Posted on 09/19/2004 1:23:19 PM PDT by Laissez-faire capitalist
It seems that you are too eager to dismiss this work as "shoddy", without actually consulting the source of the information in its entirety.
To do this you would first need to consult "Sexual Behavior and Increased Anal Cancer. Immunological and Cell Body 75 1977, as provided within the thread. As well, the other information concerning AIDS rates within the homosexual community are well established. The Centers for Diseases Control and Prevention backs this up, thank you.
The clinical information is there. Follow the links!!!!
Yes, the information is there, despite your apparent desire to dismiss it.
If you needed the enlightenment, you're welcome.
1. Click on the source URL(which will direct you to Narth)
2. Then click on the line that says "Part 3"
All of the references are there.
No, there is no "shoddy work" on her part.
All of the science is verifiable and documented, thank you.
No, your level of dialogue need to be improved and enlightened, thank you.
Class dismissed.
ping
deadly lifestyle 'choice'
You're a pretentious moron, and probably a school teacher.
End of dialogue.
Oh, you mean the body is not designed for Homo sex? Whoda thunkit.
BTW, to aid you in your research, you will note that sperm will readily penetrate the cell nucleus of whatever they find.
As well, the authors of the study contained within Immunological and Cell Body 75, 1977, are Richard J. Albin and Rachel Stein-Werblowsky.
Busted.
Hmmmm.... you are capable of raising your level of dialogue, at least within the realm of using words such as "pretentious"...
Bravo!
To bad it has to come about in this fashion.
"You're a pretentious moron"
If that were true, which it isn't, that would be a blatant example of the pot calling the kettle black.
"...and probably a school teacher."
??? Whatever.
BTW, lay off the caffeine, I was just rattling you chain. Jeeeeezzzzzzz....
Of course, I did check part 3 at the link and found:
1) A long list of virus and/or bacteria induced diseases that are undoubtedly spread through homosexual sex, including AIDS.
2) J. R. Daling et.al, "Correlates of Homosexual Behavior and the Incidence of Anal Cancer," Journal of the American Medical Association 247, no.14, 9 April 1982, pp. 1988-90, the risk of anal cancer soars by 4,000 percent among those who engage in such intercourse. The article appears to be about the statistical occurance of anal cancer but not about the biochemistry involved. It's already been shown many times that cancers can be virus induced, see #1.
3) Information about Emotional/Mental Health Risks, physical abuse and church teachings.
However, I found no scientific evidence whatsoever about how a sperm cell merges with a normal human cell with its full array of chromosones. Again, the author seems to flippantly throw out pseudo-scientific terms and phrases with nothing to back up her assertions. What biochemistry research has been done to substantiate a human sperm cell merging with a full human cell? What are the enzymes or other markers that are present in female humans that are not present in males? Or is this person just thinking something like, "well, that's the way it is." Then the author talks about church teachings as if that had anything to do with biochemistry.
No doubt there are a lot of bad things associated with homosexual sex. Most everyone, even homosexuals, acknowledge that fact. But if someone is going to assert that male sperm cells merge with full human cells then I'd sure like to know how that happens as I have never heard of it happening. This assertion defies 8th grade biology.
The author states, "For instance...substances in seminal fluid...send out 'signals' that are only understood by the female body.". I wonder if she's saying this "signal" is undestood in the female rectum, but not in males. I'd be interested in knowing the occurence of anal cancer in women that regularly engage in anal sex. Would the study above show that females that engage in anal sex have a lower rate of rectal cancer? Why would that be? Because of some kind of "signal" receptors? I fail to see how that could be. On a moral level, what does that say about the morality of anal sex between men and women?
As you can see, the article is full of huge holes. Unfortunately, what starts out to be some kind of scientific article ends up being intermixed with religious morality which reduces this to the level of "creation science".
Sorry to bite your head off - I am particularly grumpy this AM.
I was merely drawing attention to the tautological nature of the headline.
BTW, AFAIK, God appointed no one as enforcer of natural law.
No gravity cops, no sex cops.
Concerning your 2), It is a well established fact that homosexuals men who are the passive party and engage in insertive anal-penile sexual contact are at an increased 4000% risk of getting anal cancer due to HPV Human Pap. Virus. and there is no known fool-proof and preventative method, as yet. Hence...don't engage in sodomy.
The human rectum was never intended for insertive sexual activities. The lining of the rectum is only one cell wall thick and science has shown that it is guaranteed to tear when sodomy is committed. Even if the active partner wears a condom, fecal matter will enter the body of the passive partner, thereby nearl guaranteeing them Hepatitis and a host of other pathogens entering their bloodstream.
That's the biochemistry involved.
In order to discover that sperm does indeed penetrate the cell wall of whatever somatic cells they encounter you will have to reference the Journal and read the pages given for yourself. It is all there, and indeed proves that when the sperm encounter any somatic cell within the passive homosexuals rectum, cancerous malignancies can, quite often, result.
As you can see there is never a reason for anyone to engage in receptive anal-penile homosexual/heterosexual activities.
Engaging in anal-penile activities is just plain stupid, and sadly, only a moron would even think of doing so.
