Well, maybe testosterone levels do protect us men a little. It seems that men have always had a little more risk out of everything. Men traditionally had a shorter lifespan than women, and were more susceptible to die from things like stroke and heart disease.

But that is all changing now. Men are even gaining on women when it comes to life expectancy. In fact, wasn’t it just recently that the oldest person in the world was revealed to now be a man?  Women traditionally outlived their husbands for all these years, and now we are seeing a bit of a paradigm shift when it comes to that thought process.

Well, smoking appears to be one of the things that is lending itself to the paradigm shift that women are somehow more long-living than men or more disease resistant for some reason.  Smoking is actually more deadly to women when it comes to developing heart disease, and often fatal and if not fatal, crippling health condition to deal with.

Studies found that women were a whopping 25% more likely to develop heart disease than men for partaking in the deadly habit of smoking cigarettes. That’s quite an astounding number, especially for something that doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.

What’s even more apalling is that the percentage, which is already pretty high, rose another 2% for every additional year that a woman smoked!  This means that is you are a woman and you smoke, you should probably quit smoking immediately!

This is not to downplay the risks of smoking in men. They are still enormous. Men who smoke are more likely to develop several different types of cancer, not the least of which is prostate cancer, lung cancer and any other type of organ cancer.

Men who smoke not only have a higher risk of heart disease than their non smoking counterparts, but it increases their risk of stroke as well, and leads to a variety of other health problems associated with the lungs, especially as we age.

Women need to worry about smoking more though because most likely their higher estrogen levels have something to do with it. Women are warned repeatedly about combining smoking with the birth control pill – because the estrogen levels and smoking can be a deadly combination.

Estrogen and smoking just don’t mix – at all.  It leads to things like increased risk of blood clots, stroke and because it has a lot to do with the viscosity of the blood – heart disease.

There have been many arguments over what determines a person’s sexual orientation. Some people think you are born heterosexual or homosexual, and as you grow you begin to discover that by the feelings you feel toward the sex you are predetermined to be attracted to.

Some people think that homosexuality and heterosexuality are primarily determined by the environment that you are brought up in, or are mostly exposed to.  There are even special treatment programs, mostly headed by those with religious agendas, that claim they can “cure” homosexuality.

I don’t believe that you can “cure” homosexuality”, just as I believe that I can’t change the fact that I’m heterosexual. Whatever you find yourself attracted to, whether it’s the opposite sex or not, I think that’s pretty much the way you’re going to go for the rest of your life.

I also believe that I was hetero from a very young age, and that I was always attracted to little girls when I was a lot younger. It became more apparent that I was hetero when I came into my teens and started to discover my sexuality.

So, I do think to some extent that your sexual orientation is determined at birth and by your genetic makeup. But I also agree with some who say that sexuality is partly determined by environment, or can at least sway you in a direction of orientation that you may not have otherwise been swayed to in other circumstances.

One example often cited is men who are in prison for long periods of time. You’ve seen the stereotype of men who are very masculine becoming homosexual, at least in the prison environment, when they are deprived of access to women.

They may have gone into prison without too many homosexual tendencies, but had emerged as sort of a bisexual.  It has happened many times.

Another example might be older women who considered themselves to be heterosexual for many years. Maybe they fell into an abusive relationship or marriage, and then became lesbian (or maybe the tendency was there, they just needed to be “pushed” in the right direction) after many years with men proved to be unsatisfactory to their needs.

While it is true that many people know from a very young age that they are gay, it is also fair to assume that the environment one is in can push them a little in a certain direction if they are attracted to both sexes. Circumstances, or even meeting particular people they are attracted to, can push one into being more attracted to one vs. another sex.

Circumcision is a common practice here in the US, but it wasn’t always that way. Since about the mid fifties, it became pretty much the status quo to do this relatively expensive procedure on all male infants at a very young age, all in the name of being sanitary and preventive of disease.

