Pre-ejaculate Fluid

[joshuam168]

Not sure if this belongs here but anyways.....

Ive heard that pre-ejaculate fluid, or pre cum, can contain sperm and that you can impregnate a women by this means. Ive also heard that it doesnt, which is the one i believe, because it comes from a gland just at the base of the penis, but that this fluid can pick up and carry any sperm left in the urethra after a previous ejaculation. Though this seems to me that unless you have unprotected sex right after you just had sex then the sperm would be inert, not encouraging or discouraging unprotected sex by any means thats your personal decision. But i would like to see if anyone out there has a link or some such proof that "pre cum" does not contain sperm.

 

Thanks

P.S. please dont offer any personal ideas/beliefs on birth control, just answers that directly pertain to my question please, Gracias

[insane_alien]

i haven't seen any official reports on this but sperm can survive several days even outside the body so it would definitely be possible(and probably likely) that precum would contain a few hundred sperm or so. and seeing as it only really takes one to get the job done then this is capable of impregnating someone.

 

of course, the less sperm there are the less likely it will happen. i'm sure there a lot more factors to it as well.

[carol]

i haven't seen any official reports on this but sperm can survive several days even outside the body so it would definitely be possible(and probably likely) that precum would contain a few hundred sperm or so.

 

Yes, I agree that a pre cum could contain some sperm, and there is some chance that it could impregnate a woman. but the sperm's survival would depend on many factors, one of this is temperature. sperm survives longer on lower temps but i don't think it would live for several days.

How long human sperm can live outside the human body depends on several things: temperature and humidity among them. At room temperature (75 °F or 25 °C) without dehydration the sperm can live between 4 and 6 hours. Dehydration means, without drying out. After all, the semen (viscous, whitish secretion of the male reproductive organs, containing spermatozoa and serving as their transporting medium) is over 85% water. So then if the semen loses water (dehydration) this material begins to crystallize; all the while the sperm cells also undergo water loss. Therefore, in ordinary dry air at room temperature when dehydration is an added factor, human sperm can live maybe 1 to 3 hours.

 

from http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/1999-01/916415658.Cb.r.html

 

i believe this is true since we have handled sperm before and we worked on a cooler environment. the sperm on the sample only lived for about 3-4 hours.

[insane_alien]

i stand corrected then. must have been one of those myths. i have never really done much with microorganisms(appart from how to kill them effectively in food processing).

[Dak]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coitus_interruptus

 

according to wiki, it would seem that the answre is 'it can do'.

[zule]

I know that the spermatozoids have a half-live of 72 hours in the uterus. They can even live there for 6 days depending of factors as the acidity of the uterus.

 

I don’t know how much time they can live in the urethra, but perhaps the half-life could be more similar to the 72 hours in the uterus than to the 4 hours in the exterior.

[vampares]

I hesitate to entertain this thread, but could someone please define "precum".

[iNow]

But i would like to see if anyone out there has a link or some such proof that "pre cum" does not contain sperm.

 

I happen to trust this source:

 

 

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/birth-control/AN00197

Q: Can you get pregnant from pre-ejaculation fluid? How often does this happen?

 

A: Yes, a woman can get pregnant even when ejaculation doesn't occur within the vagina. This is because pre-ejaculation fluid may contain some sperm.

 

Withdrawal of the penis from the vagina before ejaculation is one of the oldest methods of birth control. But fewer than 4 percent of adults in the United States use it as their primary method of contraception. The failure (pregnancy) rate is high. About 27 percent of women who rely on the withdrawal method of birth control become pregnant each year.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I hesitate to entertain this thread, but could someone please define "precum".

 

 

http://www.sexhealthinplainenglish.com/men_articles/cowpers_gland_secretion/cowpers_gland_secretion.htm

 

What is this white pre-ejaculation fluid?

Cowper’s gland secretion is essentially that pre-cum, mucus like fluid that emits from the tip of a man’s penis. It is the product of the Cowper’s gland (also known as glandula bulbourethralis), which are two small pea shaped structures located on either side of the man’s urethra and beneath the prostrate gland.

 

Men generally notice this normal secretion coming out of the tip of their penis when they are excited, but the penis does not necessarily have to be erect. This pre-ejaculation substance contains very little semen and is actually a natural lubricant for the penis. The secretion may, however, contain sperm, which is why the withdrawal method of birth control (withdrawal of the penis prior to ejaculation) is not very effective means of birth control.

 

What is it for?

Cowper’s secretion is actually a natural part of the body’s preparation for sex. It allows for lubrication for easier intercourse. Some studies also suggest it may generally serve to clean and flush out the urethra to make sure that there is no residual urine that would be harmful to spermatozoa.

[joshuam168]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coitus_interruptus

 

according to wiki, it would seem that the answre is 'it can do'.

 

Yes i looked on wiki but it seemed to say to me that it wasnt very likely......in any case i prefer not to take wiki's word for it....

[lucaspa]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coitus_interruptus

 

according to wiki, it would seem that the answre is 'it can do'.

 

I'm trying to get people to stop using Wiki as a source, since it is not referreed for accuracy. What you need to do is check the references to see if the article is accurate. If I track the reference, I get the following article. Notice the bold:

 

1: Contracept Technol Update. 1993 Oct;14(10):154-6.

 

Researchers find no sperm in pre-ejaculate fluid.

