Are the statistics for a condom's success rate if

---

Originally Posted By: Rad

Urinating beforehand doesn't do anything, but empty the bladder.
It flushes out the precum. That might reduce the risk of pregnancy some small amount if the condom slips off inside.

Okay, let me clarify. It flushes out any latent live sperm that may be left over on the urethra from a previous ejaculation. If they old sperm is not left hanging out, then it can't get into the pre-cum and cause pregnancy.By the way, "clarify" can have more than one meaning.

Clarify the meaning of the words; clarify the pre-cum.The OP brought up the topic of peeing before sex: Originally Posted By: The OP(I suppose it's worth mentioning that I pee'd beforehand each time, the pee acting as an alcohol cleaning out my uthera including any unwanted sperm).Sperm (from a previous ejaculation) can't last for a long time in the urethra, but a urination will clean out whatever is there. Whatever is there can get into the precum. If the old sperm is flushed out, it can't get into the precum. You can pee 15 minutes after your last ejaculation, or 5 minutes before your next intercourse; I doubt that it matters.If the old sperm does get into the precum and it's viable, it can cause a pregnancy, if it finds its way into the vagina of a fertile female. It's not very likely, but it's possible.I don't know how much clearer I can make it. If you disagree with what I said above, well, okay then.

(1) He didn't say how long it was since his previous ejaculation, but he did bring up the topic of peeing. He did. I did not. Do you agree with that?

(2) If he ejaculated recently before the current session, then it's relevant, if he's really concerned about reducing the chance of pregnancy as much as possible. Do you agree with that?

(3) If at some time since his last ejaculation, whether 5 minutes or 5 hours ago, he has urinated, then he has flushed out of his urethra any sperm that may be hanging out there. Do you agree with that?

(4) If the condom fails or slips off during intercourse, but before ejaculation, and if the guy produces precum, there's a risk it will get into the vagina. Do you agree with that?

(5) If the precum contains viable sperm and it gets into the vagina, there is a small risk of pregnancy. Okay?

(6) Urinating pretty much guarantees that there will be no viable sperm in the precum. Are you alright with that statement?

I hope there's no need for a (7).

Originally Posted By: Rad

Oh, well! I suppose if you pee before sex, you've pee'd twice in your lifetime, so congratulations!
I understand you're trying to be sarcastic here, but I have no idea what you mean, unless you're implying that I've had sex twice in my lifetime, which doesn't really make any sense in this context.

Is "known to be in". Does that mean frequently? Rarely? What I've read indicates that it's not common.If you ejaculate (and don't pee) some time before, then it's even more likely that there will be viable sperm on your precum, right? Originally Posted By: RadTherefore, his pissing is of little or no value whatsoever, other than to empty his bladder.No. You fail to understand.If you pee before sex you will reduce the likelihood that there will be viable sperm in your precum. It won't reduce it to zero, but it will reduce it. It's all a matter of chance, and reducing the probability of pregnancy is the goal.Let's review: It's not impossible that precum would contain some viable sperm anyway, but if there's any left over from a previous ejaculation, that sperm would be flushed out by a urination, and reduce the overall likelihood of pregnancy by some small amount.If that still doesn't make sense to you, perhaps Ineligible can help.

Dude, what are you talking about?

I don't see why it matters at what point he urinates, just as long as he does it between the time of last ejaculation and current condom application. A flush is a flush.

If it's been days, since his last ejaculation, then there's no point worrying about it, but I would hope he'd have urinated anyway.

My you're a pedantic fellow.

Wow, you're real clever. I'm getting a "we don't like your kind around here" vibe from you.Here's my issue: If you're going to dispense medical advice, endeavor to get it right. Google is just a few keystrokes away. There's no need to post to thread about which you have nothing to add; unless it's an emergency, "see your doctor" can wait. Maybe some clued-in person will respond.Oh wait, maybe you do have great knowledge about breasts and breast feeding. (have you actually touched one?) Ahh, but that's on another thread, and we shouldn't cross-contaminate topics.But if you're going to nitpick, you'd better have the right information, and some understanding of the language.

