Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / AIDS / April 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Condom Use Linked to Risk of Preeclampsia

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
PaulKing - 09 Apr 2005 10:45 GMT
Condom Use Linked to Risk of Preeclampsia

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/433419?srcmp=wh-051002

LOS ANGELES (Reuters Health) May 09 - Women who are not exposed to a
partner's sperm prior to pregnancy because the couple used condoms may be
at increased risk for developing preeclampsia, a new study presented here
concludes.

The findings suggest that when the uterus is repeatedly exposed to sperm,
a woman's immune system may become accustomed to this "foreign" genetic
material, said Dr. Jon I. Einarsson, an obstetrician/gynecologist at
Baylor College of Medicine in Houston.

However, when a woman's body has only recently been introduced to the
sperm because she stopped using barrier contraception and was trying to
conceive, she may have an immune reaction to the paternal genetic material
that causes arterial damage and contributes to preeclampsia, Dr. Einarsson
suggested. This reaction may be heightened because the placenta produces
paternal proteins similar to those on sperm, he told Reuters Health.

Preeclampsia affects about 7% of pregnant women, yet little is understood
about why the condition develops, according to the American College of
Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). The Baylor study findings were
presented Wednesday during the College's annual meeting.

Dr. Einarsson described his team's findings for 113 women who developed
preeclampsia during their pregnancies and another 226 women who did not.

He said those who used barrier methods and had only been having sex with
their partners for a short period of time were most at risk. "Women who
used barrier methods who had been having sex with their partners for less
than 4 months prior to getting pregnant had a 6.5-fold increased risk of
getting preeclampsia, compared with women who did not use barrier methods
and had been in a sexual relationship for more than 12 months," he said.

Most women in the study who reported using barrier contraception relied on
condoms, while some also used diaphragms. Women who relied on the
withdrawal method also were included in this group.

"Women who use barrier methods exclusively prior to pregnancy should
consider changing to an alternative method 4 to 6 months prior to getting
pregnant, especially if they have other risk factors for preeclampsia,
such as diabetes, high blood pressure, or if they are overweight," Dr.
Einarsson recommended.

http://www.ldsbirth.homestead.com/condoms.html
dsaklad@zurich.csail.mit.edu - 09 Apr 2005 11:17 GMT
> http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/433419?srcmp=wh-051002

         What should be that correct link?... It did not work !
PaulKing - 09 Apr 2005 22:57 GMT
I just tried it and it work just fine for me.
GMCarter - 09 Apr 2005 23:36 GMT
>Condom Use Linked to Risk of Preeclampsia
>
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>at increased risk for developing preeclampsia, a new study presented here
>concludes.
snip...
>He said those who used barrier methods and had only been having sex with
>their partners for a short period of time were most at risk. "Women who
>used barrier methods who had been having sex with their partners for less
>than 4 months prior to getting pregnant had a 6.5-fold increased risk of
>getting preeclampsia, compared with women who did not use barrier methods
>and had been in a sexual relationship for more than 12 months," he said.

Thus, CONDOMS do not CAUSE pre-eclampsia. Simply new exposure to sperm
increases the risk.  Knowing that this may be a risk, women can be
treated to prevent eclampsia from developing.  Eclampsia occurs in
about 1 of 200 pregnancies where the woman develops pre-eclampsia.

While it is a risk to be aware of, it does not mean men should not
wear condoms! To the contrary.

HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases can have much more of an
impact on risks for pregnancy complications (as can substance use such
as nicotine, diuretics (which may mask pre-eclampsia symptoms),
alcohol, and various other drugs.

Better to use the condom, despite Paul's delirium and demented
interpretations.

        George M. Carter
PaulKing - 09 Apr 2005 23:59 GMT
Are condoms a greater health risk than the std's they don't really protect
against?

It is politically correct to advocate condoms but every day the evidence
increases that they do little to protect and may pose a very serious
health risk. It is hard for the CDC and FDA to examine these risks as they
have been so vocal in promoting condoms but could their silence lead to
dire consequences. I for one having done exaustive research strongly feel
so.

"...... new concerns are arising regarding allergic or other toxic
reactions to various components of latex condoms such as vulcanization
accelerators, latex proteins, spermicides and finishing powders."