 

[No authors listed]

 

PIP: A study in Boston, Massachusetts, and another study in New York City

examined samples of pre ejaculate fluid from HIV seropositive and HIV

seronegative men to determine whether HIV was or was not present in pre ejaculate fluid. The researchers found macrophages and CD4 lymphocytes in most samples, indicating that HIV was present. The more significant finding, however, was that most pre ejaculate samples did not contain any sperm and those that did had only small clumps of a very small amount of sperm which seemed to be immobile. A larger study is needed to verify these results. If these results are confirmed, they may dispel the myth that pre ejaculate fluid contains sperm. An ongoing WHO/USAID study shows that the pregnancy rate caused by men with 3 million sperm/ml/ejaculation is very low; fertility clinics consider men with a sperm count of no more than 5 million/ml to be infertile, particularly if is there is low motility. The average ejaculation has about 100 million sperm/ml, but about 10 million sperm pass through the cervical mucus, about 1 million make it to the top of the uterine tract, and just about 100,000 sperm reach the fallopian tubes.

Thus, only a couple of sperm, assuming motility, would reach the fallopian tubes in the case of the pre ejaculate samples with some sperm, which tended to be immobile (sperm levels only in the 1000s). Thus, the probability of pregnancy is very low if pre-ejaculate fluid enters the vagina.

 

I note that the recommended larger follow-up study has never been done.

 

The failure rate of "withdrawal" as a birth control method seems to lie in that the penis is not fully withdrawn before ejaculation or that ejaculation occurs on the vulva (entrance to the vagina). In either case, the sperm in the ejaculate can then travel to the fallopian tubes for conception.

[vampares]

The HIV study seems dubious. If there are sperm, there is the HIV virus which has integrated itself into the DNA. This is a diabolical; it is to suggest CD4 or AIDS could be separated from the sperm. It catechism of serpent. Who even cares if they get AIDS from that vantage point?

[iNow]

It catechism of serpent. Who even cares if they get AIDS from that vantage point?

 

Excuse me?!?

[zule]

If there are sperm, there is the HIV virus which has integrated itself into the DNA.

Can the HIV virus be integrated in the DNA of the sperm cells? Could you provide any link that treats about this discovery?

 

 

 

This is a diabolical; it is to suggest CD4 or AIDS could be separated from the sperm.

In fact, CD4 and AIDS can be separated from the sperm http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17721098?ordinalpos=5&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

 

 

Anyway, how does your post relate to the OP? I don't understand

[iNow]

Anyway, how does your post relate to the OP? I don't understand

Ditto.

[Mr Skeptic]

The HIV study seems dubious. If there are sperm, there is the HIV virus which has integrated itself into the DNA. This is a diabolical; it is to suggest CD4 or AIDS could be separated from the sperm. It catechism of serpent. Who even cares if they get AIDS from that vantage point?

 

Very few types of retroviruses can infect germ cells. HIV infects macrophages and T helper cells; it can only infect cells that have a CD4+ protein and a special coreceptor. Most of your cells cannot get infected by HIV, including your sperm. However, HIV does have a presence in semen, just that it is not inside sperm nor integrated into the sperm DNA. I would assume that HIV easily have a presence in pre-ejaculate fluid, and even if it doesn't it could leak out if there were even a small cut. So you still have to wear protection if you have HIV, even if you are trying coitus interruptus.

[lucaspa]

The HIV study seems dubious. If there are sperm, there is the HIV virus which has integrated itself into the DNA. This is a diabolical; it is to suggest CD4 or AIDS could be separated from the sperm. It catechism of serpent. Who even cares if they get AIDS from that vantage point?

 

Vampares, you need to read the abstract more carefully. HIV can be separate from the sperm: "The researchers found macrophages and CD4 lymphocytes in most samples, indicating that HIV was present."

 

It is the macrophages and lymphocytes (both are names for types of cells) that are in the pre-ejaculate. There are several types of lymphocytes. CD4 lymphocytes happen to be the type of lymphocyte most susceptible to HIV infection. As Mr Skeptic says, even if the person engages in sex but doesn't ejaculate, the partner is still at risk of getting HIV. The macrophages and CD 4 lymphocytes will have the HIV virus, even if the sperm does not. Since semen is also a filtrate of blood, semen is also going to have macrophages and CD4 lymphocytes.

 

Also, HIV does not "integrate itself into the DNA". Viruses infect the cell and reside -- for the most part -- in the cytoplasm, not the nucleus. They coopt the cell's machinery for making proteins by substituting their messenger RNA in place of the cell's. So the ribosomes make virus proteins (including proteins to make DNA or RNA) instead of the cell's proteins.

 

HIV invades only a few cell types. Mostly it attacks CD4 lymphocytes. It does NOT infect bone cells, muscle cells, heart cells, cartilage cells, red blood cells, platelets, sperm cells, ova, etc, etc, etc. Just cells of the immune system.

http://www.kidshealth.org/kid/health_problems/infection/hiv.html

http://library.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/AIDS/HIV.html

 

Finally, since HIV is an RNA virus, it can't integrate with host DNA. Because it is not DNA!

[Dak]

Also, HIV does not "integrate itself into the DNA". Viruses infect the cell and reside -- for the most part -- in the cytoplasm, not the nucleus. They coopt the cell's machinery for making proteins by substituting their messenger RNA in place of the cell's. So the ribosomes make virus proteins (including proteins to make DNA or RNA) instead of the cell's proteins.

 

[...]

 

Finally, since HIV is an RNA virus, it can't integrate with host DNA. Because it is not DNA!

 

umm... it's a retro-virus, so it reverse-transcribes in the cytoplasm and the DNA transcript integrates into the host genome.

 

this is pointed out in at least one of your sources

[CharonY]

If integrated into the hosts genome it is not longer directly infectious.

Only the complete virus particle (RNA + Capsule) is.

A chunk of genomic DNA even if containing viral sequences cannot infect you.