The issue appears to rotate around whether pre-cum contains sperm and, if so, where they came from.The Wikipedia article on precum states the situation as:"There have been no large-scale studies of sperm in pre-ejaculate, but some smaller-scale studies suggest that no sperm is present and thus pre-ejaculate is ineffectual at causing pregnancy.[4][5] It is likely, however, that pre-ejaculate which follows a recent ejaculation will contain sperm, as some ejaculate is always left in the duct after orgasm.[6]"I've done a PubMed search myself, and the only first-hand reports I can find are the two referenced in the article as [4] and [5]. The abstract of reference [4] says:"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. Pre-ejaculate fluid of 6 of the 9 HIV seropositive donors in Boston and 6 of the 14 HIV seropositive donors in New York contained HIV, regardless of symptom status or antiretroviral therapy status. Thus, the risk of HIV transmission may be higher than unplanned pregnancy, so people should use condoms before the penis enters the vagina, mouth, or anus."The abstract of reference [5] says:"PURPOSE: To determine if spermatozoa are present in the preejaculatory penile secretion, originating from Cowper's gland. METHODS: DESIGN: Prospective clinical and laboratory study. SETTING: Andrology and Sex Counseling Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Academic Teaching Hospital. PATIENTS: Five patients referred for premature ejaculation, three for excessive fluid secreted during foreplay and four normal healthy volunteers. INTERVENTION: Glass slide smears of preejaculatory Cowper's gland secretion obtained during foreplay from at least two different occasions, and semen samples after masturbation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Microscopic examination of air-dried smears, and routine semen analyses. RESULTS: None of the preejaculatory samples contained sperm. All the patients had sperm in routine sperm analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Preejaculatory fluid secreted at the tip of the urethra from Cowper's gland during sexual stimulation did not contain sperm and therefore cannot be responsible for pregnancies during coitus interruptus."Larger studies are needed, but it appears pretty clear that pre-cum usually contains very few motile sperm, and the only likely significant danger would be the one identified in the Wikipedia article, where there had been a recent ejaculation and pre-cum might push out residual semen from the urethra.The next question is whether urination would flush out this semen along the entire length of the urethra from the meatus to the Cowper's gland. It is clear from this diagram of male anatomy that the ureter from the bladder joins the ejaculatory duct upstream of where the precum from the Cowper's gland enters. We may therefore conclude that it will, and urination after the last ejaculation should ensure that the urethra is clear of semen, in which case chance of conception should be minimal.(It's worth adding to the first reference's estimate of only 100,000 sperm reaching the fallopian tubes out of hundreds of millions in the ejaculate, that one estimate is that of these only 10 reach the egg.)

Originally Posted By: RadSo, therefore, urinating prior to putting on a condom is a useless practice, unless he just ejaculated and another session is about to take place.Unless? Did you say UNLESS? That means that you agree that it is sometimes useful. Originally Posted By: RadTo urinate solely for the purpose of flushing pre-cum is not necessary when using a condom.You just contradicted yourself. Originally Posted By: RadIt's exactly what I have been saying.No it's not, no matter how hard you want to believe it. Originally Posted By: RadHowever, I don't read where the OP is about to begin a second or subsequent session, just that his practice is to urinate prior to putting on a condom each time.No he didn't, and you didn't inquire. But you said it was pointless to do so. Period.  Originally Posted By: RadWikipedia articles (which you hate)What are you talking about? Are voices talking to you? I think Wikipedia is a great resource, especially if an article is backed up with references, but since anyone can edit an article, sometimes incorrect information can creep in, especially on controversial subjects. You just need to be aware of that when you use it. Originally Posted By: Wikipedia"There have been no large-scale studies of sperm in pre-ejaculate, but some smaller-scale studies suggest that no sperm is present and thus pre-ejaculate is ineffectual at causing pregnancy.[4][5] It is likely, however, that pre-ejaculate which follows a recent ejaculation will contain sperm, as some ejaculate is always left in the duct after orgasm.[6]"Isn't that what I said? And what is "recent"? There's the possibility that precum may push out left-over sperm. That sperm can get get into the vagina, obviously, if penetration is occurring while the precum is flowing.(There is the possibility that HIV and perhaps other pathogens might be carried by the pre-cum, so a condom is a good idea in any case, according to reference [4].) Originally Posted By: IneligibleLarger studies are needed, but it appears pretty clear that pre-cum usually contains very few motile sperm, and the only likely significant danger would be the one identified in the Wikipedia article, where there had been a recent ejaculation and pre-cum might push out residual semen from the urethra.The next question is whether urination would flush out this semen along the entire length of the urethra from the meatus to the Cowper's Gland. It is clear from this diagram of male anatomy that the ureter from the bladder joins the ejaculatory duct upstream of where the precum from the Cowper's Gland enters. We may therefore conclude that it will, and urination after the last ejaculation should ensure that the urethra is clear of semen, in which case chance of conception should be minimal.Let me quote that last sentence again: "We may therefore conclude that it will, and urination after the last ejaculation should ensure that the urethra is clear of semen, in which case chance of conception should be minimal." Therefore it seems helpful that if you're very worried about pregnancy and you don't fully trust your condom, that it's a good idea to flush by peeing before having sex again if you've recently ejaculated.I have no problem with the word recently. Now, as I've said, tell me what "recently" means. Obviously a week is not recent. A minute is. But where do you draw the line?(I'd appreciate that, if you chose to reply, you dispense with the speculation on my sexual experience and other irrelevant topics.)