If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Human papillomavirus (HPV) & Genital Warts - bad news about the foreskin
Circumcision, Condoms Reduce Risk of Genital Warts
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Human papillomavirus (HPV) is the cause of genital warts, and some subtypes of the virus can cause cancer. Now, researchers report that circumcision and regular condom use seem to reduce the risk of penile HPV infection. Although HPV is the main cause of cervical and anal cancer, few studies have looked at risk factors for penile HPV infection in men, Dr. Susie Baldwin, from the VA Sepulveda Ambulatory Care Center in California, and colleagues point out in the medical journal Sexually Transmitted Diseases. To investigate this issue, the researchers studied 393 men who attended an STD clinic in Arizona between July 2000 and January 2001. The team gave the men questionnaires and tested swabs of the penis for DNA from HPV, to see if they were infected. The likelihood of detecting HPV was over three times higher for men who engaged in sexual intercourse more than 30 times per month compared with those who had intercourse no more than 5 times per month. As noted, circumcision and regular condom use seemed to protect against penile HPV. Circumcised men were one-third as likely as uncircumcised men to be infected, while always using a condom halved the risk compared with never using a condom. The increasing rate of HPV-related cancers in the US "attests to the importance of understanding HPV not only in women, but in men, who serve as vectors of this ubiquitous virus and potentially as reservoirs," the researchers conclude. SOURCE: Sexually Transmitted Diseases, October 2004. © Reuters 2004. All Rights Reserved. http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...toryID=6443516 See more at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unashamedly_procirc/ |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Briar Rabbit wrote:
Circumcision, Condoms Reduce Risk of Genital Warts NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Human papillomavirus (HPV) is the cause of genital warts, and some subtypes of the virus can cause cancer. Now, researchers report that circumcision and regular condom use seem to reduce the risk of penile HPV infection. ------------------------ Nonsense, more insane pro-circumciser nonsense. The statistical difference is too tiny to matter, especially when the side-effects and extra mortality/morbidity from circumcision itself is enormous by comparison! Although HPV is the main cause of cervical and anal cancer, ---------------------- That isn't demonstrated by research either, especially anal cancer, this ismerely homophobic nonsense. To investigate this issue, the researchers studied 393 men who attended an STD clinic in Arizona between July 2000 and January 2001. The team gave the men questionnaires and tested swabs of the penis for DNA from HPV, to see if they were infected. The likelihood of detecting HPV was over three times higher for men who engaged in sexual intercourse more than 30 times per month compared with those who had intercourse no more than 5 times per month. --------------------- That's ludicrous, it suggests HPV can arise in some magical spontaneous manner due to frequency between previously virgin partners. This is also poorly studied. As noted, circumcision and regular condom use seemed to protect against penile HPV. Circumcised men were one-third as likely as uncircumcised men to be infected, ------------------------- Nonsense, this is basically a racist finding where the research they reference was done, which was where circumcision was a distinct mark of economic class division, and that morbidity was far more related to poverty and poor diet! while always using a condom halved the risk compared with never using a condom. --------------------------- Using condoms is a million times more useful than circumcision, statistically. Steve |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
R. Steve Walz wrote:
Briar Rabbit wrote: Circumcision, Condoms Reduce Risk of Genital Warts NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Human papillomavirus (HPV) is the cause of genital warts, and some subtypes of the virus can cause cancer. Now, researchers report that circumcision and regular condom use seem to reduce the risk of penile HPV infection. ------------------------ Nonsense, more insane pro-circumciser nonsense. The statistical difference is too tiny to matter, especially when the side-effects and extra mortality/morbidity from circumcision itself is enormous by comparison! Oh dear Steve, you obviously didn't like that much now did you. Now for the abstract: ===================== Condom use and other factors affecting penile human papillomavirus detection in men attending a sexually transmitted disease clinic. Baldwin SB, Wallace DR, Papenfuss MR, Abrahamsen M, Vaught LC, Giuliano AR. *Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Arizona College