This topic is in the Medical Issues & Conspiracies discussion forum.  (rss)


Masturbation 'cuts cancer risk'


<<  1    2    3    4    5  >>



reply posted on 17-4-2008 @ 06:21 PM by 44soulslayer


I guess all that money they spend on scientific research is a total waste...

The cure for cancer turns out to be a 10 minute dose of Jenna Jameson



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 17-4-2008 @ 06:24 PM by WalkOn



Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
reply to post by WalkOn



Not sure how french kissing correlates to masturbation, but I am sure I went to the wrong school for 6th grade..

sooo you never got a hard on that had to be delt with after getting mugged by 2-3 girls at the same time around your first time?



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 18-4-2008 @ 08:18 AM by tomcat ha


8 wanks a day keeps the doctor away....

up next masturbation in public because of trying to get your dose of anti cancer.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 18-4-2008 @ 08:37 AM by JohnnyCanuck



Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by Jeff Riff
Looks I have been preventing cancer since I was 13...
flippin sweet
Ummm... one small problem, though. I have prostate cancer, and by all accounts, then, I oughtn't.
I am really sorry to hear that man. I hope we develope some means of a cure for you and the others


Thanks for the good thoughts. There are cures...I'm doing standard and alternative therapies, and even on the conventional one the cure rate at early onset is 95% at 10 years. Gotta get it early, though. But by all means, lads..keep on keepin'on.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 18-4-2008 @ 09:12 AM by aleon1018


Thanks for the heads up. But, there's a lot more to keeping your pipes clean than that. Certain foods and oils can either be a blessing or a curse.

Does this also apply to women folk or just another note on the honey do list? I've heard somewhere that women have a prostate type of gland also; where they refer to the G-spot? I believe this has something more to do with childbirth though. I've read recently that your body needs to have a certain ph balance that's more alkaline to avoid cancer also.

www.healthrecipes.com...



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 18-4-2008 @ 09:39 AM by grover




Then I should be cancer free for the next hundred years.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 18-4-2008 @ 09:51 AM by redmage


Hmmm, tough choice...

Glasses & hairy palms, or cancer?

Aww, to heck with it. I've worked my way up to glasses already; so why stop now!

Lasik & electrolysis here I come!!!



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 18-4-2008 @ 10:05 AM by SystemiK


Did they happen to publish any information about the maximum "safe dosage"?

I'm placing myself on a stiff regimen immediately but don't want to over-medicate.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 18-4-2008 @ 10:47 AM by hookedfish


On the other hand , don't you risk a mineral loss if you do it too much or eat not enough meat?



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 18-4-2008 @ 10:51 AM by andy1033


I always think that its good for a man to get rid of the energy, as that energy built up, can cause problems.

I am not saying whether the study is true, but i agree that build up of that energy and no release is bad for males, and your health.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 18-4-2008 @ 12:46 PM by 44soulslayer



Originally posted by SystemiK
I'm placing myself on a stiff regimen immediately


loooool... thats a good one.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 18-4-2008 @ 12:50 PM by Skyfloating


you guys are hilarious.

But seriously: There does seem to be a correlation between suppression of sex and prostate cancer. Not with everyone...but the stats speak for themselves.


(Thanks Master W for this news)

[edit on 18-4-2008 by Skyfloating]



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 18-4-2008 @ 01:02 PM by Skyfloating



Originally posted by 44soulslayer
I guess all that money they spend on scientific research is a total waste...

The cure for cancer turns out to be a 10 minute dose of Jenna Jameson


Serioulsy though:

9 times out of 10 "having a good time" is more effective than the junk prescribed by pharmaceutical companies.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 18-4-2008 @ 02:04 PM by JohnnyCanuck



Originally posted by Skyfloating 9 times out of 10 "having a good time" is more effective than the junk prescribed by pharmaceutical companies.


Being in the middle of the process, knowing a bunch of people in varying degrees of the same boat, I'd take issue with that. I don't think the sun shines outta Big Pharma's butt, but there's a lot of people alive and kicking strictly because of their meds...I'm sure you can think of a few yourself.

But a thread like this is just achin' for a punchline, and I'm not gonna be the threadkiller this time out.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 18-4-2008 @ 02:06 PM by Skyfloating


reply to post by JohnnyCanuck



alright. fair enough.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 18-4-2008 @ 02:52 PM by RUFFREADY


Is this real? I haven't seen this on Fox..I wonder if somebody's trying to jerk us around?

I know one thing.. it would be just my luck to be one of the control subjects that are told, "ok, no wacking for a year",

[edit on 18-4-2008 by RUFFREADY]



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 18-4-2008 @ 03:49 PM by esecallum





reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 18-4-2008 @ 03:53 PM by Shmoo006


Another perfectly good excuse for the MRS!!!



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 18-4-2008 @ 06:27 PM by St Udio


Well, i can't find the factoid link immediately,

but there is a lack of cancer with people that are pre-disposed to having warts.
There is also evidence that people that have contracted herpes-simplex
do not get life shortning cancer either.


maybe we can find enough statistics to show that bubble gum chewers
that swallow their gum, contract cancer more often than the population at large...


engaging in a hedonist pleasure does not necessarily reduce cancer,,,
as those self-satisifiers probably met their end before any cancer
had the time to become fatal.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 18-4-2008 @ 07:19 PM by 44soulslayer


reply to post by Skyfloating



In that case, should be not be seriously worried for the health of monks around the world!?



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


<<  1    2    3    4    5  >>







Find More:





Top Topics Right Now:






Active Topics Right Now:






ATS MIX Podcasts:


Recently Added Videos







Newest Topics:























ATS Thread Tag System
Members can add a custom descriptive tag to any thread on ATS. Thread Tags will help categorize our site content, help to cross-reference similar threads, and improve the searchability of all ATS threads. This thread is currently defined by these tags:

(no tags)


















ATS Server: www4.theabovenetwork.com
Powered by AboveTop:Board v2.3
Header data processed in 0.003 seconds
Page processed in 0.115 seconds
8 total database queries (2)









( The Above Top Secret Conspiracy Community Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC. )





thread