Semen 'makes women happy'

[Wayne_Rooney]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2067223.stm

Semen 'makes women happy'

Women exposed to their partner's semen during sex may find themselves feeling happier than those who use a condom, say scientists.
Scientists in the US believe the mood-altering hormones in semen absorbed through the vagina help to boost women's mood.

Semen contains a range of hormones, including testosterone and oestrogen, both of which have been shown to improve mood.

We are not advocating that people abstain from using condoms

Gordon Gallup
However, they warned that their findings should not be used to encourage people to practise unsafe sex.

Gordon Gallup and colleagues at the State University of New York divided 293 female students into groups on the basis of how often their partners wore condoms.

Mood tests

They used standard psychological tests to assess how happy they were and their overall mood.

They found that women whose partners never used condoms were happiest. They were followed by women whose partners sometimes used condoms.

Women whose partners always used or usually used condoms were less happy.

The study, details of which are published in New Scientist magazine, also found that a lack of sexual intercourse made some women depressed.

Women whose partners never or sometimes used condoms became more depressed the longer they went without sex.

However, there was no similar pattern for those women whose partners usually or always used condoms.

The scientists also found that depression and suicide attempts were more common among those women whose partners used condoms regularly.

Further evidence

Mr Gallup told the magazine that an extended study on more than 700 women has backed up these findings.

He added that other factors such as how often the women had sex, the strength of their relationships, their personalities or the use of oral contraceptives did not affect the overall conclusions.

Mr Gallup said the findings may also apply to women who engage in unprotected oral sex and people who engage in anal sex. But he said further research was needed in these areas.

But Mr Gallup, whose study will be published in the journal Archives of Sexual Behaviour, urged couples to continue to practise safe sex.

"I want to make it clear that we are not advocating that people abstain from using condoms," he said.

"Clearly an unwanted pregnancy or a sexually transmitted disease would more than offset any advantageous psychological effects of semen."

[why must i constantly come here?]

[suzanne]

did they even take into account that most of these women who don't use condoms are either:

1. trying to get pregnant

or

2. use birth control

the latter of which is known to alter mood

[anonnymouse]

This irrrational fear of aids is ridiculous. Just how many straight or even gay people do you know who are HIV positive or have AIDS? Except in third world countries that have a boatload of other contributory public health issues, AIDS is just not the massive killer that its portrayed to be. More people die from ciggies and alcohol abuse. Not to mention congenital proplems like heart disease that get far less public funding for research than AIDS. You have all been hoodwinked .

[CrushingBore]

> This irrrational fear of aids is ridiculous. Just how many straight or
> even gay people do you know who are HIV positive or have AIDS? Except in
> third world countries that have a boatload of other contributory public
> health issues, AIDS is just not the massive killer that its portrayed to
> be. More people die from ciggies and alcohol abuse. Not to mention
> congenital proplems like heart disease that get far less public funding
> for research than AIDS. You have all been hoodwinked .

You don't get away with statements like that by hiding them behind such a measured-sounding title! AIDS is no longer a massive killer in the western world only because of the introduction of unbelievably expensive anti-retroviral drugs, which are not a cure, but in themselves a life-consuming alternative to the death sentence that AIDS was a few years ago.

And as to the merits of your little survey; "how many AIDS patients do you know?", well, I'm sure we should cease funding rehabilitation schemes for sex offenders, because I don't personally know any paedophiles.

And what the $#@$ are you talking about with these "contributory public health issues" in third world countries - the only contributory public health issue of consequence is the non-usage of contraceptives. Period.

And you seem to imply that any "western" money which might benefit those dying in plaugue-like proportions in "third world" countries would not be money well spent. Are you a racist, elitist, or too thick to see the natural extension of your own arguments?

As for your assertions about AIDS research getting more public funds than heart disease, etc. well, bollocks! I have no idea where you're refering to, but it's not even close to being true for any countries I'm aware of.

There are already indications that the AIDS virus is finding its way around the latest anti-retroviral treatments, and if the kind of attitudes you're propounding here become prevalent we will find ourselves in as much trouble as these "third world" countries are now. But, speaking as a citizen of the world, I'd sooner see a true cure found to benefit the massive numbers dying of AIDS in impoverished countries than those smaller numbers dying of lifestyle-related diseases in the first world. However, cultural relativism is a very slippery slope and of course any loss of life is a tragedy. Meat is murder, no matter which continent it comes from.

