Bad News For Bottoms: New Study Finds Too Much Penetration Can Cause Cancer

bottom_1.jpg_480_480_0_64000_0_1_0Originally published on

A new study out of the University of Montréal has found that men who have sex with 20 or more partners during their lifetimes are less likely to develop prostate cancer. But there’s a catch: It only applies to straight guys. Gay men who bump uglies with 20 or more partners during their lifetimes are more likely to develop prostate cancer.

Epidemiologist Marie-Élise Parent and her researchers surveyed more than 3,200 guys in the Montréal area who answered a comprehensive questionnaire that covered many aspects of their lives, including their bedroom activities. About half of respondents had been diagnosed with prostate cancer between 2005 and 2009.

According to the study’s findings, straight male sluts are 28 percent less likely of one day being diagnosed with prostate cancer than their more chaste counterparts, and those that do develop prostate cancer are 19 percent less likely to develop an aggressive form of the disease.

Why is this?

“A new partner over time keeps one active over the years,” Parent explains. “So the presumption is that men with several partners were exposed to more ejaculations.”

She added: “I would like to clarify that ‘sleeping with many women’ does not mean all at the same time. People must understand that it’s more than 20 women over a lifetime.”

Gay men, however, aren’t so lucky. Or at least not bottoms.

Parent’s team found that guys who have sex with more than 20 male partners doubled their risk of prostate cancer. And their risk of getting a non-aggressive cancer was five times more likely.

How come?

Parent has no idea.

But Dr. David Samadi, chairman of urology at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City, thinks he knows why. According to Health Daily, Samadi speculated that it could be due to more risky sexual behaviors among gay men, or because of physical trauma to the prostate gland.

Samadi said trauma to the prostate may cause it to release the protein prostate-specific antigen, or PSA. Tests that check the level of PSA in a man’s blood are often used to diagnose and monitor prostate cancer.

So there you have it, fellas. Tops, you’re probably okay. Bottoms, you’re traumatizing your prostates. You better be careful or cancer might get you!


Now, that totally, TOTALLY sucks!

39 thoughts on “Bad News For Bottoms: New Study Finds Too Much Penetration Can Cause Cancer

  1. *eyes popping* Really? Cancer? I just found another excuse to decline sex 4rm some of all those raging he goats that call themselves tops! Lol!
    But on a more serious note, this should b a warning to all those slutty bottoms dat feel dat dey must ride d dicks of all guys in naija in a day! Cancer is real ooooooooooooooo!

  2. I thought massaging the prostate was supposed to help reduce chances of cancer… Thats what they’ve been preaching.. Now it’s better to leave the prostate alone.. Hian

  3. Science… Today A, tomorrow B! They said massaging the prostate reduces chances of cancer, and now friction and trauma cases prostate cancer. Well, for all the size queens in the house, I bet y’all heard! Hope there ain’t gon be a ‘Bottoms Strike’… Cause hands are gonna bleed, and pretty soon, another research’s gon show hand jobs cause hand cancer! #ScientificUncertainty #ProblemOfGeneralization

  4. Besides that this may affect me negatively, I doubt the integrity of the study.

    1. University of montreal is not exactly know as a place for ground breaking research.

    2. The sample sizes are really small

    3. Anal cancer and prostate cancer has been reported in so many people who have never had anal sex before.

    I need more information to draw an objective conclusion. This is all speculation if you ask me!

  5. ‘University of montreal is not exactly know as a place for ground breaking research.’……What a ridiculous statement!!!

  6. Abeggi.. Everything kills you. If it’s not drinking water straight from a plastic bottle it’s breathing. There should just be moderation in stuff you do.

  7. More confusing I see!! Hmmm someone should be wise enuf to know that there can never be any semblance of ORDER in this world system that says something today but debunks it tomorrow IN THE SAME BREATH..i might add!! Hmmm no wonder fear is rife there….and strictly for suckers who would believe the Crap that scientists (who I might add here are also searching for the way, truth and LIFE) churn out.
    That’s just not like my father whose WORD is YES or for me YAY and Amen!! He can never say one thing and change it the next…oh no….HE is the SAME yesterday today and tomorrow’s forevers!!!

  8. I have to address this, as a researcher and a doctor.

    First of all, Woe to thee that art trying to spoil my market, especially this beuriful Sunday.

    Note the beginning of the article says it is a new study- in science we always wanna compare and verify and repeat before we prove.

    Secondly in the middle note that it says they are Not Sure Why it is so. This may indicate a retro-research design from answer to question- the english word for that is Bias, a major no-no in accurate research.

    Thirdly, at the end, there is a Dr Samadi who offers a Speculative Opinion, attempting to explain the results. Again this is prejudice- he feeds his own perceptions into a supposedly scientific study. I am guessing by his name he is of Muslim or Arab descent who thinks gays are shit.

    In summary, from an anatomical point of view, any tissue in the body can potentially grow more layers ( tending towards cancer) when it is used more actively. The resultant effect is called dyplasia- but it could have happened to any other tissue in other parts of the body with a tendency for friction or movement, such as the vagina for fucking, the stomach for food processing or the mouth for chewing and smoking. All these areas have their own cancers too. In other words, it is not specifically because you are gay or bottom that you are at risk of friction-related cancer. The inherent stigma and discrimination in that kind of “scientific thinking” must be addressed.

    In fact, the theoretical risk of these frictionally induced dysplasias is 1 in 100,000.

    How did we skip the fact that the prostrate is a good organ, responsible for lubrication during sex and for powerful orgasms? I guess what you are looking for is what you will see….

    Anyway I know this will not satisfy some bottoms, who are hell bent on finding an excuse to be afraid.

    Emphasis on hell. And bent too by the way…

  9. I really don’t subscribe to Dr Samadi’s opinion biko. From the little I know, high PSA levels doesn’t mean someone has prostate cancer. And also high PSA levels doesn’t lead to prostate cancer. There is no study that says high PSA levels leads to prostate cancer.
    Well, what do I know?
    But I still maintain my stand though.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s