of Medicine, Tucson, Arizona; the Arizona Cancer Center, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona; Arizona College of Public Health, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona. BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:: Human papillomavirus (HPV) is the primary cause of cervical, anal, and other anogenital cancers, but risk factors for penile HPV detection in men have not been well-characterized. GOAL:: The goal of this study was to identify correlates of penile HPV detection in ethnically diverse men attending a sexually transmitted disease clinic. STUDY:: A cross-sectional investigation was conducted among 393 men. Participants completed a risk-factor questionnaire and underwent testing for penile HPV DNA. Presence of HPV DNA was assessed using polymerase chain reaction with PGMY primers and reverse line blot genotyping. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify variables associated with any-type, oncogenic, and nononcogenic HPV. RESULTS:: Circumcision was associated with reduced risk for oncogenic, nononcogenic, and overall HPV. Regular condom use was associated with reduced risk for oncogenic and overall HPV. CONCLUSION:: These findings, if confirmed by other studies, could impact public health practices and messages regarding HPV. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q..._uids=15388997 More on circumcision at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unashamedly_procirc/ |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Briar Rabbit wrote:
R. Steve Walz wrote: Briar Rabbit wrote: Circumcision, Condoms Reduce Risk of Genital Warts NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Human papillomavirus (HPV) is the cause of genital warts, and some subtypes of the virus can cause cancer. Now, researchers report that circumcision and regular condom use seem to reduce the risk of penile HPV infection. ------------------------ Nonsense, more insane pro-circumciser nonsense. The statistical difference is too tiny to matter, especially when the side-effects and extra mortality/morbidity from circumcision itself is enormous by comparison! Oh dear Steve, you obviously didn't like that much now did you. ------------- No one likes your lies. Now for the abstract: --------------- All you did was repeat your NON-PEER-REVIEWED PUT-UP LIES from pro-circumciser cranks! Steve |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
R. Steve Walz wrote:
Briar Rabbit wrote: R. Steve Walz wrote: Briar Rabbit wrote: Circumcision, Condoms Reduce Risk of Genital Warts NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Human papillomavirus (HPV) is the cause of genital warts, and some subtypes of the virus can cause cancer. Now, researchers report that circumcision and regular condom use seem to reduce the risk of penile HPV infection. ------------------------ Nonsense, more insane pro-circumciser nonsense. The statistical difference is too tiny to matter, especially when the side-effects and extra mortality/morbidity from circumcision itself is enormous by comparison! Oh dear Steve, you obviously didn't like that much now did you. ------------- No one likes your lies. Now for the abstract: --------------- All you did was repeat your NON-PEER-REVIEWED PUT-UP LIES from pro-circumciser cranks! Steve Oh dear you skin freaks really turn inside out when faced with the truth. What about this one then? Male Circumcision, Penile Human Papillomavirus Infection, and Cervical Cancer in Female Partners http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/short/346/15/1105 More on circumcision at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unashamedly_procirc/ |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Briar Rabbit wrote:
R. Steve Walz wrote: Briar Rabbit wrote: R. Steve Walz wrote: Briar Rabbit wrote: Circumcision, Condoms Reduce Risk of Genital Warts NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Human papillomavirus (HPV) is the cause of genital warts, and some subtypes of the virus can cause cancer. Now, researchers report that circumcision and regular condom use seem to reduce the risk of penile HPV infection. ------------------------ Nonsense, more insane pro-circumciser nonsense. The statistical difference is too tiny to matter, especially when the side-effects and extra mortality/morbidity from circumcision itself is enormous by comparison! Oh dear Steve, you obviously didn't like that much now did you. ------------- No one likes your lies. Now for the abstract: --------------- All you did was repeat your NON-PEER-REVIEWED PUT-UP LIES from pro-circumciser cranks! Steve Oh dear you "skin freaks" ---------------------- Your ignorant contrived pet-name for people who want to defend and protect infants from your insane butchery of their natural genital inheritance brands you as an obvious raving paranoid. There is nothing in the least abnormal about foreskins or people defending infants from your brutality. That you pretend there is is evidence that YOU'RE the one with the mental/emotional PROBLEM! You are clearly terrified of anyone without damaged genitals like you, and this is because you feel threatened and intimidated by their escape from the kind of mutilation that you suffered. Your hatred of foreskins is merely a defensive compensatory reaction. Steve |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
