Made with Love
Cupid Escorts
Toronto Passions

Sexual Health - ASK AN EXPERT! -- Extended till next week

Jump to Latest
Jaymasters said:
I'm not for or against Gardasil, but I am skeptical. I have a question, I literally found hundreds of cases of negative results and you begin to wonder, who really is "twisting the facts for their own agendas?" Who has more to lose? Big pharma who makes billions for creating a vaccine that is now believed to be mandatory by modern medicine? Or the people that are getting sick? Not sure what those poor girls would gain by lying about their experiences
Click to expand...

Who are you?.
 
Jaymasters said:
Just someone who wants to help reduce damage. As mentioned before I can take you to the water, but I can't make you drink it. Think before you take the pill, do your own research

Here are some other references regarding Gardasil from Dr. Mercola

Don't Give This to Your Daughter - Despite What Your Doctor Says
HPV Vaccine Gardasil Increases Risk of HPV Infection
Does Gardasil Actually Increase Your Risk of Cervical Cancer?
Click to expand...

Once again I point out all these posts are pure bullshit...there's not a shred of scientific or medical clinical trials to back up most of what the poster is pushing. I (and all doctors) run into these people with their own agendas to push (and nothing to back them up) all the time. It's a total waste of time arguing with them because they refuse to listen, think, or consider those little things called 'facts". Instead, they make up their own "facts" without evidence.

Scientific method is clear and irrefutable: while I'm the first to agree some doctors overprescribe, they do a lot less damage than a lot of these edge-case fanatics.

Jaymasters...instead of links to sites that have their own agendas to push, can you link to ONE peer-reviewed journal to back up what you claim?
 
oldguyzer said:
Once again I point out all these posts are pure bullshit...there's not a shred of scientific or medical clinical trials to back up most of what the poster is pushing. I (and all doctors) run into these people with their own agendas to push (and nothing to back them up) all the time. It's a total waste of time arguing with them because they refuse to listen, think, or consider those little things called 'facts". Instead, they make up their own "facts" without evidence.

Scientific method is clear and irrefutable: while I'm the first to agree some doctors overprescribe, they do a lot less damage than a lot of these edge-case fanatics.

Jaymasters...instead of links to sites that have their own agendas to push, can you link to ONE peer-reviewed journal to back up what you claim?
Click to expand...

I didn't want to get into some debate about this, but I will not let people believe this vaccine is completely safe.
oldguyzer, I understand you have a strong belief with the efficiency of Gardasil, but I would refrain from saying any and all information for the warning of it's use to be bullshit. Are you seriously 100% sure that injecting this vaccine is unlikely to cause serious side effect for some? You did mention that not all drugs are without side effects, so I'm assuming no.

It's not even hard to understand why it causes so many problems. It is known that Gardasil contains genetically engineered virus-like protein particles as well as aluminum, which can affect immune function. You seem to be knowledgeable with bodily functions, do you know what happens when you inject yourself with aluminum?

Here is an example of what happens, not bullshit, no fake articles, plain facts. It happened:
A MELBOURNE woman who suffered an auto-immune and neurological attack after being injected with the cervical cancer drug Gardasil is leading a class action against its manufacturer.
[h=1]Gardasil in court: drug's maker sued[/h]
Humans see what they want to see or hear, and as I mentioned prior, it is impossible to change your views on something you believe so strongly (like changing someone's religion), which is why I don't do it. My goal is not to change your beliefs, but to make sure people are aware of possible side effects of a toxic vaccine.

There are tonnes of peer reviewed articles and research. A lot of those links have references at the bottom if you want to indulge.
Before I get into that, let me inform you why you wouldn't see as many peer reviewed articles on the other side. Because they are being deleted:
Merck Insider Caught Deleting Peer-Reviewed Study Linking “Behavioral Abnormalities” To Gardasil | Health Nut News

Why? Because they are fighting for a multi-million dollar industry (directly or indirectly).


Dr. Lee recently filed an open-letter of complaint to the Director-General of the WHO, Dr. Margaret Chan, stating:
“I have come into possession of documentation which leads me to believe multiple individuals and organizations deliberately set out to mislead Japanese authorities regarding the safety of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines, Gardasil® and Cervarix®”
​
It is interesting to note that both Dr. Lee’s research and the authors of the rejected Gardasil HPV study both cite aluminum adjuvants in the HPV vaccines as major contributors to the observed serious adverse reactions.

The records include Merck’s patent and drug information submitted to the FDA, transcripts and briefing material from approval meetings, and reports documenting health, safety, and efficacy test results, as well as Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) documents detailing 8,864 cases of adverse effects experienced by people after receiving the Gardasil vaccine. VAERS reports show that at least eighteen people have died after receiving Gardasil.1 Many health officials believe that adverse reactions to medications are widely underreported, therefore the actual number of adverse events occurring after vaccination with Gardasil is likely to be higher
https://www.judicialwatch.org/documents/2008/JWReportFDAhpvVaccineRecords.pdf

We report five patients who presented with multifocal or atypical demyelinating syndromes within 21 days of immunization with the quadrivalent human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccine, Gardasil.
CNS demyelination and quadrivalent HPV vaccination. - PubMed - NCBI



oldguyzer, your beliefs are so strong that you cannot even fathom the opposite side's existence. This is very common, and is the main reason why I don't even try most of the time. For example, if I were to tell you that drinking milk is harmful, you wouldn't believe it, you would think I'm retarded, and that all evidence that relates against it would be bullshit. You would be oblivious to the fact that there are scientific research stating that humans don't even have the enzymes to digest the milk of another animal. Here's some info on that if you are interested, of course you'd probably ask for peer-reviewed articles and I can get them, but currently don't have time to do that.

