leaving children alone
[email protected]
In a message dated 5/4/03 4:47:26 AM Central Daylight Time,
[email protected] writes:
<<
It hasn't really been all that long in the scheme of things since almost
*all* women were having sexual intercourse before age 18. Most women
through the ages married soon after puberty, didn't they? >>
That's why I said it wasn't very conclusive! Young women were commonly
married at age 14 in days of yore.
I doubt that age has as much to do with it as they might try to make it sound.
And I didn't see any studies that were linking diet to cervical cancer
(although I'm sure they exist), which has GOT to play a significant role I
would think.
Ren
"They dined on mince, and slices of quince, Which they ate with a runcible
spoon;
And hand in hand, on the edge of the sand, they danced by the light of the
moon."
--The Owl and the Pussycat
Edward Lear
[email protected] writes:
<<
It hasn't really been all that long in the scheme of things since almost
*all* women were having sexual intercourse before age 18. Most women
through the ages married soon after puberty, didn't they? >>
That's why I said it wasn't very conclusive! Young women were commonly
married at age 14 in days of yore.
I doubt that age has as much to do with it as they might try to make it sound.
And I didn't see any studies that were linking diet to cervical cancer
(although I'm sure they exist), which has GOT to play a significant role I
would think.
Ren
"They dined on mince, and slices of quince, Which they ate with a runcible
spoon;
And hand in hand, on the edge of the sand, they danced by the light of the
moon."
--The Owl and the Pussycat
Edward Lear
nellebelle
Maybe it's the multiple partners that is the risk factor, rather than the age that intercourse begins?
Mary Ellen
----- snip----- It hasn't really been all that long in the scheme of things since almost
*all* women were having sexual intercourse before age 18. Most women
through the ages married soon after puberty, didn't they? >>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Mary Ellen
----- snip----- It hasn't really been all that long in the scheme of things since almost
*all* women were having sexual intercourse before age 18. Most women
through the ages married soon after puberty, didn't they? >>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
In a message dated 5/4/03 10:06:05 AM, nellebelle@... writes:
<< Maybe it's the multiple partners that is the risk factor, rather than the
age that intercourse begins? >>
Since nobody's insides can count, maybe "multiple partners" is more of an
odds thing than not. Like multiple lottery tickets might theoretically make
it easier to win.
But IF it comes off or from a guy in ANY way, why couldn't it come from one?
Sandra
<< Maybe it's the multiple partners that is the risk factor, rather than the
age that intercourse begins? >>
Since nobody's insides can count, maybe "multiple partners" is more of an
odds thing than not. Like multiple lottery tickets might theoretically make
it easier to win.
But IF it comes off or from a guy in ANY way, why couldn't it come from one?
Sandra
nellebelle
Good point. Not that it's the number of partners, but that you are more likely to encounter the wrong one if there are more of them.
Mary Ellen
----- snip ----- maybe "multiple partners" is more of an
odds thing than not. Like multiple lottery tickets might theoretically make
it easier to win.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Mary Ellen
----- snip ----- maybe "multiple partners" is more of an
odds thing than not. Like multiple lottery tickets might theoretically make
it easier to win.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Fetteroll
on 5/4/03 12:13 PM, SandraDodd@... at SandraDodd@... wrote:
There are different risk factors for diseases based on where someone's
ancestors came from which suggests slightly different chemistries. No reason
there can't be slight variations in the chemistry of bodily fluids.
Joyce
> But IF it comes off or from a guy in ANY way, why couldn't it come from one?Different bacteria? Different viruses? Different chemicals?
There are different risk factors for diseases based on where someone's
ancestors came from which suggests slightly different chemistries. No reason
there can't be slight variations in the chemistry of bodily fluids.
Joyce
Tia Leschke
>make
> Since nobody's insides can count, maybe "multiple partners" is more of an
> odds thing than not. Like multiple lottery tickets might theoretically
> it easier to win.one?
>
> But IF it comes off or from a guy in ANY way, why couldn't it come from
More partners, more chance that one of them has something to pass on?
Tia
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
saftety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Ben Franklin
leschke@...
[email protected]
In a message dated 5/4/03 11:54:49 AM, leschke@... writes:
<< More partners, more chance that one of them has something to pass on? >>
Right.
But that would be like saying having sex frequently is what causes babies.
It only takes once. Someone TRYING to have one might want to up the
frequency.
Sex with multiple pratners is more likely to produce a pregnancy where the
father isn't known with certainty. My mother proved that with the
half-brother she produced when I was 19 and smarter than she was about birth
control.
Sandra
<< More partners, more chance that one of them has something to pass on? >>
Right.
But that would be like saying having sex frequently is what causes babies.
It only takes once. Someone TRYING to have one might want to up the
frequency.
Sex with multiple pratners is more likely to produce a pregnancy where the
father isn't known with certainty. My mother proved that with the
half-brother she produced when I was 19 and smarter than she was about birth
control.
Sandra
[email protected]
In a message dated 5/4/03 4:17:07 PM Central Daylight Time,
[email protected] writes:
<< But IF it comes off or from a guy in ANY way, why couldn't it come from
one? >>
It can.
I'm sure we've all heard stories of someone getting HIV virus from only one
sexual encounter.
BUT, the reason it raised the risk for other cervical problems, including
cancer risk is that the body is trying to deal with too many people's
differnet virus/bacteria.
Where it could adapt to one person, it can't to so many different ones.
That's just a theory though.
It IS considered a true risk factor to have multiple partners (although if
you look at the studies, what they call multiple are fairly high numbers) but
beyond that, I don't think there is anything considered absolutely conclusive.
Ren
"They dined on mince, and slices of quince, Which they ate with a runcible
spoon;
And hand in hand, on the edge of the sand, they danced by the light of the
moon."
--The Owl and the Pussycat
Edward Lear
[email protected] writes:
<< But IF it comes off or from a guy in ANY way, why couldn't it come from
one? >>
It can.
I'm sure we've all heard stories of someone getting HIV virus from only one
sexual encounter.
BUT, the reason it raised the risk for other cervical problems, including
cancer risk is that the body is trying to deal with too many people's
differnet virus/bacteria.
Where it could adapt to one person, it can't to so many different ones.
That's just a theory though.
It IS considered a true risk factor to have multiple partners (although if
you look at the studies, what they call multiple are fairly high numbers) but
beyond that, I don't think there is anything considered absolutely conclusive.
Ren
"They dined on mince, and slices of quince, Which they ate with a runcible
spoon;
And hand in hand, on the edge of the sand, they danced by the light of the
moon."
--The Owl and the Pussycat
Edward Lear