the pull out method does NOT work. i have a 10 month old little girl for proof and her diapers every month cost alot more than your condoms lol. so just be safe, buying those condoms will safe you more money than the future school supplies and clothes and food and everything else it takes to care for a child.

Something such as 32 women get pregnant annually with this method. Look at all birth control methods.

This method is fine if you don't mind having a child together and married.

[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]Guess what, a baby cost a lot more the $40.00. If you aren’t going to be responsible about sex then don’t have it. Pulling out is not an effective form of birth control, period. So give me all the bad rep. you want, but if you can’t afford to have safe sex then don’t have sex. [/SIZE][/FONT]
[SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman][/FONT]
[SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman][COLOR=black]P.S. you can get latex-free condoms for as little as $25 per dozen online.[/COLOR][COLOR=black][/COLOR][/FONT][/SIZE]
[/SIZE]

pulling out isn't really birth control (since odds are there are some sperm hanging around in there at all times), but i'd at least add a spermicide to it. and that's a huge at least. i'm not really sure why she's willing to engage in sex without adequate protection if she's had such negative experiences with pregnancy. i wouldn't.

If I was her... I would probably just get fixed, LOL.

There has been much debate on the precum theory. I think for the most part... Ok say if you are going for round 2 after having ejaculated earlier in the day... then yes there is a high chance for sperm to still be "hanging around".... peeing I think flushes some out of the tract... but it only takes one!

Wah makes a good point about at least using some sort of spermicide... it's non hormonal and non latex.

And yes they'll be people who have practiced pulling out and the rhythm method for years w/ complete success.... but for me... it's too much to chance!
I was retarded and depending on this for about a year... until I got up the nerve to go to the DR and get on the pill.... due to this I rarely wanted to have sex and I was paranoid till each period... the stress was a killer! I was lucky...but dumb! lol

[SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman]I did not say lambskin condoms, I said non-latex condoms. They are not the best condoms out there but here is the link to cheap polyurethane condoms. [/FONT][/SIZE]

http://www.allcondoms.com/latex-free-avanti.htm

hahahahahaha...oh wait your serious...The pull out method is I think 40 percent effective...but thats if you leak no pre cum inside, and you pull out and it gets no where near the pudenda. (I believe thats the correct term for the outer parts lol)

Spermicide, Only like 60 percent...so your looking at 24 out of every 1000 times if you combine the two...and that number is way too high. Just use a condom because if she is going to do it for you anyways, what does it matter...so she finishes, you pull off the condom and she jerks you off...nobody gets prego and everyone is happy!

Pulling out does probably count as a form of birth control but together with the rhytem method a very unreliable one. However there is a place for it, ideally you should at least have 2 forms of birth control. Condoms typically have a 5% failure rate, adding the withdrawal method you get much % much lower that their individual sums.

Condoms screen the pre cum much more effectivly than the main ejaculate, plus if the guy has the intention of pulling out he's going to be paying more attention to his cock and whether the condom is staying on proberly.

I've used this method in the past when I had to come off the pill .

Why is the answer to this question so complicated? If you have heard differing stories as to whether there are sperm in precum or not then why the debate?

It's simple, if you don't want kids then you must use some form of protection. ITS THAT SIMPLE!!!! YOU MUST ERR ON THE SIDE OF SAFETY.

[QUOTE=sarah_rsl;219252]At the end of the day it is possible for precum to contain semen so that should be an end to it.
[COLOR="Red">
This is only true if the man has already ejaculated recently. Because sperm may be trapped in the urethra. You could then say that it's just as likely for urine to contain sperm. Cause it is. But does urine contain sperm? Not by itself. Does cowper's fluid contain sperm? Not by itself. Only if sperm is still residing in the urethra.[/COLOR]

As for my stats I've been told 5 % failure rate if used probably with spermicde.
[COLOR="Red">
You've been told by word of mouth. How reliable is word of mouth? You should always check your stats by looking them up. In this case the stats are available right on this very website.[/COLOR]

I do want to restate the widely held view that under no circumstance is the withdrawal method a practical form of birth control. It can be used as added protection isn't effective by iteself.