Proponents of male circumcision say that it helps prevent penal cancer (cancer of the penis, which is rare, but can apparently be aggravated by an uncleanly foreskin), and also can help prevent adult men from giving their female partners cervical cancer.

Circumcision is where a part of the foreskin is removed, and then peeled back. It is what most penises look like that we see today, it may even make penises look a bit larger, since it can extend them a bit with the foreskin. It happens in roughly 80% of all boys today, which is why most adult men have circumcised penises.

Often times, uncircumcised penises are because of a man’s religion or his parent’s personal preference. The controversy over circumcision is that it is primitive and even cruel, and that you are essentially defacing a child’s manhood when he has no say in it. It is supposedly painful to the child as well, albeit not nearly as painful as it would be if they had it done when older.

A new law proposes that patients who are paid for by Medicaid, one of the state run medical programs that offers help to those that cannot afford healthcare on their own, are not given circumcision. It would cut a lot of money from the budget, on something that many say is an unnecessary and expensive surgery on male infants.

This would free up money for more life saving and critical healthcare in the program, and some say that it’s worth it. Others say that it would discriminate against people of certain religions who are on Medicaid.  Why?  Because circumcision is actually a ceremonious tradition in some religions.

They say that because circumcising infants is a religious right for some, Medicaid should cover it rather than deprive these religions of something that is necessary according to their gospel.

I can understand all points of view here. I understand that budgetary emergencies require that something be cut, and that it is now at critical path for them to cut something or lose other programs or potentially not be able to cover more life threatening emergencies.

I also understand people’s concern about discriminatory practices. However, when you have budget woes like the economic problems of today have presented to so many of these government programs, there often has to be a choice that no one likes.

Circumcision is quite a hot topic amongst some circles. Although it is a custom that a large percentage of Americans have followed, there are some grown men who are uncircumcised because their parents chose not to have this done to their babies, perhaps out of personal of religious beliefs – and that is just fine.

Russell Crowe, the very talented and outspoken actor who also happens to have somewhat of a reputation for being hot headed at times, has spoken out against circumcision on his twitter messages, stating that he feels circumcision is barbaric, and that we don’t have the right to take a baby boy’s foreskin off and basically maim the baby simply due to traditional practice.

Why was circumcision started in the first place? It was mostly a sanitary thing that was started in medical practice because it was thought that bacteria could collect in the area between the foreskin and the penis.

The “peeling back” (yuck, just saying that makes me gag) of this flap of skin helped to ensure that the area was much easier to clean and access, and to keep bacteria free.

However, guys with uncircumcised penises claim that they really don’t have any issues keeping their packages clean, it’s just a matter or knowing how to clean it yourself in the shower.

An interesting note on circumcision and its beginnings is that it really started as more of a social ritual hundreds of years ago, and only in the past recent decades became the status quo for most male infants born in hospitals.

Some parents describe the ordeal of their infant going through circumcision as grueling, and seemingly cruel. It really is painful for the baby, and for that reason alone, some parents may not choose to do it.

In the end, circumcision is a totally individual choice.  Some boys don’t even get it done until they are older if their parents choose not to do it to them when they are babies. However, it of course is a lot more painful as one ages and everything becomes more “in cement” on the body. Sort of like having your tonsils out.

It’s always more painful later on in life!  Whatever Crowe’s opinion on circumcision, he has the right to hold it and voice it. So any critics out there, let’s just let the guy say his opinion. After all, we do live in the era of free speech without retribution.

A supplement that is found in countless herbal male enhancement supplements for enhanced sexual performance and pleasure, l-arginine, is part of a new amino acid supplement that also may help pregnant women to avoid a condition that can cause great complications in the pregnancy as well as for the baby and mother’s health called pre-eclampsia.

Pre-eclampsia is where the mother’s blood pressure goes up beyond control. Because of this, the baby could be born earlier than it should be, and the mother’s life could be in danger. Further, pre-eclampsia makes it many times more likely that the mother will have high blood pressure and all the health complications that go with it way after she has had her baby.

