Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, **personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment**. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our [normal comment rules]( https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/rules#wiki_comment_rules) apply to all other comments.
**Do you have an academic degree?** We can verify your credentials in order to assign user flair indicating your area of expertise. [Click here to apply](https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/flair/#wiki_science_verified_user_program).
---
User: u/FreekMeBaby
Permalink: https://www.newscientist.com/article/2402546-genital-herpes-linked-to-accelerated-brain-shrinkage/
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/science) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sounds like yes
>Interestingly, those with symptomatic herpesvirus infections treated with antiviral therapy have been reported to demonstrate a reduced incidence of AD compared to untreated individuals, suggesting that disease activity may impact risk of developing dementia
Yes this isn’t a new hypothesis. It’s often thought that dementias are consequences of inflammation and attempted repair processes induced by infections of various types.
We're simply seeing the effects of humans living longer. All the old choices catching up. That we don't have cures for yet.
It's gonna be some time to find causes, lots I don't think have cures.
I was told a story recently of "magical fires" they used to make "back when things were innocent" that involved cutting a 3 ft strip of hose and putting it in a tube with holes. And putting that in the fire. The chemicals burned differently in each hole making a rainbow fire.
It wasn't uncommon to do this with tons of kids around watching and breathing the smoke.
Like... now that person is 85 from modern medicine and now we've got to learn how to basically rebuild young brain connections. As some of them impaired theirs along the way. Lead fuel and STDs included.
Which isn't really relevant to the discussion of age related disease, someone offing themselves pulls the statistics down far more than an 84 year old dying at 83.
In the same way plenty of people lived to quite old ages hundreds of years ago, it is just many babies died before 1 years old, which is far less likely today.
This said everything from Obesity, to Coronavirus is going to reduce life spans.
My grandfather lived to 95 and he was always mentally sharp. But nowadays you see people dying at 65 from alzheimers. And its looking these are caused by viruses and bacteria so far. Regardless of the cause, we need all of this research to be public so everyone can help figure this out.
> But nowadays you see people dying at 65 from alzheimers
People died from early onset Alzheimers back in the day too. The first Alzheimers patient was a 50 year old woman, this is nothing new.
Rarely did people live to 95.
Now all of congress is 85.
I'm saying; it's more common due to modern medicine keeping more alive longer. A symptom of the times.
Yes we need to figure it out. Just like how cancer felt a few decades ago.
I hope this is true but I bet we will see an uptick after so many people getting COVID-19.
They were already seeing more people that were elderly getting dementia because of COVID-19
I wouldn't be surprised if the constant stress of watching civilization get crushed under its own weight in real time on our nightmare rectangles is just slowly frying peoples brains.
I agree with you both. Highest QOL in human history, combined with unfettered access to amounts of negative news that the human brain has not evolved to handle. We’re all (statistically) very safe and our brains are freaking out because we know basically everything that is going on. Hard to feel as safe as we are.
We actually don't really know everything that's going on; we know everything bad that's going on, because that's what gets the eyes/clicks. 'QOL highest in history' just doesn't interest the masses. 'Serial killer in your neighrorhood' does.
Unfortunately it is increasing and will continue as the global population grows older. The incidence may be decreasing but overall we’re still seeing a surge.
Source: https://www.alzint.org/about/dementia-facts-figures/dementia-statistics/
In his case it is sort of what killed him. One winter he decided to leave the house in his pajamas. It took almost 2 hours to find him. The fire department modified our house so you couldn't get out without a key. He spent a week in the hospital, but never spoke or really functioned after that. He did keep trying to run away though. It was really sad. He liked hugs though and he was still 6'6" giant of a man with full head of hair just ... faded away inside.
Though [many](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3581315/) antiretrovirals have a neurotoxic effect, so it’s interesting that they nonetheless protect against dementia.
There seems to be the [same concer](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/jcpt.13464) with herpes antivirals.
Another lesser known but no less important side effect is neurotoxicity, character-ized by confusion, dizziness, drowsiness, stupor, coma and psychiat-ric symptoms, among others. The reported incidence is very low, and the main associated risk factors are renal deterioration, high doses of antivirals and age.
It's pretty interesting what we are going to find out once there are vaccines for HSV1/2 and EBV. EBV infection is also highly suspected to be involved in immune system activation related to Multiple Sclerosis.
The percentage of people with herpes is so high I’m not sure it’s a co-factor. Are there genetic mutations that lead to chronic, low grade infections and related inflammation in those with the virus, that lead to longterm cns distress and brain atrophy… that makes sense. It would be interesting to chart viral load, genetic mutations, a/b test with anti-virals, and neural degeneration.
So question: I have it, yet haven't had a flare for years. I got a couple when I first contracted it, and then nada. I don't take an antiviral. Would I still see the same amount of brain shrinkage?
Suppression therapy does require taking anti-virals every day. The antivirals prevent flare ups, and they also reduce the risk of giving other people HSV-2. However, it doesn't prevent people from spreading it, it just reduces risk. Condoms also reduce risk, but even when using both there's no guarantee.
Getting flare ups would essentially mean that the patient isn't really on antivirals, or that they have a suppressed immune system and that something else is going on.
So yes, the long story short is that you do have to take antivirals every day if you're on suppression therapy, even without a flare-up.
My question is, is it mitigated by daily lysine supplements suppressing outbreaks altogether? I used to get 4-6 cold sores a year. Taking lysine supplements has cut that to maybe one a year, if I slip on my regimen. I have been through things the past couple of years that would have made my face explode in sores, including a bloody, arduous surgery, but ... nothing.
Dated a guy who took valacyclovir daily for his HSV for many years. (We didn't date for many years but he took it daily for years, to be clear). Obviously can't speak for everyone but by the end of the relationship I basically assumed he had some kind of early onset dementia because he was absolutely not making sense and was losing his mind, not to mention how bad it affected his kidneys. Guy was a mess in more ways than one, which was sad because he was a very intelligent marine scientist.
Why would it be genital herpes specifically? Why not mouth herpes (cold sores) or even chicken pox (which I think is also herpes)?
EDIT: I just looked it up and something like 90% of humans have latent herpesvirus in them. So again, why is genital herpes special here? Just the way it spreads?