You can quote an 82% success rate if done properly, but the problem with it is that it's quite demanding and difficult to do correctly.[/QUOTE]

I never suggested that the withdrawal method should be used. I just provided the actual stats and then real information regarding sperm in the cowper's fluid and also for whether or not the method is recommended.

I will requote myself:

[QUOTE]
The withdrawal method depends on one thing ... removal of the penis from the vagina before ejaculation. If a man neglects to do this then this method will undoubtedly fail. Secondly, there is no way for a man to restrict the flow of Cowper’s fluid from his penis, and thus no assurance the method will work. Furthermore, if a woman doubts the man's ability to withdraw his penis in time, she will not be relaxed and able to enjoy the sexual experience. This is not a highly recommended form of birth control and should not be practiced unless it is absolutely the only method available and the risk of pregnancy would not be considered a disaster.

It offers no protection from STDs.
[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=pozzolane;219247]There is some really bad information on this thread. The actual reliability of the withdrawal method is about 82%. There is actually a sticky about this method on the main page of this website.

Go Here

Sarah: Check your stats before you post them. The failure rate of condoms is higher than 5%. IF a condom is used correctly it has an approximate 90% success rate. However, there are a lot of men and women out there that do not know how to properly use a condom and therefore the actual success rate is in the mid 80's. In other words, the withdrawal method is almost as effective as condoms. However, it depends on the reliability of the male to pull out in time. And it also provides zero protection against STD's.

However, Can Cowper's fluid (''pre-cum'') contain sperm?[/QUOTE]

At the end of the day it is possible for precum to contain semen so that should be an end to it.

As for my stats I've been told 5 % failure rate if used probably with spermicde.

I do want to restate the widely held view that under no circumstance is the withdrawal method a practical form of birth control. It can be used as added protection isn't effective by iteself.

You can quote an 82% success rate if done properly, but the problem with it is that it's quite demanding and difficult to do correctly.

There is some really bad information on this thread. The actual reliability of the withdrawal method is about 82%. There is actually a sticky about this method on the main page of this website.

Go Here

Sarah: Check your stats before you post them. The failure rate of condoms is higher than 5%. IF a condom is used correctly it has an approximate 90% success rate. However, there are a lot of men and women out there that do not know how to properly use a condom and therefore the actual success rate is in the mid 80's. In other words, the withdrawal method is almost as effective as condoms. However, it depends on the reliability of the male to pull out in time. And it also provides zero protection against STD's.

[QUOTE]
The withdrawal method depends on one thing ... removal of the penis from the vagina before ejaculation. If a man neglects to do this then this method will undoubtedly fail. Secondly, there is no way for a man to restrict the flow of Cowper’s fluid from his penis, and thus no assurance the method will work. Furthermore, if a woman doubts the man's ability to withdraw his penis in time, she will not be relaxed and able to enjoy the sexual experience. This is not a highly recommended form of birth control and should not be practiced unless it is absolutely the only method available and the risk of pregnancy would not be considered a disaster.

It offers no protection from STDs.
[/QUOTE]

However, Can Cowper's fluid (''pre-cum'') contain sperm?

[QUOTE]
Not really. Pre-cum is a secretion from the cowper's gland that travels through the urethra and out in order to make sure the envinroment is alkaline so that sperm can survive on the way out. Previous to it, the urethra is acidic because the last thing to go through it was urine. So unless the man had a recent ejaculation (there may be live sperm left) then there is absolutely no way it can contain sperm.
[/QUOTE]

Instead of arguing whose stats are right and whose are wrong can we get back to the main point? Let's review:
1-Sex with utterly zero protection is very risky for many reasons.
2-OP has a latex allergy.
3-OP's SO has a history of difficulty with BC.
4-OP's SO has already had children, and also has a history of difficulty with pregnancies.