DR. Haymen MD:
https://drhyman.com/blog/2010/06/24/dairy-6-reasons-you-should-avoid-it-at-all-costs-2/
Dairy is nature’s perfect food — but only if you’re a calf. If that sounds shocking to you, it’s because very few people are willing to tell the truth about dairy.
In fact, criticizing milk in America is like taking on motherhood, apple pie, or baseball.

According to Dr. Willett, who has done many studies and reviewed the research on this topic, there are many reasons to pass up milk:

  • Milk doesn’t reduce fractures. According to the Nurses’ Health Study dairy may increase risk of fractures by 50 percent
  • Research shows that higher intakes of both calcium and dairy products may increase a man’s risk of prostate cancer by 30 to 50 percent.
  • About 75 percent of the world’s population is genetically unable to properly digest milk and other dairy products — a problem called lactose intolerance.
 
My beliefs are not "strong". I am a scientist and doctor. I believe in letting evidence and theory rule, and if they overturn long-held opinions, great! That's the scientific method, something I take very seriously.

But you're quoting a very, very limited number of sources, not peer reviewed in scientific or medical journals, and hence not subjected to the same scrutiny as legitimate research. That has to be stacked against the clinical studies by independents, not big Pharma.

Do I believe big Pharma maniuplates for profit? Absolutely! I have personal proof of that in my own career. But that's another story.
 
How likely is it to get pharyngeal gonorrhea by cunnilingus for the performer?
 
cyber said:
How likely is it to get pharyngeal gonorrhea by cunnilingus for the performer?
Click to expand...

Hard to give you a specific number, but I've seen a typical infection rate quoted of 2%. So, for every 50 people done, 1 lucky person gets it. Odds go up with repeate performances, of course.
 
oldguyzer said:
Hard to give you a specific number, but I've seen a typical infection rate quoted of 2%. So, for every 50 people done, 1 lucky person gets it. Odds go up with repeate performances, of course.
Click to expand...

That means, mathematically, to get pharyngeal gonorrhea, you'd have to go down on a woman, who has gonorrhea, 50 times. Is that right?
 
From a statistically perspective, no that's not how it would work. Everytime it would be 1/50 (2%) and that wouldn't change from the the first to the fiftith or beyond.

A simpler example to consider is coin flip. The possible results are heads or tails, so 50-50 odds. If first time you flip it and it lands heads, the next is not automatically tails. Every time you flip the odds will be 50-50.

Going back to the 1/50 imagine that there is a bag with 49 white golf balls and 1 green one. Every time you go down on a woman you reach into the bag and pull out a ball. If its white you're okay; if it's the green than you get infected. Afterwards puts the ball back into the bag.

You could reach into the bag 100 times and never pull the green ball; or you could get it on the first attempt.

Sorry if I over explained. Enough math for today. :)
 
What A Wookie said:
From a statistically perspective, no that's not how it would work. Everytime it would be 1/50 (2%) and that wouldn't change from the the first to the fiftith or beyond.

A simpler example to consider is coin flip. The possible results are heads or tails, so 50-50 odds. If first time you flip it and it lands heads, the next is not automatically tails. Every time you flip the odds will be 50-50.

Going back to the 1/50 imagine that there is a bag with 49 white golf balls and 1 green one. Every time you go down on a woman you reach into the bag and pull out a ball. If its white you're okay; if it's the green than you get infected. Afterwards puts the ball back into the bag.

You could reach into the bag 100 times and never pull the green ball; or you could get it on the first attempt.

Sorry if I over explained. Enough math for today. :)
Click to expand...


My emphasis was on the fact that the 2% chance applies only if the recipient already has gonorrhea not for the general pop (which includes people with and without).
 
I understand and that's the math. In the example you wrote, oral on someone 50 times doesn't mean you will get gonorrhea. However everytime you do so you're exposed to the 2% risk.
 
cyber said:
How likely is it to get pharyngeal gonorrhea by cunnilingus for the performer?
Click to expand...
She already answered this and it is available on the transcript and over audio. Verdict: theoretically possible but very rare. STI transmission from oral sex barring HSV(herpes) has a lot to do with the penis touching the soft, back palate and throat (essentially the pharyngeal area), and in that case the risk is for the giver more than the recipient.
 
Jaymasters said:
Good info, only thing I would warn against is the use of Gardasil. Not her fault for recommending it as it is a normal thing for clinics to do, but I'd do a lot more research before getting it.[...]
Click to expand...
This isn't the place for debating Gardasil. Hasslefree clinic and leading HPV researchers advise for it. This is a thread for questions about sexual health as they relate to paid companionship.

She answered the questions and spoke to HPV issues for over ten minutes, and both the audio and transcript are available in complete for everyone to hear.

Let's keep this clean, direct and concise so we can disseminate information.
 
FINALLY got a next Q&A scheduled; the director was ill.

Wednesday, May 31st at 1pm.

Get your questions in!

We'll be talking about bacterial infections: chlamydia, gonorrhea and syphilis, and answer the questions we didn't get into last time around.

Again, the entire transcript and audio recording are available online from last time and I'll do the same for this next meeting.
 
Rebecca Richardson said:
FINALLY got a next Q&A scheduled; the director was ill.

Wednesday, May 31st at 1pm.

Get your questions in!

We'll be talking about bacterial infections: chlamydia, gonorrhea and syphilis, and answer the questions we didn't get into last time around.

Again, the entire transcript and audio recording are available online from last time and I'll do the same for this next meeting.
Click to expand...

I can't find your link Madam Rebecca.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
Another take on sexual Harassment.....
2
Replies
27
Views
3K
catherine st.claire
C
T
IN-Call Alexandria of DreamMakers, the Super-Tight, Genuine Girlfriend Experience
2
Replies
21
Views
2K
thetank
T

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom