SirBillybob

As well as Hot in Cleveland. Estranged child parallel, among others. M-C M is on Disney Plus in my jurisdiction. Hah. Disney.

For the OP it’s a question of his urethral exposure to the giver’s pharynx in receptive oral by the giver, where granted pharyngeal Mgen is less prevalent and pharyngeal -> urethral is rare, OR his pharyngeal exposure to the receiver’s inserted penis given higher prevalence of urethral infection. In the latter, if his spouse is female I assume the cascade effect is very limited. In samples large enough to detect the comparatively rare pharyngeal carriage of Mgen, the ratios of NG and CT pharyngeal detection, respectively, to Mgen pharyngeal detection actually don’t seem to really dwarf the latter. But, yes, far greater chance for the OP to sustain urethral infection if insertive in anal sex. In contrast, getting blown low but not zero risk. Some of the references to zero pharyngeal detection relate to research in which merely 10 or so subjects screened have any pharyngeal STI or have MGen in other anatomical sites. Obviously, the ratio will trend to x:0 where x is a different STI or is urethral/rectal Mgen in meagre numbers. In the case study appended, the vector of transmission to the man with urethral Mgen infection would seem to have been pharyngeal infection of the partner [I would suggest gender irrelevant] blowing him, that partner having ostensibly previously blown a different male partner with urethral infection. As I understand it, any prophylaxis or treatment regimen based on presumptive exposure for the more common bacterial STI infections won’t include the recommended regimen for Mgen. I believe some degree of crossover for azithromycin but different dosing.

We all have in common the desire to avoid infection and have various ways and means to accommodate that goal. Everybody sucking cock has mostly overcome the fear that may exist preceding and during the act. Post-oral fear is of a different variety and many deal with it. However, I’m still not sure what you are asking. For ideas on reducing or eliminating anxiety regarding protected oral sex (condom use)?, as you haven’t clarified whether you wish to bypass this failsafe step for insertive or receptive oral? Have you used condoms and wish the next step? Or for advice on 100% avoidance of STI transmission potential during unprotected oral? As you know, it’s not easily arranged. Or for ideas on reducing anxiety to a level where you can break through the oral sex fear barrier but only to the extent that normative anxiety nevertheless continues to serve you? Your marriage is to a woman with whom oral has or has not occurred, or is it to a man with whom oral has not occurred? If you were to merely check this desire off on a one off basis your bucket list, theoretically there could be a way, with a knowledgeable and open minded physician, for fairly solid bacterial STI prophylaxis notwithstanding the limits of doxycycline PEP or PrEP. This should include considerations for Myoplasma genitalium added to the usually mentioned (upthread) three diseases.

Promising.

Every Tuesday AppleTV offers a 99c rental special that usually reverts to regular low tier (now usually $6.99) the following Tuesday but sometimes extended through putting it in the 99c group batch. Today Sing Sing is 99c.

I would interpret with reservation as it doesn’t pass the smell test if you drill down further, including into the reams of supplementary data appended. The results don’t satisfy standard assumptions of causality. For the first 14 years (circa 2000-13) the Alzheimer’s (AD) number-at-risk ratio based on subgroup denominators was 3:1, loaded for PDE5i use, and there was an apparent scramble to equalize the ratio over the final 3-4 years to an eventual number-at-risk ratio that landed at 1.2:1 AFTER the Kaplan-Meier incidence curves trended to merging, thus having shown at that 14 year point no difference in Alzheimer’s incidence between PDE5i users and non-users. Hence the average follow-up period was about 6 years for PDE5i users, twice the period length compared to that of non-users because the majority of non-users with ED in the database were chased down closer to the end of the retrospective study period. Moreover, the average age of non-users was 78 at date of AD diagnosis, 2 years older than that of PDE5i users at their date of diagnosis, so PDE5i users were diagnosed at a younger age. However, one would not be inclined to say PDE5i use predisposed to younger AD onset UNLESS wanting to put forward a finding as specious as the actual biased published results. Non-users diagnosed with AD had higher rates of comorbidities (on all 18 conditions measured, and with comorbidity prevalence differentials much greater than that of AD incidence comparing the subgroups!) [comorbidities are associated with AD] as well as higher rates of illness medication treatments compared to PDE5i users. They were older and sicker and these factors alone could explain a higher rate of Alzheimer’s Disease using the person-years denominator over the shorter period of time assessed for that subgroup. For greater than mid-70’s age range the AD incidence curve begins to rise more steeply, for example age 78.5 compared to age 76.5 within the general population. Based on age standard deviation values depicted in the study herein reviewed, 68% of PDE5i users at time of AD diagnosis were age 69.5-83.7 while 68% of non-users were age 71.6-85.4 Since PDE5i’s are widely used for ED the reality that uptake would be nil in spite of ED diagnosis supports the notion that the importance and pursuit of sexual function may have been secondary for them in the context of worse health overall. More meds, more drug interaction, more onerous dosage adjustment considerations, less incentivizing for PDE5i uptake. These factors suggest the possibility of reverse causation; an association between the prodomal stage of AD and PDE5i non-prescribing as opposed to causative directionality where no uptake predicts AD and uptake is protective against AD. In sum, there would be no more reason to conclude PDE5i uptake confers Alzheimer’s risk reduction than to assert it lowers incidence of the 18 comorbidities tracked. The non-users had higher vulnerabilities to cognitive decline but never having popped Viagra or other PDE5i’s was not convincingly one of them. Latent mining the UK national database for men with ED not taking PDE5i’s in order to round out the investigative study comparator data simply yielded older and less healthy males within that subgroup.