Can I ask if her BC problems have been with various types of hormonals? IE Pills and patches? I have an IUD, which works totally differently and is highly effective. It's specifically geared toward women who have already had children. I have not, but am diabetic and so hormonals are contra-indicated. The IUD, according to my doctor, does administer a very low dose of hormone, but I believe he said its localized to the uterus and geared toward altering the lining itself, not changing the hormonal levels of the entire bodily system. The particular one I have also stays in place for 5 years, and has made my periods easier on me. Worth investigating.

Okay there was a sticky posted about the failure rates, if Im not mistaken, the pull out method isnt actually 82% effective, its 82% ineffective.

There is no way that spermicide is less effective than pulling out.

Int you have spunk and that is always a good thing...........Thumbs up to you.

[QUOTE=lnt1103;219289]Instead of arguing whose stats are right and whose are wrong can we get back to the main point? Let's review:
1-Sex with utterly zero protection is very risky for many reasons.
2-OP has a latex allergy.
3-OP's SO has a history of difficulty with BC.
4-OP's SO has already had children, and also has a history of difficulty with pregnancies.
[/QUOTE]

The original question was not actually the risks of other types of birth controls. The thread took a turn in that direction after some discussion about how risky the withdrawal method is.

The original question was "is there sperm in "pre-cum" (cowper's fluid)?"

To which the answer is "No". But... there is sperm still residing in the urethra shortly after ejaculation which may "leak" out with the cowper's fluid.

[QUOTE=Ducy]
Okay there was a sticky posted about the failure rates, if Im not mistaken, the pull out method isnt actually 82% effective, its 82% ineffective.

There is no way that spermicide is less effective than pulling out.
[/QUOTE]

Ducy: You're one person who should do far more reading, and far less posting.

Thanks CL. I just find it unnecessary and actually a little annoying for any one person to decide they're the be all and end all authority on any given matter and pick arguments with people they deem incorrect for the sole reason that they disagree. The practice strikes me as purposely attempting to puff oneself up in the eyes of others out of insecurity. Especially in a public forum such as this which is meant for many of differing opinions and experiences to share and gather.

And on that note I"m officially off this particular box.

[QUOTE=lnt1103;219325]Thanks CL. I just find it unnecessary and actually a little annoying for any one person to decide they're the be all and end all authority on any given matter and pick arguments with people they deem incorrect for the sole reason that they disagree. The practice strikes me as purposely attempting to puff oneself up in the eyes of others out of insecurity. Especially in a public forum such as this which is meant for many of differing opinions and experiences to share and gather.

And on that note I"m officially off this particular box.[/QUOTE]

It's a trend with many message boards when this happens. Anywho I think their is a sort of 'dialogue of the deaf going on.

Just to recap my own point, the withdrawal method does reduce the risk of pregnancy, used with condoms and spermicide you've got a fairly reliable system. As for percentages well!! it all depends on how adept you and your partner are at using each individual form.

This is the 21st century there is absolutly no reason for a woman to end up with an unwanted pregnancy.

[QUOTE=pozzolane;219320]The original question was not actually the risks of other types of birth controls. The thread took a turn in that direction after some discussion about how risky the withdrawal method is.

The original question was "is there sperm in "pre-cum" (cowper's fluid)?"

To which the answer is "No". But... there is sperm still residing in the urethra shortly after ejaculation which may "leak" out with the cowper's fluid.

Ducy: You're one person who should do far more reading, and far less posting.[/QUOTE]

Pozzolone why dont you try reading around the New to sex forum before you start telling me how I should be acting. In fact here Ill save you the hassle. Read the link

Birth Control Failure Rates

[QUOTE=Ducy;219337]Pozzolone why dont you try reading around the New to sex forum before you start telling me how I should be acting. In fact here Ill save you the hassle. Read the link

Birth Control Failure Rates[/QUOTE]

Just because Brandye posted it, doesn't mean it's accurate. Again, in this case her information contradicts all other sources.

