Posted on 12/12/2002 8:13:17 AM PST by Sangamon Kid
Oral sex linked to cancer of the mouth
By Sarah-Kate Templeton
New research to be published next year will provide powerful evidence that oral sex can cause mouth cancer.
Doctors who first suggested a form of mouth cancer could be linked to the same sexually transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer have found more data to back their controversial theory. Two years ago, the group from Johns Hopkins University in the US published a paper suggesting the human papilloma virus (HPV), the cause of most cervical cancer, can also cause mouth cancer.
A new study, to be published in six months' time, will confirm this research, according to Dr Maura Gillison, an oncologist and member of the Johns Hopkins group. The news comes as Scottish mouth cancer experts are calling for research to be done here into the suspected link with oral sex.
David Soutar, president of the British Association of Head and Neck Oncologists, said: 'We were involved in a pilot study which suggested that this is certainly something that we should look into.
'It should be investigated further, particularly in people who don't have any of the risk factors such as smoking and drinking.
'One of the things that has interested me over the past 15 years is the increase in the number of women with oral cancer. It used to be five men to one woman but it is now about two men to one woman. What we do not know is whether this is all down to smoking.
'When I see the increase in women with oral cancer I think oral sex has to be one of the causes. We also have to find out why the age group suffering from oral cancer is becoming younger. Ideally, we would want to look at the under-45s.'
Mr Soutar, a consultant plastic surgeon at Canniesburn Hospital and the Nuffield Hospital, both in Glasgow, says it is difficult to find people willing to discuss their sexual behaviour, but says we have to consider the possibility sexually transmitted viruses are one of the causes.
Finding out whether HPV is a cause of mouth cancer is all the more pressing now that new treatments are being developed to fight cervical cancer. A vaccine to stop cervical cancer could become available within five years and doctors believe a similar vaccine could protect against some oral cancers.
The vaccine works by boosting the immune system against strains of HPV. The vaccine against cervical cancer will be targeted at girls of about 12 or 13, before they become sexually active and vulnerable to HPV.
But Soutar warns that, unlike cervical cancer where most forms of the disease are caused by HPV, the sexually transmitted virus could only be responsible for less than 20% of mouth cancer cases. He said targeting a vaccine would therefore be more difficult.
'If we could identify the sub-group this would be of benefit. We know smoking and drinking is probably the cause in 80% of cases so we couldn't use it in the same way as the vaccine against cervical cancer. This would only be a small proportion of those who have oral cancer.'
In the past decade in Scotland there has been an almost 50% increase in oral cancer among under-45s, and in the last 40 years a fourfold increase in younger patients suffering from it. Oral cancer affects 3000 people in the UK each year and the problem is worse north of the border.
www.omfsaboutface.co.uk/ aware.htm
www.cancerresearchuk.org
I'd bet it was a rabid feminist that jumped to this conclusion.
Yes, many Catholics believe this. While I understand their position and believe in the sentiment it means to inspire (e.g. the extremely sacred quality of sex), I do not subscribe to it in every detail.
That's my take.
If the act itself was the sin, then we should all never eat fruit from a tree either. IMO.
So i should never have sex with a woman again just in case I'm carrying HPV? Is that what you're saying?
And if the virus does in fact cause cancer of the mouth then it will cause it in men who perform oral sex on women as well. The tissue of the mouth is not so different that one sex would have immunity.
Actually you can extrapolate from the texts that are there, in that if the wife is offended/feels cheated by it, you should not do it. If you are thinking of someone other than your wife you should not do it (it is lust). If it causes you to pull away from your wife emotionally you should not do it.
I'm married, so things like this are strictly between me and my lovely wife.
I've heard many women discuss the matter in a wide variety of settings. Those from more churched backgrounds tend to think there is something wrong with it or for that reason don't want to admit to it or as you say, some, from any background just don't like it. I remember these two girls at a bar were discussing it and one occassionally performed under duress for her boyfriend and the other one couldn't understand what the problem was as she liked it a lot. On the flip side most men just out of image projection amongst peers won't admit to not liking to perform for women even if they are sqeamish in practice.
As you stated in a marriage though selfishness is not a good thing and that covers any topic. Best to have a good understanding of someone's feelings and beliefs before a lifetime contract is finalized.
Yes and I have been wearing glasses since I was 15
I don't consider myself a strange woman, others may disagree. :)
I have seen one, an old woman who lost her entire lower jaw decades ago. Any good dentist today can catch a mouth cancer early, and women tend to see their dentists far more often than they see their gynecologists.
But you simply refuse to answer my question, don't you?
If neither the man nor the woman has HPV, they're not going to get mouth cancer from HPV. So what do they risk, except your disapproval?
And I'm sure there are untouched virgins out there who come down with mouth cancer for other reasons than an act they've never performed. HPV is not the only cause, and the risk of getting it seems extremely small for everyone except--oh, I don't know. Prostitutes and drugged up teenagers willing to put out for their entire school?
You remind me of several girlfriends of mine who gave up tampons because they were convinced they would get toxic shock syndrome unless they reverted to the feminine hygiene of the last century. No amount of telling them that men and boys and postmenopausal women also got toxic shock made any difference. They had it in their minds that tampons cause toxic shock and that was that as far as they were concerned.
Personally, I refuse to let baseless fears or infinitesimal risks dictate the course of my life. There's just nothing in that article that would frighten me.
It's too bad that the Bible is silent on the matter of oral sex. Intercourse is the only sexual act addressed directly. Sex, oral sex, manual stimulation, kissing, etc. are not bad in and of themselves. The context within which one takes part in these activities can be a problem. The Bible is clear that intercourse is left to married couples, any other act and you're going to have a hard time showing the "fornication" angle.
I guess an orgasim is only "ok" when it leads to conception within a marrige context - heaven forbid couple enjoy each other without having sex.
I am not anti sex or anti oral sex I am pro life...there is life beyond orgasims ..although some folks do not seem to think so
I always said, "how a man could have a desire for something that he has on his own body is beyond me". Maybe it's just another form of mental illness.
terrific...get a good dentist
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.