Sugar Babies
Shemales

Author Topic: CIM - are there degrees of risk?  (Read 8586 times)

Offline MrMicawber

Now you're spouting shite
Viruses and bacteria are two completely different things


Perhaps he means bacteriophages .... which are viruses which attack bacteria. ... hence he describes it as a "bacterial virus". Confusion ???

Offline MrMicawber


Quite right, Scutty, and well said.

Two points to make here.

Firstly, my caution arises not from reading "the media" (whom, I agree, are sometimes prone to sensationalising issues), but from a statement made by the British Association For Sexual Health and HIV,  the foremost professional body in the UK dealing with matters of sexual health (and therefore, one must assume, in close liaison with the science of the speciality as well as the clinical practice), which can be found on the following link:-

External Link/Members Only...

Secondly, whilst it is no doubt correct that new antibiotics are always being developed  (and not just to combat STIs, so drug companies have plenty of R & D work to do), the process is a long and expensive one, and it can take years between a perceived need to arise and new, effective antibiotics becoming available. Set against this, it is also true that bacteria are always mutating into more resistant forms, and they can do so very quickly.  Therefore there is a race going on between the research scientists and the bugs, and it is far from a foregone conclusion that the scientists are going to win ... That's why BASHH is worried, and not complacent.. So I don't think I'm being overdramatic .... I'm just being forward-looking and cautious.


Apologies everyone .... I gave the wrong link here.  It should have been:-

External Link/Members Only

I hope that saves anyone frustration.  The BASHH site is a good source of information generally.

The second link I gave in a subsequent post was correct - it will take you to the right site, but you will need to go to the bottom of the first page and go to page 55 for the article I intended to cite

Offline Waterhouse

Only if you're a rabbit, there's a long standing belief that myxomatosis was bio-engineered in Australia to improve its lethality
I always thought that was a given, in spite of the denials.  :unknown:

TailSeeker

  • Guest
True that they are always being researched and developed, but only using what we have already as a basis.

Think in comparison of microchip technology, they get faster and smaller and can do fancier things, but they are all based on the same tech that was discovered and developed decades ago. 

In simplistic terms the next leap/generation/family (whatever you want to call it) is still being researched and experimented with and is still yet to happen/be released.

There was discussion a while ago about using microbes/organisms discovered in deep sea diving and deep cave diving. A lot of our antibiotics are based on plants/mold/microbes/others. No idea though why that fizzled out. Or maybe it didn't. But it's not talked about at all anymore in my circles.

The main problem we have with antibiotic resistance, especially with STDs is that the big single dose is used rather than the multi smaller doses. But also when prescribed antibiotics, many people stop using them once they feel better rather than when the course is finished. Increasing chances of some infectious particles surviving and having resistance due to surviving low dose of the previous treatment.

We see this in TB. Where you don't just have normal TB and drug resistant TB, but normal TB, mono-resistant, poly resistant, multi resistant, extensively resistant, and rifampicin resistant. (That's gone up by 3 types of resistance in the last 10 years).

Research now is branching in a few directions, using old technology/drugs in new ways (gold particles for killing tumours), exploring personalised treatments based on genetics, immuno response manipulation, stimulation of controlled cell death, and others.

I don't know a lot of what pharma is doing. We only ever get a few collaborations, and it's mostly to get us to do initial and early phase tests on the cheap. But we are involved in working with the hospitals on developing unique treatment plans for certain individuals (I'm only a support on that research, so know it just surface wise, my research doesn't really need much involvement with patients. I just get swabs and biopsies).

So in sum. Some of our stuff is based on past work, some is fairly innovative. It's just the papers are boring as anything to read and people keyboard smash when naming drugs/treatments so it becomes difficult to dive into.

Offline cotton

Its incredible how much we still rely on the penicillin family of antibiotics. Like penicillin is the go to treatment for Syphillis.

Offline Reallytired86

Go jump off a building for me. You know, the 'theory' of gravity isn't a fact, according to you. You'll be fine.