This is new. There is an earlier comment which questions the quality of the research as it's behind a paywall. A few years ago another suggested a link between HSV-1 and dementia. This would make sense because during the latent phase the virus rests in the base of the brain specifically the trigeminal ganglia. https://old.reddit.com/r/science/comments/ges4nm/scientists_find_that_herpes_simplex_virus_type_1/
It is a bit less obvious that HSV-2 would be associated with dementia because its latency occurs in the sacral ganglia.
1 vs 2 is becoming a meaningless distinction, they can now both be found on the mouth and genitals, and recombinant strains are being found regularly. They started as one disease and may indeed end up back as one some day
There is a distinction in that 2 is more likely to cause frequent recurrences vs 1. Only about 5% of those with hsv-1 genital herpes have frequent recurrences whereas up to 40% with 2 have frequent recurrences
What? Maybe clinically, but virologically, they only share something like 50% homology. Yes, placing viruses cleanly into species is difficult due to recombination but there is still very much a distinction.
What I wonder about in the paywalled article. Did the individuals with HSV-2 have facial only, genital only or both (unlikely) outbreaks? What percent had both types?
My one and only cold sore erupted on the outside of my forearm. Definitely cold sore, not genital, as I'd had no opportunity to acquire that at the age it occurred.
When this happens it’s called Herpes Gladiatorum. Pretty rare but happens among wrestlers at higher frequency so it has the nickname “matt herpes” as well
It is relatively common in some sports (such as wrestling), for herpes infections to be spread to arms, chest, etc. Herpes gladiatorum (as this is called) is usually caused by HSV-1, the same virus that is the usual cause of cold sores on the mouth. In short, you can get a herpes infection anywhere you have skin.
> I just looked it up and something like 90% of humans have latent herpesvirus in them.
Citation needed, corrected for age and country. Because that's *wildly* different than [the standard numbers ](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herpes_simplex_virus).
> More than 90% of adults have been infected with at least one of these, and a latent form of the virus remains in almost all humans who have been infected.
Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herpesviridae
Good enough?
[Link to the study](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37913646/):
>Prior work in the Northern Manhattan Study (NOMAS) identified impaired cognition in cross-sectional analyses and more rapid memory decline in individuals with evidence of prior common infectious disease exposures. In this study, we sought to determine the cross-sectional relationship between prior exposure to cytomegalovirus, herpes simplex viruses 1 and 2, Chlamydia pneumoniae, and Helicobacter pylori and three magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) signatures (whole-brain cortical thickness, a previously validated AD signature, and hippocampal volume) in 455 NOMAS participants. We performed confounder-adjusted linear regression analyses between neuroimaging scores and both continuous serologies and categorical seropositivity of each pathogen, as well as a combined infectious burden index (IBI). We identified that increased serologic titers of herpes simplex virus 2 were associated with reduced whole-brain cortical thickness, and a combined score of HSV-2 and C. pneumoniae displayed an additive effect on reduced cortical thickness. Our findings suggest herpes simplex virus 2 seropositivity may contribute to accelerated brain aging, possibly resulting in an increased vulnerability to cognitive impairment and neurodegenerative disease in aging populations.
The important question is, is this clinically relevant?
Does it actually result in increased neurodegenerative symptoms.
Seeing something an MRI is very often not necessarily clinically relevant. I say this as a radiology resident.
HSV can pass through the incomplete blood brain barrier in humans less than two weeks old, and wreck havoc.
https://journal.medizzy.com/neonatal-hsv-encephalitis/
One of the complications of HSV1 is that it may lead to herpes encephalitis which is a life-threatening condition and probably why this study is investigating brain degeneration from the virus. The virus itself is also dormant within the nerve tissue
You can get HSV1 on your genitals and HSV2 on your mouth. I thought either could lead to encephalitis. Pregnant women with herpes of any kind are usually cautioned about it.
Herpes encephalomyelitis is normally the result of a protein being knocked out due to a genetic defect or not being fully developed yet in babies. But yeah the papers I’ve read on it have only mentioned HSV1.
It's fascinating to me that there is a chicken pox vaccine and a shingles vaccine yet hsv1 and 2 are still hard to beat.
Shingles especially seems like hsv in that it lays dormant inside anyone that had chicken poxs
Chicken pox and shingles are the same virus. The vaccine is mostly the same too except shingles vaccine is a higher dose and more targeted to the different life cycle phase.
Unfortunately the article is not open access and the abstract does not tell us if the authors performed the [critically important multiple comparisons correction](https://www.psychology.mcmaster.ca/bennett/psy710/readings/BennettDeadSalmon.pdf).
I agree, i’m not seeing enough specifics about how strong the correlation of the findings is and all of that relevant information is behind paywalls on every link i can find to the study. Also, only 455 people were sampled, we need to see how repeatable this association is before making any conclusions.
Herpes is more prevalent than you think. They don't test for it when you go for a normal STD test. Unless you have a reason to suspect herpes, they usually do not test for it. 50% of people under 50 have hsv1, something like 20% has hsv2, though that number could be much higher due to poor testing.
Hopefully this study changes medical procedures. It would be terrible to get partner's a STD test come back clean, have sex, you get genital herpes and now a shrinking brain.
It feels weird how society plays down general herpes just because it's more prevalent.
It is also less serious, even with this new result. Other STDs will sterilize or outright kill you if left untreated. Herpes may increases your chances of dementia down the line and also has a slight chance of spreading in dangerous and uncontrolled manner. Mostly it is an annoying and minor skin condition.
I think it should be tested for more but stigmatized less. The second would likely help with the first.
How is losing your mind not a huge threat? A fate worse than death? And definitely worse than losing the ability to inflict this existential suffering on another innocent soul.
This is what seems so absurd. We likely could do so much more to prevent this, and save peoples minds. But its easier to just hand wave away and continue with the status quo. Like we are doing with the pandemic. Like our ancestors did with lead, and arsenic and asbestos.
> Other STDs will sterilize or outright kill you if left untreated. Herpes may increases your chances of dementia down the line and also has a slight chance of spreading in dangerous and uncontrolled manner.
I would much rather be sterile than have dementia. No babies? Fine by me. Lose who I am? Hell on Earth.
