4/16/2008

Satisfactory Sex Can Be Achieved In A Matter Of Minutes

Survey findings released this week dispel the commonly held fantasy that satisfactory sex requires a significant time commitment. The survey, conducted at Penn State by the Society for Sex Therapy and Research, revealed that satisfactory sex for couples typically lasts 3 to 13 minutes. Movies, television, books and the internet have convinced many couples that if they aren’t having sex “all night long:” their sexual life is in the pits and they are missing out on something significant.

The survey included information garnered from psychologists, physicians, social workers, marriage/family therapists and nurses who have collectively seen thousands of patients over a period of several decades. According to the survey data, 3-7 minutes of intercourse is categorized as “adequate,” 7-13 minutes is “desirable,” 1-2 minutes is “too short” and 10-30 minutes is “too long.”

“A man’s or woman’s interpretation of his or her sexual functioning as well as the partner’s relies on personal beliefs developed in part from society’s messages, formal and informal,” the researchers said. “Unfortunately today’s popular culture has reinforced stereotypes about sexual activity. Many men and women seem to believe the fantasy models of large penises, rock-hard erections and all-night-long intercourse.”

“This seems to be a situation ripe for disappointment and dissatisfaction,” said lead author Eric Corty. “With this survey, we hope to dispel such fantasies and encourage men and women by providing realistic data about acceptable intercourse, thus preventing sexual disappointments and misfunctions.”

Source: medheadlines.com

4/07/2008

Cell Phones Bad For Your Health – Again

We’ve heard the pros and cons before, but a new Australian study claims cell phones could be worse for your health than smoking or asbestos.

It’s the issue that won’t go away. Are cell phones detrimental to your health? Will the electromagnetic radiation cause brain tumors? Studies have said yes, studies have said no.

Now a new paper from a staff specialist neurosurgeon at the Canberra Hospital and associate professor of neurosurgery with Australian National University Medical School, Vini G. Khurana, entitled "Mobile Phones and Brain Tumors – A Public Health Concern", looks at the results of previous reportage in both the academic and popular press.

Khurana’s warning is quite dire:

“It is anticipated that this danger has far broader public health ramifications than asbestos and smoking, and directly concerns all of us, particularly the younger generation, including very young children.”

The latency time, he believes, “may be in the order of 10-20 years.” He feels that “the link between mobile phones and brain tumours should no longer be regarded as a myth. Individual and class action lawsuits have been filed in the USA, and at least one has already been successfully prosecuted, regarding the cell phone-brain tumour link.”

However, it’s worth noting that many studies have yet to establish a link between the use of cell phones and cancer.

Source: digitaltrends.com

3/31/2008

Emotion Makes Nose a Sharper Smeller

Know how a whiff of certain odors can take you back in time, either to a great memory or bad one? It turns out emotion plays an even bigger role with the nose, and that your sense of smell actually can sharpen when something bad happens.

Northwestern University researchers proved the surprising connection by giving volunteers electric shocks while they sniffed novel odors.

The discovery, reported in Friday's edition of the journal Science, helps explain how our senses can steer us clear of danger. More intriguing, it could shed light on disorders such as post-traumatic stress syndrome.

"This is an incredibly unique study," said Dr. David Zald, a Vanderbilt University neuroscientist who studies how the brain handles sensory and emotional learning. "We're talking about a change in our perceptual abilities based on emotional learning."

Scientists long have known of a strong link between the sense of smell and emotion. A certain perfume or scent of baking pie, for instance, can raise memories of a long-dead loved one. Conversely, a whiff of diesel fuel might trigger a flashback for a soldier suffering PTSD.

Could an emotionally charged situation make that initial cue be perceived more strongly in the first place?

The research team recruited 12 healthy young adults to find out.

Volunteers repeatedly smelled sets of laboratory chemicals with odors distinctly different from ones in everyday life. An "oily grassy" smell is the best description that lead researcher Wen Li, a Northwestern postdoctoral fellow in neuroscience, could give.

Two of the bottles in a set contained the same substance and the third had a mirror image of it, meaning its odor normally would be indistinguishable. By chance, the volunteers correctly guessed the odd odor about one-third of the time.

Then Li gave the volunteers mild electric shocks while they smelled just the odd chemical. In later smell tests, they could correctly pick out the odd odor 70 percent of the time.

MRI scans showed the improvement was more than coincidence. There were changes in how the brain's main olfactory region stored the odor information, essentially better imprinting the shock-linked scent so it could be distinguished more quickly from a similar odor.

In other words, the brain seems to have a mechanism to sniff out threats.

That almost is certainly a survival trait evolved to help humans rapidly and subconsciously pick a dangerous odor from the sea of scents constantly surrounding us, Li said. Today, that might mean someone who has been through a kitchen fire can tell immediately if a whiff of smoke has that greasy undertone or simply comes from the fireplace.

But the MRI scans found the brain's emotional regions did not better discriminate among the different odors, Li noted. That discrepancy between brain regions is where anxiety disorders may come in. If someone's olfactory region does not distinguish a dangerous odor signal from a similar one, the brain's emotional fight-or-flight region can overreact.

Researchers say that is a theory not yet tested.

For now, Northwestern neuroscientist Jay Gottfried, the study's senior author, says the work illuminates a sense that society too often gives short shrift.

"People really dismiss the sense of smell," said Gottfried, who researches "how the brain can put together perceptions of hundreds of thousands of different smells. ... Work like this really says that the human sense of smell has much more capacity than people usually give it credit."

Source: www.foxnews.com

Sex Ed Can Help Prevent Teen Pregnancy

Comprehensive sex education may help reduce teen pregnancies without increasing levels of sexual intercourse or sexually transmitted diseases.

So find U.S. researchers who reviewed data from a 2002 national survey of more than 1,700 heterosexual teens, ages 15 to 19.

There is ongoing debate about whether abstinence-only education or comprehensive sex education (including instruction in birth control) is best for students.

Study lead author Pamela Kohler, a program manager at the University of Washington in Seattle, and colleagues found that about 25 percent of teens received abstinence-only education and about two-thirds received comprehensive sex education. About 9 percent - particularly teens from poor families and those in rural areas - received no sex education at all.

The researchers found that teens who received comprehensive sex education were 60 percent less likely to get pregnant or to get someone pregnant than those who received no sex education.

Other results - not statistically significant, however - suggested that comprehensive sex education, but not abstinence-based sex education, slightly reduced the likelihood of teens having vaginal intercourse. Neither approach seemed to reduce the likelihood of reported cases of sexually transmitted diseases.

The findings, published in the April issue of theJournal of Adolescent Health, support comprehensive sex education, Kohler concluded.

"There was no evidence to suggest that abstinence-only education decreased the likelihood of ever having sex or getting pregnant," she said in a prepared statement.

This study offers "further compelling evidence" about the value of comprehensive sex education and the "ineffectiveness" of the abstinence-only approach, said Don Operario, a sex education expert and professor at Oxford University in England.

Source: www.washingtonpost.com