 :sarcastic: :sarcastic: :sarcastic:

You clearly don’t study at Oxford.

The theory of gravity explains why things fall i.e gravity, it doesn’t mean “things fall” or “fact of gravity”, the evidence/fact of gravity isn’t to do with the theory. If the theory of gravity was to be disproved today, it wouldn’t mean things stop falling. The theory of gravity was even modified - it doesn’t mean things fell differently.

The theory of evolution isn’t to tell people things evolve, but how things evolve. The reason Dawkins made that comment about theory = fact was people’s misunderstanding that evolution being a theory meant that evolution might have not happened. There were many theories of evolution in the past, many which were incorrect - but at no point did any of those scientists believe evolution didn’t happen.

Evolution is seen as fact due to the evidence, not because of the theory.

Qualification: I am actually a developer, but did do A-level biology and read several of Dawkins books.
« Last Edit: March 31, 2019, 10:40:22 am by Reallytired86 »

Online Doc Holliday

Please can we all (myself included) draw a line under the confrontation element in this thread and which seems to have died down and concentrate just on the topic itself?  :)

Offline MrMicawber

Please can we all (myself included) draw a line under the confrontation element in this thread and which seems to have died down and concentrate just on the topic itself?  :)


That would be a very positive development!

I also have read a couple of Prof. Dawkins books, and viewed many of his online debates and DVDs.  A man who has my profound admiration, not just for his science, but for his mild-mannered ability to argue his points firmly and skilfully, but still with respect, civility and patience, even when faced with opponents who are clearly wanting in knowledge and intelligence - qualities to be emulated if one wants one's views to be well received and fairly considered.

"You'll catch more flies with honey than with vinegar"

Online scutty brown


Perhaps he means bacteriophages .... which are viruses which attack bacteria. ... hence he describes it as a "bacterial virus". Confusion ???

maybe, but phage technology was never accepted in the west and didn't really survive the fall of the iron curtain. The commies used it because they were locked out of purchasing western drugs, but there's little use of it now
Annoying really, as it could be a viable source of treatment

Offline MrMicawber

maybe, but phage technology was never accepted in the west and didn't really survive the fall of the iron curtain. The commies used it because they were locked out of purchasing western drugs, but there's little use of it now
Annoying really, as it could be a viable source of treatment

I don't know much about it or it's use behind the Iron Curtain, but as you suggest, it could turn out to be a fall-back option, in the absence of, or even alongside, antibiotic development. 

"Necessity is the mother of invention"...

But, again, as well as the viability, it will be the R & D money issue, won't it ?   
« Last Edit: March 31, 2019, 11:57:39 am by MrMicawber »

Offline Marmalade

It's just the papers are boring as anything to read

I don’t find medical papers boring to read. Though as you know it’s a case of looking not just what they prove or suggest but the strength of the particular research. Then after looking at the overriding evidence, still being aware of exceptions. (This is for people who can bothered, not for long winded discussions — but just links to relevant stuff is usually what I do myself).

On the present discussion though I think the thread has probably gone as far as is useful.  :hi:

Offline webpunter

Not much
A good 2 or 3 pages back
Parts have resembled something off University Challenge, with obscure topics
And it keeps popping up  :dash:
Can it be locked ?

On the present discussion though I think the thread has probably gone as far as is useful.  :hi:

Offline MrMicawber

Not much
A good 2 or 3 pages back
Parts have resembled something off University Challenge, with obscure topics
And it keeps popping up  :dash:
Can it be locked ?

No-one's under any obligation to read the thread if they're bored with it. Other's might still be interested, and I think it's a bit Dog-In-The-Manger to call for it to be locked just because you're not.



Offline webpunter

Noted  :thumbsup:

No-one's under any obligation to read the thread if they're bored with it. Other's might still be interested, and I think it's a bit Dog-In-The-Manger to call for it to be locked just because you're not.

