Montreal Escorts

New gonorrhea strain resistant to all antibiotics...

K

Kansas Frank

It seems nature continues to try to make it harder for humans to enjoy the pleasures of sex. Here's another sobering STD to worry about, which is more common among women over 40:

Sex Parasite Is Most Common in Women Older Than 40, Study Finds

By Elizabeth Lopatto - Jul 12, 2011 4:00 AM PT (Bloomberg News)

A sex disease that’s more prevalent than gonorrhea and chlamydia, and less well-known, is suffered by 13 percent of women aged 50 and older, a study found.

The sexually transmitted parasite Trichomonas vaginalis causes urogenital infection, and can raise susceptibility to HIV. A study, reported at the International Society for STD Research in Quebec City, found the infection is twice as prevalent in those over 40 than in younger women because it isn’t adequately screened for. Women in their 40s had an 11 percent infection rate, according to the data.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...ommon-in-women-older-than-40-study-finds.html

It seems younger women are less suspectible to this parasite. Thank goodness for hobbyland!
 

The_Expanding_Man

New Member
Nov 22, 2009
66
4
0
Montreal
oh boy, very sobering

So medical science tells us that there are countless diseases out there waiting for us if we choose . Yes of course it is much more desirable than CBJ, but is it worth the risk?

And if the escort you are with has done this same act with 20 guys in the last few days... what then?

If it`s true that each time you have (unprotected) sex with someone, you are exposing yourself to the last 50 or 100 partners they have been with...

Do you only go with young, beautiful & healthy looking girls? Or give up sex and go live a secluded life in a monastary?

What is the answer?
 
K

Kansas Frank

So medical science tells us that there are countless diseases out there waiting for us if we choose . Yes of course it is much more desirable than CBJ, but is it worth the risk?

Do you only go with young, beautiful & healthy looking girls? Or give up sex and go live a secluded life in a monastary?

What is the answer?

We are more likely to get killed on the road either driving or walking.

If we abstain from everything that is likely to kill us, we all be living in monastary. Even in monastaries, most of us will go insane from the silence and be killed by poisoneous mushrooms.

As for `s, Montreal is probably one of the safest places to get them from SP`s. I`d never get a (or engage in DATY) in Amsterdam, Berlin, South America or Thailand. If an SP does not look healthy, move on to the next one. Most of the SP`s in Montreal are under 30`s and none seem to be over 40`s -- based on what I see on their websites and Merb. Hell, I`d rather die happy than to have lived a life of misery -- deprivation and abstanance.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

hormone

Well-Known Member
Feb 28, 2007
1,027
145
63
We are more likely to get killed on the road either driving or walking.

As for `s, Montreal is probably one of the safest places to get them from SP`s. (...) If an SP does not look healthy, move on to the next one.

More likely to get killed on the road... More likely than what? Than catching an STI? Or more likely than dying of AIDS caught by ? Very different ...

I hate to read something akin to ``if the SP does not look healthy... `` It perpetuates the myth that you can screen out who has STI by just looking at their face/ body. Oh, yeah, this one could not have gonorrhea, they look so well.. ! Sure.

It saddens me when I read such a comment... Very 1970`s or early 80`s attitude. Sorry...
 

CLOUD 500

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2005
7,088
4,031
113
We are more likely to get killed on the road either driving or walking.

Do you have any statistics to support this statement?

Hell, I'd rather die happy than to have lived a life of misery -- deprivation and abstanance.

Easier said then done. Getting a disease and suffering with it is very hard to understand till you get it. Once you get it you are not gonna go away painlessly. You will suffer and be stuck in the hospital enduring one test after another. You will die eventually but not before suffering. Abstinence for me is a far better choice then to catch a disease and suffer in the hospital. Dying from a disease is no way for a man to die.
 

CLOUD 500

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2005
7,088
4,031
113
This is a completely false presumption, because those who believe they are in a"full time monogamous" relationship are usually wrong and when they find out, it's after they have been fucked by their cheating significant other many times. I have a close friend who is a private investigator whose money is made almost exclusively compiling video and photographic proof of the lies your so called monogamous people have been living, and then dropping it on them.