So, consult the Journal, and you will find that sperm cells do indeed penetrate somatic cells. They don't merge with them(somatic cells as in a human rectum) as they would with a female egg cell.
Furthermore even a female who subjected herself to anal-penile activities would quite likely be putting herself at isk of cancerous malignincies developing. Furthermore, she would also place herself at risk of contacting numerous pathogens when then lining of her rectum was ruptured when she engaging in thses activities.
Sodomy...it should never, ever be engaged in. Truly,moral and religious codes which state that sodomy shouldn't be engaged in are truly corrcet in their teachings.
You say that the author flippantly throws out psuedo-scientific terms and doesn't back them up?
She gave the name of the journal the year, the volume, and the pages....So that one could reference it for themself
That is backing up what she has written with fact, since she summarized what was found therein.
Why you are attempting to try and discredit her, despite her listing of the journal,the pages,the volume, and th year of its release only you know why, but others can reason for themselves why.
bump
In general, I don't have a problem with anything you say except the "fusing" of sperm cells with normal, healthy non-egg cells. There are no links at the article to substantiating science except for the cited reference to some publication. A quick google search yields nothing of science on this issue. I remain unconvinced that sperm cells will merge with non-egg cells. The credibility of the article is destroyed on this point.
At the website of BMJ, Biomedical Journal, BMJ Publishing Group Ltd of the BMA, assisted by the STANFORD UNIVERSITY HIGHWIRE PRESS, it has this to say, under:
Intercourse and Fidelity -- A Connection 14 April 2004
Anal intercourse and HIV/AIDS
http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache:VQUkpGBuTA0J:BMJ.bmjjournals.com/cgi/eletters/328/7444/891+&hl=en
"Ablin and Stein-WerBlowsky have provided a venue of research that validates another Shelton et al concern for HIV prevention regarding the practice of anal intercourse. They [10] have observed that "spermatozoa are capable of penetrating somatic cells and fusing with their nuclei," and caution that "nuclear fusion, other than in normal fertilization, can result in malignant transforamation in the invaded tissue." They conclude that male seminal plasma "may directly and/or indirectly contribute to an immunopermissive environment favorable for the perpetuation of spermatozoa (or otherwise) induced tumors."
All of this information contaioned on this web page is fully referenced at the bottom, yet again, thank you.
Your credibility on this matter, not this article, is destroyed on this point, Dagman. Thank you for assisting in that.
Good day.
I thought that you, along with scripter, it'sourtimenow, and little jeremiah might want to see this(post #295).
Thanks for the article of the Gov. in California.
He's showing his liberal stripes.....
I seem to remember reading somewhere that four of the Village People were actually straight.
Is nothing sacred?
However I still don't buy the concept that just because these guys say that sperm can merge with healthy cells that it must be true.
As the original article points out, anal sex transmits a host of virus and bacteria to a place they don't belong. To wit, a different study (http://www.innovations-report.com/html/reports/medicine_health/report-30966.html) says in part... "The study tested for the presence of human papillomavirus, or HPV – a well-known sexually transmitted viral marker of anal cancer – in both blood and tumor tissue. It also assessed the impact of various lifestyle factors associated with the disease, such as smoking, sexual orientation, number of sexual partners and history of anal intercourse.
"We found that infection with HPV is necessary in most if not all cases of anal cancer, as close to 90 percent of the tumors studied were positive for the virus," said Daling, a pioneer in studying the link between HPV and anogenital-cancer risk.
Overall, regardless of the patient’s sexual orientation or gender, the researchers found that 88 percent of the tumors were positive for HPV DNA. Of these, 73 percent tested positive for a strain called HPV-16, and 7 percent contained a strain called HPV-18. Both strains of HPV are implicated in cervical-cancer development as well. The researchers also found significantly higher amounts of circulating HPV antibodies in the blood of anal-cancer patients as compared to healthy controls. Approximately 40 percent of the women and 50 percent of the men with anal cancer tested positive for HPV antibodies as compared to about 15 percent of the men and women in the control group."
This would appear to contradict the the author that inspired this thread's assertion that there are signals that the female body understands that the male body does not, and that those signals somehow protect the female while the male is endangered. Both sexes are in danger of being infected with the HPV virus which appears to cause "most, if not all" anal cancer. So much for the "signals".
More can be found at:
http://www.fhcrc.org/pubs/center_news/2004/jul15/sart2.html
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9358129&dopt=Abstract
http://webcenter.health.webmd.netscape.com/content/article/90/100756.htm
So it would appear that rather than through the alchemy of sperm merging with healthy cells, the real cause of anal cancer in both men and women that engage in anal sex is from virus that are transmitted during the act. Both sexes are obviously at risk of anal cancer if they participate in anal sex. Again, the article that started this thread goes down in flames.
It appears your contention is centered on the following statements:
This fusing is what often results in the development of cancerous malignancies.Is it possible the cause of anal cancer in both men and women that engage in anal sex is from virus that are transmitted during the act and the above statements are not mutually exclusive?and
They conclude that male seminal plasma "may directly and/or indirectly contribute to an immunopermissive environment favorable for the perpetuation of spermatozoa (or otherwise) induced tumors."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.