R. Steve Walz wrote:
Briar Rabbit wrote: R. Steve Walz wrote: Briar Rabbit wrote: R. Steve Walz wrote: Briar Rabbit wrote: Circumcision, Condoms Reduce Risk of Genital Warts NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Human papillomavirus (HPV) is the cause of genital warts, and some subtypes of the virus can cause cancer. Now, researchers report that circumcision and regular condom use seem to reduce the risk of penile HPV infection. ------------------------ Nonsense, more insane pro-circumciser nonsense. The statistical difference is too tiny to matter, especially when the side-effects and extra mortality/morbidity from circumcision itself is enormous by comparison! Oh dear Steve, you obviously didn't like that much now did you. ------------- No one likes your lies. Now for the abstract: --------------- All you did was repeat your NON-PEER-REVIEWED PUT-UP LIES from pro-circumciser cranks! Steve Oh dear you "skin freaks" ---------------------- Your ignorant contrived pet-name for people who want to defend and protect infants from your insane butchery of their natural genital inheritance brands you as an obvious raving paranoid. There is nothing in the least abnormal about foreskins or people defending infants from your brutality. That you pretend there is is evidence that YOU'RE the one with the mental/emotional PROBLEM! You are clearly terrified of anyone without damaged genitals like you, and this is because you feel threatened and intimidated by their escape from the kind of mutilation that you suffered. Your hatred of foreskins is merely a defensive compensatory reaction. Steve Now why did you not comment on the second study? Evidence getting a bit heavy for you now? Here one about some other STD's. Steve you must admit the foreskin really is a dog. Here are the facts: "CONCLUSION: Uncircumcised men in the United States may be at increased risk for gonorrhoea and syphilis, but chlamydia risk appears similar in circumcised and uncircumcised men. Our results suggest that risk estimates from cross sectional studies would be similar to cohort findings." ========================= From the following study: Circumcision and STD in the United States: cross sectional and cohort analyses. Diseker RA 3rd, Peterman TA, Kamb ML, Kent C, Zenilman JM, Douglas JM Jr, Rhodes F, Iatesta M. Kaiser Permanente Research Department, Nine Piedmont Center, 3495 Piedmont Road, NE, Atlanta, GA 30305-1736, USA. BACKGROUND: Male circumcision status has been shown to be associated with sexually transmitted disease (STD) acquisition in some, but not all, studies. Most studies have been cross sectional. OBJECTIVES: We examined the association between circumcision status and the prevalence and incidence of gonorrhoea, chlamydia, and syphilis. METHODS: We analysed cross sectional and cohort study data from a multicentre controlled trial in the United States. Between July 1993 and September 1996, 2021 men visiting public inner city STD clinics in the United States were examined by a clinician at enrolment and 1456 were examined at follow up visits 6 and 12 months later. At each visit, men had laboratory tests for gonorrhoea, chlamydia, and syphilis and were examined for circumcision status. We used multiple logistic regression to compare STD risk among circumcised and uncircumcised men adjusted for potentially confounding factors. RESULTS: Uncircumcised men were significantly more likely than circumcised men to have gonorrhoea in the multivariate analyses, adjusted for age, race, and site, in both the cross sectional (odds ratio (OR), 1.3; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.9 to 1.7) and in the cohort analysis (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.0 to 2.6). There was no association between lack of circumcision and chlamydia in either the cross sectional (OR, 1.0; 95% CI 0.7-1.4) or the cohort analysis (OR, 0.9; 95% CI 0.5-1.5). The magnitude of association between lack of circumcision and syphilis was similar in the cross sectional (OR, 1.4; 95% CI 0.6 to 3.3) and cohort analysis (OR, 1.5; 95% CI 0.4 to 6.1). CONCLUSION: Uncircumcised men in the United States may be at increased risk for gonorrhoea and syphilis, but chlamydia risk appears similar in circumcised and uncircumcised men. Our results suggest that risk estimates from cross sectional studies would be similar to cohort findings. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...&dopt=Abstract More on circumcision at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unashamedly_procirc/ |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Briar, you told Steve to check out unashamedly pro at yahoogroups.
