Scientists studying swingers say they have higher rates of sexually transmitted infections than prostitutes.
Article Source: msnbc.com
from:msnbc.comSTI risk higher for swingers than prostitutes
Seeded on Wed Jun 23, 2010 9:09 PM EDT (msnbc.com)
- msnbc.com sites & shows:
- TODAY
- Rock Center
- Nightly News
- Meet the Press
- Dateline
- Morning Joe
- Hardball
- Ed
- Maddow
- Last Word
- msnbc tv
Leave a Comment:
Based on the results of this study more than 11% of the population are "swingers" and prostitution is the safest way to engage in sexual activity and avoid STIs...
With medical research like this, who needs enemies... No wonder wealthy patients chose to be treated in the US as opposed to Europe or Great Brittan.
Somehow it's noteworthy and clinically significant to publish a study highlighting research saying that "swingers" have the same statistically significant likelihood of contracting STIs as "straight" people.
While an exciting prospect, somehow it seems somewhat unreasonable... The fact that two such historically well revered organizations (the BMJ & Reuters) would promote this as exceptional is truly sad. That MSNBC calls it "journalism"... well... (but here I am reading it so what's that say about me...).
Flabbergasted, I completely agree with you. A 10% rate among "straight" people versus a 10.4% rate among swingers? There's no statistical difference. The title of the article could have easily said "STI risk higher for straight people than swingers." I don't get the point.
As a result of its geography and unique history, the Dutch are practical people whose sexual morals, among their other cultural values, are quite different than those in many parts of the world. It appears the study involved only native Dutch and hence the sampling is rather narrow to permit any conclusion to have broad application. While the finding of this study is illuminating, the scope of the study indicates caution as to formulating any meaningful medical-social policy.
I had to read that paragraph a few times also. It looks like a typographical error. They can't possibly mean that prostitutes have 1/2 the risk of STIs that ordinary monogamous couples do. And I'm sure they didn't mean swingers only had a 0.4% increased risk over ordinary couples either.
The Dutch have also regulated the industry of prostitution. If a prostitute is caught engaging in sex without a prophylactic she will lose her license to engage in profitable sex...thus discounting the analysis for those nations that do not regulate prostitution.
Also, why does it take a statistician to know that sex by swingers is more likely to promote STD infection? Do scientists find that such studies make them look MORE intelligent or LESS so? What are the statistics on this?
.
.
wow, news you can use.
This story is about as surprising as the fact that just about every article I read on MSNBC contains at least one typo error like the example below where the "s" is missing from the word "meeting". Who proof reads their work... Jack Daniels?
Amazing...I think people who think for themselves would call this article in its entirety a "Truism", ( a duh moment).
I think that the title to this article needs to
"Hookers are the cleanest sex partners"
Not
"STI risk higher for swingers than prostitutes"
Swingers only had a .4% higher risk of STI's then the genreal population, and was 5% lower than Gay males?
I find it very interesting that they titled this article as a bias against swingers, when the reality of the article is nothing of the sort...
Thats cause prostitutes aren't stupid enough to not wear condoms, some of those guys they are about to sleep with just came from sleeping with another girl. Plus alot of swingers come from upper class so they probably think oh I wont get anything either that or because they may think they know the person they are sleeping with.
you
The researchers also classified anyone that identified as heterosexual, in a relationship, and had heterosexual sex outside that relationship as a "swinger". This also could include people cheating on their partner. The distinction was never made of "sex outside the primary relationship with the knowledge and consent of all involved" which is what swinging is. This is also evident in the researcher's number of "swingers" being more than 10-times higher than any other study ever done. Another thing that skews the data is that it was only obtained from health clinics, and outside of sex workers that get checked regularly, most everyone else only go to the doctor when something is itching or burning, so of course the numbers having an STI will be higher for them.
An overlook statistic here is that those tagged as "swingers" in the study, whether they were or not, only have a 0.4% higher instance of STI's than the heterosexual non-swingers control group. So where's the story here? It could easily been titled "Monogamous straight people have twice the instance of STI's as prostitutes"
I see the idiots are out again complaining that someone did a scientific study. Look, morons, you can not know reality until you study it. And you can't study it unless you use proper protocol, including using statistics. If you idiots came out and said that swingers got more STDs than everyone else without doing a study then someone, likely the swingers, is going to say you are an idiot because you have no proof. So, there you have it. The people not wanting to do the studies are idiots and the swingers are idiots. I did not need a study to figure that out.