Offline Marmalade

I agree with webpunter that it should at least be ignored.

a) it comes up too often and people could just RTFF.

b) it tends to incite aggro

c) it’s a medical question that anyone can and should google.

d) most punters welcome OWO. In the unlikely event you contract gonny you’ll probably know within a day or two and get down to the GUM clinic to get it sorted. If you are also fucking your wife/girlfriend and can’t abstain until you know you’re clear, then just keep the jacket on when fucking prostitutes.

e) it tends to be a question favoured by beginners, non-punters, non-contributors and the overly-paranoid. Grow up. Punting is not for the feeble stay-at-home types. Ask your mum before signing on to UKP.

Offline Marmalade

As a courtesy to TTGR, who does not appear to be a beginner, he was asking about dangers prostitutes, not punters. His question was more suited to UKE in my opinion but the thread mostly drew the usual technical spraff which is more appropriate to google/pubmed or fluttery worries from too-worried-to-punt posters.

Offline mrfishyfoo

As a courtesy to TTGR, who does not appear to be a beginner, he was asking about dangers prostitutes, not punters. His question was more suited to UKE in my opinion but the thread mostly drew the usual technical spraff which is more appropriate to google/pubmed or fluttery worries from too-worried-to-punt posters.

Indeed.  :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Offline mrfishyfoo

No-one's under any obligation to read the thread if they're bored with it. Other's might still be interested, and I think it's a bit Dog-In-The-Manger to call for it to be locked just because you're not.

If you put as much effort into your punting as what you have this thread then your first review MrC is going to be an epic.

 
« Last Edit: March 31, 2019, 06:50:37 pm by mrfishyfoo »

Offline webpunter

Well observed
I can't wait - the excitement is virtually unbearable

Think he should put a pad & pen on the bedside table
So when he wakes up he can write everything down & then get the punt inch perfect on here  :lol:

If you put as much effort into your punting as what you have this thread then your first review MrC is going to be an epic.

Offline MrMicawber

Well observed
I can't wait - the excitement is virtually unbearable

Think he should put a pad & pen on the bedside table
So when he wakes up he can write everything down & then get the punt inch perfect on here  :lol:

As I said, you're under no obligation .....

Offline webpunter

 :lol:

As I said, you're under no obligation .....

When its bed time & mummy brings the hot chocolate remind her you need a pen & paper [to do your homework of course]

mikexxlong

  • Guest
well the horse has ran it's course, went off track collapsed got picked up then beaten to death
so I'll beat it yet some more before the carcass is cremation :cool:

The most effective way to reduce the overall risk of oral STD/STI transmission is screening, treatment, and using barriers for oral sex.  :thumbsup:

However, recent studies have also begun to suggest that using antiseptic mouthwash,
such as Listerine, may also be able to reduce the risk of some oral STD transmission
The manufacturers of Listerine have been claiming (even if it took 137 years to get it)  that the mouthwash
(it was never intended as a mouthwash! Listerine was invented in the nineteenth century as a surgical antiseptic.
 Soon afterward it was sold as a floor cleaner and a cure for everything from chapped hands to gonorrhoea :sarcastic:.)
 can cure gonorrhoea, a common sexually transmitted infection that has been increasing

To test the claims about Listerine, scientists first used Listerine Cool Mint and Listerine Total Care, both 21.6% alcohol,
 in petri dishes with a colony of gonorrhoea bacteria. They diluted the Listerine at different levels, from a 1:2 dilution to a 1:32 dilution,
and compared its ability to kill the bacteria to saline. At dilutions of 1:2 and 1:4, the Listerine successfully wiped out the gonorrhoea, unlike the saline.

Then, the researchers conducted a randomized controlled trial with 196 men who have sex with men.
All the men received a standard treatment of antibiotics ceftriaxone and azithromycin,
but 104 of them also gargled for one minute as far back in their throats as they could with 20 mL of Listerine Cool Mint.
 The other 92 gargled with saline.