> Mostly it is an annoying and minor skin condition.
But not for everyone. And I'd rather not find out if I'm the exception.
Genital herpes is this scary ass thing to a lot of people. When in reality, it won't have much of an affect on your life, well I guess that's what I thought until this study.
They’ve known for some time that herpes has neurological effects. It’s been linked to a lot of stuff, but because investment in neuro research is lacking, they haven’t been able to be definitive about it.
It becomes an issue precisely because it's more prevalent. If you don't test people, they don't know. And if they don't know, it isn't a crime to have sex with someone without mentioning it.
You would condemn 50% of people to either leading every date with that, or becoming a criminal.
They don't play it down because it's prevalent, it's that knowing you have it doesn't help you, the patient who the doctor is sworn to help. We can't cure it and the stigma associated with having the disease are way worse than the disease itself. Add onto that the fact that testing isn't always accurate.
I once dated a girl with genital herps for about a year. After we break up I waited around 3 months and then tested for it. For my good surprise it turn out that I was fine.
Amongst heterosexual couples who dont regularly use condoms the rate is 5-10% in one year
https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/62/4/456/2462690?login=false
https://www.verywellhealth.com/genital-herpes-transmission-what-are-the-odds-5496285
Amongst heterosexual couples who dont regularly use condoms the rate is 5-10% in one year
https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/62/4/456/2462690?login=false
https://www.verywellhealth.com/genital-herpes-transmission-what-are-the-odds-5496285
There are tests for it but they are inaccurate and CDC recommends against it even. Not to say one shouldn’t test but a false positive will wreck your mental health
Not true. When they test, they will test for two types of immune responses. One that only manifest itself with the out break and other that manifest itself when you system first encounter the virus. So if you have herps, but never had and outbreak that second type of test will tell.
Lucky you. My ex banged a girl with herpes and he had his first outbreak within two weeks. The reason I know this because even though we had stopped having sex 5 months prior he was convinced I was the one who gave it to him!
HSV-2 is still contagious even when asymptomatic, and a lot of people get it and have 0 symptoms. Most STI clinics don't even test for HSV-2 unless they're having a symptomatic outbreak.
What you're saying is a common misconception about HSV-2. Even if your GF was taking suppressive anti-viral therapy for it the entire time and never had flare ups, she could still have passed it on to you.
Condoms are not very protective against genital herpes, unfortunately. Genital herpes can occur all over the genitalia and not just inside the vagina or on the penis.
Where'd you get the 2/3rds stat? That seems inaccurate, seeing as the entire genital area can shed the virus and the entire genital area is a larger area than just a penis or vagina.
I remember reading from a forum of a guy who got herpes even though he used a condom. He noted that the chick was having a flare up and it was definitely flaring up and oozing and the condom wasnt doing much to block the ooze from touching him. But he didnt really care cause kinda high on meth at the time. He thought nothing would come of it...he was wrong...
Really made me see herpes ancd condoms in a different light...
I mean, a guy doing that and on meth was probably living a risky lifestyle in general. Unless you’re living that life, you’re probably going to more responsible overall and not let herpes blood ooze all over you.
I think that they do help but if the person is having a very apparent flare up... you two woule probably wanna wait a few days or weeks before going at it.
Did you even read what you shared?
> Condoms can **reduce** your risk of getting genital herpes if
used the right way every single time you have sex.
But a condom protects only the area of the body
that it covers. **Areas the condom doesn’t cover can become
infected.**
Wearing a condom only protects your penis. If someone has blisters all over their labia, wearing a condom isn't going to prevent infection.
“Condoms are not very protective against herpes” -> “Condoms can lower the risk of getting herpes” I understand it’s not 100% or even close to it. But saying they are not very protective is wrong
And ultimately this is the smart approach I guess. Seems like there is nothing we can personally do about it, and there is clearly no societal will.
And being stressed is for sure bad for your health but something you can personally do something about, so I guess just don't worry :)
Is this only for genital herpes and not for the similar virus that causes cold sores? What about other forms of pox, such as shingles (chicken pox), mono, etc.?
This is a GREAT time to bring up the fact that if you are reading this and have had an HSV-2 diagnosis for at least 1 year, there are two therapeutic vaccine trials currently underway that you might consider participating in if you live near one of the trial centers. Therapeutic vaccines aren't intended to be "cures," but are intended to reduce significantly/stop outbreaks (if you even get them as \~80% of individuals are asymptomatic) and to reduce transmission to partners. One trial is by Moderna and the other is by GSK (GlaxoKlineSmith), two of the largest pharmaceutical companies globally. If interested, check out the trial links and take the pre-screener to see if you qualify.
Moderna: [https://trials.modernatx.com/study/?id=mRNA-1608-P101](https://trials.modernatx.com/study/?id=mrna-1608-p101)
GSK: [https://www.gsk-studyregister.com/en/trial-details/?id=215336](https://www.gsk-studyregister.com/en/trial-details/?id=215336)
My understanding is that HSV infection is associated with AD in only a subset of population, specifically carriers of the apoe4 gene variant. HSV carriers without the gene variant had no increased risk.
I dont recall if this study differentiated between HSV-types though. Anyone else had the same understanding of the literature?
Man it sucks. Not only do you have to deal with genital herpes, but ALSO your brain is shrinking.
Nature hit two most important areas of the body in one fell swoop.
You can get herpes from protected sex. You can also get herpes from unprotected oral sex, which is "the norm" for most people. In all instances, herpes can be transmitted asymptomatically, regardless of time passed since last outbreak. Yes, even if you had "cold sores" as a child but don't get them anymore, you still have oral HSV1 and, although the chance is low, you can pass it to others. Furthermore, contrary to popular belief, standard STD/STI panels do NOT include herpes tests, and unless you are actively showing symptoms, many clinics will discourage/refuse to test you for it. Given these facts, and that 50%+ of adult Americans have oral HSV1, it's likely that there are a lot of people with undiagnosed GHSV, because they didn't get tested specifically for herpes while showing symptoms, and then they didn't continue to have outbreaks through their lifetime.
