The Decapitated Saints Who Still Managed to Hold Their Heads Up
Index of articles
Experts believe the injections could help for months at a time, increasing blood flow to the penis.
The treatment is best known for eradicating wrinkles, but doctors use the jab for a range of different conditions.
Long before it was injected into the faces of women desperate to turn back the ravages of age, Botox was used treat excessive sweating, overactive bladders and chronic migraine.
But, now urologists believe the treatment could prove effective in giving guys the lift they need down there.
The treatment could help millions, as experts predict half of men aged 40 to 70 will suffer erectile dysfunction to some degree.
Recent studies published in the Journal of Sexual Medicine, show injections of onabotulinum toxin A – Botox, could treat erectile dysfunction.
Urologists at Western University in Canada noted the therapy “represents a promising avenue for future experimental and clinical research for the treatment of ED”.
The drug, a neurotoxin, works by weakening the muscles and nerves it targets.
So far tests in animals, as well as a small pilot study in 12 men, have shown encouraging results, according to the International Society for Sexual Medicine.
Experts believe Botox could help smooth muscle tissue relax.
By doing so it’s hoped increased blood flow to a man’s member could help him maintain an erection.
The authors explained: “The ability to decrease the tone of resistance vessels, increase resting blood flow, and inhibit the persistent cavernosal smooth muscle tone might allow many men currently with ED or in some men unresponsive to oral or injectable agents to respond to less invasive therapy or perhaps require no therapy at all.”
They believe, like when Botox is used to smooth facial wrinkles, the treatment could be effective for several months at a time.
Though it is becoming more and more common, Botox does not come without risks.
The NHS warns the injections, which are not available on the health service to combat wrinkles, can trigger side effects.
They include flu-like symptoms, bruising, temporary weakness and droopiness of facial features, your body developing resistance to treatment.
In rare cases, serious side effects can develop in the hours and days after having the treatment.
The NHS warns they include blurred or double vision, if injections are given around the eyes, and breathing difficulties when the neck is injected.
Currently, treatment for erectile dysfunction depends on what is causing it.
Lifestyle factors, such as losing weight if you are overweight, giving up smoking, cutting back on booze, exercising regularly and combating stress can all help.
Drugs including Viagra are among the most widely used treatment, and work by increasing blood flow to the penis.
But they are not always suitable for all men, and should be used with caution in those suffering heart disease or Peyronie’s disease, which affects the tissue of the penis.
They are also not recommended for those with low blood pressure, or men who have suffered a heart attack or stroke, the NHS warns.
And where Viagra and similar drugs are effective they only work for around eight hours.
Other treatments for ED include vacuum pumps, which involves a bloke putting his penis in a tube before pumping out the air.
It creates a vacuum that causes the penis to be filled with blood, making it erect.
But it can take several attempts and often proves cumbersome.
While experts are hopeful Botox could offer hope to men suffering ED, much more research is needed.
They warn men should not seek out the injections outside of a clinical trial, because it has the potential to result in a prolonged erection which can permanently damage the penis.
It’s really not about length. It’s about what you do with it.
But despite this knowledge being spread far and wide, many men are still bothered by the size of their penis – judging by the Google searches for ‘how to make my penis bigger’, anyway.
So of course, surgeons are stepping up to meet the demand, creating procedures that they claim will make men’s dicks larger.
They’re probably more effective than the herbal teas recommended all over the internet, to be fair.
Dr Norman Rowe, a surgeon in New York, has just debuted a new technique for boosting men’s genitals.
Essentially, it’s a bit like those vampire facials everyone got excited about when Kim Kardashian shared a bloody-faced selfie. You pop into the surgery, get your own blood injected into your genitals, and, apparently, can expect a growth of 1.5 inches in circumference.*
*Yep. We’re talking girth, not length.
Dr Rowe told Daily Mail Online that the procedure lasts just 10 minutes and there’s no need for a recovery period. You can get the procedure done in your lunch break and go straight back to work. If you fancy.
The only after-effect you need to worry about is accidentally disrupting the symmetry of the injection. Dr Rowe recommends skipping sex for two days post-op.
The procedure is a pretty big deal, as it’s the first time someone’s come up with a way to enlarge the penis without surgery.
Dr Rowe was inspired to create the treatment by the rise of quick fix procedures like Botox and fillers, and wondering if something similar could work for penises.
He then looked into a method often used in sports medicine, which involves injecting blood back into the body to revive the muscle, and the vampire facial.
And voila: he came up with his bulge booster, which he claims can remedy erectile dysfunction alongside increasing girth.
Which all sounds wonderful, if girth is something you’re worried about.
But would you dare to get multiple injections in your dick? Could you actually go through with it? We’re crossing our legs and cringing a little at the thought.
Fake news is great news. The more, the better. Because it undermines the media's credibility.
