• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Resolve a debate: Which is better for you, "man juice" or a ho ho?

Which is better for you from a nutitional view: cum or a ho ho

  • A ho ho

  • Cum

  • Who the crap cares? You two should just go make love in a pile of ho hos


Results are only viewable after voting.
Nutritionally speaking of course.

My friend, who is getting his degree in health/sports/etc, and I are debating if ho ho's are better/worse nutritionally than the average load of cum. Which is better for you and why?
 
My friend, who is getting his degree in health/sports/etc, and I are debating if ho ho's are better/worse nutritionally than the average load of cum.

Why not run through a bunch of tests and determine the answer yourself? Do you think any of us are going to have an actual answer to this backed with facts?

Lastly, I must ask - Who the hell cares?

Are you really going to tell your girlfriend, "Hey hun, you should really put that ho ho down and ... (fill in the blank)"
 
Taking this discussion far too seriously, semen contains mainly protein with some carbohydrate. Neither semen nor ho-hos have very much nutrition in the sense of vitamins and minerals. Ho-hos are full of sugar. Semen is 100% more healthy, all the way.
 
If my friend tried to debate me that a Ho Ho was more nutritious than a load of cum, I would just give up and let him win that debate.
 
Taking this discussion far too seriously, semen contains mainly protein with some carbohydrate. Neither semen nor ho-hos have very much nutrition in the sense of vitamins and minerals. Ho-hos are full of sugar. Semen is 100% more healthy, all the way.

Unless the person has AIDs in which case the ho-ho would be the healthier choice :thumbsup:
 
Unless the person has AIDs in which case the ho-ho would be the healthier choice :thumbsup:

Unless you're getting it right from the source, there's no chance of getting AIDS/HIV. Even if you got it directly from the source the odds are so low.
 
Unless you're getting it right from the source, there's no chance of getting AIDS/HIV. Even if you got it directly from the source the odds are so low.

Not really true, but I'm not gonna debate mechanisms of contamination for sexually transmitted disease on an non-serious thread.
 
Not really true, but I'm not gonna debate mechanisms of contamination for sexually transmitted disease on an non-serious thread.

I'm actually curious. If you can find me a verified/confirmed study of more than 5 people ever getting HIV from oral sex I'll change my opinion.

Should be relatively easy?
 
I'm actually curious. If you can find me a verified/confirmed study of more than 5 people ever getting HIV from oral sex I'll change my opinion.

Should be relatively easy?

Considering oral sex leads to true intercourse almost each and every time, the sample size is not appropriate. There's too many confounding variables. If you have any open pathway within the tract before (and possibly including) the stomach, you have a pretty good chance of acquiring almost any contagious pathogen, including HIV.

EDIT: Surprisingly, I was able to find a research article generated by the CDC: http://www.retroconference.org/2000/abstracts/473.htm. Also, here's a review of several articles: http://www.sidastudi.org/resources/inmagic-img/dd1765.pdf. The risk is lower than other types of sex, but the risk is still very, very present.

And btw, that's hundreds of people getting HIV from oral sex. Way to know the risks.
 
Last edited:
So what you're saying is that you can't provide a verified study where 5 people have contracted HIV from oral sex? 😛
 
So what you're saying is that you can't provide a verified study where 5 people have contracted HIV from oral sex? 😛

I just posted two (actually, a review of many plus one abstract of a given article). I didn't expect to find any... it seems that controlling for confounds is easy because certain people give BJ's, but don't put out otherwise.

I honestly don't know where you got in your head that HIV/AIDS wasn't contractible orally. Almost all STD's can be - HIV being the most serious.
 
Well, I was under the impression it was possible to transmit, but that the likelihood was so low that it was hardly worth noting.

If you're 100% cut, sore, and blister free, yes, but even small cuts you can't see from flossing or brushing your teeth can be portals for infection. Even if you have something like gingivitis, it opens up portals into the bloodstream.
 
Considering oral sex leads to true intercourse almost each and every time, the sample size is not appropriate. There's too many confounding variables. If you have any open pathway within the tract before (and possibly including) the stomach, you have a pretty good chance of acquiring almost any contagious pathogen, including HIV.

EDIT: Surprisingly, I was able to find a research article generated by the CDC: http://www.retroconference.org/2000/abstracts/473.htm. Also, here's a review of several articles: http://www.sidastudi.org/resources/inmagic-img/dd1765.pdf. The risk is lower than other types of sex, but the risk is still very, very present.

And btw, that's hundreds of people getting HIV from oral sex. Way to know the risks.

I think you're wrong, and I think those studies are wrong. The odds of contracting HIV through oral sex is so minuscule that it doesn't even merit consideration for the average person.

Worst case scenario, if you're going to blow a lot of dudes, don't brush your teeth.
 
Back
Top