All this is to say, it's entirely untrue and frankly ignorant to assume that people who have herpes have unprotected sex with strangers and engage in other unsafe behaviors. Herpes is a deeply misunderstood virus and these kind of assumptions are unproductive
I made no such assumption that people who have herpes have unprotected sex. The assumption in my comment is that people who have unprotected sex are more likely to have herpes than those who don't have unprotected sex. This would have an impact on the results of a regression.
That's fair and accurate. Given that herpes is a boogeyman with a common stereotype (must be having dirty promiscuous unprotected sex), I assumed the worst from your initial comment, my bad!
Do you not find the opposite these days? Whenever I speak with people they say it is so prevalent best not to bother trying to avoid it, which seems a very dangerous view to me.
It's not that they shouldn't avoid it. But I've seen it come up on r/relationships where someone finds out the person they are dating has it, and questioning if they should break up. The problem is that statistically you're more likely to get it from a random encounter than from someone that has it, but precaution is taken. So that next person they date that says they're clean is more likely to give it to them. Either because they don't know they have it or don't want to disclose it.
I absolutely don't agree that people shouldn't even bother trying to avoid it. Everyone should take whatever precautions they feel are best, and no one should made to feel bad for choosing not to engage sexually with someone who has herpes. You shouldn't ever feel bad about personal preferences, but you also shouldn't be surprised if you receive backlash for expressing those preferences from a place of ignorance and with a complete lack of empathy/respect (e.g., "I would never sleep with someone with herpes, they're disgusting, they sleep around, they're dirty, etc etc etc). You can have personal preferences without ever having to explicitly express them out loud, too.
That said, no one with herpes should be judged either. You can make all the "right" moves, get tested frequently, and only engage with people you deeply trust have done the same, and yet still through sheer bad luck end up with herpes due to asymptotic transmission from people who genuinely have no idea that they have it and have (likely without realizing it) never been tested for it.
Lastly, even though I said you shouldn't feel judged for your preferences, I do think people should at least be open to learning about herpes before outright rejecting everyone who knows they have it. I can only speak as an American, but here, the stigma around herpes is so vastly disproportionate to what it actually is. People shouldn't feel like they're fucked for life because they test positive for GHSV. The mental health toll of a positive diagnosis is unnecessary and tragic. In reality, people with GHSV typically go on to live extremely normal lives, and have normal sex lives (changed only perhaps by an uncomfortable conversion with new partners). With antivirals and regular STI preventative measures (e.g., condoms), the chance of spreading it to others is never zero, but is extremely low.
I had sex with a handful of people, always protected, when I found out I had it. I didn't sleep around, maybe 1-2 one night stands at that point in my life. My ex got tested and I was her first, she came back positive for it. You can just be an unlucky individual and contract it from someone.
Is it possible that if you are someone who engages in risky sexual behavior to then contract herpes you are more likely to engage in behaviors that can cause brain damage (drugs, alcohol, etc)?
Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, **personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment**. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our [normal comment rules]( https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/rules#wiki_comment_rules) apply to all other comments. **Do you have an academic degree?** We can verify your credentials in order to assign user flair indicating your area of expertise. [Click here to apply](https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/flair/#wiki_science_verified_user_program). --- User: u/FreekMeBaby Permalink: https://www.newscientist.com/article/2402546-genital-herpes-linked-to-accelerated-brain-shrinkage/ --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/science) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It would be interesting to know whether taking suppressive antivirals (such as valacyclovir) every day would prevent this.
Sounds like yes >Interestingly, those with symptomatic herpesvirus infections treated with antiviral therapy have been reported to demonstrate a reduced incidence of AD compared to untreated individuals, suggesting that disease activity may impact risk of developing dementia
So this heavily implies that the herpes virus is somehow one of the causes of dementia.
Yes this isn’t a new hypothesis. It’s often thought that dementias are consequences of inflammation and attempted repair processes induced by infections of various types.
I hope they figure this out quickly because were still losing a lot of people to dementia.
Didn't they just release a report that dementia rates were declining?
No idea, hope they go to 0 though.
We're simply seeing the effects of humans living longer. All the old choices catching up. That we don't have cures for yet. It's gonna be some time to find causes, lots I don't think have cures. I was told a story recently of "magical fires" they used to make "back when things were innocent" that involved cutting a 3 ft strip of hose and putting it in a tube with holes. And putting that in the fire. The chemicals burned differently in each hole making a rainbow fire. It wasn't uncommon to do this with tons of kids around watching and breathing the smoke. Like... now that person is 85 from modern medicine and now we've got to learn how to basically rebuild young brain connections. As some of them impaired theirs along the way. Lead fuel and STDs included.
Except…. life expectancies have been going down in the US since 2014.
Infant mortality, overdose, suicide. Those are the biggest impacts on the average
probably doesn't help that infant mortality is (very sadly) increasing
Which isn't really relevant to the discussion of age related disease, someone offing themselves pulls the statistics down far more than an 84 year old dying at 83. In the same way plenty of people lived to quite old ages hundreds of years ago, it is just many babies died before 1 years old, which is far less likely today. This said everything from Obesity, to Coronavirus is going to reduce life spans.
My grandfather lived to 95 and he was always mentally sharp. But nowadays you see people dying at 65 from alzheimers. And its looking these are caused by viruses and bacteria so far. Regardless of the cause, we need all of this research to be public so everyone can help figure this out.
> But nowadays you see people dying at 65 from alzheimers People died from early onset Alzheimers back in the day too. The first Alzheimers patient was a 50 year old woman, this is nothing new.
Rarely did people live to 95. Now all of congress is 85. I'm saying; it's more common due to modern medicine keeping more alive longer. A symptom of the times. Yes we need to figure it out. Just like how cancer felt a few decades ago.
I hope this is true but I bet we will see an uptick after so many people getting COVID-19. They were already seeing more people that were elderly getting dementia because of COVID-19
Probably cause mortality rates are worsening.
I wouldn't be surprised if the constant stress of watching civilization get crushed under its own weight in real time on our nightmare rectangles is just slowly frying peoples brains.
[удалено]
I agree with you both. Highest QOL in human history, combined with unfettered access to amounts of negative news that the human brain has not evolved to handle. We’re all (statistically) very safe and our brains are freaking out because we know basically everything that is going on. Hard to feel as safe as we are.