A couple of days ago, a petition to the mayor of Toronto, signed by over 40,000 people and boosted by CBC, tried to keep “neomasculinist” speaker and author Roosh V out of Canada. Thankfully, it failed.
Roosh, a pen name of Daryush Valizadeh, was already in North America, and his speech went off just fine. The quality of Canadian defence has been off lately, which is probably why the Stanley Cup was between Chicago and Tampa Bay. Male Canucks are so henpecked that even their hockey is suffering.
Obviously, both the petition and this daft assault were illiberal and dumb. Everyone who added their signature should be quarantined in the one place that is worse than purgatory: Quebec. Finally, the city would have a purpose, keeping feminists and the French from contaminating the wider continent.
But wait, no, now I’m thinking like a progressive, aren’t I. If there’s a Canadian secession, perhaps it should be free-thinking classical liberals breaking off from loony social justice bloggers. Admittedly, such a schism in Canada would create a new country of about 12 people.
In any case, this failed feminist fox hunt is a good excuse to remind those retarded pseudo-French losers what freedom of speech is, and how avoiding and banning speech we dislike is a really, really bad idea, like almost as bad as Avril Lavigne, Rufus Wainwright, Michael Cera, Nia Vardalos or for the love of fucking Christ Shania Twain.
“The past week I received heavy resistance from the Canadian left to shut down my planned Montreal speech,” Valizadeh told me via email yesterday from the land of poutine and transgender four-year-olds. “A petition to ban me from the country topped 35,000 people and the booking to my original hotel venue was cancelled after it was leaked online, putting the entire event in jeopardy.
“The mayor of Montreal, the Canadian state-owned media (CBC), and many thousands of locals combed the entire city trying to find the event venue in order to sabotage it. I stuck to my guns, found another venue, and I successfully held the event. ”
Internet searches for Roosh V have never been higher, so if Canadian liberals were attempting to silence him or drive him into obscurity, well. Lame job guys. If there’s one thing we ordinary folk enjoy it’s something forbidden. And we don’t mind telling you so.
After the talk, Valizadeh had a beer thrown in his face. Regular readers of this column will know the high regard in which I hold feminists, and Canadians, but even by the pathetic standards of #KillAllWhiteMen or #BlackLivesMatter, this was a cowardly stunt of the highest order, and only served to gild Roosh’s victory.
“After the event, I was attacked on the street by a mob who shouted talking points that I remembered reading from CBC articles published a couple days earlier,” explained Valizadeh. “I believe this attack against me approaches a fine line of state-supported violence. I filed a police report against the perpetrators, but those in the CBC should be held responsible for inciting the naive youth of Montreal.”
Truth be told, my research team is divided on the subject of Roosh, which is why I found it interesting that my most liberal colleague was the one who stepped up to do the work on this article. He didn’t say why, but I suspect he did it for the same reason I’m writing this article: because he’s more worried about a world where ideas cannot get their day in court than anything Roosh V writes on his blog.
Veteran Reason and TIME journalist Cathy Young, who has little time for Valizadeh’s opinions on women, was nonetheless forthright on his right to speak unmolested when I asked her yesterday whether his event ought to have been shut down and whether threats of violence against speakers are ever justified.
“Threats of violence are usually more about venting than about actual intent to carry out violent acts,” said Young. “That said, given that feminists have made such a big issue of violent threats to women – and specifically to feminist activists and speakers – making or condoning threats toward Roosh and his guests certainly seems hypocritical.
“As for actual violence, I would say that it’s never justified in response to speech, though there are probably times when I would be inclined to sympathize with the perpetrator, for example. if it was a Holocaust survivor punching a Holocaust denier.”
“I will also add that, to the extent that Roosh has a following, it’s largely thanks to the toxic atmosphere radical feminists have helped create,” added Young, who has reported extensively on the excesses of the modern third-wave feminist movement.
“When preaching hatred toward men is normalized and demonising male behaviour becomes part of normal discourse, it’s not surprising that frankly misogynistic rhetoric in the ‘manosphere’ will gain more appeal. Feminists should worry less about Roosh and more about their own failure to offer a positive vision of male-female relationships.”
In other words, revolutionaries will always breed counter-revolutions.
No-platforming, a favourite tactic of the progressive left, denies us, the public, the ability to interrogate a speaker ourselves. It’s not only illiberal and profoundly anti-intellectual but it can create a halo of martyrdom around people who are already pushing at an open door – such as men’s rights activists, who rightly point to dozens of structural inequalities in the way men are spoken about and treated in today’s uber-progressive societies.
And when one person refuses to talk to another, the only remaining option is violence. By and large, it’s the political left doing the violence these days, and it’s not just directed at men’s rights activists or conservative speakers: even Bernie Sanders is getting shoved around.