Five minutes later, the scientists swabbed the men’s tonsils and the backs of their throats.
 Ultimately, only 58 of the men tested positive for gonorrhoea in throat and tonsil swabs before gargling,
 so only these men’s results were analysed: 33 who gargled with Listerine and 25 who gargled with saline.

Of these post-gargling swabs, 84% of the men who gargled with saline had a positive result for gonorrhoea,
 but just 52% of the men who gargled with Listerine did. So half the men who gargled with Listerine for one minute
 no longer had detectable quantities of gonorrhoea bacteria in their mouths.

This is good news, but several major caveats should be immediately noted:
First, the study is very small. Second, the men were tested only 5 minutes after one minute of gargling,
 and the researchers did not test longer-term effects of Listerine on mouth bacteria.
For all we know, the bacteria could have returned a day later, or an hour later or 10 minutes later.

Third, half the men who gargled with Listerine still tested positive for having detectable levels of gonorrhoea bacteria in their mouths,
 so the short-term effect is only half effective based on this small group. Fourth, the study in no way suggests that Listerine can “cure” gonorrhoea.
Only prescribed antibiotics have been shown to treat the infection.
 Fifth, the intervention only addresses oral gonorrhoea—no one is testing or suggesting using mouthwash in the genital area.
 That may not work out too well :music:

yet, the findings, especially if confirmed in larger studies, do suggest that gargling with Listerine can reduce the risk of oral transmission of the STI,
and that’s no small thing.

“If daily use of mouthwash was shown to reduce the duration of untreated infection and/or reduce the probability of acquisition of N. gonorrhoeae
then this readily available, condom less and low-cost intervention may have very significant public health implications in the control of gonorrhoea
 the researchers wrote. “Interventions such as this are urgently needed in the context of rising rates of gonorrhoea in men who have sex with men
and the likelihood that condom use may fall further as condom-free HIV preventions are more widely adopted.”

it's recommend that future studies look at long-term effects and long-term use of Listerine, such as daily use over months.
This study, then, was more of a proof-of-concept study that provides the evidence needed to justify additional larger, longer,
more expensive and more involved studies.
The longer lasting effects of Listerine in the petri dish experiment suggest the same may be possible in people

“In addition, if the load of N. gonorrhoeae was reduced by the mouthwash after a single dose then one might expect that daily mouthwash
 over weeks would potentially reduce the viable number of N. gonorrhoeae, and hence reduce further transmission or reduce the mean duration of infection,”.

researchers don’t know if it’s the alcohol content or another ingredient or combination of ingredients in Listerine that killed the bacteria.
 Therefore, gargling with, say, a shot of vodka before fellatio may not necessarily have any protective effect :D

Online Doc Holliday

I agree with webpunter that it should at least be ignored.

a) it comes up too often and people could just RTFF.

b) it tends to incite aggro

c) it’s a medical question that anyone can and should google.

d) most punters welcome OWO. In the unlikely event you contract gonny you’ll probably know within a day or two and get down to the GUM clinic to get it sorted. If you are also fucking your wife/girlfriend and can’t abstain until you know you’re clear, then just keep the jacket on when fucking prostitutes.

e) it tends to be a question favoured by beginners, non-punters, non-contributors and the overly-paranoid. Grow up. Punting is not for the feeble stay-at-home types. Ask your mum before signing on to UKP.

I wouldn't disagree with most of that that especially (e) but as you know the same topics will inevitably keep cropping up on a vibrant forum once it has been running for some time.

In the world of punting there are a finite number of discussion topics many of which will not change or evolve, unlike say reports which constantly update.

There are dangers to the longevity of a forum when members, especially long standing ones, begin to ignore threads through fatigue of "having read it all before".

A quick glance down the listings page will reveal quite a few perennials apart from this one, including the old favourite "relationship with a wg" although I accept you were referring more specifically to medical threads.

This thread has had over 5k views and the relationship one a remarkable 17k+

If these topics are ignored so that responses wither over time as they inevitably reappear, that is a lot of forum traffic to lose?