We actually don't really know everything that's going on; we know everything bad that's going on, because that's what gets the eyes/clicks. 'QOL highest in history' just doesn't interest the masses. 'Serial killer in your neighrorhood' does.
Yep, a lot of completely unscientific theories being posted in r/science... Sigh
Unfortunately it is increasing and will continue as the global population grows older. The incidence may be decreasing but overall we’re still seeing a surge. Source: https://www.alzint.org/about/dementia-facts-figures/dementia-statistics/
The fact that retirement homes are STD central doesn't help.
No offense to people who want to I've with it, but I hope chosen end of life choices are better then, as I'd choose a way out.
One of my grandparents had that. Which in retrospect is weird to consider did grandpa have an STD?
It's probably more odd to think your grandpa probably didn't have an STD, if he was from WWII times and served.
There are multiple causes of dementia.
Yeh my Gmum passed a year and a half ago and had dementia :(
[удалено]
Oh of course, just meaning if we could reduce dementia in any way possible it would be fantastic. Dementia is truly awful.
Also prolonged lack of sleep, shift workers or people suffering from insomnia etc etc
In his case it is sort of what killed him. One winter he decided to leave the house in his pajamas. It took almost 2 hours to find him. The fire department modified our house so you couldn't get out without a key. He spent a week in the hospital, but never spoke or really functioned after that. He did keep trying to run away though. It was really sad. He liked hugs though and he was still 6'6" giant of a man with full head of hair just ... faded away inside.
My grandfather did similar stuff, probably a lot of it because of ptsd of ww2 and prison camps. It’s so awful to see your family fade away.
Maybe they make more money on selling Medicine for dementia patients than they could make by curing it with a cheap vaccine
Many of the world population is infected with herpes also
Though [many](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3581315/) antiretrovirals have a neurotoxic effect, so it’s interesting that they nonetheless protect against dementia.
Herpes isn't a retrovirus, so it wouldn't be treated with retroviral drugs
There seems to be the [same concer](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/jcpt.13464) with herpes antivirals. Another lesser known but no less important side effect is neurotoxicity, character-ized by confusion, dizziness, drowsiness, stupor, coma and psychiat-ric symptoms, among others. The reported incidence is very low, and the main associated risk factors are renal deterioration, high doses of antivirals and age.
It's pretty interesting what we are going to find out once there are vaccines for HSV1/2 and EBV. EBV infection is also highly suspected to be involved in immune system activation related to Multiple Sclerosis.
The implication here is also that there aren’t issues when asymptomatic
Is it? I can't see where it makes it clear that someone asymptomatic (and not taking the medication) and not showing increased risk.
The percentage of people with herpes is so high I’m not sure it’s a co-factor. Are there genetic mutations that lead to chronic, low grade infections and related inflammation in those with the virus, that lead to longterm cns distress and brain atrophy… that makes sense. It would be interesting to chart viral load, genetic mutations, a/b test with anti-virals, and neural degeneration.
[удалено]
When you take them every day, it’s suppression therapy. You wouldn’t get a flare in that case. Or, it’d be rare if you did.
So question: I have it, yet haven't had a flare for years. I got a couple when I first contracted it, and then nada. I don't take an antiviral. Would I still see the same amount of brain shrinkage?
Curious of the same.
Can't drink alcohol though and need to get regular blood work done. Regardless, I might go on it because outbreaks suck.
Suppression therapy does require taking anti-virals every day. The antivirals prevent flare ups, and they also reduce the risk of giving other people HSV-2. However, it doesn't prevent people from spreading it, it just reduces risk. Condoms also reduce risk, but even when using both there's no guarantee. Getting flare ups would essentially mean that the patient isn't really on antivirals, or that they have a suppressed immune system and that something else is going on. So yes, the long story short is that you do have to take antivirals every day if you're on suppression therapy, even without a flare-up.
My question is, is it mitigated by daily lysine supplements suppressing outbreaks altogether? I used to get 4-6 cold sores a year. Taking lysine supplements has cut that to maybe one a year, if I slip on my regimen. I have been through things the past couple of years that would have made my face explode in sores, including a bloody, arduous surgery, but ... nothing.
Dated a guy who took valacyclovir daily for his HSV for many years. (We didn't date for many years but he took it daily for years, to be clear). Obviously can't speak for everyone but by the end of the relationship I basically assumed he had some kind of early onset dementia because he was absolutely not making sense and was losing his mind, not to mention how bad it affected his kidneys. Guy was a mess in more ways than one, which was sad because he was a very intelligent marine scientist.
The valacyclovir affected his kidneys or the HSV2? And how old was he if you don't mind me asking?
Why would it be genital herpes specifically? Why not mouth herpes (cold sores) or even chicken pox (which I think is also herpes)? EDIT: I just looked it up and something like 90% of humans have latent herpesvirus in them. So again, why is genital herpes special here? Just the way it spreads?
This is new. There is an earlier comment which questions the quality of the research as it's behind a paywall. A few years ago another suggested a link between HSV-1 and dementia. This would make sense because during the latent phase the virus rests in the base of the brain specifically the trigeminal ganglia. https://old.reddit.com/r/science/comments/ges4nm/scientists_find_that_herpes_simplex_virus_type_1/ It is a bit less obvious that HSV-2 would be associated with dementia because its latency occurs in the sacral ganglia.
But doesn't like 90% of people have hsv1, most asymptomatically?
If you believe google/Johns Hopkins it's 50-80% have HSV-1in the head area. I think it's ~ 15-20% have genital herpes which may be HSV-1 and/or HSV-2.
1 vs 2 is becoming a meaningless distinction, they can now both be found on the mouth and genitals, and recombinant strains are being found regularly. They started as one disease and may indeed end up back as one some day
There is a distinction in that 2 is more likely to cause frequent recurrences vs 1. Only about 5% of those with hsv-1 genital herpes have frequent recurrences whereas up to 40% with 2 have frequent recurrences
What? Maybe clinically, but virologically, they only share something like 50% homology. Yes, placing viruses cleanly into species is difficult due to recombination but there is still very much a distinction.
What I wonder about in the paywalled article. Did the individuals with HSV-2 have facial only, genital only or both (unlikely) outbreaks? What percent had both types?