This group stinks, to put it mildly. Here are some better ones (short list): http://groups.yahoo.com/group/circumcision_pro_or_con_ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mothersandcircumcision http://groups.yahoo.com/group/circumcisedfamilyshow http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Circumcision_Or_Not http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mother...siondiscussion http://groups.yahoo.com/group/autocircumcision Plenty of good ones here, for and against and in between. If you need more, there are plenty of links in the ones I mention to others one. These are just some of the big ones. Im not trying to argue for or against your views, Im just poiting out that there are plenty of good groups to refer people to beside the horrible 'unashamed' group, which is just one guy ranting. No exchange and no one else posting. You you havent already, check these groups out. Tim Briar Rabbit wrote in message ... R. Steve Walz wrote: Briar Rabbit wrote: R. Steve Walz wrote: Briar Rabbit wrote: R. Steve Walz wrote: Briar Rabbit wrote: Circumcision, Condoms Reduce Risk of Genital Warts NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Human papillomavirus (HPV) is the cause of genital warts, and some subtypes of the virus can cause cancer. Now, researchers report that circumcision and regular condom use seem to reduce the risk of penile HPV infection. ------------------------ Nonsense, more insane pro-circumciser nonsense. The statistical difference is too tiny to matter, especially when the side-effects and extra mortality/morbidity from circumcision itself is enormous by comparison! Oh dear Steve, you obviously didn't like that much now did you. ------------- No one likes your lies. Now for the abstract: --------------- All you did was repeat your NON-PEER-REVIEWED PUT-UP LIES from pro-circumciser cranks! Steve Oh dear you "skin freaks" ---------------------- Your ignorant contrived pet-name for people who want to defend and protect infants from your insane butchery of their natural genital inheritance brands you as an obvious raving paranoid. There is nothing in the least abnormal about foreskins or people defending infants from your brutality. That you pretend there is is evidence that YOU'RE the one with the mental/emotional PROBLEM! You are clearly terrified of anyone without damaged genitals like you, and this is because you feel threatened and intimidated by their escape from the kind of mutilation that you suffered. Your hatred of foreskins is merely a defensive compensatory reaction. Steve Now why did you not comment on the second study? Evidence getting a bit heavy for you now? Here one about some other STD's. Steve you must admit the foreskin really is a dog. Here are the facts: "CONCLUSION: Uncircumcised men in the United States may be at increased risk for gonorrhoea and syphilis, but chlamydia risk appears similar in circumcised and uncircumcised men. Our results suggest that risk estimates from cross sectional studies would be similar to cohort findings." ========================= From the following study: Circumcision and STD in the United States: cross sectional and cohort analyses. Diseker RA 3rd, Peterman TA, Kamb ML, Kent C, Zenilman JM, Douglas JM Jr, Rhodes F, Iatesta M. Kaiser Permanente Research Department, Nine Piedmont Center, 3495 Piedmont Road, NE, Atlanta, GA 30305-1736, USA. BACKGROUND: Male circumcision status has been shown to be associated with sexually transmitted disease (STD) acquisition in some, but not all, studies. Most studies have been cross sectional. OBJECTIVES: We examined the association between circumcision status and the prevalence and incidence of gonorrhoea, chlamydia, and syphilis. METHODS: We analysed cross sectional and cohort study data from a multicentre controlled trial in the United States. Between July 1993 and September 1996, 2021 men visiting public inner city STD clinics in the United States were examined by a clinician at enrolment and 1456 were examined at follow up visits 6 and 12 months later. At each visit, men had laboratory tests for gonorrhoea, chlamydia, and syphilis and were examined for circumcision status. We used multiple logistic regression to compare STD risk among circumcised and uncircumcised men adjusted for potentially confounding factors. RESULTS: Uncircumcised men were significantly more likely than circumcised men to have gonorrhoea in the multivariate analyses, adjusted for age, race, and site, in both the cross sectional (odds ratio (OR), 