And you are a wholesale moron and a bigot to boot (just what does that "even" mean when you refer to "gay people"?). So, bad luck, you have turned this into a topic. Sit on it and twist.

[Some Totally Random Moz Fan]

This irrrational fear of aids is ridiculous.
- no it is not

Just how many straight or even gay people do you know who are HIV positive or have AIDS?

- I have known 5 people personally who have died of complications from AIDS. Nobody I know has died from cigarette or alcohol abuse.

[big question????]

How many of those 5 were straight or serially monogamous?

[Some Totally Random Moz Fan]

> How many of those 5 were straight or serially monogamous?
- they were all homosexual males... I have no idea if they were monogamous... but it doesn't really matter though, does ot? Without AIDS they would still be alive, regardless of if they were with one person or many.

[CrushingBore]

> How many of those 5 were straight or serially monogamous?

What the hell are you implying?
That queers or sexually active people deserve to die?

Personally I reserve that privelege exclusively for bigots, or those who would wish it on others.

[big question???]

> What the hell are you implying?
> That queers or sexually active people deserve to die?

> Personally I reserve that privelege exclusively for bigots, or those who
> would wish it on others.

I wasn't implying anything. I made a statement. To express an OPINION ,based on facts, is not bigotry. And to acuse me someone of such is plain ignorance.

Aids is a disease,in the western world, that's propogation is based on extreme sexual promiscuity and drug abuse. Someone that went through life with the standard dozen or so,hopefully needle-free, sexual partners has very little to worry about.
No, Gay people don't deserve to die.

But statistics (facts) bear out most Gay men have many,many times the amount of sexual encounters of either Lesbians or straight,or semi-straight, people.and as such are far more exposed to HIV. Sadly,Like ciggies,drugs and alcohol abuse, it is a CHOICE that influences ones health and well being.

[Caleb's Bloody Bride]

[Mr. Wanky]

[Notastitchtowear]

> This irrrational fear of aids is ridiculous. Just how many straight or
> even gay people do you know who are HIV positive or have AIDS? Except in
> third world countries that have a boatload of other contributory public
> health issues, AIDS is just not the massive killer that its portrayed to
> be. More people die from ciggies and alcohol abuse. Not to mention
> congenital proplems like heart disease that get far less public funding
> for research than AIDS. You have all been hoodwinked .

I actually know/knew a good amount of people with HIV and AIDS, I work in theater and dance in San Francisco. Trust me, AIDS, unfortunatley is alive and well, especially here. Why? Because some of those who have died shared your attitude, AIDS won't happen to me...it's all a lie...there are drugs that can help me live longer, etc. etc. So you keep believing it doesn't really exist and you'll be next. Look at all the diseases that we have to keep getting immunizations for, mumps, polio, and such. We think they go away and the next thing you know someone turns up with the disease.
You don't deal well with reality do you?

[big question????]

Well, you obviously did not read what wrote so I see no need to say anything more.

[Caleb's Bloody Bride]

Cute!! :0P

[Mindy]

"He added that other factors such as how often the women had sex, the strength of their relationships, their personalities or the use of oral contraceptives did not affect the overall conclusions."

let me get this straight, their personalities and the strength of their relationship did not affect the overall findings? so their personalities do not affect one's moods? the strength or weakness of one's relationship does neither augments nor diminishes one's happiness? am i reading this right? how the hell does that make any sense? could it be that these women are happier because they are stupid? i mean, ignorance is bliss, and if they are consistently having sex sans condoms, they might a) be really dumb or b) be with men who don't respect them (since they don't care enough about their health to wear a condom). i'm not saying all of them are stupid, but this study sure is.

[big question?????]

> "He added that other factors such as how often the women had sex, the
> strength of their relationships, their personalities or the use of oral
> contraceptives did not affect the overall conclusions."