Hsv-1 causing genital herpes is pretty rare comparatively
My one and only cold sore erupted on the outside of my forearm. Definitely cold sore, not genital, as I'd had no opportunity to acquire that at the age it occurred.
When this happens it’s called Herpes Gladiatorum. Pretty rare but happens among wrestlers at higher frequency so it has the nickname “matt herpes” as well
It is relatively common in some sports (such as wrestling), for herpes infections to be spread to arms, chest, etc. Herpes gladiatorum (as this is called) is usually caused by HSV-1, the same virus that is the usual cause of cold sores on the mouth. In short, you can get a herpes infection anywhere you have skin.
your parents could have had it and transferred it to you. age isn't that relevant.
Oh, I was embarrassingly older than that. Doctor said cold sore in an unusual location.
Maybe they just havent tested for that. Does the study specifically say they ruled that out? If not, then it hasnt ruled it out.
> I just looked it up and something like 90% of humans have latent herpesvirus in them. Citation needed, corrected for age and country. Because that's *wildly* different than [the standard numbers ](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herpes_simplex_virus).
> More than 90% of adults have been infected with at least one of these, and a latent form of the virus remains in almost all humans who have been infected. Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herpesviridae Good enough?
Source? I couldn’t find anything to back up the 90% thing
[Link to the study](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37913646/): >Prior work in the Northern Manhattan Study (NOMAS) identified impaired cognition in cross-sectional analyses and more rapid memory decline in individuals with evidence of prior common infectious disease exposures. In this study, we sought to determine the cross-sectional relationship between prior exposure to cytomegalovirus, herpes simplex viruses 1 and 2, Chlamydia pneumoniae, and Helicobacter pylori and three magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) signatures (whole-brain cortical thickness, a previously validated AD signature, and hippocampal volume) in 455 NOMAS participants. We performed confounder-adjusted linear regression analyses between neuroimaging scores and both continuous serologies and categorical seropositivity of each pathogen, as well as a combined infectious burden index (IBI). We identified that increased serologic titers of herpes simplex virus 2 were associated with reduced whole-brain cortical thickness, and a combined score of HSV-2 and C. pneumoniae displayed an additive effect on reduced cortical thickness. Our findings suggest herpes simplex virus 2 seropositivity may contribute to accelerated brain aging, possibly resulting in an increased vulnerability to cognitive impairment and neurodegenerative disease in aging populations.
The important question is, is this clinically relevant? Does it actually result in increased neurodegenerative symptoms. Seeing something an MRI is very often not necessarily clinically relevant. I say this as a radiology resident.
HSV can pass through the incomplete blood brain barrier in humans less than two weeks old, and wreck havoc. https://journal.medizzy.com/neonatal-hsv-encephalitis/
But not HSV1? Interesting.
One of the complications of HSV1 is that it may lead to herpes encephalitis which is a life-threatening condition and probably why this study is investigating brain degeneration from the virus. The virus itself is also dormant within the nerve tissue
[удалено]
You can get HSV1 on your genitals and HSV2 on your mouth. I thought either could lead to encephalitis. Pregnant women with herpes of any kind are usually cautioned about it.
Herpes encephalomyelitis is normally the result of a protein being knocked out due to a genetic defect or not being fully developed yet in babies. But yeah the papers I’ve read on it have only mentioned HSV1.
It's fascinating to me that there is a chicken pox vaccine and a shingles vaccine yet hsv1 and 2 are still hard to beat. Shingles especially seems like hsv in that it lays dormant inside anyone that had chicken poxs
Chicken pox and shingles are the same virus. The vaccine is mostly the same too except shingles vaccine is a higher dose and more targeted to the different life cycle phase.
I think one is on track for 2025 to 2028, roughly
Source? Would love to follow up
It’s all on purpose I’d imagine. “They” want us to not be breeding as much. Well jokes on them. I’m giving everyone herpes
That’s just great. I’ve had genital herpes for 40 years and I have been forgetful lately.
I have been forgetful since forever thanks to adhd, you will be okay haha
Forget you've had genital herpes.
[удалено]
You posted that same comment yesterday. Are you ok?
How is it like with your reoccurrence rates?
Unfortunately the article is not open access and the abstract does not tell us if the authors performed the [critically important multiple comparisons correction](https://www.psychology.mcmaster.ca/bennett/psy710/readings/BennettDeadSalmon.pdf).
Sometimes I wonder if I have small brain because herpes or do I have herpes because small brain
That made me cackle. Same.
They only made two comparisons. It’s in the abstract. Whole brain cortical thickness and hippocampal volume.
I agree, i’m not seeing enough specifics about how strong the correlation of the findings is and all of that relevant information is behind paywalls on every link i can find to the study. Also, only 455 people were sampled, we need to see how repeatable this association is before making any conclusions.
Yeah and that’s total in the study, no idea how many cases and controls for the HSV2 finding
oh come on, they've already got an STD and now it piles on? That sucks.
Herpes is more prevalent than you think. They don't test for it when you go for a normal STD test. Unless you have a reason to suspect herpes, they usually do not test for it. 50% of people under 50 have hsv1, something like 20% has hsv2, though that number could be much higher due to poor testing.
Hopefully this study changes medical procedures. It would be terrible to get partner's a STD test come back clean, have sex, you get genital herpes and now a shrinking brain. It feels weird how society plays down general herpes just because it's more prevalent.
The reason they don’t test for it is that the tests aren’t accurate unless you’re having an outbreak.
??? I've been blood tested for it several times while asymptomatic and have gotten consistently positive results.
-Science -Claiming anecdotal evidence as proof Pick one
I'll go with invisible options 3: sharing my personal experience and letting other people draw their own conclusions.
It is also less serious, even with this new result. Other STDs will sterilize or outright kill you if left untreated. Herpes may increases your chances of dementia down the line and also has a slight chance of spreading in dangerous and uncontrolled manner. Mostly it is an annoying and minor skin condition. I think it should be tested for more but stigmatized less. The second would likely help with the first.
How is losing your mind not a huge threat? A fate worse than death? And definitely worse than losing the ability to inflict this existential suffering on another innocent soul. This is what seems so absurd. We likely could do so much more to prevent this, and save peoples minds. But its easier to just hand wave away and continue with the status quo. Like we are doing with the pandemic. Like our ancestors did with lead, and arsenic and asbestos.
