"Horus and Seth contended for the throne of Egypt for many years, their
antagonism culminating in Seth undertaking a homosexual assault on
Horus, who later tore off Seth's testicles. The former unpleasant
episode relates to the concept of poisonous semen, which was a recurring
feature in the supernatural causation of disease in ancient Egypt (see
Westendorf, 1992). The Egyptian word metut means both semen and poison,
in each case with a phallus as biliteral phonetic for m+t, and a second
(discharging) phallus as a determinative. This double meaning accords
with the act of the malign incubus who could inseminate and thereby
poison a sleeping victim."

John F. Nunn, Ancient Egyptian Medicine, p. 98



**

Those who have been paying attention will of course know already of the
theory that the immunosuppressive effects of semen may play a role in
the development of AIDS, which makes the above really fascinating, don't
you think? I don't say it proves anything, but it does put modern
theories about the possible dangers of semen in an interesting light.

So true. Sex kills people which is why there are no human beings on
Earth.....or is it because they all walked over the edge....or was it that
fire breathing dragon?

Let me think about it.

In article
<715392fbb5e1412e4ff9bac79565a0b5@localhost.talkab outhealthnetwork.com>,
"PaulKing" <aimulti@aimultimedia.com> wrote:

The only point I was making was that theories about semen as a cause of
disease go back a very long way. It's historically and psychologically
very interesting, and certainly something to keep in mind when one reads
about how semen is immunosuppressive and so on. Do you, incidentally,
take that seriously at all? The Perth Group do.

Uiopp wrote:

And do you have any cites from a peer-reviewed publication regarding
links to myths, legends, folklore and reality?

B/

In article <409002BF.88902509@sfo.com>,
Brian Mailman <bmailman@sfo.invalid> wrote:

I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

In article <uislad-0AD85B.11005129042004@lust.ihug.co.nz>,
Uiopp <uislad@faaa.co.nz> wrote:
You need to spell out clearly what conclusion you think follows from
your comments, or people will make erroneous assumptions about what
you're trying to prove.

--
David Canzi "Efforts to make it more difficult for users to set envelope
return path and header "From" fields to point to valid addresses
other than their own are largely misguided." -- RFC2822

Uiopp wrote:
Lemme try it again. Can you produce any cites from a peer-reviewed
publication that links myths, legands, and folklore to the real world?

B/

Followup to myself:

That is, we know about the link from the folk medicine use of foxglove
and heart disease is one example. Willow bark and aspirin. George Bush
and willful stupidity.

Can you produce a verified link from "poison sperm" myths and folklore
to reality?

B/

In article <4090509E.330DCCA@sfo.com>,
Brian Mailman <bmailman@sfo.invalid> wrote:

No, I wasn't trying to. I merely thought it was interesting, in view of
the discussion among AIDS dissidents about the immunosuppressive effects
of semen and its possible role in AIDS, that there is a long history of
superstitious beliefs about the nature of semen and its role in disease.

The psychoanalyst Casper Schmidt in his article on the Group-Fantasy
Origins of AIDS (first published in the Journal of Psychohistory, Summer
1984, and reprinted in John Lauritsen and Ian Young's book 'The AIDS
Cult') does not mention the ancient Egyptian myth, which is a
particularly interesting one since it has a homosexual context, but does
mention several others:

'In epidemics of "Dhat syndrome" in India and South East Asia, men's
semen became spoiled through their being libertines, and this spoiled
semen (fantasy of poison sperm) had to be countered by celibacy and
other restrictions on sexual activity." p. 17 of 'The AIDS Cult.'

'A third group of etiological ideas are fantasies of poison sperm: John
of Gaddesden warns that a man who sleeps with a woman who has previously
had intercourse with a leper will still contract the disease. Bernard
Gordon adds that the man will become leprous only if the woman still
retains the seminal fluid of the leper.' p. 31 of 'The AIDS Cult.'

Schmidt does mention theories about immunosuppressive semen (p. 32), but
sneers at them as "sophisticated." He does not discuss the evidence for
the possible role of semen in AIDS, which might show that the 'fantasy'
actually corresponded, even to a limited extent, with reality. It seems
to be axiomatic for Schmidt that anything that shows semen in a bad
light must be wrong (he was gay, incidentally). If one took Schmidt
seriously about bad semen being only a fantasy, his views should be more
effective as a criticism of some of the dissident theories than they are
against HIV (which I mention only in the interests of fairness, since I
am generally sympathetic to the dissidents).

The Perth Group do discuss the evidence about immunosuppressive semen,
which is problematic for some of their gay followers
(http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/data/fcanal.htm).

On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 14:30:24 +1200, Uiopp <uislad@faaa.co.nz> wrote:

snip...
Casper was a psychiatrist. Neat guy. Died of AIDS, unfortunately,
years ago. From Namibia, did you know?

The sperm as immune suppressive was better articulated by Robert
Root-Bernstein. I think there may be some small contribution in terms
of facilitating transmission of HIV to this aspect of sperm. But
otherwise, I don't think it's really much of a contributor. This kind
of went with the notion that the only people that got AIDS had had
LOTS and LOTS of sex, thousands of men. Indeed, many such guys in the
80s died, but it is little wonder since such a high exposure will
result in pretty much guaranteed infection. By contrast, many
individuals with far more limited sexual activity develop AIDS when
infected with HIV (but not otherwise).

George M. Carter

In article <30c1901qco328bgjmkk5m5hkr51urfhqk8@4ax.com>,
GMCarter <fiar@verizon.net> wrote:

Schmidt was a psychoanalyst. That's what it says in the book. As for his
being from Namibia, why do I get the idea that you're only telling me
that so that you can show you know it? Kind of weird.

I don't know who had that notion. Most of us have heard of hemophiliacs
and drug users. They're not necessarily that promiscuous.

They're the ones who get stuffed full of AZT and god knows what else.

On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 21:15:49 +1200, Uiopp <uislad@faaa.co.nz> wrote:

Just sharing.

Nor are gay men necessarily that promiscuous.

Currently, people get "stuffed" with a lot of drugs. Instead of dying
immediately as such a theory as "AZT causes AIDS" might predict, most
improve dramatically. CD4 counts INCREASE.

Side effects? Yes. Toxicities? Yes. For the majority of people that
DON'T have access to ARV, the outcome is grim.

Another brain dead theory of what causes AIDS that has no support
whatsoever. Indeed, AZT CAN cause some blood dyscrasias. Persistent
decline in CD4 count to zero, however, is not one of them.

George M. Carter