 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / AIDS / October 2004JAMA -Condoms may cause fallopian tube fibrosis with resultant infertility
Talc...(on condoms)...may result in fallopian tube fibrosis with resultant infertility. Question raised by Doctors Kasper and Chandler in Journal of the American Medical Association. (JAMA) 3/15/95 -from Nutrition Health Review, Summer 1995 n73p8(1) Talc Linked to Ovarian Cancer Talc is a very fine substance, so fine it can be used as a “dry” lubricant. Talc is chemically similar to asbestas, a known cancer causing substances. Talc is found in many “body and baby” powders, feminine powders and many cosmetics. It’s also used as a lubricant on condoms! While it makes your skin “feel” slippery smooth; Talc does so much more! How does Talc keep babies and your private parts so “fresh”? Presumably by clogging the pores that secrete those neccesary fluids. Could those fine little particles manage to get into the system? TALC being similar to asbestos is not comforting, especially when used on babies and genital areas. Talc’s harmful effect on human tissue has been known for quite some time. Long ago, its dry lubricating properties were used as a glovedonning powder (easy to slide on) for surgical gloves. As early as the 1930s, talc was linked to post-operative granulonatous peritonitis and fibrous adhesions. Talc... (on condoms)... may result in fallopian tube fibrosis with resultant infertility. - Question raised by Doctors Kasper and Chandler in Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) 3/15/95 Nutrition Health Review, Summer 1995 n73 p8 (1) “A possible tie between talcum powder and ovarian cancer, long suspected last week when a study found a higher risk of the cancer among women who dusted themselves with talc or used feminine deodorant sprays. The study, published in the American Journal of Epidemiology, found that women who used talcum powder in the genial area has an increased ovarian cancer risk of 60% and women who used feminine deodorant sprays had a 90% increased risk.” In 1994, the FDA conducted a scientific workshop on the issue and did not find enough of a causal link to justify even a consumer warning. - U.S. News & World Report, March 17.1997 v122 n10 p77(1) While more studies link talc to ovarian carcinoma and urinary tract disorders - and cancer rates soar - the FDA is waiting for conclusive evidence. But don’t worry about the surgeons. You see, talc is not used in glove-donning powders any more... but is still found in cosmetics, powders and condoms! So while they protect their health, their flow of patients may be protected as well! "A possible tie between talcum powder and ovarian cancer, long suspected because of talc's chemical similarity to asbestos, was strongly supported last week when a study found a higher risk of the cancer among women who used feminine deodorant sprays. The study, published in the American Journal of Epidemiology, found that women who used talcum powder in the genital area had an increased ovarian cancer risk of 60% and women who used feminine deodorant sprays had a 90% increased risk." -from The University of California, Berkeley Wellness Letter, April 1993 v9n7p1 > "A possible tie between talcum powder and ovarian cancer, long suspected > because of talc's chemical similarity to asbestos, was strongly supported [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > -from The University of California, Berkeley Wellness Letter, April 1993 > v9n7p1 There is another way to look at this. The women who tend to use deodorants tend to have something unwholesome cooking downthere. Perhaps there is another reason behind this higher risk of cancer? "Jordan" <jord@nian.net> wrote in message > There is another way to look at this. The women who tend to use > deodorants tend to have something unwholesome cooking downthere. Perhaps > there is another reason behind this higher risk of cancer? You make a valid point. This so-called "feminine hygiene" is a myth that few South African women that I know buy in to, but in the States there seems to be quite a wide spread idea that these things somehow make women "good and clean and fresh" so they spend fortunes on things that cause the very problems they sell themselves as preventing. I thought this was one of the most obvious differences between South African women and American women when I visited the States in 2002. American women use deodorising "everything" from gum to "feminine hygiene" sprays. I didn't meet any American women with body odour, but then I don't meet many South African women with body odour either. The idea that women who practice "normal" hygiene are somehow "dirty" simply because they are women is misogynistic in the extreme. The process of washing the external part of the female genitalia in the normal process of bathing/showering on a daily basis is more than adequate for prevention of body odour. Most women prefer to do this twice daily while menstruating, and in places