So to continue our discussion on internet culture this morning we have a perfect opportunity to introduce another internet phrase:
O’RLY? which literally translates to “oh really?” However it is meant with a sarcastic tone so maybe a better translation would be “No F$^%ing S*^&” or “No S#$% Sherlock”
In an older post I documented a perfect example of this where some brilliant scientists were able to link alcohol consumption with aggression Add this to the no sh@t file…...
Today we have yet another get example Men taking Viagra risk sex diseases
It’s almost like they are trying to say that having sex makes it more likely you will get a sex diseases[sic] (I assume by this they mean sexually transmitted disease) but that’s just crazy talk…..
“At a minimum, use of ED drugs seems to correlate with higher-risk sexual behavior, either in the number or type of sexual encounters.”
O”RLY? Wow I hope this researcher got a whole bunch of my tax dollars, money that would have been otherwise “wasted” researching alternate energy sources (ones that might actually work not the BS ones we have now) or paying down the national debt.
The study suggests that 40% of men at some time have ED issues but only 7% seek one of these drugs for it. Of course the people in this small sub-population, the ones who are willing to have “the talk” with their doctor, are much more interested in and/or likely to be having sex. So what this study is telling me is men who are more interested in and/or likely to have sex, and who are physiologically now “able” to have sex are more likely to have sex than the general population….. SLOW DOWN …..
In order for this study to have any meaning at all you would have to assume there was some sort of bias between the innate(i.e. before they had ED) riskiness of men with ED and men without ED which I doubt exist. The reporter even talks about the critical piece of information
This infection rate was higher even in the year before the men got their prescriptions filled, which suggests the risky behavior came first, the researchers reported in the Annals of Internal Medicine.
But fails to mention its significance, imo, because he doesn’t get it…. This statement virtually refutes the entire premise of this article.
This study is saying nothing more or less than if you take a sample from a population of the 15-20% of men with the highest interests in or desire to have sex who also are likely to be able to have sex in the near to midterm (i.e. access to a partner). Then this group will be more likely to end up with the STDs ….. A brilliant conclusion I bet this reporter covered Wall Street in 2007/2008 … I’d go as far as to say this study would only be news worthy if they found men taking ED had the same or less likely hood of getting STDs as the general population.
Lastly as a parting shot I’ve got to really hammer the journalist because the title of the article “Men taking Viagra risk sex diseases” is obviously implying that taking Viagra somehow gives you some type of “Sex Disease”[sic] (do media outlets even hire editors anymore) when the information in the article clearly shows the exact opposite. A much more responsible title would have been. “Having More Interest in / Opportunity to have Sex Increases Your Risk of Getting a Sexually Transmitted Diseases” …. But I guess if you did this people might not read your article, or fund your research …. So to hell with presenting legitimate information let’s stir the pot!! It’s sad really….
Maybe they should study/write about the effect on society of not being able to watch TV for more than ten minutes without having to see a “help my #$%* get hard” commercial.