I've yet to find an answer to how a specialist forum can deal with this, but I have seen forum fatigue/apathy have a detrimental effect?
« Last Edit: March 31, 2019, 08:43:07 pm by Doc Holliday »

Offline workinallweek

well the horse has ran it's course, went off track collapsed got picked up then beaten to death
so I'll beat it yet some more before the carcass is cremation :cool:

The most effective way to reduce the overall risk of oral STD/STI transmission is screening, treatment, and using barriers for oral sex.  :thumbsup:

However, recent studies have also begun to suggest that using antiseptic mouthwash,
such as Listerine, may also be able to reduce the risk of some oral STD transmission
The manufacturers of Listerine have been claiming (even if it took 137 years to get it)  that the mouthwash
(it was never intended as a mouthwash! Listerine was invented in the nineteenth century as a surgical antiseptic.
 Soon afterward it was sold as a floor cleaner and a cure for everything from chapped hands to gonorrhoea :sarcastic:.)
 can cure gonorrhoea, a common sexually transmitted infection that has been increasing

To test the claims about Listerine, scientists first used Listerine Cool Mint and Listerine Total Care, both 21.6% alcohol,
 in petri dishes with a colony of gonorrhoea bacteria. They diluted the Listerine at different levels, from a 1:2 dilution to a 1:32 dilution,
and compared its ability to kill the bacteria to saline. At dilutions of 1:2 and 1:4, the Listerine successfully wiped out the gonorrhoea, unlike the saline.

Then, the researchers conducted a randomized controlled trial with 196 men who have sex with men.
All the men received a standard treatment of antibiotics ceftriaxone and azithromycin,
but 104 of them also gargled for one minute as far back in their throats as they could with 20 mL of Listerine Cool Mint.
 The other 92 gargled with saline.

Five minutes later, the scientists swabbed the men’s tonsils and the backs of their throats.
 Ultimately, only 58 of the men tested positive for gonorrhoea in throat and tonsil swabs before gargling,
 so only these men’s results were analysed: 33 who gargled with Listerine and 25 who gargled with saline.

Of these post-gargling swabs, 84% of the men who gargled with saline had a positive result for gonorrhoea,
 but just 52% of the men who gargled with Listerine did. So half the men who gargled with Listerine for one minute
 no longer had detectable quantities of gonorrhoea bacteria in their mouths.

This is good news, but several major caveats should be immediately noted:
First, the study is very small. Second, the men were tested only 5 minutes after one minute of gargling,
 and the researchers did not test longer-term effects of Listerine on mouth bacteria.
For all we know, the bacteria could have returned a day later, or an hour later or 10 minutes later.

Third, half the men who gargled with Listerine still tested positive for having detectable levels of gonorrhoea bacteria in their mouths,
 so the short-term effect is only half effective based on this small group. Fourth, the study in no way suggests that Listerine can “cure” gonorrhoea.
Only prescribed antibiotics have been shown to treat the infection.
 Fifth, the intervention only addresses oral gonorrhoea—no one is testing or suggesting using mouthwash in the genital area.
 That may not work out too well :music:

yet, the findings, especially if confirmed in larger studies, do suggest that gargling with Listerine can reduce the risk of oral transmission of the STI,
and that’s no small thing.

“If daily use of mouthwash was shown to reduce the duration of untreated infection and/or reduce the probability of acquisition of N. gonorrhoeae
then this readily available, condom less and low-cost intervention may have very significant public health implications in the control of gonorrhoea
 the researchers wrote. “Interventions such as this are urgently needed in the context of rising rates of gonorrhoea in men who have sex with men
and the likelihood that condom use may fall further as condom-free HIV preventions are more widely adopted.”

it's recommend that future studies look at long-term effects and long-term use of Listerine, such as daily use over months.
This study, then, was more of a proof-of-concept study that provides the evidence needed to justify additional larger, longer,
more expensive and more involved studies.
The longer lasting effects of Listerine in the petri dish experiment suggest the same may be possible in people