So your attempt to portray this as our problem is pure fiction. By and large the hobbyist community is safer than the liars who are the ones having BBFS and spreading these infections while in "monogamous relationships".

This is a very wild statement and I find it completely absurd. You make it sound like everyone is cheating. You are generalizing. If that is what you believe then you were obviously with the wrong type of woman. I really do not know. Risk factor is determined by the amount of partners. It is simple mathematics. The more partners you have, the greater the probability getting infected. Escorts maybe have sex with ten different guys a day I do not know the exact numbers.

As for BBFS versus CFS, the fact that escorts are having sex with multiple partners every day makes it that much more important they they have protected sex. Being in a monogamous relationship one thing is for sure is that if she does cheat she is not having sex with ten different guys a day. The chance to get infected is a lot less then with an escort.
 

EagerBeaver

Veteran of Misadventures
Jul 11, 2003
20,370
3,268
113
U.S.A.
Visit site
This is a very wild statement and I find it completely absurd. You make it sound like everyone is cheating. You are generalizing. If that is what you believe then you were obviously with the wrong type of woman. I really do not know. Risk factor is determined by the amount of partners. It is simple mathematics. The more partners you have, the greater the probability getting infected. Escorts maybe have sex with ten different guys a day I do not know the exact numbers.

As for BBFS versus CFS, the fact that escorts are having sex with multiple partners every day makes it that much more important they they have protected sex. Being in a monogamous relationship one thing is for sure is that if she does cheat she is not having sex with ten different guys a day. The chance to get infected is a lot less then with an escort.

This is a very wild, absurd and irresponsible statement by you. Your statements are based on what exactly? ?????????????? We have a few guys in this thread who do not see escorts yet they are all knowing experts on the risks of seeing escorts. What a joke!!

Your statement is way off base, and totally wrong. There is a much greater risk of spreading infection by "monogamous" partners who do not know they are being cheated on, than by partners who both know they have multiple partners and are not engaged in BBFS. This is basic common sense.

>>> Edited by Mod 11: Insults are not tolerated, you should know better. 1 week as a learning exercise. <<<
 
Last edited by a moderator:

CLOUD 500

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2005
7,088
4,031
113
So medical science tells us that there are countless diseases out there waiting for us if we choose . Yes of course it is much more desirable than CBJ, but is it worth the risk?

And if the escort you are with has done this same act with 20 guys in the last few days... what then?

If it`s true that each time you have (unprotected) sex with someone, you are exposing yourself to the last 50 or 100 partners they have been with...

Do you only go with young, beautiful & healthy looking girls? Or give up sex and go live a secluded life in a monastary?

What is the answer?

That is the million dollar question and there is no one answer to that one. It all depends on the individual and what risks they are willing to take. Whether the risks are worth depends on the individual. That is something you have to decide for yourself and if you are ready to suffer with a disease.
 

Merlot

Banned
Nov 13, 2008
4,111
0
0
Visiting Planet Earth
Hello all,

Everybody knows that, but CBJ is not enjoyable to many hobbyists. It's also safe to put a condom on my dick and stick it in a gas pipe, but I do not enjoy it. My penis is densensitized to a CBJ to the point that it is not sexual activity. It is nothing. It is similar to breathing and I do not pay to breath the air.

Well, I've never involved my penis in anything other than a human female, but if you send photos of this hot hot hot gas pipe..... I guess Connecticut pipes are special. :rolleyes:

This is a completely false presumption, because those who believe they are in a"full time monogamous" relationship are usually wrong and when they find out, it's after they have been fucked by their cheating significant other many times. I have a close friend who is a private investigator whose money is made almost exclusively compiling video and photographic proof of the lies your so called monogamous people have been living, and then dropping it on them.

So your attempt to portray this as our problem is pure fiction. By and large the hobbyist community is safer than the liars who are the ones having BBFS and spreading these infections while in "monogamous relationships".

There are four main flaws with this reasoning.