Try this:
Withdrawal: (Scroll down to "natural methods")

Or this:
Withdrawal: (From this very website)

And again...Withdrawal:

All other sources corroborate that the withdrawal method is approximately 75% - 80% effective. With a maximum effectiveness reported at 82%.

Pozzolane, the first source you gave is from 1997.... and it is based on "a variety of studies". That is all the information given.

Theres no date for the sexinfo page, nor does it say where they get the statistic. (tisk tisk sexinfo!!)

And the third is only the effectiveness out of 100 women. I think it would be better if it was a higher number for more accurate statistics. It also says it was not observed if all women took the pill properly, so how can they know if any other methods were used correctly anyways? Where they there for the study?

Brandeye is a doctor and was referring to real life experiance. The point was, the pull-out method is an ineffective form of birthcontrol. Is she 100% accurate? No.. But no one is anyways.

Now, the whole point of this thread is whether or not there is sperm in pre-cum, so I don't know why everyone is throwing statistics at each other. The answer is yes, it can. Does it always? no. Do you want to take that chance? Its up to you. If you really don't want her to get pregnant, then use a more effective BC.

Thank you CN. Pozzolone you really should not jump in criticizing people. Just plain rude. If I had said that their was a 0 percent chance of people getting pregnant than ok. Their is such a dispute of wheather or not their is sperm in precum it is impossible to tell. If you produced absolutely no precum whatsoever than maybe it would be 82 percent effective. But everyone produces a tiny tiny amount. and depending on the acidity of their urine, then their is a chance of their being no sperm.

But for now, I would rather go off of the one posters experience of a ten month old daughter. And also you should never go off of sources that are more than a few years (~2) because we are constantly coming out with new advances in medicine and everything.

I'm reminded of that joke about arguing on the internet and the special olympics (which isn't very nice to disabled people, but all the same...)

:)

Here are a few links commonly used to answer the Original Posters Questions:

http://www.andrologyjournal.org/cgi/content/full/28/3/374

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/birth-control/withdrawal-...

http://www.contracept.org/withdrawal.php

Simply put if you are not seeking parenthood the method is poor at best to prevent a pregnancy.

If a man had ejaculated 15 hours prior there can still also be remains of sperm. If you cannot assume a child at this time; I suggest adding spermicidal jelly/foam.

As far as STD protection, condoms are a must; try a different type. Look at the Condomdepot.

If none of the above methods suit either of you and she is a high risk & not wed to you what are you assuming such failure rates? Avoid intercourse until you are able to assume such and she is as well.

Thanks Wet Suit

[QUOTE=Ducy;219395]... Pozzolone [COLOR="Red">(it's P.O.Z.Z.O.L.A.N.E.) [/COLOR]you really should not jump in criticizing people. Just plain rude....

[COLOR="Red">It's "plain rude" for me to point out the error's in someone else's logic or information??!! Since when?[/COLOR]

... And also you should never go off of sources that are more than a few years (~2) because we are constantly coming out with new advances in medicine and everything.[/QUOTE]

Wrong. Again Ducy, stick to reading. As a person in the science field myself, I have referenced many papers (journals, texts etc...) in my day that are far older than 2 years. Just because the source is old doesn't mean it's wrong (or has expired). And new information doesn't necessarily mean the old information is wrong either.

[QUOTE=CleverName]
Pozzolane, the first source you gave is from 1997.... and it is based on "a variety of studies". That is all the information given.

[COLOR="Red">Isn't that a good thing for stats to be gathered from a variety of studies!?! If you're referring to a lack of references, may I suggest that it's quite Hippocratic to demand it from one source while accepting that Brandye provided none. [/COLOR]

Theres no date for the sexinfo page, nor does it say where they get the statistic. (tisk tisk sexinfo!!)

