Listen up, virgins - have sex, or else!

[Correction]

I think the primary problem with the article is what happens every time a writer with a deadline and word count ceiling has to 'digest' science for the teeming masses. If he had to present sexual dysfunction and STD infection patterns as a function of variables other than 'when you popped your cherry' the article would be at once too long for publication on MSNBC.com and not have the snazzy headline to grab the viewer's attention. It's a shitty misdeed to the actual science, making me wish it had never been reported on in this manner in the first place.

There's only so much relevant, important information you can sacrifice at the altar of the Lowest Common Denominator. Aurik's not wrong about how they grossly oversimplified the conclusions of the study for the sake of a gripping headline and sexy lead sentence.

[Obev]

Less arguing over semantics and more using this study as an excuse to get laid, please.

[Correction]

Less arguing over semantics and more using this study as an excuse to get laid, please.

Because nothing wins 'em over like pie charts and longitudinal studies!

[Lordwafik]

just send that bitch some smilies.

bitches love smilies.

[Demosthenes11]

Did someone summon me!?
They fail to mention that you can be sexually active without having full blown sex. My boner doing fine tyvm

[guartz]

Did someone summon me!?
They fail to mention that you can be sexually active without having full blown sex.

Oh come on man, that takes even MORE self control. Oral sex is fine a couple of times, but then it just gets easier to sti.... uh, you know what. No. I'm not having this conversation until I have a kid. lol

[aurik]

So having lung cancer appears to put you at greater risk of being a smoker? And if you have a car wreck on New Years Eve you are at greater risk of having a drinking problem? If the statement really wasn't loaded with causality and merely established correlation then these statements should be perfectly logical, but they aren't.

This is where we stop having a discussion and you dig in your heels to avoid being wrong. Based on past threads I honestly believe you won't admit that you simply interpreted it as causation where the text does not suggest that but I'll indulge you.

Lung cancer and the car wreck in your analogy is the outcome studied much like sexual problems. Your analogy would be like saying sexual problems puts you at a greater risk of having sex earlier or later. Certainly a valid hypothesis (if weirdly worded), but not exactly what the study was for; their objective was clearly stated:

Objectives. We explored long-term health correlates of age at sexual initiation and of abstinence until marriage.

Their objective wasn't even to find causes. They wanted to find correlations between the two variables (age of sexual initiation, and sufferers of sexual health problems). In their conclusions they state they think "Further research is needed to understand how sexual initiation patterns affect later health outcomes." Here is where you could say they are reaching for causation, but I read that as they want to explore this hypothesis in future studies. They crunched numbers and found a correlation and want to study it more. You are parsing words.

And you're talking about the science while I'm talking about the news article, gj.

[evilbau]

And you're talking about the science while I'm talking about the news article, gj.

/sigh

"the researchers found that those who started having sex at a relatively young age were more likely to have certain risk factors for sexually transmitted diseases (STD) — including a high number of sexual partners and a history of having sex under the influence of alcohol."

- more likely to have certain risk factors

"People who start having sex at a younger or older than average age appear to be at greater risk of developing sexual health problems later in life, a new study suggests."

- appear to be at greater risk of developing... suggests.

"It's not clear from the survey why both early and late starters tend to have more sexual dysfunction, according to the researchers,"

- Its not clear why

"Although our findings support an association between early initiation and long-term (STD) risk, they also suggest a more complicated picture of sexual functioning,"

- support an association... also suggest a more complicated picture

"It's not possible to determine cause-and-effect from the survey data, according to the researchers. For example, young men with sexual problems may start having intercourse at a later age, contributing to the link between later sexual "debut" and higher odds of sexual dysfunction."

- Its not possible to determine cause and effect from the survey data

i'm basically quoting every few sentences, my point is found throughout the article

[Plow]

So then...


Is it true if you don't use it, you lose it?

[Faris]

Ok, so get married at an early age then. Don't just have casual sex, I think thats wrong.

[Kuya]

Imo, this is bullshit, that researcher is the antichrist. Telling people to have sex at an early age, what the fuck seriously....I don't need to point out the disadvantages in that, we all know them i'm sure.

waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat

[Faris]

Imo, this is bullshit, that researcher is the antichrist. Telling people to have sex at an early age, what the fuck seriously....I don't need to point out the disadvantages in that, we all know them i'm sure.

waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat

Edited, damn your fast. Well i still think its bad to have casual sex, but then i remembered there is marriage, and thats fine=X

[Kuya]

Well then don't keep quoting it, most people would not hesitate to take a shot at a muslim saying antichrist. Also, i'm kind of surprised, for a middle eastener, you're pretty passive about these arguments. Albeit, sometimes you make really shitty comments, but better than what one would normaly assume if they held themselves to stereotypes.

[EternityEnd]

You've never had sex outside of Marriage, Firas? Or are you a hypocrite? I'm calling bullshit unless you were married at ~15.

[Faris]

You've never had sex outside of Marriage, Firas? Or are you a hypocrite? I'm calling bullshit unless you were married at ~15.

I've had a good share of sex before getting married, to say with confidence that it is wrong.

[EternityEnd]

So basically, you admit to living a life of perpetual sin? I thought for sure you'd contradict yourself. Blast~

[Faris]

So basically, you admit to living a life of perpetual sin? I thought for sure you'd contradict yourself. Blast~

Meh, im a Muslim, i never said im a good mulsim. I've done some nasty shit, and I'm going to hell because i knew its nasty shit, yet i still did it.

unless i truely say ask for forgiveness, and never do it

[Dmitry]

just send that bitch some smilies.

bitches love smilies.

Yes.

[Kaliden]

I think I'm gonna start a news site and fill it up with "half-truths".

Including but not limited to:
100% of drug users will die at some point in their lives

[Demosthenes11]

Love how this thread doesn't say "Stop having sex so early," but instead is "Stop having sex so late."