which are hot and humid bathing or showering twice daily is also probably standard. I suspect that the rise in cancer is simply the combined results of living longer with more cancer causing substances. When the life expectancy of the "average" woman was 45 years then it was likely that very few women got cancer. When the life expectancy rose then it became more likely that women would die of cancer. Also, when the statistics refer only to those "female" complaints relating to anything from botched legal and illegal voluntary abortions, septic spontaneous abortions, preganancy problems, infertility problems, problems with reproductive organs etc. then it also makes sense that the percentage of people being seen for cancer is rising against the number of other problems as other problems become somewhat easier to treat. And I'm not sure what statistics are being quoted. Moira, the Faerie Godmother "Moira de Swardt" <moira.deswardt@wol.co.za> wrote: > When the life > expectancy of the "average" woman was 45 years then it was likely > that very few women got cancer. When the life expectancy rose then > it became more likely that women would die of cancer. You are extremely ignorant. Even in Ancient Greece the average life expectancy for women (and men) was almost exactly what it is today. The reason the average life expectancy foe ALL BORN PEOPLE, however, was lower and has been consistantly rising. In earlier ages the death of babies and children was so common that it lowered the average life expectancy....but the life expectancy of a "woman"...or "a man" (meaning they had passed adolescence still alive)...was not all that different from today. "tyronerie" <qerty678@yahoo.com> wrote in message > > When the life > > expectancy of the "average" woman was 45 years then it was likely > > that very few women got cancer. When the life expectancy rose then > > it became more likely that women would die of cancer. > You are extremely ignorant. Even in Ancient Greece the average life > expectancy for women (and men) was almost exactly what it is today. > The reason the average life expectancy foe ALL BORN PEOPLE, however, > was lower and has been consistantly rising. > In earlier ages the death of babies and children was so common that it > lowered the average life expectancy....but the life expectancy of a > "woman"...or "a man" (meaning they had passed adolescence still > alive)...was not all that different from today. Women have always had the problem of childbearing. In days of yore it was common for a woman to die in childbirth - even today this is risky - I have known of two women who have died during pregnancy (eclampsia - spelling?) and childbirth (cause unknown to me). People died at a younger age than they would today because of a whole range of things from which people do not usually die today - scarlet fever, measles and undetected cancers amongst them. Moira, the Faerie Godmother >> When the life >> expectancy of the "average" woman was 45 years then it was likely [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > "woman"...or "a man" (meaning they had passed adolescence still > alive)...was not all that different from today. So let me get this clear what your saying is if someone alive in 100 BC managed to live past middle age the life expectancy for that person would be the same as it is today. What you simply don't understand is that it is perfectly reasonable to estimate the average life expectancy for a population based on that entire population not on the statistically long lived members of that population. Thus your statement is totally misapplied when used in the context of what Moira was commenting about. The odds of living from birth to past the age of 45 in 100 BC was orders of magnitude lower then it is today, in the developed world at the least. Gary Stein >Talc Linked to Ovarian Cancer >Talc is a very fine substance, so fine it can be used as a dry >lubricant. Who puts talc on condoms? How much is there compared to other methods? Wow. You'll believe the most weak-assed, way out distal non-connections to things to support your craziness while ignoring the fact that HIV exists and causes AIDS and demanding ever higher proofs. I have the kinda horrible feeling you'll be finding out soon enough. Best of luck. George M. Carter "Who puts talc on condoms? How much is there compared to other methods?" Silly questions. The manufacturers, is the first answer (obvious). The quantity is considerable as it's function is to prevent the latex sticking together and to provide a lubricant. Compared to 'other methods' the quantity is similar as the function remains the same. The 'other methods' you refer to are the use of silicone (also a carcinogen). You are rude, lacking in knowledge of the subject and a fool. You think insults are a good alternative to facts and rational debate. They are not my friend. They simply expose you character faults and ignorance. Paul |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.