“In addition, if the load of N. gonorrhoeae was reduced by the mouthwash after a single dose then one might expect that daily mouthwash
 over weeks would potentially reduce the viable number of N. gonorrhoeae, and hence reduce further transmission or reduce the mean duration of infection,”.

researchers don’t know if it’s the alcohol content or another ingredient or combination of ingredients in Listerine that killed the bacteria.
 Therefore, gargling with, say, a shot of vodka before fellatio may not necessarily have any protective effect :D


Any chance that a good Brandy might have the same effect ????        Sorry
Banned reason: Offering glowing positive reviews for free bookings.
Banned by: daviemac

mikexxlong

  • Guest

Any chance that a good Brandy might have the same effect ????        Sorry


might very well do  :D

but until a lab coat wearing or  some government type says it does (even if it doesn't)
we will never know  :rolleyes:

Offline workinallweek


might very well do  :D

but until a lab coat wearing or  some government type says it does (even if it doesn't)
we will never know  :rolleyes:


will ask a friend   :D
Banned reason: Offering glowing positive reviews for free bookings.
Banned by: daviemac

Offline Marmalade

It’s maybe to the forum’s advantage in my opinion to the limit the patience and kindness extended to persons who can’t be bothered RTTfuckingF. Otherwise laziness becomes standard and the forum would become useless (to all except lazy idiots).

It is not to do with how long you’ve been here.

We have a first rate search engine thanks to Admin’s dedication and kindness. Is it too much to ask people to use it??

Just try entering “CIM STD”.  :rolleyes:

The forum prioritises information over chitchat.

Online Doc Holliday

It’s maybe to the forum’s advantage in my opinion to the limit the patience and kindness extended to persons who can’t be bothered RTTfuckingF. Otherwise laziness becomes standard and the forum would become useless (to all except lazy idiots).

It is not to do with how long you’ve been here.

We have a first rate search engine thanks to Admin’s dedication and kindness. Is it too much to ask people to use it??

Just try entering “CIM STD”.  :rolleyes:

The forum prioritises information over chitchat.


Agreed. I thrive on search engines, but if forums ignore or take punitive action against lazy bastards who start new threads rather than searching for that information, then you lose new threads and ultimately traffic. You are never going to educate them otherwise. This is balanced against the effect it has on more established members who get bored with being nice to lazy bastards.

As I said I'm not sure there is an answer to the conundrum other than just accepting what it is? I certainly don't have a solution?



Online Doc Holliday

Re Listerine etc it rather fits in with Marmalade's post about deciphering the relative importance of scientific papers/studies.

I seem to recall some evidence that daily use  of antibacterial mouthwash may significantly increase diabetes risk?

The 'swings and roundabouts' of life.


Online scutty brown

Re Listerine etc it rather fits in with Marmalade's post about deciphering the relative importance of scientific papers/studies.

I seem to recall some evidence that daily use  of antibacterial mouthwash may significantly increase diabetes risk?

The 'swings and roundabouts' of life.

more likely to have been it reduces heart disease........seems to be a link with dental decay

Offline mrfishyfoo

Agreed. I thrive on search engines, but if forums ignore or take punitive action against lazy bastards who start new threads rather than searching for that information, then you lose new threads and ultimately traffic. You are never going to educate them otherwise. This is balanced against the effect it has on more established members who get bored with being nice to lazy bastards.

As I said I'm not sure there is an answer to the conundrum other than just accepting what it is? I certainly don't have a solution?

 :lol: :lol: :lol:

Offline mrfishyfoo

It’s maybe to the forum’s advantage in my opinion to the limit the patience and kindness extended to persons who can’t be bothered RTTfuckingF. Otherwise laziness becomes standard and the forum would become useless (to all except lazy idiots).

It is not to do with how long you’ve been here.

We have a first rate search engine thanks to Admin’s dedication and kindness. Is it too much to ask people to use it??

Just try entering “CIM STD”.  :rolleyes:

The forum prioritises information over chitchat.