Further implications are that the baby is born prematurely, and may also have complications in their health way down the line in life from being born too early and not getting a chance to develope certain organs. 

Another thing that pre-eclampsia patients exhibit is that they have very high amounts of protein in their urine, some sort of bizarre biproduct of the condition.  So, why does L-arginine, which is an amino acid help both men with their impotence problems and women with pre-eclampsia? It’s a two word answer : blood flow.

L-arginine helps women to retain a healthy amount of blood flow during their pregnancy.  This is why the amino acid also help men who are having issues with impotence of premature ejaculation – it helps their penis maintain an erection because blood flow is the essence of the erection.

The study that was conducted on pregnant women found that those getting a daily dose of l-arginine exhibited stunningly lower risk rates than the women who did not get this amino acid every day, for the dangerous pre-eclampsia condition.

Hmm, that’s a loaded statement I just made. I know it. I’m actually smirking slyly right now because I know that is just loaded with sexual undertones and explicity innuendos about men using their fingers on women in a certain way

But seriously, every time I read about human sexuality, attractiveness, and just generally how we have evolved as a species that is highly driven to procreate, and to procreate the best looking, best functioning humans there can be, it blows my mind. It is truly the miracle of life.

The latest study in male sexuality and men’s attractiveness as rated by females, the ultimate stakeholder in a man’s attractiveness and ability to breed well, shows that a man’s facial attractiveness is all linked to one finger in particular.

The interesting thing is the finger the attractiveness quotient is related to. It’s the right ring finger. Not the right and left, and no not even the left, that would be very interesting indeed since that is how a mate claims their husband.  It’s only the right though. The right ring finger on a guy apparently is very telling if he is attractive or not.

And it’s supposed to be a pretty darn good predictor of attractiveness according to studies.  Researchers found that men who had longer right ring fingers consistently rated higher on the looks scale when compared to men who had shorter fingers in this arena.

The really interesting part is why. Men who are born to mothers who have a large amount of sex hormones, and particularly, a large amount of testosterone circulating in the body during gestation, are more likely to grow a longer right ring finger.

Testosterone is actually the hormone that is connected to male traits, and more importantly, to attractive male traits and physical features that typically drive women nuts. These traits are things like deep voice, chiseled bone structure, larger forehead, thicker necks, broader shoulders, and a generally more beefy look to them – ALL MEN. 

So guys, if you have a long right ring finger, chances are staring back at you in the mirror every morning is a bonified studmuffin.

You probably heard the news and controversy surrounding a professor’s allowance of a live sex toy demonstration at the pretstigious Northwestern University in his classroom as part of a very popular human sexuality class he teaches there. 

The professor later said he regretted the reactions the live sex toy demonstration caused and the emotions it stirred up.  However, he did emphasize, and I think he is correct in that, the people who stayed to watch the sex toy demo are indeed adults who are old enough to make decisions for themselves and could have left the demonstration if it made them uncomfortable.

It was not a mandatory demonstration for the class, but simply voluntary for anyone who wanted to watch it.  This shows that we as Americans are still a bit uptight about sex, but it also shows the important dividing line between the classroom, the professional arena, and where we draw the line for expressing sexuality.

To me, I’m not sure this would have been the appropriate arena to have a live sex demonstration.  I am surprised that a professor thought it would be ok, but then again, there are a lot of open types of classes at the more progressive types of colleges, so it wouldn’t be totally out of the question. 

It was not clear what sex toy was used, but I’m thinking by the sounds of it, it must have been a vibrator of some sort, since a gentleman reportedly performed the demo on his fiance in the classroom. 

I’m not so sure I’d feel comfortable watching something that really only occurs in a bedroom between two people, live, in public, and in front of peer students.  What do you think? Is this off-the-charts inappropriate, or is this something that is being blown out of proportion?

I mean after all, it is a human sexuality class, and things like this are talked about and viewed in these types of classes.