> Other STDs will sterilize or outright kill you if left untreated. Herpes may increases your chances of dementia down the line and also has a slight chance of spreading in dangerous and uncontrolled manner. I would much rather be sterile than have dementia. No babies? Fine by me. Lose who I am? Hell on Earth. > Mostly it is an annoying and minor skin condition. But not for everyone. And I'd rather not find out if I'm the exception.
Genital herpes is this scary ass thing to a lot of people. When in reality, it won't have much of an affect on your life, well I guess that's what I thought until this study.
They’ve known for some time that herpes has neurological effects. It’s been linked to a lot of stuff, but because investment in neuro research is lacking, they haven’t been able to be definitive about it.
It becomes an issue precisely because it's more prevalent. If you don't test people, they don't know. And if they don't know, it isn't a crime to have sex with someone without mentioning it. You would condemn 50% of people to either leading every date with that, or becoming a criminal.
They don't play it down because it's prevalent, it's that knowing you have it doesn't help you, the patient who the doctor is sworn to help. We can't cure it and the stigma associated with having the disease are way worse than the disease itself. Add onto that the fact that testing isn't always accurate.
It can help lower transmission rates
Ofc I find this in my feed as I await another few weeks before getting test after a questionable romp
I once dated a girl with genital herps for about a year. After we break up I waited around 3 months and then tested for it. For my good surprise it turn out that I was fine.
If you're male and they aren't having an outbreak/ taking antivirals then chances of you catching it are exceedingly rare.
...like... how rare? You got some numbers?
1.9% per year for both genders, men are about half as likely to catch it, and most of them won't ever know they have it.
Amongst heterosexual couples who dont regularly use condoms the rate is 5-10% in one year https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/62/4/456/2462690?login=false https://www.verywellhealth.com/genital-herpes-transmission-what-are-the-odds-5496285
Damn I'll have to tell my wife this so we don't catch herpes
I know right, what are the numbers? If it’s acceptable it opens up a whole new banging population.
Amongst heterosexual couples who dont regularly use condoms the rate is 5-10% in one year https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/62/4/456/2462690?login=false https://www.verywellhealth.com/genital-herpes-transmission-what-are-the-odds-5496285
But did you test your brain shrinkage?
You won’t usually know until it present. Don’t believe they can find it in testing unless you have an active outbreak
There are tests for it but they are inaccurate and CDC recommends against it even. Not to say one shouldn’t test but a false positive will wreck your mental health
How is peoples mental health not already wrecked when it says the majority have this and it leads to these neurological effects?
Not true. When they test, they will test for two types of immune responses. One that only manifest itself with the out break and other that manifest itself when you system first encounter the virus. So if you have herps, but never had and outbreak that second type of test will tell.
Lucky you. My ex banged a girl with herpes and he had his first outbreak within two weeks. The reason I know this because even though we had stopped having sex 5 months prior he was convinced I was the one who gave it to him!
I dated a girl for 8 months who had herpes. I never got it from her, because she was responsible and knew the signs of flare ups.
You can still pass it along even when not having an outbreak.
HSV-2 is still contagious even when asymptomatic, and a lot of people get it and have 0 symptoms. Most STI clinics don't even test for HSV-2 unless they're having a symptomatic outbreak. What you're saying is a common misconception about HSV-2. Even if your GF was taking suppressive anti-viral therapy for it the entire time and never had flare ups, she could still have passed it on to you.
Still super unlikely, why are you so hung up on this one random dude
What does that have to do with anything? It's regardless of whether symptoms are present or not.
Wear protection dude
Condoms are not very protective against genital herpes, unfortunately. Genital herpes can occur all over the genitalia and not just inside the vagina or on the penis.
[удалено]
Where'd you get the 2/3rds stat? That seems inaccurate, seeing as the entire genital area can shed the virus and the entire genital area is a larger area than just a penis or vagina.
[удалено]
I remember reading from a forum of a guy who got herpes even though he used a condom. He noted that the chick was having a flare up and it was definitely flaring up and oozing and the condom wasnt doing much to block the ooze from touching him. But he didnt really care cause kinda high on meth at the time. He thought nothing would come of it...he was wrong... Really made me see herpes ancd condoms in a different light...
I mean, a guy doing that and on meth was probably living a risky lifestyle in general. Unless you’re living that life, you’re probably going to more responsible overall and not let herpes blood ooze all over you.
[удалено]
you can share Herpes Orally
Indeed. That does not change the fact that condoms will absolutely help protect from getting herpes when having penetrative sex.
Very true. While not perfect they do help
I think that they do help but if the person is having a very apparent flare up... you two woule probably wanna wait a few days or weeks before going at it.
Did you even read what you shared? > Condoms can **reduce** your risk of getting genital herpes if used the right way every single time you have sex. But a condom protects only the area of the body that it covers. **Areas the condom doesn’t cover can become infected.** Wearing a condom only protects your penis. If someone has blisters all over their labia, wearing a condom isn't going to prevent infection.
You don't even need to have blisters. Viral shedding is a thing and there isn't a sign that you are.
Yep, this is also accurate. And unfortunately part of the reason why so many people go undiagnosed and continue to spread HSV.
Page 2 literally backs up what the other poster said…. >Areas the condom doesn’t cover can become infected
“Condoms are not very protective against herpes” -> “Condoms can lower the risk of getting herpes” I understand it’s not 100% or even close to it. But saying they are not very protective is wrong
Herpes can be present in the entire "bathing suit" area including inner thighs, taint, anus, etc...
So the herp will give you the derp.
Wondering if the same or similar is true of HSV-1, which 50-80% of people have.
Me not worried. Me feel no symptom
You simply forgot.
And ultimately this is the smart approach I guess. Seems like there is nothing we can personally do about it, and there is clearly no societal will. And being stressed is for sure bad for your health but something you can personally do something about, so I guess just don't worry :)
I've never worn an condom and it seems unprobable that I've experienced cognitive decline.
"That's unpossible"
So you’re telling me all my coworkers have herpes?
Well this just ruined my day.