Not difficult is it.  :hi: :hi:

Offline Marmalade

I don’t think we’ve been too hard on the OP, though others are entitled to a different opinion. “57+ new reviews per day, 1,000+ message postings per day, 600,000+ unique visitors per month and 12+ million pageviews per month.” Not exactly short of traffic ...

And Admin clamps down if established members get too censorious.

Changing the subject ... I wish more prossies would do a two minute Listerine gargle between customers. Many of them would taste a lot better.

Online Doc Holliday

more likely to have been it reduces heart disease........seems to be a link with dental decay

Not decay but periodontitis (gum disease) There have been many studies and reviews of studies over the last 30 years and it is pretty much agreed and established that there is a link between these two and mouthwashes of course may have a beneficial effect in treatment of gum disease.

I was referring to a possible detrimental effect which was this External Link/Members Only

Online Doc Holliday

I don’t think we’ve been too hard on the OP, though others are entitled to a different opinion. “57+ new reviews per day, 1,000+ message postings per day, 600,000+ unique visitors per month and 12+ million pageviews per month.” Not exactly short of traffic ...

And Admin clamps down if established members get too censorious.


Apologies for dragging this off topic but would like to make one final point. Just took a quick screenshot of the ten most recent threads as I type.

Hidden Image/Members Only

At least half of those are regularly repeated topics. If each one had started off with replies saying "all been done before just try searching *****" or "google the NHS website" then it can have e detrimental effect on newly posting (albeit lazy) members and potentially then on the forum health in maintaining what are outstanding stats in the longer term.

We all just have to put up with the lazy bastards  ;) :)

« Last Edit: April 01, 2019, 08:51:43 am by Doc Holliday »

Offline MrMicawber

well the horse has ran it's course, went off track collapsed got picked up then beaten to death
so I'll beat it yet some more before the carcass is cremation :cool:

The most effective way to reduce the overall risk of oral STD/STI transmission is screening, treatment, and using barriers for oral sex.  :thumbsup:

However, recent studies have also begun to suggest that using antiseptic mouthwash,
such as Listerine, may also be able to reduce the risk of some oral STD transmission
The manufacturers of Listerine have been claiming (even if it took 137 years to get it)  that the mouthwash
(it was never intended as a mouthwash! Listerine was invented in the nineteenth century as a surgical antiseptic.
 Soon afterward it was sold as a floor cleaner and a cure for everything from chapped hands to gonorrhoea :sarcastic:.)
 can cure gonorrhoea, a common sexually transmitted infection that has been increasing

To test the claims about Listerine, scientists first used Listerine Cool Mint and Listerine Total Care, both 21.6% alcohol,
 in petri dishes with a colony of gonorrhoea bacteria. They diluted the Listerine at different levels, from a 1:2 dilution to a 1:32 dilution,
and compared its ability to kill the bacteria to saline. At dilutions of 1:2 and 1:4, the Listerine successfully wiped out the gonorrhoea, unlike the saline.

Then, the researchers conducted a randomized controlled trial with 196 men who have sex with men.
All the men received a standard treatment of antibiotics ceftriaxone and azithromycin,
but 104 of them also gargled for one minute as far back in their throats as they could with 20 mL of Listerine Cool Mint.
 The other 92 gargled with saline.

Five minutes later, the scientists swabbed the men’s tonsils and the backs of their throats.
 Ultimately, only 58 of the men tested positive for gonorrhoea in throat and tonsil swabs before gargling,
 so only these men’s results were analysed: 33 who gargled with Listerine and 25 who gargled with saline.

Of these post-gargling swabs, 84% of the men who gargled with saline had a positive result for gonorrhoea,
 but just 52% of the men who gargled with Listerine did. So half the men who gargled with Listerine for one minute
 no longer had detectable quantities of gonorrhoea bacteria in their mouths.

This is good news, but several major caveats should be immediately noted:
First, the study is very small. Second, the men were tested only 5 minutes after one minute of gargling,
 and the researchers did not test longer-term effects of Listerine on mouth bacteria.
For all we know, the bacteria could have returned a day later, or an hour later or 10 minutes later.