Somewhat different in Canada, latest revision mid-Jan (see below). That said, I cannot imagine a practice in either nation suggesting zero per year as discretionary.

As it was 2 months ago, and up to a month ago if not more recent than that.

I only paid attention from mid-January to mid-February as I was periodically in other locations previous to, and following, that time frame, or it wasn’t worth a focus. The OP’s note was a prompt for curiosity. I casually witnessed working guys receiving 10 back from a 50 note given to Claudio etc when in queue; asked guys what their entry fee was, told 40; and reimbursed a select few as a favour. One fellow … bless his heart … needlessly offered 10 in change back from a 50. Perhaps an increase had been rolled back very shortly after Réveillon.

Thank goodness. Eyebrows may grow back. Fostering flambé can be bananas.

If the bell curve represents a gradient of maintenance left to right and symmetrically, then the centre of it would be considered the 50th percentile of difficulty, veering close to above average maintenance prospects. There can be zero difficulty but not negative difficulty. I’d suggest aligning with lower maintenance as opposed to the arithmetic average of difficulty if I were to use a Gaussian distribution analogy, not that I’d either employ such a parallel or have noted an association between communication stages and quality of outcum. Moreover, the 🚩 theory cannot be tested if contact isn’t made.

I think that some of the opinion and solution variance running through the topic relates to the unknown as to how exciting an actual encounter would be, notwithstanding the degree of effort to arrange it. There is usually an element of standard gamble and resource trade-off that can only be evaluated after the fact. Add to this the complexity of a bigger whispering brain on one shoulder, a smaller one on the other.

Imma do me for sure. Au contraire, you’re making oodles of time and energy to get to bye. You’d think there was a crisis; a contact number with which you repeatedly get “message box is full”. Good luck with the toothache.

Each episode is, impressively, single-shot style. Graham and Doherty are superb. Glad I’m not a parent with adolescents and watching this.

The first sentence would mean I had actually considered it an impropriety and that I’m unable to handle with equanimity life’s little speed bumps, such as somebody managing their personal paid public-facing property in the way they prefer or my flipping through a phone booth directory pages and discovering that somebody had ripped out the section on better business bureau complaint contacts. I wouldn’t consider the absence of a contact method a torrential downpour on my punting parade. If the ad were to be one of the very few that interest me there would be naughty options in terms of how to relate to it.

If they had been Caucasian I suspect we wouldn’t be privy to the ethnicity category.

Righto, also being a talcum order.

Johnsons makes sense. My point is that that particular version is inconsistently delineated within their own branding. More lack of attention to detail than wilting manners.

The punter constituency’s johnsons set the price, not Johnsons / Johnson’s … let me know when they figure out how to spell the venue. The dancers don’t set the price. Patrons’ payment of costs historically, including adjustments along the way, dictates it. I don’t go there and the currency conversion yields an absurd upcharge so I would likely try to figure out how to cum more rapidly.

A key element not discussed was the difference between generalized latent or absent orgasm in which the phenomenon is consistent in all contexts, partner and autosexual, versus situational with partner(s), versus masturbatory. One obvious way to partially rule out physiological causality is to inquire about arousal and orgasm that may be comparatively accessible autosexually. This must be handled sensitively as the partner desiring the other’s elusive orgasm will often frame the problem as a withholding once made aware of the contextual difference. Women generally won’t have attributed to them such a wilful deprivation of partners’ satisfaction with her climax, yet both genders’ common basis of anorgasmia is not having reached the threshold of arousal that promotes orgasm. Some men may have, in a sense, premature arousal in which the logical outcome should be orgasm but the robust tumescence is erroneously conflated with sufficient subjective arousal for it. This doesn’t mean they are not turned on, just not enough to arrive at the synthesis of factors culminating in orgasm. Women’s partners may activate a workhorse role if presented with the notion that she is underaroused. In contrast, anorgasmic mens’ partners faced with robust erections along with the notion of insufficient subjective arousal for orgasm may take it more personally and assume hangups related to internal prohibitions or deliberate or even subconscious suppression of what is framed, perhaps overly simplistically, as the most valued ultimate outcome. The orgasm’s enemy is the punitive consequence of its non-existence.

It’s as if a new disorder has been manufactured. We have biogenic and/or psychogenic erectile disorder intrinsic to a male. And an absurd attempt to treat a version of erectile function that is neither of the former and not reflective of pathology, but driven by commercial expectations for function. How about forgoing this kind of amateurish diagnosis, sparing the guy’s uptake of drugs, and taking a chill pill oneself? Setting up compensation contingencies for functioning that evades absolute prediction on their part seems to be a far more onerous exercise than broadening capacity for erotic enjoyment that doesn’t entirely hinge on a few cubic centimetres of intracavernosal tissue.

Paywall workaround?

Google is your friend in terms of accessing educational resources on the basics of male sexual function.