[COLOR="Red">Well, I'd assume that it's accurate considering that it corroborates so well with the majority of other literature values.[/COLOR]

And the third is only the effectiveness out of 100 women. I think it would be better if it was a higher number for more accurate statistics. It also says it was not observed if all women took the pill properly, so how can they know if any other methods were used correctly anyways? Where they there for the study?

[COLOR="Red">Wrong. Very Wrong. They simply did the same thing that Brandye did. They used 100 as a base number so simple minded people can understand the statistical value.[/COLOR]

Brandeye is a doctor and was referring to real life experiance. The point was, the pull-out method is an ineffective form of birthcontrol. Is she 100% accurate? No.. But no one is anyways.

[COLOR="Red">And I agree with that point. However, wrong information is worse than no information. [/COLOR]

[/QUOTE]

It does not state what those studies are, so for all we know it could be flipping a coin. The point is, a "variety of studys" is a very broad statement. If I am reading somthing, I want to know how its gets its information.

Brandyes source was personal experiance as a doctor. Thats where she gets her information. I trust personal experiance far more then statistics that I have no real information about.

I am not arguing over what statistics are right or wrong, I am arguing over whats more reliable. A 9 year old source of information based on studies we don't know about, or a doctors personal experiance with patients. How do you know her information is wrong? I am not saying its right, but there is no evidence that it is or isn't. Which goes the same for most of these studies really, which brings me back to trusting a doctor over a statistic in reliabilty of a BC method.

If you disagree, then its really just a matter of what sources you trust. There is not really a right or wrong here, just personal opinion on what information is more trustworthy. You can't prove one right or wrong, because there are so many variables when reserching this type of information.

I do not think its hippocratic to trust one source over another. Also, what right do you have to tell ducy to stick to reading? I find that very rude. If you think ducy is wrong, all you have to do is correct him.

The subject of withdrawal and contents of cowper's fluid is covered extensively on other threads from over the years. Sometimes practical advice trumps scientific precision.

Pozzolane is correct in identifying cowper's fluid as being from the glands of the same name and, therefore, not transmitting sperm. The male genito-urinary system always has sperm lurking around, more so during sexual arousal. If a microscopic examination is done of Cowper's fluid, it may or may not contain sperm.

Cowper's fluid is produced shortly before ejaculation and is preparing the urethra for the transmittal of the semen. The current theory is that it is a lubrican to ease the movement of the semen. The older theory that it adjusted the acidity of the urethra to protect the sperm is no longer generally accepted. Because of its purpose, the timing is usually close to ejaculation. At that point, there is likely to be some semen, with sperm, already escaped from the prostate increasing the likelihood of sperm being delivered with the Cowper's fluid.

A sixteen year old woman probably would have difficulty explaining, "Mum, it was just Cowper's fluid; the pregnancy should not count!"

I return to advice stated so often: If you both have your pants off, there should be a condom on the penis and spermicide in the vagina.

[QUOTE=bud1975;218861]Hi,
I hear different numbers on this method. I would like to have a child, but not at the risk of my girlfriends health. She has three children and two were high risk and she had complacations with all three. So, for that reason I would not want to get her pregnant. Hopefully we will have some spare money so she can start on birth control, but some has given her problems in the past. Right now I am not sure if I will continue this method. The plastic condoms are terrible and lamb skin is better but 40.00 for 12 condoms is way too much and I can't afford them at this time.
I would like to hear any couples that use this method. Thanks for the reply.

bud1975[/QUOTE]

For some info look here as well:

http://www.questia.com/googleScholar.qst;jsessionid=LFJYvL9nk5hx1QPnLyQD...

If she is a high risk using withdrawal alone, no condoms, no additional birth control will result at year end with a high rate of pregnancy if performed properly. If not performed properly, the rates increase.

Overall generally stated is 1 of 4 or 1 of 3 women will become pregnant if done perfectly with this method alone.

Many people who are married and a child not being a life hazard use this method since it's used "not minding if you accidentally become pregnant" similarly seen with ovulation prediction methods. Often, women do fall pregnant yet were ready for parenthood, they were just holding off for a time frame or ended a long term birth control method and wanted children.

