Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: where's_the_Outrage?

“In 2015, after taking a male pregnancy test ...”

I’m confused. Does this mean there was such a product as a “male pregnancy test” in 2015, or does it mean that the man used a standard pregnancy test, designed to detect pregnancy in women?

Regardless, it’s an interesting endocrinological phenomenon that should be included in the analysis of men’s urine samples as part of their regular physicals.


5 posted on 05/30/2022 5:03:19 AM PDT by Tax-chick (Nature, art, silence, simplicity, peace. And fungi.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Tax-chick

I would venture to say the only difference in the process would be the excellent urine aiming capacity a man has over the woman in hitting the target.


7 posted on 05/30/2022 5:18:47 AM PDT by moovova
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Tax-chick

“Does this mean there was such a product as a “male pregnancy test” in 2015,”

From the article: “A Reddit user, CappnPoopdeck, posted a “rage comic” that depicted a man who, as a joke, took an unused pregnancy test left behind by his ex-girlfriend. Weirdly, the test came back positive.”

So it was a standard female preg test.


18 posted on 05/30/2022 6:27:18 AM PDT by where's_the_Outrage? (Drain the Swamp. Build the Wall.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson