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.
Of all the problems with this study, the basic problem is self-report.
Self-report is one of the worst dependent measures you can use even with relatively innocuous questions. As the topic becomes more sensitive, more error is introduced. For example, ‘how tall are you’ and ‘how much do you weigh’ will probably be less accurate than ‘what is your address.’ Teen age boys tend to report taller heights and adult women report lower weight.
Answers to questions about sexual behavior are probably the least accurate, although the order of the categories is probably indicative of relative frequently.
Sloppy, badly written study.
= = =
Totally agree. For all of your reasons.
Wouldn’t a lifetime sexual partner only be one?
Best post of the day!
Heh. I used that joke just the other day here at FR.
That thread was later deleted. Not because of my joke mind you.
Because the OP was a moron. But that’s another story in and of itself.
I would imagine there’s also a heightened risk of developing a burning sensation including discoloration in the discharge while urinating.
Oy
Take her out to dinner occasionally, have a nice wine, compliment her, tell her how pretty she is, take her home, give her a whole body massage with quiet music she likes in a dimly lit room and while your cancer risk probably won't change, your chance of getting lucky will.
Trust me. Try it, you'll like it. ;-)
How is Bill Clinton still among the living?
Wilt Chamberlain unavailable for comment.
Go Navy!
“No, it’s natural for men to screw around. Because it’s easy.”
Women have as many if not more sex partners than men. Women are masters of discretion when it comes to sex. Women were having booty calls and friends with benefits back in my day even before those terms were used. Women are so discrete most of their girl friends do not know lest they later be called a slut.
I had some crazy drunk college years. So I’m somewhere between 8-15.
There is no way I could remember.
But I would think the “unprotected” kind would make a difference. And if that is the case, it is just 3.
I would speculate that while men have 2 rather small areas permitting viral, fungal, or bacterial entrance, women have 3, one of which has a much larger surface area than that of males, plus a rather constant state of moisture, in that larger area. (Not including oral entry, which, of course, would be of no difference in males, than females).
Then there’s Keith Richards, who no one can explain.
Sounds like Buttigeig and Little Mikey...
Ten sex partners give me cancer, they say?
Well f... erm.. I mean I’m soo scre... I mean oh no!
Unless they mean ten all at once? Not sure I ever done did that.
I know I did five or six in a single night a time or few, but that was overseas and that doesn’t count, right?
Besides, it wasn’t my fault. Foreign TV was terrible and there was nothing else to do.
So am I. When I was in the USAF I was at an ATC base that brought new busloads of women every three days from basic training to their AFSC school. These women had been kept under lock and key for 6-8 weeks at basic training. They had been screened for diseases and isolated from men. They arrived at the base and turned loose to go...where we PDS airmen were waiting to descend upon them like a hawk on a mouse. I'll just say after three years I can refer to sexual partners with an exponent. I settled down after I left the USAF.
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.