The cost of condoms is nothing compared to having and raising your own child.

The pull out method isn't a safe form of birth control at all. There are sometimes considerable amounts of sperm in the pre-ejaculatory fluid that is secreted to fuel the sperm.

"fuel the sperm?" What are you talking about? Semen has the necessary nutrients and the secretions of the Cowper's gland just lubricate the tracks.

Damn..
You want to get down to the pathophysiology of semen. First of all, the Cowper's gland is a relatively outdated term for the bulbourethral glands. I know what each of the glands in the male reproductive tract produce and the relative function of each. I was just generalizing about semen and the fact that pre-ejaculate can contain sperm in sufficient amounts to get someone pregnant. You refer to the Cowper's gland, I know its function is to lubricate the male reproductive tract but it makes up only 2-5% of semen volume and yes the fructose released by the seminal vessicles is an essential nutrient that provides energy for sperm motility. I have also seen a lot of poor information you have presented on various topics but haven't found the need to beat you up for it. I'm using general terms on here as most of the posters probably don't have the medical terminology and background to wade through a bunch of medical jargon. They are looking for answers, not something you are looking up out of a medical text!

PS What kind of physician are you?
I'm not an OB?GYN or Urologist but I do practice Emergency/Family medicine and do have a small amount of insight regarding sex and related issues!

Let us see. Yes, you joined the Board yesterday. Welcome. Pathophysiology of semen?

[QUOTE=RAM MD;220285]Damn..
You want to get down to the pathophysiology of semen.[/QUOTE]

Just going off latin roots here. but doesn't pathophysiology refer to diseases of, and not just the physiology?

[quote=RAM MD;220286]PS What kind of physician are you?
I'm not an OB?GYN or Urologist but I do practice Emergency/Family medicine and do have a small amount of insight regarding sex and related issues![/quote] Ah, ER & Trauma mixed with a bit of F.P. in the US. Same area as myself. I only found one area on posting to be more cautious on Brandye initially; Birth Control Methods. Why the discrepancy in numeric figures? Drug Companies post a given failure rate during controlled trial periods. Her figures appear more representative of real life seen in an ER and I chose to err on caution in this area of the US.

MRSA? Must be rampant in Georgia if treating cysts for such. I assume we are fortunate since here in NY since C&S of drainage have been negative. More of an issue in urine in the elderly from nursing homes with long term foley's.

I have not found discrepancy's in medical information merly differences in Health Care delivery from Scotland with the NHS & Health care insurance practices and subsequent fallout in the US. Anyhoo...

[QUOTE=RAM MD;220285]Damn..
You want to get down to the pathophysiology of semen. First of all, the Cowper's gland is a relatively outdated term for the bulbourethral glands. I know what each of the glands in the male reproductive tract produce and the relative function of each. I was just generalizing about semen and the fact that pre-ejaculate can contain sperm in sufficient amounts to get someone pregnant. You refer to the Cowper's gland, I know its function is to lubricate the male reproductive tract but it makes up only 2-5% of semen volume and yes the fructose released by the seminal vessicles is an essential nutrient that provides energy for sperm motility. I have also seen a lot of poor information you have presented on various topics but haven't found the need to beat you up for it. I'm using general terms on here as most of the posters probably don't have the medical terminology and background to wade through a bunch of medical jargon. They are looking for answers, not something you are looking up out of a medical text![/QUOTE]

You practice medicine? Well, you're definitely not a linguistic surgeon. I raised an eyebrow myself when I saw your sloppy writing; "There are sometimes considerable amounts of sperm in the pre-ejaculatory fluid that is secreted to fuel the sperm."

There is sperm that fuels sperm?! :confused:

For a self proclaimed practitioner, you should know that there is no sperm in Cowper's fluid. Just like there is no sperm in urine. It's "left-over" sperm residing in the urethra from a (recent) previous ejaculation.

