Posted on 02/20/2020 12:20:23 PM PST by fwdude
A history of 10 or more lifetime sexual partners is linked to a heightened risk of being diagnosed with cancer, reveals research published online in the journal BMJ Sexual & Reproductive Health.
And among women, a higher number of sexual partners is also linked to heightened odds of reporting a limiting long term condition, the findings indicate.
Few studies have looked at the potential impact of the number of sexual partners on wider health outcomes.
To try and plug this knowledge gap, the researchers drew on information gathered for the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA), a nationally representative tracking study of older adults (50+) living in England.
In 2012-13, participants were asked how many sexual partners they had had. Complete data were provided by 5722 of the 7079 people who responded to this question: 2537 men and 3185 women. Responses were categorised as 0-1; 2-4; 5-9; and 10 or more sexual partners.
Participants were also asked to rate their own health and report any long standing condition or infirmity which impinged on routine activity in any way.
Other relevant information obtained included: age; ethnicity; marital status; household income other than a pension; lifestyle (smoking, drinking, physical activity); and presence of depressive symptoms.
The average age of participants was 64, and almost three out of four were married. Some 28.5% of men said they had had 0-1 sexual partners to date; 29% said they had had 2-4; one in five (20%) reported 5-9; while 22% reported 10 or more.
The equivalent figures for women were: just under 41%; 35.5%; just under 16%; and just under 8%.
In both sexes, a higher number of sexual partners was associated with younger age, single status, and being in the highest or lowest brackets of household wealth.
Those who reported a higher tally of sexual partners were also more likely to smoke, drink frequently, and do more vigorous physical activity on a weekly basis.
When all the data were analysed, a statistically significant association emerged between the number of lifetime sexual partners and risk of a cancer diagnosis among both sexes.
Compared with women who reported 0-1 sexual partners, those who said they had had 10 or more, were 91% more likely to have been diagnosed with cancer.
Among the men, those who reported 2-4 lifetime sexual partners were 57% more likely to have been diagnosed with cancer than were those who reported 0-1. And those who reported 10 or more, were 69% more likely to have been diagnosed with the disease.
While the number of sexual partners was not associated with reported long standing conditions among the men, it was among the women.
Women who reported 5-9 or 10+ lifetime sexual partners were 64% more likely to have a limiting chronic condition than those who said they had had 0-1.
This is an observational study, and as such, can't establish cause. Nevertheless, the findings chime with those of previous studies, implicating sexually transmitted infections in the development of several types of cancer and hepatitis, suggest the researchers.
They didn't obtain information on the specific types of cancer participants reported, but speculate: "...the heightened risk of cancer might be driven by those types known to be associated with [sexually transmitted infections]."
And they suggest that enquiring about the number of sexual partners might complement existing cancer screening programmes by helping to identify those at risk, if further research can establish a causal association between the number of sexual partners and subsequent ill health.
But an explanation for the gender difference in long term condition risk remains "elusive," they write, especially given that men tend to have more lifetime sexual partners than women, while women are more likely than men to see a doctor when they feel ill, so potentially limiting the associated consequences for their long term health.
I’m screwed.
Back when I was studying health in seventh grade I read an article on the doctors who were treating people for various VD's in a free clinic. They were started with one young man, got a list of his partners and hunted them down to tell them they were probably infected, they then got a list of their partners and so on. Finally ended with the original young man who was now reinfected but they did not get to him in time.
Talk about being scared straight!
No, it’s natural for men to screw around. Because it’s easy.
Much easier to stick an external organ in and out without problems or discomfort, AND not have the imposition of pregnancy disrupt things, or menses, or just plain the infections caused internally by the external organ.
How’s Wilt Chamberlain doing?
Yeah, I was into midgets for a while. Does each of them count as 1?
Those who have more sex partners are also more likely to live unhealthy lifestyles as the article noted. Correlation is not causation.
LOL!
Yeah, but what a way to go!
Is there a difference between having cancer and being diagnosed with cancer?
“It always makes me very angry when correlation is confused with causation.”
You don’t use seat belts? You habitually drive over 70 mph?
Just those two correlates result in higher death rates.
My ex-wife is a midget. I was nuts over her.
Rim shot..... If you’re lucky...
Is the increased cancer risk due to stress or viruses?
Are you implying that, therefore, I am having sex with myself? What the....
I dated a midget. On our first date she pulled out a joint and asked, “Do you want to get medium?”
They mentioned that the upper and lower income tended to be higher in # of pelts collected. They also reported among those with higher # of notches on the belt (or lipstick case) were “more likely” to smoke and drink. A lot of drinking ties in with cancer too, so there’s that.
Did they eat any carrots while growing up?
What a completely worthless study.
= = =
Aren’t you chuckling a little at the comments?
If this was true then queers would the most cancer ridden demographic in the world.
= = =
Maybe HIV gets them first.
Smoking causes cancer. We know that.
Now we learn being a Ho does too?
= = =
What did Mae West say about smoking after sex?
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.