First, your presumption seems to be that cheating is much more the norm among so-called monogamous people, and I presume you think that when they cheat it's not just once. Having been around the boards for 10 years now I have seen that many here took up this hobby because they became jaded about "normal" relationships for one reason or another likely to do somehow with some kind of betrayal experience. So it's understandable that you and many others as hobbyists have some jaded feelings and such is the flaw of projecting those back as typical of monogamous relationships.

Second, by using a private investigator who specializes in uncovering extramarital activities as a reference for the whole picture is especially flawed. If you are going to use sources who specialize in working the harsher side of society such fireman, police, nurses you will get a distorted generalized view simply because what they seek out and fill their lives with is harsh, not because that is the real balance of everything.

Third, the numbers just don't add up. People catch diseases being safe, no matter how safe you try to be it can still happen. Now factor in the mix of hard working escorts and frequenting hobbyists, multiply all the escorts the clients see over time, times all the clients the escorts see in a week times all the clients escorts see in a 52 weeks. Then make a presumption that both are also having some sort of "real" relationships and the numbers for each side in this hobby are staggering versus the possible numbers a man or woman may see in "normal" sexual contact...even if not monogamous.

Lastly, the presumption of safety in this hobby is the most critical error. Two private polls in the past both indicate that between 25-35% of those in this hobby have had unprotected sex at least once. We know that escorts have initiated offers of BBFS for extra pay and we know hobbyists have initiated offers of pay for BBFS. If you look at the numbers of both side mixing it up in this hobby then look at the percentage of those who indicate involvement in BBFS it's just not possible that hobbying is safer over the long haul than those who cheat on monogamous relationships.

Getting a disease and suffering with it is very hard to understand till you get it. Once you get it you are not gonna go away painlessly. You will suffer and be stuck in the hospital enduring one test after another. You will die eventually but not before suffering. Abstinence for me is a far better choice then to catch a disease and suffer in the hospital. Dying from a disease is no way for a man to die.

However Cloud, the way you wrote this is totally overblown, alarmist, and the extreme scenario you guarantee is outlandish. You make no indication you are talking exclusively about HIV or AIDS or any fatal diseases yet you insist "you will die", even though being resistant to antibiotics does not necessarily make something fatal.

I agree totally with EB here that regarding what I have bolded above "this is a very wild, absurd and irresponsible" statement by you. You sound like some Evangelist telling everyone they will go to Hell. The fact is most STDs are treatable, curable, and there is usually minimal suffering involved in the vast majority of cases if they are taken care of in a timely and proper manner, unlike the hell world you seem to want to insist on.

You really have generalized badly here by guaranteeing a fatal scenario in the manner you wrote your post above.

That is the million dollar question and there is no one answer to that one. It all depends on the individual and what risks they are willing to take. Whether the risks are worth depends on the individual. That is something you have to decide for yourself and if you are ready to suffer with a disease.

Now this is the truth. Both you and EB seem to want to take sides, yet the truth is what happens depends on individuals and the risks they chose to take and who they chose to take them with...whether in monogamy or hobbying.

Cheers,

Merlot
 
Last edited:

Keissy Hennessey

Supporting Member
Jul 12, 2009
12
0
0
Montréal
With all due respect to your 6400+ posts, E.B., your replies have been pointless - - ``It is nothing``.

Can anyone give an informed response as to health consequences of with/without CIM?

Thanks in advance

t.e.m.


Hi I hope it will help, here are some informations that were posted on perb by the health nurse

https://perb.cc/vbulletin/showthread.php?41215-What-are-the-risks-related-to-oral-sex

https://perb.cc/vbulletin/showthread.php?49506-0ral-safety-question-for-HN

https://perb.cc/vbulletin/showthread.php?48616-deep-throat--v-shallow-

you can alway pm her on perb if you have other questions.
 

CLOUD 500

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2005
7,088
4,031
113
This is a very wild, absurd and irresponsible statement by you. Your statements are based on what exactly? ?????????????? We have a few guys in this thread who do not see escorts yet they are all knowing experts on the risks of seeing escorts. What a joke!!

Your statement is way off base, and totally wrong. There is a much greater risk of spreading infection by ``monogamous`` partners who do not know they are being cheated on, than by partners who both know they have multiple partners and are not engaged in BBFS. This is basic common sense.