There have been known to be sperm in a man's urine following ejaculation. But does that mean we should start saying that urine contains sperm?

Furthermore, funinthesun is correct in identifying your incorrect usage of the term "pathophysiology".

The more I think about it, the more I'm certain you are a young boy with decent googleing and wikipedia skills masquerading as a family doctor. Let me warn you that that is a dangerous game. And a highly unethical one.

I'm a doctor!...but just on the internet!;)

Yes, here in Georgia, a large majority of the abscesses and cysts do come back positive for MRSA and yes we often cover with dual antibiotic therapy until culture results become available. Incision and drainage is the treatment for an abscess and complete drainage and capsule removal for a cyst, but given the degree of penetration, location, and prevalence of MRSA in the area, antibiotic management is also required. The treatment for MSSA is I/D only as antibiotics have poor abscess and cyst penetration, but unfortunately most of these infections have infiltrated the surrounding tissues and warrants antibiotics. In a perfect world it would be great if all that was required was incision ot the abscess and drainage or excision of the cyst but in everyday clinical practice it doesn't work out that way. As for the comment regarding the suprapubic lesion that one of the poster's alluded to, it may only require antibiotic management. If it is an abscess and she lives in an area with a large prevelance of MRSA she would need both antibiotics and I/D. If it were a sebaceous cyst you can either drain it and place on antibiotics and remove the cyst capsule at a later date or you can remove the entire thing on initial presentation. It all depends on the situation and what you see clinically. I'm not looking at it so I don't know what type of lesion she has but I do know she shouldn't poke it with a needle.

Yes, I realized that I typed in pathophysiology instead of physiology after I sent the message. Didn't realize everyone on here was so interested in correcting my grammer.

Yes, I am a physician and did complete a dual residency in emergency medicine and family medicine (5 years after medical school). I'm even board certified if you can believe that. I even work full time seeing patients and have a very successful private practice after working for several years in a level II trauma center.

I signed up a couple days ago but I have read some of the posts on this thread for quite some time.

I never said that there was sperm secreted by the bulbourethral glands or in the urine.

P.S. You have convinced me to never post on here again and to erase this site off my computer and for that I thank you! To those of you who felt the need to bash my comments, you can all go back to giving advice about sex from behind your computers while the rest of us are actually having it!

To the moderators of this forum, please remove my information and allow the posters who feel the need to bash others to keep up the good work. I commend those of you who have given accurate advice to those in need of answers based on your own personal experiences and knowledge. I just never realized how may want to be doctors there are out there that get all pumped up when someone writes down the wrong word or speaks in generalized terms. I didn't realize everyone on this forum was a physician otherwise I would have put a little more effort into providing a textbook response. Good luck with your online MD career, at least I get paid for it!

To pozzolane,
Never claimed to be great with my typing skills. I've got better things to do with my life than practice my keyboard skills.

I never said that sperm fuels sperm? I said that there are nutrients produced by the seminal vessicles that assist in sperm function and motility.

Never said that sperm is produced or released by the "Cowper's gland". Sperm is often released in small amounts prior to ejaculation and never did I say that there was sperm that resides in the urethra. I do appreciate the anatomy and physiology lesson though!

You don't need to warn me about anything as I have a license to practice medicine and you don't!!!

[QUOTE=RAM MD;220326]
You don't need to warn me about anything as I have a license to practice medicine and you don't!!![/QUOTE]

You forgot to stick your tongue out at me and go "nanner nanner naaaaanner!".

As for Brandye,
"pathophysiology of semen"..that was me not thinking before typing.
As for your brutal comments, you need to go back to medical school and repeat your education as alot of the medical advice you are giving is completely inaccurate. Look at your prostatitis diagnosis requiring antibiotics? Wrong treatment to place someone on 2-4 weeks of antibiotics for a diagnosis of prostatitis without any other clinical findings other than hermatospermia. Sounds more like mechanical irritation to me, which could have even have occured during intercourse or if toys...were used. Sounds like you have your medicine down to a science! Sperm released from the prostate??? The implanon thread with red marks running along the veins?? Are you referring to streaking with cellulitis as it follows fascial planes....

