because there were no Jews running around snipping them is hilarious. Likewise I can't imagine them not cleaning themselves ever. Even regular sexual activity would have been sufficient to remove the chunky debris they must be referring to. (Pardon me while I wipe the vomit off my thigh.)

My feelings are that these researchers (and we have no idea where they're from, what their qualifications are, or what their agendas might be) stumbled upon a completely vague and remote statistic and ran with it. Stats are always completely ambiguous.
Click to expand...
Penis rot was fairly common in medievil times IIRC, I'll have to ask Desslock about it again
 
Sarcasmo said:
My feelings are that these researchers (and we have no idea where they're from, what their qualifications are, or what their agendas might be) stumbled upon a completely vague and remote statistic and ran with it. Stats are always completely ambiguous.
Click to expand...



Plus it made for great headlines on the evening news:

"DIRTY WANGS GET CANCER!! WASH THEM WANGS BOYS , WASH EM GOOD!! WITH SOAP & WATER SCRUB SCRUB SCRUB!!!"
 
Sarcasmo said:
:fly: That word makes me chuckle.

Yeah I saw that, but I find that difficult to comprehend. The amount of excretory build up of common fluids it must take to cause cancer must be astronomical. I'm not talking merely third-world hygiene, but a complete absence of it for like....decades.

I'm not a doctor, but to imagine that all of our ancestors were running around with dick cancer just because there were no Jews running around snipping them is hilarious. Likewise I can't imagine them not cleaning themselves ever. Even regular sexual activity would have been sufficient to remove the chunky debris they must be referring to. (Pardon me while I wipe the vomit off my thigh.)

My feelings are that these researchers (and we have no idea where they're from, what their qualifications are, or what their agendas might be) stumbled upon a completely vague and remote statistic and ran with it. Stats are always completely ambiguous.
Click to expand...
You don't have to be a smoker to get lung cancer. Surely those people didn't have super large deposits of stuff on their lungs. Some people are just more prone to develop it given the right conditions. The point is here, with circumcision, you remove the conditions entirely, bypassing almost all chance you may have of getting it, regardless of you predisposition to develop it.
 
theacoustician said:
You don't have to be a smoker to get lung cancer. Surely those people didn't have super large deposits of stuff on their lungs. Some people are just more prone to develop it given the right conditions. The point is here, with circumcision, you remove the conditions entirely, bypassing almost all chance you may have of getting it, regardless of you predisposition to develop it.
Click to expand...
And there's all them folks that get brain cancer from powerlines
 
I'm glad I got snipped, not because of the cleanliness issue, but because I think an uncircumised wang looks like a long turnip.
 
Sarcasmo said:
I'm glad I got snipped, not because of the cleanliness issue, but because I think an uncircumised wang looks like a long turnip.
Click to expand...
That and there is the part where you would have an even LESS chance of getting laid.
 
theacoustician said:
The point is here, with circumcision, you remove the conditions entirely, bypassing almost all chance you may have of getting it, regardless of you predisposition to develop it.
Click to expand...

i can see the logic here, but it's dumb logic. circumcised men are still going to have to wash their wang... so it makes no difference if you wash every day.

and i can't believe anyone wants their wang chopped up :eek: that's why parents get in early when the poor fella is a baby :dont:
 
distortedmind said:
i can see the logic here, but it's dumb logic. circumcised men are still going to have to wash their wang... so it makes no difference if you wash every day.

and i can't believe anyone wants their wang chopped up :eek: that's why parents get in early when the poor fella is a baby :dont:
Click to expand...


Just accept it, Beavis.
 
JJ Lady said:
Forget getting laid. You know that those guys NEVER get BJs...
Click to expand...


Eww... nothing like pulling it back and finding a smegma surprise before you put it in your mouth. :barf: :barf:

I wonder if there is a market in the porn industry for this. Chick slurps off Smegma vol. 4
 
April23 said:
Eww... nothing like pulling it back and finding a smegma surprise before you put it in your mouth. :barf: :barf:

I wonder if there is a market in the porn industry for this. Chick slurps off Smegma vol. 4
Click to expand...

Dear God.... :barf:
 
Weed is mine...then again I haven't tried anything besides that and alcohol, but I still stand by my choice :o
 
distortedmind said:
i can see the logic here, but it's dumb logic. circumcised men are still going to have to wash their wang... so it makes no difference if you wash every day.

and i can't believe anyone wants their wang chopped up :eek: that's why parents get in early when the poor fella is a baby :dont:
Click to expand...
Its easy. HPV is the suspected culprit of cervical cancer and penile cancer. It is theorized that the smegma that occurs in your genital area creates a more favorable condition to for HPV to grow. How is it stupid when the statistical evidence is overwhelming?
 
theacoustician said:
Its easy. HPV is the suspected culprit of cervical cancer and penile cancer. It is theorized that the smegma that occurs in your genital area creates a more favorable condition to for HPV to grow. How is it stupid when the statistical evidence is overwhelming?
Click to expand...

it's stupid because it's a drastic measure when washing your cock works just as well. or do circumcised men not wash :confused: :drool:

i also know hpv is a very common group of viruses, i think the figure is around 3 our of 4 americans are infected during their lifetime. it seems most people carry the a strain of the virus at some time or another, circumcised or not. i accept that hpv infection is a prerequisite for cervical cancer, but it would be a very stupid women who assumes because her partner is circumcised and less likely to contract hpv she no longer needs pap smears. heck even if she's had the hpv vaccination she still needs a pap test... my point is being circumcised makes no difference here either



http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/cancer/menczer1/
Although the dispute over the association of circumcision and cervical cancer in various populations is still ongoing [23,24], there seems to be no hard evidence that circumcision prevents its occurrence in Jewish women, and it is no longer considered to play a protective role.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back