With some justification, Roosh views his experience as, “one of the biggest free speech victories that Canada has ever seen, where a small group of intelligent and masculine men stood up the entire establishment and won decisively. I’m still on cloud nine from it.”
I say “with some justification” because liberals really shot themselves in the foot on this one. Valizadeh will be thanking his lucky stars for the notoriety these authoritarian pearl-clutchers just handed him. I imagine his book sales are through the roof. (He was too discreet to comment.)
As for the claim that Valizadeh is a “rape apologist,” he says this: “It’s absolutely false. My ‘How To Stop Rape’ article, a big source of the outrage in Canada, was a mere thought experiment to show how a woman who takes personal responsibility of herself will experience less sexual assault. The sad fact that they didn’t even read the article, where I clearly state the importance of consent, shows their lack of comprehension and reason.”
MUMBAI: At a time when voices of dissent against khatna or female genital mutilation (FGM) performed on little girls in the Dawoodi Bohra community are getting stronger, a group of six Bohra women, including two doctors, have formed a group called Dawoodi Bohra Women for Religious Freedom (DBWRF) in support of female circumcision.
While the subject is still being debated in legal and medical circles in India, the involvement of two doctors as founders of the group endorsing khatna or khafz - a procedure where a pinch of skin from the clitoral hood of girls between the ages of six and twelve is sliced off on religious grounds, in silence and secrecy - can warrant action if brought to the attention of the Indian Medical Association (IMA), Dr KK Aggarwal, national president of the IMA, told TOI on Thursday.
"DBWRF has been formed to give voice to mainstream Dawoodi Bohra women who have been taken for granted as a community. We are here to say that we have a right under the constitution to practise something that is harmless. We don't need a law that victimises a minority community," claimed Dr Fatema Jetpurwala, a homeopath and specialist in neuro-developmental disabilities at Saifee Hospital who is among the founders alongside Dr Alefiya Bapai, a gynaecologist and laparoscopic surgeon at Saifee Hospital; Nafisa Kagalwala, a teacher; Batul Ratlamwala, a home chef; Rashida Diwan, an educator; and Johra Attarwala, a counsellor.
The involvement of doctors in endorsing the act "goes against medical ethics" Aggarwal said. "IMA is a signatory to the World Medical Association's policy cleared at Taipei in October 2016. We condemn the practice of genital mutilation or cutting of women and girls, regardless of the level of mutilation. It is not scientific and we oppose the participation of physicians in these practices," he said.
Although DBWRF believes religion gives them the freedom to practise the custom and offers reasons for its continuation, "these reasons do not justify the considerable damages to a woman's physical and mental health in the long run", said Dr Duru Shah, scientific director of Gynaecworld in Mumbai. "There is no evidence-based material available that talks about the utility of female circumcision but enough to prove that it harms... No doctor should practise it," added Aggarwal.
Aggarwal said, "If I read a report or someone raises a complaint about a doctor propagating FGM, IMA will take it up. The doctor will have to show institutional permissions and offer scientific explanations since it is not an established procedure. We will also refer the matter to the ethical committee of the Medical Council of India for further probe."
While international organisations such as WHO and countries like the US, UK, Australia and some African nations are using laws to restrict, regulate, or ban the practice considered an extreme form of human rights violation, Jetpurwala insists 'female circumcision' and 'FGM' are different things. "Khafz is harmless and should not be mixed up with FGM. It is a travesty of justice to call khafz, FGM," reasoned Jetpurwala. According to DBWRF, the removal of a speck of superficial skin is a "simple gentle process in which there is negligible if any, pain". She claims that it is done to "satisfy the religious requirement of taharat (religious purity)" and argues that female circumcision is equivalent to male circumcision, which Shah and Aggarwal dismiss.
"Female circumcision has no medical benefit unlike in boys where complications may occur if the foreskin is not removed. In fact, many outside the community are getting circumcised to lower the risk of cancer," said Shah. In contrast, research reveals grave and permanent damage to health, including haemorrhage, infections, urinary retention, injury to adjacent organs, shock and severe pain, pointed out Aggarwal. "Long-term complications include severe scarring, chronic bladder and urinary tract infections, urologic and obstetric complications, apart from psychological and social problems," he added.
DBWRF's theories refute every line of reasoning that has surfaced in the anti-khatna movement in the last two years. "We do not accept that female circumcision is a mutilation. It is a harmless procedure and as such should not be termed FGM," reads DBWRF's explanation on their website.
Masooma Ranalvi, who was one of the first to bring the issue to light with her personal experience of undergoing khatna at seven, says: "It is shocking that educated people especially doctors after taking a Hippocratic Oath are supporting something that is in violation of that code. Not only are they tampering with what is God given but also committing a form of sexual assault."
Index of articles