I'd stay where you are and hopefully the community you care for has little need for competent clinical skills. Curious as to why someone has to travel to multiple locations for their postgraduate training following medical school. The people I've seen in the past that have done this do it because they are incompetent clinicians and are forced to leave their training programs in search of another one. I understand that you have been posting on this thread for quite some time and have alot of followers and I will agree alot of the advice you give is quite good and that I don't know everything being posted on here. I came her for my own educational purposes and finally decided to leave a simple post and got bashed for it. Made a typing error and got bashed for it. Wrote pathophysiology instead of physiology and got bashed for it. Don't worry about me stepping on your toes as a physician as you would not be up for the challenge. I have never until now felt the need to attack a colleague's knowledge or character, and I will not post any further comments on this website because of this. I make my living giving advice and caring for the needs of others, I teach at both the medical school and college levels as a guest speaker and I feel that I've been blessed with the opportunity to become a physician and make differences in the lives of others. You can continue to provide your suspect medical recommendations here and I will go back to practicing clinical medicine.

> I will not post any further comments on this website....

Bye. Don't trip over the mouse pad or let the mouse get you as you begin surfing.

Good one! I knew it wouldn't be long before you decided to throw in your 2 cents worth. Unfortunately your comments aren't even worth that! You also seem to give either alot of poor information or you simply agree with Brandye. Amazing that the resident Ph.D can't come up with some creative thoughts of his own. I hope you are better at dancing than at giving advice. If Brandye told you the earth was flat you would probably agree! What is amazing is that many of you seem to take offense to those who have a differing opinion regarding some of the topics discussed on this forum. I suppose you agree with the good doctor regarding her advice on "blood in the cum". I can only wonder why there is an increasing prevelance of C-dif colitis and antibiotic resistence in the world today. Crappy medicine, crappy advice, crappy personalities.. BYE!!!

I agree with many a reply, regardless of who made the comments. If and when I do I generally say so.

There are plenty of times when I do have a difference of opinion.

I believe what has people upset with you is your aggressive posturing. Your feedback is representative more of a teenager than an adult. The site can use all the knowledgeable help it can get so your participation is welcome.

Brandye and the dancin doc stay right where you are, here. Although I have only been a member for a very short period of time I have come to trust your opinions and to enjoy the banter.
As a person with more ist's (doctors) than I care to have I know that what is in one Country is not in another, and you don't want to know how many second opinions I've had. Like the skin doctor who diagnosed my dermatomyositis and well just called in his dad for confirmation. Two really great guys, dad must be in his 70's and still practices 4 days a week.
RAM you better be careful, you've heard of that guy out in Cali (for the dancin doc) that isn't really licensed to practice in Cali. Where are you licensed to practice and what is your specialty? Or maybe your just here trying to drum up some business for yourself.

Don't need any more business, I do quite well for myself and have a strong practice. Last time I checked my name and practice have not been posted anywhere on this forum so why would i attempt to drum up business from people all over the US and throughout Europe. I see 40-50 patients daily and have a great track record. I have worked as both an emergency department attending and as a family physician in private practice. I am dual board certified through the american board and completed a residency in both of those specialties. My aggressive posturing came as a result of 3-4 individuals attacking me for writing pathophysiology instead of physiology and my generic comment regarding pre ejaculatory fluid containing sperm....Look back at the defensive posturing of many of your members when someone has a differing opinion or bashes them. Take the circumcision posts for instance. Watch Brandye and something300 take offense and attack the posters....If someones opinion differs, they spell a word incorrectly, they defend themselves you all go on the hunt....I'm not the one that is posting immature comments on here but i will defend myself and my credibility, especially when I see the wrong advice being posted by those that have attacked me. Human nature to defend yourself, right?

See pull out method doesn't work, i thought this guy was gone yesterday.
Tootles