Third, half the men who gargled with Listerine still tested positive for having detectable levels of gonorrhoea bacteria in their mouths,
 so the short-term effect is only half effective based on this small group. Fourth, the study in no way suggests that Listerine can “cure” gonorrhoea.
Only prescribed antibiotics have been shown to treat the infection.
 Fifth, the intervention only addresses oral gonorrhoea—no one is testing or suggesting using mouthwash in the genital area.
 That may not work out too well :music:

yet, the findings, especially if confirmed in larger studies, do suggest that gargling with Listerine can reduce the risk of oral transmission of the STI,
and that’s no small thing.

“If daily use of mouthwash was shown to reduce the duration of untreated infection and/or reduce the probability of acquisition of N. gonorrhoeae
then this readily available, condom less and low-cost intervention may have very significant public health implications in the control of gonorrhoea
 the researchers wrote. “Interventions such as this are urgently needed in the context of rising rates of gonorrhoea in men who have sex with men
and the likelihood that condom use may fall further as condom-free HIV preventions are more widely adopted.”

it's recommend that future studies look at long-term effects and long-term use of Listerine, such as daily use over months.
This study, then, was more of a proof-of-concept study that provides the evidence needed to justify additional larger, longer,
more expensive and more involved studies.
The longer lasting effects of Listerine in the petri dish experiment suggest the same may be possible in people

“In addition, if the load of N. gonorrhoeae was reduced by the mouthwash after a single dose then one might expect that daily mouthwash
 over weeks would potentially reduce the viable number of N. gonorrhoeae, and hence reduce further transmission or reduce the mean duration of infection,”.

researchers don’t know if it’s the alcohol content or another ingredient or combination of ingredients in Listerine that killed the bacteria.
 Therefore, gargling with, say, a shot of vodka before fellatio may not necessarily have any protective effect :D


Thanks for making the effort to share this.  Worth knowing.

Offline Marmalade

We all just have to put up with the lazy bastards  ;) :)

Good luck and enjoy. But why are you defending a troll?
No need to answer (though doubtless you will).

I think I’ve made my point & humoured the lazy bastard troll quite enough for one session so wish you all the best in dragging out the thread. :D

Online Doc Holliday

Good luck and enjoy. But why are you defending a troll?
No need to answer (though doubtless you will).

I tried hard not to honestly   ;) :D

Only reason I did was to ask who is/was the troll in this thread? ... not including me that is  :)

Online scutty brown

..............Changing the subject ... I wish more prossies would do a two minute Listerine gargle between customers. Many of them would taste a lot better.

Dunno about gargling, but some of them need a Listerine douche

Offline webpunter

I deffo feel more comfortable having been noshed off when they do this post punt

Fresh breath & more importantly hopefully killing off some nasties

Enuf of em do it so there must be sumfink behind this

If they do this i usually ask can i have a bit please [assuming FK DFK {rare} RO]

Fingers crossed they did the gargle before i rocked up

Changing the subject ... I wish more prossies would do a two minute Listerine gargle between customers. Many of them would taste a lot better.

Offline webpunter

Nuffink worse that the taste of latex

Dunno about gargling, but some of them need a Listerine douche

Well apart from bellus endus  :lol:  :scare:

TailSeeker

  • Guest
I don’t find medical papers boring to read. Though as you know it’s a case of looking not just what they prove or suggest but the strength of the particular research. Then after looking at the overriding evidence, still being aware of exceptions. (This is for people who can bothered, not for long winded discussions — but just links to relevant stuff is usually what I do myself).

On the present discussion though I think the thread has probably gone as far as is useful.  :hi:

Perhaps so. I guess because I have to read several a day they become pretty boring a repetitive. I'd even class my own papers in that group, even my early work that was outside of cancer and STDs.

The thread has rather shifted gears now. Will likely die out soon. As many a prior thread in this field has.