1.3; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.9 to 1.7) and in the cohort analysis (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.0 to 2.6). There was no association between lack of circumcision and chlamydia in either the cross sectional (OR, 1.0; 95% CI 0.7-1.4) or the cohort analysis (OR, 0.9; 95% CI 0.5-1.5). The magnitude of association between lack of circumcision and syphilis was similar in the cross sectional (OR, 1.4; 95% CI 0.6 to 3.3) and cohort analysis (OR, 1.5; 95% CI 0.4 to 6.1). CONCLUSION: Uncircumcised men in the United States may be at increased risk for gonorrhoea and syphilis, but chlamydia risk appears similar in circumcised and uncircumcised men. Our results suggest that risk estimates from cross sectional studies would be similar to cohort findings. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...&dopt=Abstract More on circumcision at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unashamedly_procirc/ |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Tim Deringer wrote:
Briar, you told Steve to check out unashamedly pro at yahoogroups. This group stinks, to put it mildly. Here are some better ones (short list): Well done son. Obviously a kid. Maybe yet to learn the more you slag someone or something off the more curious people become. One more time then? More on circumcision at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unashamedly_procirc/ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/circumcision_pro_or_con_ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mothersandcircumcision http://groups.yahoo.com/group/circumcisedfamilyshow http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Circumcision_Or_Not http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mother...siondiscussion http://groups.yahoo.com/group/autocircumcision Plenty of good ones here, for and against and in between. If you need more, there are plenty of links in the ones I mention to others one. These are just some of the big ones. Im not trying to argue for or against your views, Im just poiting out that there are plenty of good groups to refer people to beside the horrible 'unashamed' group, which is just one guy ranting. No exchange and no one else posting. You you havent already, check these groups out. Tim Briar Rabbit wrote in message ... R. Steve Walz wrote: Briar Rabbit wrote: R. Steve Walz wrote: Briar Rabbit wrote: R. Steve Walz wrote: Briar Rabbit wrote: Circumcision, Condoms Reduce Risk of Genital Warts NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Human papillomavirus (HPV) is the cause of genital warts, and some subtypes of the virus can cause cancer. Now, researchers report that circumcision and regular condom use seem to reduce the risk of penile HPV infection. ------------------------ Nonsense, more insane pro-circumciser nonsense. The statistical difference is too tiny to matter, especially when the side-effects and extra mortality/morbidity from circumcision itself is enormous by comparison! Oh dear Steve, you obviously didn't like that much now did you. ------------- No one likes your lies. Now for the abstract: --------------- All you did was repeat your NON-PEER-REVIEWED PUT-UP LIES from pro-circumciser cranks! Steve Oh dear you "skin freaks" ---------------------- Your ignorant contrived pet-name for people who want to defend and protect infants from your insane butchery of their natural genital inheritance brands you as an obvious raving paranoid. There is nothing in the least abnormal about foreskins or people defending infants from your brutality. That you pretend there is is evidence that YOU'RE the one with the mental/emotional PROBLEM! You are clearly terrified of anyone without damaged genitals like you, and this is because you feel threatened and intimidated by their escape from the kind of mutilation that you suffered. Your hatred of foreskins is merely a defensive compensatory reaction. Steve Now why did you not comment on the second study? Evidence getting a bit heavy for you now? Here one about some other STD's. Steve you must admit the foreskin really is a dog. Here are the facts: "CONCLUSION: Uncircumcised men in the United States may be at increased risk for gonorrhoea and syphilis, but chlamydia risk appears similar in circumcised and uncircumcised men. Our results suggest that risk estimates from cross sectional studies would be similar to cohort findings." ========================= From the following study: Circumcision and STD in the United States: cross sectional and cohort analyses. Diseker