Is too Much KY safe?

(this post was edited 2005-09-25 21:49:41)

.

The point I am trying to make is that too much of a good thing may not be a good thing.

Just as years ago artificial sweetner when consumed to an extreme was deemed to cause cancer.

Tom

(this post was edited 2005-09-23 14:06:04)

My biology teacher used to say, "You can overdose on water if you try hard enough." His point being that no substance is ever completely safe. But many things can be assumed to be safe within reasonable limits.

If KY was dangerous to use on a regular basis for long periods of time, I'm fairly certain they would have discovered that decades ago and a warning label about "continued use" would be on every tube and bottle.

After all, KY has been around a lot longer than saccarin was on the market. And truth be told, if you research about the tests used to determine that saccarin "caused cancer," you'd find out that the dosages they were injecting into rats during tests were so extreme, that you would literally have to drink hundereds of cans of diet soda every day to recieve the same dosage in your own body.

So, ironically, the great "saccarin scare" of the early 80's is actually an excellent example of consumer paranoia rather modern chemical hazards.

Anyway, no one can promise you KY is perfectly safe, but I would definitely bet a great deal of money that less than 1% of people who use it regularly for years ever experience any side effects at all.

Fluoride is a slightly poisonous chemical most of us have been putting in our mouths twice a day, every day, since we were kids. By comparison it's far more toxic than the ingredients in good 'ol KY Jelly.

Anyone here plan on not brushing their teeth anymore...?

(this post was edited 2005-09-23 16:52:00)

Remember cyclamates? Same scene. Ridiculous concentrations delivered to mice producing cancerous lesions..!!! Hysteria finally gave way to reason with saccharin, but cyclamates are still listed (errantly) as carcinogens.

I concur with Pan's comments and would also add the following. Glycerin (water) based lubricants have been around for well over 50 years. They were originally introduced in hospitals for the insertion of catheters, tubing, speculums, enemas, etc. The point is that there has been more than enough time for an accumulation of data on this regarding any possible toxicity, and frankly.... it's just not there (not even a hint). Glycerin itself is used in literally thousands of different applications, from cosmetics to food products.

As Pan alluded to, the possibility exists from some people to be allegic to anything. And as I sit here I'm certain that some people are allergic to glycerin...it simply the way of things. But that's not really what we're talking about . What's at issue is whether these substances are themselves, intrinsically toxic. I believe the answer is..they are not.

However, recently, as many of you know, I attended the Erotica LA convention with the Aneros team. One of the things that came out of it was that I was able to meet with the owner of a company called S-LIQUID who manufacturers an entire line of lubricants that are formulated WITHOUT glycerin. He explained that there are some women who experience an overgrowth of bacteria when they use glycerin based products.

My sense, is that this is really niche marketing, rather than a conscientious response to a widespread epidemic of vaginitis!

TomF, you're certainly wise to be cautious, but I don't think there is cause for concern here. If you learn differently, please let us know!

BF Mayfield