Up the bum no harm done

Mr. Loverman

What the hell does that even mean?

Lol26

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

What the hell does that even mean?

Is that a serious Q?

Nodin

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

What the hell does that even mean?

What it says.

Pighead

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

What the hell does that even mean?

Reduces the risk of impregnating a women by 64%.

maglite

lack of hemorrhoids, anal prolapse, leakage, ano-rectal pain and ulcers and fissures.

or infections

Mr. Loverman

Pighead wrote: »

Reduces the risk of impregnating a women by 64%.

Unfortunately it increases the risk of getting AIDS by about 500%...!

/Doesn't have a bum

strokemyclover

Up the gick, ten times quick!

Griffen262

Can I ask you why you picked that username?

racso1975

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

Unfortunately it increases the risk of getting AIDS by about 500%...!

most stupid statement on boards ever! Congrats

phill106

Griffen262 wrote: »

Can I ask you why you picked that username?

Because he kept shouting "Shabba!"

Agricola

Its a phrase used by drug mules while passing through airport security

Fight_Night

I'll be sure to test out this theory later today.

bonerm

It means helping the needy will not necessarily cause economic collapse.

Mr. Loverman

Griffen262 wrote: »

Can I ask you why you picked that username?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5aJgkMionkg

I used to be famous and have sex with Jamaicans.

Now I post on boards.ie at 22:34 on a Friday night.

Mr. Loverman

racso1975 wrote: »

most stupid statement on boards ever! Congrats

I don't want to get all serious, but I can show you the statistics that prove that.

I am a statistician.

EDIT: http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/msm/index.htm (Don't bother replying to this, let's leave it at that).

efb

The a$$ is class.

The sphincter is legend- ary

Hello prostate

Get his/her finger up yours while Ur c0cks up theirs! Jizztastic!!!

Dravokivich

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

Now I post on boards.ie at 22:34 on a Friday night.

Sucks to be us

Rabble Rabble

racso1975 wrote: »

most stupid statement on boards ever! Congrats

or is it?

cleremy jarkson

Up the fanny your mammy's a granny!

how has nobody said that yet!

stovelid

It used to be up the mucker, no babies in my day.

Rabble Rabble

Anyway its not about the potential "harm" of anal sex in that way. The second bit is missing.

Up the bum no harm done.
Up the bum no babies.

bonerm

stovelid wrote: »

It used to be up the mucker, no babies in my day.

When you're drunk and stumbling round in the dark it's easier to just remember a rhyme.

r3nu4l

Pighead wrote: »

Reduces the risk of impregnating a women by 64%.

and with oral sex there's a 69% reduction in the risk of impregnation.

...and there ends the wit

Jumpy

r3nu4l wrote: »

...and there ends the wit

It never started.

















.











burrrrn

Stinicker

Isn't going up "there"; well a bit ghey?

ebixa82

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

I don't want to get all serious, but I can show you the statistics that prove that.

I am a statistician.

EDIT: http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/msm/index.htm (Don't bother replying to this, let's leave it at that).

You do realise that the maximum percentage possible is 100 don't you? Well you would if you were a statistician!

Mr. Loverman

ebixa82 wrote: »

You do realise that the maximum percentage possible is 100 don't you? Well you would if you were a statistician!

You are wrong, but that's ok, I don't mind.

OwenM

ebixa82 wrote: »

You do realise that the maximum percentage possible is 100 don't you? Well you would if you were a statistician!

You're not really that dim are you?

Mr. Loverman

ebixa82 wrote: »

You do realise that the maximum percentage possible is 100 don't you? Well you would if you were a statistician!

Here's a simple explanation for you:

http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/58166.html

Uriel.

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

I don't want to get all serious, but I can show you the statistics that prove that.

I am a statistician.

EDIT: http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/msm/index.htm (Don't bother replying to this, let's leave it at that).

Can you point out where the risk of HIV is 500% greater with anal sex?

efb

Stinicker wrote: »

Isn't going up "there"; well a bit ghey?

It's George Michael Freddie Mercury Super Ghey

Thata why is so amazing


You think your a man, you're only a boy!!!

ebixa82

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

Here's a simple explanation for you:

http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/58166.html

You don't say 500%. You would say 5 times...

Trust me, I'm a mathematician...

ebixa82

OwenM wrote: »

You're not really that dim are you?

Now I don't want to get into it BUT what does per cent mean?? Yes, out of a hundred. So how can you have 500 out of 100 my dear friend?

I know what you mean, 500% would be 5 times as much etc., however it's just not correct to express like this!

Dboy85

So super gay!

NeedaNewName

I took lots of drugs once. I smoked the weed too.

Drank like a wanker also.

