Jump to content
World's Largest Herpes Support Group
Sign in to follow this  
ntdc

Irresponsible scientists and Howard Stern

Recommended Posts

ntdc

Listening to a recent episode of the Howard Stern Show they were talking about a recent study by "contraception magazine" (LOL seriously...) that claims condoms are about as effective as the withdrawal method in preventing pregnancy. I understand the study authors mention it cannot prevent against STDs but honestly this research seems totally irresponsible. You know most people just hear whatever they want to hear and putting out there that condoms and withawal are equally as effective is just leaving thei impression on people that it is OK. There are already enough people who simply think that STDs cant happen to them and are willing to forgo condoms if one isnt around. You know it just seems like it encourages risky behavior and I cant see any possible benefit gained from publishing such a study and it simply supports a negative behavior.

Then a guy, Ralph, calls in who is a regular caller and friend of Stern's and says he's never used a condom in 20 years. Stern who talks often about his personal adherance to condom use asked if he isnt afraid of disease like HIV or Herpes. Ralph replies that he can "just tell" if a girl is clean or not.

Thankfully the rest of the cash admonished him and called him basically a nut.

It just boggles my mind how many people out there have that thought. Personally I got infected despite knowing the risks and kind of willfully ignored them. And I am really shocked in the age of HIV some scientists would actually publish a study which supports incredibly risky behavior.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Seatortuga

Oh Look! I can add this magazine to my list of murderers who get away! Here it is so far:

1.Pope

2. This magazine

3. O.J.

That's right, let's tell people not to use condoms. This makes me sick.

Sorry to any catholics on here...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GntiNh

It's frightening to read your post that so many people have no real sex education.

Personally I had no idea about herpes before I contracted it. But it's been the best health education I can teach my children. I have also got more comfortable about talking about it with friends adn I actually corrected someone a couple of weeks ago when they said that condoms were total protection.

It's still wrong that in the UK, herpes testing is not included in a "full" STD screening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Now18
Ralph replies that he can "just tell" if a girl is clean or not.

That is my least favorite misconception about herpes! I bet you anything that I would be that girl that everyone would assume to be clean.

Also, my ex boyfriend (who gave me GHSV) always talked about this study. The first time we had sex, he just started having sex with me without a condom and just pulled out at the end. He didn't ask me anything about STDs and he didn't know that I was on birth control. Afterwards I said "Why didn't you use a condom???" He gave some answer about how pulling out works just as well (based on a study) and if either of us had STDs we could clear it up with antibiotics. "I said, what about HIV or hepres?" He looked at me as if those two STDs were incredibly rare... and that he would never have either of them.

Same dumb logic!! UGGGGH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Was23

Irresponsible non-scientists

Not sure I see how the scientists are being irresponsible: they did a study, and AFAIK, the results are sound. And you mention that those scientists did caution (in case anyone was dumb enough to think otherwise) that the withdrawal method of birth control would not protect one against STDs (it might work just a little bit for some of them, like HIV from male to female, but I'll concede the point). All the other examples you list are of people (non-scientists) doing irresponsible things despite the fact that science has firmly establish that those acts are risky.

Their study is valuable information in the birth control arena (some couples, for religious or other reasons, can't use condoms or any other method). Just because it is not relevant in the STD world is no reason to scoff.

While I might draw the line at, say, scientists publishing plans for a new way to make a nuclear bomb with ordinary kitchen utensils, my tendency is to be extremely skeptical about society attempting to suppress information because we think some people will be too stupid to understand it. Outside of clearly dangerous findings, a scientist is behaving responsibily if he/she just insures that the conclusions reached in a study are sound and supported by the data.

IMO, if you treat adults like children, you run the risk of training them to act like children. [And who get to be a "decider" of these issues (and what would the standards be).] A better solution would be to improve the skills of people to better comprehend such information. (Better Science education, anyone?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Now18
While I might draw the line at, say, scientists publishing plans for a new way to make a nuclear bomb with ordinary kitchen utensils, my tendency is to be extremely skeptical about society attempting to suppress information because we think some people will be too stupid to understand it. Outside of clearly dangerous findings, a scientist is behaving responsibily if he/she just insures that the conclusions reached in a study are sound and supported by the data.

You're right. Scientists have every right to research this. Sometimes people only listen to what they want to hear. They're told pulling out may be effective for pregnancy but they tune out the "it doesn't protect from STDs" part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ntdc

I agree with some of what you are saying. I didn't say it should be suppressed but I question the motivation of such a study and who would find it useful. Omission or de-emphasis of certain facts happens all the time in sex education for the public good, just look at how HIV is presented in most sex education classes/literature. Not really outright lies but omission of many known facts about transmission and prevalence rates basically for people's own good.

I also agree WRT the idea critical thinking skills could be better in a lot of people.

Anway just an aside a religeous couple would certainly not be able to justify use of such an act over other contraception. The biblical justifcation for the taboo on contraception comes from genesis 38:8-10

In this passage Onan pulls out when having sex with his brother's wife to avoid getting her pregnant, and god kills him.