> let me get this straight, their personalities and the strength of their
> relationship did not affect the overall findings? so their personalities
> do not affect one's moods? the strength or weakness of one's relationship
> does neither augments nor diminishes one's happiness? am i reading this
> right? how the hell does that make any sense? could it be that these women
> are happier because they are stupid? i mean, ignorance is bliss, and if
> they are consistently having sex sans condoms, they might a) be really
> dumb or b) be with men who don't respect them (since they don't care
> enough about their health to wear a condom). i'm not saying all of them
> are stupid, but this study sure is.

Mindy you obvious have no powers of deductive reasoning. "Did not affect" means just that. The"other factors" did not affect the results of the study because they simply did not. Fundamentally proving the results it as factual. We are animals don't forget and as such have a lot of our behaviors hard-wired from our days in the cave. This study reveals what is just another facet of the complexities of human reproductive sexuality. It is completely logical that this transfer of hormones in this way would help to bond a family unit together. And this in turn would help propagate the species.

This is what science does. It explains things. Without apology.

Many people in monogamous relationships choose not to use condoms as contraception and based on trust don't need them for disease prevention.

[Mindy]

> Mindy you obvious have no powers of deductive reasoning. "Did not
> affect" means just that. The"other factors" did not affect
> the results of the study because they simply did not. Fundamentally
> proving the results it as factual. We are animals don't forget and as such
> have a lot of our behaviors hard-wired from our days in the cave. This
> study reveals what is just another facet of the complexities of human
> reproductive sexuality. It is completely logical that this transfer of
> hormones in this way would help to bond a family unit together. And this
> in turn would help propagate the species.

well i don't see how these other factors could have no effect. i mean, you can't really have a control group for such things, can you? a control personality group, etc. i'm not contesting the fact that it might be true that hormones in semen affect one's mood, but i do think that this is a stupid study and keep in mind that there are people stupid enough to misuse the information.

> This is what science does. It explains things. Without apology.

i don't have a problem with that in general, although in some cases, i don't see why anyone would care. in our quest to dissect the universe, we're losing a lot of mystery. and think about it, what are we really gaining?

> Many people in monogamous relationships choose not to use condoms as
> contraception and based on trust don't need them for disease prevention.

and obviously i know that. i think i made a comment about how there are exceptions. furthermore, i don't think it's wrong either. however, the study focused mainly on students. i'm sorry, but college students are not known for having really strong monogamous relationships built on trust. again, i know there are exceptions, before you get all pissy.

[PunchdrunkAVFC World Tours]

I cant believe the UK goverment seem to have totally forgotten about Aids.I for one and I'm sure most people my age (27 goin on 12) will remember the HIV adverts from around 1987-88 that really shite me up and made everyone aware of Aids.

I've never forgotten how scarey those adverts were.

> I actually know/knew a good amount of people with HIV and AIDS, I work in
> theater and dance in San Francisco. Trust me, AIDS, unfortunatley is alive
> and well, especially here. Why? Because some of those who have died shared
> your attitude, AIDS won't happen to me...it's all a lie...there are drugs
> that can help me live longer, etc. etc. So you keep believing it doesn't
> really exist and you'll be next. Look at all the diseases that we have to
> keep getting immunizations for, mumps, polio, and such. We think they go
> away and the next thing you know someone turns up with the disease.
> You don't deal well with reality do you?

[Notastitchtowear]

> I actually know/knew a good amount of people with HIV and AIDS, I work in
> theater and dance in San Francisco. Trust me, AIDS, unfortunatley is alive
> and well, especially here. Why? Because some of those who have died shared
> your attitude, AIDS won't happen to me...it's all a lie...there are drugs
> that can help me live longer, etc. etc. So you keep believing it doesn't
> really exist and you'll be next. Look at all the diseases that we have to
> keep getting immunizations for, mumps, polio, and such. We think they go
> away and the next thing you know someone turns up with the disease.
> You don't deal well with reality do you?

I read what I responded to,i.e the paragraph that was above my response and I think that was enough. I was afraid to read anymore of you ignorant drivel.

[Mindy]

we shouldn't be afraid, but we shouldn't be stupid either. i probably won't get hit by a bus, but that doesn't mean i should j-walk in front of one. i will probably never get struck by lightening, but it might not be such a bright idea to go out in a rainstorm wearing a cap made of tin foil. in other words, you'll probably never get aids, but you shouldn't put yourself in danger, but rather do everything in your power to keep yourself and your sexual partner(s) safe. it's common sense.