A drug called Requip, which is used in Parkinson’s patients as well as in some patients with uncontrollable restless legs syndrome, or RLS, where one feels like they can’t control their leg movements at night (I’ve actually had a touch of this here and there, it is VERY weird feeling), may be linked to a man’s sudden proclivity for gay sex, cross dressing, and gambling his family’s savings away!

At least that is what his lawsuit is claiming. He claims that after he began taking the drug for Parkinson’s disease back in 2003, he started to have wild  urges to gamble, and even stole money and gambled away his savings, spiraling into a downward life trend which caused him to try to take his own life three times.

He also claims that the drug caused him to develop an addiction to gay sex and cross dressing. He took to having a high risk lifestyle where he would take his clothes off and expose himself on the internet, which he claims led him to be raped and he also developed an obsession with cross dressing.

The question is, did this patient have these natural inclinations to begin with?  Well, no one may know, but what is very curious is the labeling on the drug now says that patients may develop different sexual behaviors and also may develop gambling problems!

Um, I don’t know about you, but you couldn’t pay me enough to take some of these drugs with warning labels like that, no matter what was wrong with me in the first place.

Well, I could certainly see how this new study may be slightly divisive!  A new study is claiming the good looking people tend to be significantly smarter than people who are…um, how to put this diplomatically, a little lacking in the looks department?  So, it appears that good looking people not only are blessed genetically with a nice appearance, but also happen to have a leg up when it comes to intelligence.

This flies in the face of the stereotype that good looking people are dumb as rocks of course, as we all know the stereotype of “dumb blond” has been around for a long time. I myself have come into contact with some very good looking people, whom upon you begin a conversation with, tend to not impress much in the intelligence department.

Then again, I have also met some very intelligent good looking people, but there are always exceptions.  The percentages were quite impressive too. The study, which was funded in Britain, claimed that women were up to 13 points higher in their IQ points, and men were up to 11 points higher in theirs, than their more normal looking or below average looking counterparts.

So, perhaps when you get the good genes, you get it for both your looks and your intelligence, no?  It would make sense, those that are blessed in both areas apparently are meant to do better in life, because there was another study that showed that good looks can really get you ahead in your career as well.

No wonder everyone is obsessed with their appearance these days. Men are really getting into their looks more, trying to stave off male hair loss, using male hair removal creams to make their bodies more attractive, and even using products for gynecomastia to get rid of excess male breast tissue.

Studies like this will definitely give you a complex about your looks!

Stem cell therapy has long been a hot topic of discussion, debate, and controversy since it really surfaced not that long ago as a way to potentially cure deadly disease and end human suffering in so many ways.

But along with the obvious benefits come a lot of questions of morality, laced with a lot of religious implications as well.

A lot of people feel that stem cell therapy, particularly from anything that could potentially create life, such as embryos, is just plain wrong.

Essentially we are “playing God” by doing things with these stem cells because they were only meant for the purpose of creating life, not of messing with, improving and tweaking existing life.

By the way, if you don’t think that there have been some serious advances made in mysterious government run labs with this kind of therapy, think again. Most likely a lot of things have already been done that would blow our minds if we knew about them.

The latest find in stem cell therapy is that stem cells taken from human testes (your testicles, which produce sperm, which then produce gametes from penetrating a female egg), can help cure men with diabetes. Hmm, doesn’t make a whole lot of sense, but let me explain.

It’s pretty cool actually, because it’s basically using stem cells from the same person’s body, altering them, and then giving them back to the person, so that they actually, in a way, cure themselves.

They take certain stem cells from the man’s testes, who has diabetes type 1, then they alter them into insulin producing cells, and they are thinking that this may cure a lot of men with type 1 diabetes.  That is, if the research totally pans out. Of course these things take time, but the theory thus far is pretty solid.

I for one think stem cell therapy is fascinating. The idea that we could end so much human suffering and disease for life betterment really appeals to me. On the other hand, there are parts of it that scare the hell out of me.