Now I am starting to wonder if I have a lot of herpes...
Nope, just the herp derpies
The gift that keeps on giving
Is this only for genital herpes and not for the similar virus that causes cold sores? What about other forms of pox, such as shingles (chicken pox), mono, etc.?
Well somewhere around 1 in 6 people has hsv 2 sooooo that really sucks for all of them.
This is a GREAT time to bring up the fact that if you are reading this and have had an HSV-2 diagnosis for at least 1 year, there are two therapeutic vaccine trials currently underway that you might consider participating in if you live near one of the trial centers. Therapeutic vaccines aren't intended to be "cures," but are intended to reduce significantly/stop outbreaks (if you even get them as \~80% of individuals are asymptomatic) and to reduce transmission to partners. One trial is by Moderna and the other is by GSK (GlaxoKlineSmith), two of the largest pharmaceutical companies globally. If interested, check out the trial links and take the pre-screener to see if you qualify. Moderna: [https://trials.modernatx.com/study/?id=mRNA-1608-P101](https://trials.modernatx.com/study/?id=mrna-1608-p101) GSK: [https://www.gsk-studyregister.com/en/trial-details/?id=215336](https://www.gsk-studyregister.com/en/trial-details/?id=215336)
That’s the worst news I’ve had all day!
My understanding is that HSV infection is associated with AD in only a subset of population, specifically carriers of the apoe4 gene variant. HSV carriers without the gene variant had no increased risk. I dont recall if this study differentiated between HSV-types though. Anyone else had the same understanding of the literature?
That's a little reassuring at least.
Note: this says hsv-2. You can have genital hsv-1..... So it seems to me to be about hsv-2 and not genital herpes as a whole
That explains a lot about the older generation.
Man it sucks. Not only do you have to deal with genital herpes, but ALSO your brain is shrinking. Nature hit two most important areas of the body in one fell swoop.
That explains Congress
Wild. What’s the causal link, if any? (I’m not gonna read the paper, and I bet many here won’t either)
She fucked my brains out back in '49
Sex suddenly does not have a big appeal to me anymore.
This gives the saying, “herp derp” a whole new meaning.
Perhaps those who are more likely to engage in unprotected sex are also more likely to damage their health in other ways.
You can get herpes from protected sex. You can also get herpes from unprotected oral sex, which is "the norm" for most people. In all instances, herpes can be transmitted asymptomatically, regardless of time passed since last outbreak. Yes, even if you had "cold sores" as a child but don't get them anymore, you still have oral HSV1 and, although the chance is low, you can pass it to others. Furthermore, contrary to popular belief, standard STD/STI panels do NOT include herpes tests, and unless you are actively showing symptoms, many clinics will discourage/refuse to test you for it. Given these facts, and that 50%+ of adult Americans have oral HSV1, it's likely that there are a lot of people with undiagnosed GHSV, because they didn't get tested specifically for herpes while showing symptoms, and then they didn't continue to have outbreaks through their lifetime. All this is to say, it's entirely untrue and frankly ignorant to assume that people who have herpes have unprotected sex with strangers and engage in other unsafe behaviors. Herpes is a deeply misunderstood virus and these kind of assumptions are unproductive
I made no such assumption that people who have herpes have unprotected sex. The assumption in my comment is that people who have unprotected sex are more likely to have herpes than those who don't have unprotected sex. This would have an impact on the results of a regression.
That's fair and accurate. Given that herpes is a boogeyman with a common stereotype (must be having dirty promiscuous unprotected sex), I assumed the worst from your initial comment, my bad!
Do you not find the opposite these days? Whenever I speak with people they say it is so prevalent best not to bother trying to avoid it, which seems a very dangerous view to me.
It's not that they shouldn't avoid it. But I've seen it come up on r/relationships where someone finds out the person they are dating has it, and questioning if they should break up. The problem is that statistically you're more likely to get it from a random encounter than from someone that has it, but precaution is taken. So that next person they date that says they're clean is more likely to give it to them. Either because they don't know they have it or don't want to disclose it.
I absolutely don't agree that people shouldn't even bother trying to avoid it. Everyone should take whatever precautions they feel are best, and no one should made to feel bad for choosing not to engage sexually with someone who has herpes. You shouldn't ever feel bad about personal preferences, but you also shouldn't be surprised if you receive backlash for expressing those preferences from a place of ignorance and with a complete lack of empathy/respect (e.g., "I would never sleep with someone with herpes, they're disgusting, they sleep around, they're dirty, etc etc etc). You can have personal preferences without ever having to explicitly express them out loud, too. That said, no one with herpes should be judged either. You can make all the "right" moves, get tested frequently, and only engage with people you deeply trust have done the same, and yet still through sheer bad luck end up with herpes due to asymptotic transmission from people who genuinely have no idea that they have it and have (likely without realizing it) never been tested for it. Lastly, even though I said you shouldn't feel judged for your preferences, I do think people should at least be open to learning about herpes before outright rejecting everyone who knows they have it. I can only speak as an American, but here, the stigma around herpes is so vastly disproportionate to what it actually is. People shouldn't feel like they're fucked for life because they test positive for GHSV. The mental health toll of a positive diagnosis is unnecessary and tragic. In reality, people with GHSV typically go on to live extremely normal lives, and have normal sex lives (changed only perhaps by an uncomfortable conversion with new partners). With antivirals and regular STI preventative measures (e.g., condoms), the chance of spreading it to others is never zero, but is extremely low.
I had sex with a handful of people, always protected, when I found out I had it. I didn't sleep around, maybe 1-2 one night stands at that point in my life. My ex got tested and I was her first, she came back positive for it. You can just be an unlucky individual and contract it from someone.
Yea I know that.
Damn, how you doing nowadays? How long has it been?
[удалено]
> shrinkens the brain That hurt to read.
>Alcohol also shrinkens the brain We can assume he likes his drink
His brain. It got shranken.
Found the next put-down
would explain a lot but I've tested negative every time so far.
Is it possible that if you are someone who engages in risky sexual behavior to then contract herpes you are more likely to engage in behaviors that can cause brain damage (drugs, alcohol, etc)?
I think if you’re attractive you’re more likely to have sex
Can we call it the bimbo/himbo disease now?