Now I am a robot with no useful purpose.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZmE3fUKU5U

Uriel.

RTE News wrote: »

I took lots of drugs once. I smoked the weed too.

Drank like a wanker also.

Now I am a robot with no useful purpose.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZmE3fUKU5U&feature=related

That must have made the news

rafared

Up the rectum doesnt affectum.:D

Mr. Loverman

Uriel. wrote: »

Can you point out where the risk of HIV is 500% greater with anal sex?

Actually the link I provided concludes it is much worse:

"In 2007, MSM were 44 to 86 times as likely to be diagnosed with HIV compared with other men, and 40 to 77 times as likely as women."

ebixa82 wrote:

Trust me, I'm a mathematician...

So am I. I just happen to work as a statistician.

ebixa82

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

Actually the link I provided concludes it is much worse:

"In 2007, MSM were 44 to 86 times as likely to be diagnosed with HIV compared with other men, and 40 to 77 times as likely as women."




So am I. I just happen to work as a statistician.

Do you understand what it means yet?

Uriel.

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

Actually the link I provided concludes it is much worse:

"In 2007, MSM were 44 to 86 times as likely to be diagnosed with HIV compared with other men, and 40 to 77 times as likely as women."




So am I. I just happen to work as a statistician.

You really need to understand HIV a lot better. That does not mean that anal sex is 500% more risky for AIDS. There's a combo affect in existence there. Ita not just anal sex on its own

Mr. Loverman

Uriel. wrote: »

You really need to understand HIV a lot better. That does not mean that anal sex is 500% more risky for AIDS. There's a combo affect in existence there. Ita not just anal sex on its own

They are talking about unprotected anal sex.

Please don't give me HIV denialist rubbish.

shuvly

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

Actually the link I provided concludes it is much worse:

"In 2007, MSM were 44 to 86 times as likely to be diagnosed with HIV compared with other men, and 40 to 77 times as likely as women."




So am I. I just happen to work as a statistician.

Statistician eh? That clears up the whole story for me as to why you havn't a clue...

Uriel.

Take a look over at the Personal issues forum and the STI thread in particular and you will see that I am no where near a demialist. Bloody far far far from it. But I know a he'll of a lot about the subject and saying anal sex is 500% more likely to result in HIV simplifies an extremely complex scientific and socio-cultural issue with many variables attached to same

ebixa82

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

They are talking about unprotected anal sex.

Please don't give me HIV denialist rubbish.

Shouldn't you be more concerned about what the phrase means. Isn't that why you started this thread, to enlighten you about certain phrases?

Mr. Loverman

shuvly wrote: »

Statistician eh? That clears up the whole story for me as to why you havn't a clue...

Are you saying the CDC are wrong?

They receive an insane amount of funding to research this stuff.

RussellTuring

Jesus, you people are getting a bit worked up on the statistics. You might say you're getting a bit anal.































Oh yes he did.

shuvly

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

Are you saying the CDC are wrong?

They receive an insane amount of funding to research this stuff.

No, not at all, just a comment on your profession...and consequently why ye might ask the question ye asked...

Mr. Loverman

Uriel. wrote: »

Take a look over at the Personal issues forum and the STI thread in particular and you will see that I am no where near a demialist. Bloody far far far from it. But I know a he'll of a lot about the subject and saying anal sex is 500% more likely to result in HIV simplifies an extremely complex scientific and socio-cultural issue with many variables attached to same

I know a lot about this subject too. (I used to work in the area -- data mining HIV data).

The fact of the matter is unprotected anal sex is the reason why MSM have a much greater chance of getting HIV. The other issues only lead up to this reason.

ebixa82 wrote: »

Shouldn't you be more concerned about what the phrase means. Isn't that why you started this thread, to enlighten you about certain phrases?

The thread was a joke. But I think you're just an angry person looking for a fight.

mfceiling

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

What the hell does that even mean?

Basically means that if you insert your erect penis into a lady's anal passage and ejaculate inside her anus she is less likely to become pregnant than if you ejaculate inside her vagina.

Anyone else need anything answered??

Uriel.

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

I know a lot about this subject too. (I used to work in the area -- data mining HIV data).

The fact of the matter is unprotected anal sex is the reason why MSM have a much greater chance of getting HIV. The other issues only lead up to this reason.



The thread was a joke. But I think you're just an angry person looking for a fight.

500% greater chance than what though? And in what circumstances? You haven't explained you're interpretation? Data mining is one thing, understanding is quite another

ebixa82

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

The thread was a joke. But I think you're just an angry person looking for a fight.

Oh I get it now...hahahahahahahahaha....that's a great joke...anymore jokes like that one?