I'm not sure why the pill is not an acceptable option for most religeous people because it does not cause destruction of the semen which is what this passage expressly forbids.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

Advertisement

Try a Lysine supplement for cold sores

  • The Hive is Thriving!

    • Total Topics
      68,843
    • Total Posts
      460,385
  • Posts

    • rareangel
      You really need to slow down or stop with your fear mongering. You are not deep in things of this nature as I am and we know the bottlenecks we face everytime we offer proof of what we have achieved as naturopaths. We are often rejected right at the door but does that stop us? Those who manage to accept us end up declaring what we do ineffective but later turn around and synthesize what we provided and began using it themselves simply because they believe they are more scientific than we are.   Much of conventional medicine was derived from nature and that should let you know that nature already holds most of the answers to our health but if anyone can easily get help from nature, then where is the money in it for big pharma? Diet alone does not handle hsv. I included a diet plan in my response to you but besides that, there is also the remedy which is most important. (This should let you know that I know what I am doing and saying) I did not come to this forum to play cloaks and daggers with anyone but to genuinely help. You should sound more encouraging and not judgemental. Hsv isn't a life sentence as many have been made to believe.
    • rareangel
      Thank you for posting our email conversation and also thank you for proving what I said about the mindset of people toward naturopaths especially when you suggested I could be a millionaire if I approached a scientific body.    If unscientific people such as you can easily be this judgemental and bigoted, how then do you think the truly scientific ones can be? Hsv is not as difficult as it is made to look. Indeed no illness is with the right treatment all illnesses that do not require surgery are easy. I run my own tests and have treated my own patients and have my own proofs. Surely you wouldn't expect me to forgo a patient confidentiality clause and release information on my patients to just about everybody do you?   If you were my patient would you want me to splash your details all over the web so anyone can have access to it?   People are afraid of what they do not understand so I understand your position and mindset but try not to label people from your position of insecurity. Not all of us are insecure.
    • Roja
      I am judgemental with people who try to take advantage of thousands of people, yes. Because I am sure some of them believe what you say and spend their savings in your "cure". And btw, I am a big fan of natural remedies. I believe that diet is one of the best ways to handle the virus. But I am also aware of the fact that it is up to now not possible to "delete" the virus. Maybe big pharma is trying to hide something, yes, but I don't think every single doctor and medical professional is lying to us. These people are professionals, they studied the human body for years. Do you really think all the doctors around the world would hide a "cure" like this for money?
    • Roja
      So you did not "just join this group".    So yeah, for everyone who is interested, I'll copy your e-mail:  "Good morning [name], The treatment for hsv from me lasts for a minimum of 3 months. The sequence of treatments goes thus 1) month 1 takes care of every symptom of hsv 2 you would ordinarily experience prior to or during an outbreak such as itchy/tingling sensation, feverish feelings and water retaining breakouts. 2) month 2 is the full body flush also done with one of my remedies which is pleasant tasting and calming to the body. This dislodges the virus from whatever nerve endings it has gone into and causes a weakening of the cell membrane in its envelope stage. 3) month 3 is a repeat of month one plus extra. The virus is killed off after the once impossible to penetrate cell membrane had been weakened and breached by the flush. Virus dies and patient at this stage would feel totally renewed and refreshed and free. Patient may experience an outbreak during the course of treatment which is expected but the appearance of the outbreak would prove patient is on track and doing well because the outbreak would be totally different from what used to be as I guarantee, no feverish feelings, no itch or tingling and no water retention in any rash that may appear. By the time we are done you can say goodbye to any form of breakouts be they stress triggered or not as you test negative. My remedy has zero side effects and works like a charm. Cost for each months treatment stands at $380. Patient has the option of running a monthly treatment thus paying monthly or paying for the entire 3 months and receiving all the remedies for the entire 3 months with directions on how to prepare them and the dose to take per time. Patient would also be required to keep in touch with me thus providing me with updates regarding progress reports so I can know if there is need to increase the dosage or leave it as it is. A diet plan would also be provided for the patient during the course of treatment. Long story short, I will work with patient for the entire 3 months of treatment up to the point of testing negative. Good morning once again. [Name]" So: 1) Not even one scientific proof. How should anyone believe your clients are "negative" if you can't prove?  2) 380 x 3 = 1140 $ for something that has no scientific proof at all AND moreover for something that up to now is IMPOSSIBLE. "This dislodges the virus from whatever nerve endings it has gone." Come on, that is impossible, as well as killing HSV from anyone's blood!  Again, you are a scam. And I feel so sad for all these desperate people who pay you a minimum of 1140$ for a treatment that doesn't work. 
    • rareangel
      The rule here says you should not be judgemental and you are already judgemental.   We are communicating via email and you got my permission to post whatever we discuss via email on this forum and I just sent you your first detailed reply and you are yet to post it here yet you have already labelled me a scam.  Do you now see why I said earlier that we naturopath's get the short end of the stick from skeptics like you?   I suggest you make amends to your post and stop being in a hurry to label everyone you see.
×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.