>>> Edited by Mod 11: Insults are not tolerated, you should know better. 1 week as a learning exercise. <<<

I can ask you the same question. What is your statement based on? Do you have any statistics to back up your argument? Or is this just based on what you think or maybe a bad experience you might have had? I do not know which one it is. You are basically saying that everyone is cheating on their partner. But that simply is not the case. There are still many monogamous relationships and the couple have not cheated on one another. Not to mention even if they are cheating they are not having sex with ten guys per day. According to your post which is under the assumption that the people cheating in their monogamous relationships are having BBFS? Maybe they are using protection maybe they want to avoid unwanted pregnancy? That is something you do not know for sure.

What we do know is that escorts are risky. They got multiple partners everyday as there job is to have sex. You should know better that no protection is 100%. Even though the chances to get an STD with a condom is greatly reduced that is kind of negated simply by the fact that an escort has multiple partners. Simple law of probability. The more partners she has the higher the risk of contracting a disease. Not to mention DATY and are common practices and bear their own risk since there is no protection at all from catching a disease.

Your statements and posts on this matter are completely absurd and ridiculous. I honestly never heard of anyone saying that the risk to catch a disease from your girlfriend is higher then catching a disease from a escort. Why not do a search on google and find something to support your wild statement? I think most people would laugh at you :lol: .
 
Last edited:

CLOUD 500

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2005
7,088
4,031
113
However Cloud, the way you wrote this is totally overblown, alarmist, and the extreme scenario you guarantee is outlandish. You make no indication you are talking exclusively about HIV or AIDS or any fatal diseases yet you insist "you will die", even though being resistant to antibiotics does not necessarily make something fatal.

I agree totally with EB here that regarding what I have bolded above "this is a very wild, absurd and irresponsible" statement by you. You sound like some Evangelist telling everyone they will go to Hell. The fact is most STDs are treatable, curable, and there is usually minimal suffering involved in the vast majority of cases if they are taken care of in a timely and proper manner, unlike the hell world you seem to want to insist on.

You really have generalized badly here by guaranteeing a fatal scenario in the manner you wrote your post above.

Cheers,

Merlot

Indeed you are correct about that. The scenario I described is an extreme. Poor choice of words. I have clearly generalized a scenario will end up all the same way. However depending on the disease the level of suffering endured will vary.

Your posts as usual are very useful and you remain neutral.
 

anon_vlad

Well-Known Member
Apr 29, 2004
1,551
526
113
Visit site
There was a great comment about this from Doug Camilli of the Montreal Gazette. He wondered if it was coincidence that this new strain appeared from Japan just after Tiger Woods' visit.
 

hormone

Well-Known Member
Feb 28, 2007
1,027
145
63
Another interesting read for those who can bear with it (some scientific details make it harsh reading)

http://www.cdc.gov/std/Gonorrhea/arg/basic.htm

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6026a2.htm?s_cid=mm6026a2_w

Basically it retraces the evolution of resistance of gonorrhea to the commonly used antibiotics to treat it in the last 10 years and the ensuing recommendations on treatment. The intiial paragraph of the 2nd link also shows the geographical appearance pattern of resistant gonorrhea. Interesting how things appear in one area, in one community to spread later in others.
Even though the reported percentages of occurence of "elevated MIC" (see my bottom note for short explanation) seems very small (from 0,2% to 1,4% for example) this is considered very significant in microbiology, because once there is emergence of a strain of bacteria that iss resistant, it quickly becomes dominant (you only need to give the stated antibiotic to wipe out the non resistant ones and the resistant ones remain.. and flourish! ) .

Note: MIC is the Minimum Inhibitory Concentration, a way to calculate how much antibiotic is needed to kill or inhibit bacterial growth and reproduction. With a high concentration, it means many bugs are actually resistant to the antibiotic "in vivo" (in a live organism). These thresholds are calculated by microbiologists and vary from bacteria to bacteria, but monitoring of emergence of resistance is done through the surveillance of this MIC...
 
Toronto Escorts