RA 3rd, Peterman TA, Kamb ML, Kent C, Zenilman JM, Douglas JM Jr, Rhodes F, Iatesta M. Kaiser Permanente Research Department, Nine Piedmont Center, 3495 Piedmont Road, NE, Atlanta, GA 30305-1736, USA. BACKGROUND: Male circumcision status has been shown to be associated with sexually transmitted disease (STD) acquisition in some, but not all, studies. Most studies have been cross sectional. OBJECTIVES: We examined the association between circumcision status and the prevalence and incidence of gonorrhoea, chlamydia, and syphilis. METHODS: We analysed cross sectional and cohort study data from a multicentre controlled trial in the United States. Between July 1993 and September 1996, 2021 men visiting public inner city STD clinics in the United States were examined by a clinician at enrolment and 1456 were examined at follow up visits 6 and 12 months later. At each visit, men had laboratory tests for gonorrhoea, chlamydia, and syphilis and were examined for circumcision status. We used multiple logistic regression to compare STD risk among circumcised and uncircumcised men adjusted for potentially confounding factors. RESULTS: Uncircumcised men were significantly more likely than circumcised men to have gonorrhoea in the multivariate analyses, adjusted for age, race, and site, in both the cross sectional (odds ratio (OR), 1.3; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.9 to 1.7) and in the cohort analysis (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.0 to 2.6). There was no association between lack of circumcision and chlamydia in either the cross sectional (OR, 1.0; 95% CI 0.7-1.4) or the cohort analysis (OR, 0.9; 95% CI 0.5-1.5). The magnitude of association between lack of circumcision and syphilis was similar in the cross sectional (OR, 1.4; 95% CI 0.6 to 3.3) and cohort analysis (OR, 1.5; 95% CI 0.4 to 6.1). CONCLUSION: Uncircumcised men in the United States may be at increased risk for gonorrhoea and syphilis, but chlamydia risk appears similar in circumcised and uncircumcised men. Our results suggest that risk estimates from cross sectional studies would be similar to cohort findings. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...&dopt=Abstract More on circumcision at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unashamedly_procirc/ |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Briar Rabbit wrote:
R. Steve Walz wrote: Oh dear you "skin freaks" ---------------------- Your ignorant contrived pet-name for people who want to defend and protect infants from your insane butchery of their natural genital inheritance brands you as an obvious raving paranoid. There is nothing in the least abnormal about foreskins or people defending infants from your brutality. That you pretend there is is evidence that YOU'RE the one with the mental/emotional PROBLEM! You are clearly terrified of anyone without damaged genitals like you, and this is because you feel threatened and intimidated by their escape from the kind of mutilation that you suffered. Your hatred of foreskins is merely a defensive compensatory reaction. Steve Now why did you not comment on the second study? ---------------------------- Because it wasn't a valid peer-reviewed study. It was a disguised aesthetic preference masquerading as phony science. Here are the facts: -------------------------------- You aren't capable of stating the facts, only of LYING. You leave out the totality of statistics which would place your supposed "study" in proper context. When you include the HUMAN RIGHT for EACH BEING to make their OWN personal medical decisions about their OWN body with their OWN informed consent, and once you include ALL dangers to their health, circumcision is a slobbering slathering vicious animal which needs to be killed. By your kind of logic, we should remove little girls' breasts at birth to prevent the VASTLY larger danger of breast cancer. And your smarmy allegation that foreskins are ugly might as well similarly be extended to those big floppy breasts on women as well. You are a mentally-emotionally distorted clown. Steve |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Ree: Why do parents keep doing this? | [email protected] | General | 35 | September 7th 04 12:22 AM |
Ree: Why do parents keep doing this? | [email protected] | Pregnancy | 32 | September 7th 04 12:22 AM |
How do uncircumcised men get laid? | karen hill | Pregnancy | 123 | April 17th 04 11:07 AM |
Catastrophic History Lesson -- MAN AS OLD AS COAL | svanier | General | 0 | July 7th 03 10:24 AM |