"* Studies are needed to evaluate the best lubricants to use in the
manufacture of condoms. Evidence suggests that the right quantity, type
and placement of lubricant is important for condom functionality,
acceptability and safety.

In addition, the added value and risk presented by spermicidal lubricants
and by dry finishing powders (e.g. talc or cornstarch) should be
critically examined."

"Since the late 1980s the reported incidence
of allergy to natural rubber latex has increased dramatically, as much as
12 -fold."

"Latex allergy is incurable, although the symptoms, such as itching,
soreness, painful blistering, runny noses, swollen eyes, asthma symptoms
and anaphylaxis can be ameliorated.

Everyone who has contact wi th natural rubber latex is potentially at risk
from sensitisation.

Both patients and health care workers can be at risk from allergic
reactions to natural rubber latex. Over the past decade, allergic
reactions to natural
rubber latex have become a major public health concern."

" Once a person has developed latex allergy, however mild, they are
“sensitised” to latex and are at risk from severe allergic reactions."

"Delayed cell-mediated reactions are the most common form of
hypersensitivity reaction to natural rubber latex. These reactions are to
individual chemical residues from the production process such as
accelerants used in the vulcanisation process which is required to
strengthen the product.

The residual chemicals may bloo on the surface of the products and can be
absorbed through the skin upon contact."

"Potent Carcinogen found in Most Condoms

Recent study has discovered the presence of a very potent carcinogen in
most condoms. Small amounts of this chemical are released whenever condoms
are used.

Nobody knows whether this is serious yet however it is not likely to be
healthy to expose the reproductive organs to cancer-causing substances on
a regular basis.

This is a potentially serious issue for much of the world's population
that cannot afford or access other forms of birth control. I hope further
studies will follow on this soon. Could this be related to the rise in
cancer in women, and men as well? "

"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)"

"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

"Benzene. In addition to the effect on fertility, some researchers believe
overexposure to chemicals may also contribute to testicular cancers. In
fact, a 2000 study concluded that there was a link between sperm
abnormalities and testicular cancer.
Among the study participants, men in couples with fertility problems were
more likely to develop testicular cancer. In addition, low semen
concentration, poor sperm motility, and abnormal sperm morphology were all
associated with increased risk for testicular cancer."

"a recent Lancet study (2002;360:971-977) found frequent use may in fact
increase the risk of HIV transmission.
The head of the Australian Federation of AIDS Organizations, Don Baxter,
said up to 10 percent of condoms sold in Australia include nonoxynol-9 as
a lubricant. "Not a high percentage of condoms use nonoxynol-9, it's
usually a particular brand, but they are fairly widely available," he
said. Baxter advised all gay men to avoid using condoms with nonoxynol-9
and said AFAO would call for the product to be withdrawn from pharmacy
shelves. "

"The allergens that cause reactions in individuals with spina bifida are
particle bound proteins that are less able to be dissolved in water than
some of the other latex proteins"

*  Talc - This is found in baby powders, face powders, body powders as
well as some contraceptives such as condoms.  Talc is a known carcinogen
and is a major cause of ovarian cancer when used in the genital area.  It
can be harmful if inhaled as it can lodge in the lungs, causing
respiratory disorders."

Condoms contain compounds known to cause cancer and serious birth defects
in substantial quantities

SOURCES. Condom Industry web site, medical publications and Beacon
Pharmaceuticals.
GMCarter - 10 Apr 2005 10:23 GMT
>Are condoms a greater health risk than the std's they don't really protect
>against?

LOL. You should write for Bush.

Condoms significantly reduce the risk of many STDs. They're very
effective. And they are harmless for 99.9% of the population that uses
them.

It never ceases to amaze me how you will take some very thin data and
make claims of belief of threat and danger based on them, yet ample
data regarding HIV you toss aside as unprofitable for your porn
business, I guess.

        George M. Carter
PaulKing - 10 Apr 2005 00:01 GMT
Ignore Mr. (Slimey Condom Mania) Carter AND NEVER, NEVER USE TOXIC
CONDOMS.

He tells you to ignore the mountain of evidence that condoms cause cancer,
birth defects, infertility and deadly type IV reactions.

He is a lier and a fool.
 
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.