Talk:Spermophagia

This point of discussion referred to as "dubious" should not be so labeled. The research was conducted by the University of North Carolina, and was reported by CNN. If the veracity of the article is questioned, then the above sources responsible for this research and the reporting of it need to be contacted. Unless and until they rescind, retract and remove these published findings, there is no justification for flagging this article. I am therefore now removing the flagging.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.117.80.210 (talk) 21:06, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Can I remove the reference to genesis because many would argue that Onan's main sin was the deception that he carried out not the actual spilling. Not to mention it had nothing to do with fellatio. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.127.164.185 (talk) 19:38, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I have restored the flagging. Please read the second reference (now the third), and look at the URL. It is clearly a hoax. This information clearly isn't verifiable enough to be used in an encyclopedia, and represents some high school students making up information for a prank.Dtemp (talk) 00:41, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Unless you are alleging that "New Scientist" magazine is a spurious publication or that SUNY is not a reputable research institution, there is no rational basis for this frivolous claim! The article can be found in the search engines of both entities. Snopes has discussion verifying this info, and you may also Google it for yourself. Flagging deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.117.80.210 (talk) 04:45, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

This article needs to be restored to its orignal "seminophagia" title page instead of "semen ingestion," which was arbitrarily initiated by a vandal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rin3guy (talk • contribs) 16:41, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Which is the more commonly used, especially in WP:RS, which is how we usually choose an article's title on WP? [1][2]. I don't think seminophagia is even correct greek or whatever. It would be spermophagia or spermaphagia, which are mentioned in WP:RS, unlike seminophagia. This article would have been a candidate for merging, not sure whether it should remain now. Sticky Parkin 21:48, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

I have reverted the name of this article to "seminophagia," not only because it is an accurate clinical term, but also because that is the original title given to it by whomever started this page, and every Wikilink to here on other pages is so labeled!

I changed the image caption which was "a cartoon character consuming a large quantity of semen from a container", as this is not a cartoon character, but a realistic illustration of a woman that was specifically created for Wikipedia. TFrenay (talk) 13:19, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Illustration

Is the illustration used on this page appropriate? I'm perfectly comfortable with graphic sexual depictions on wikipedia, where they illustrate the article in question. The illustration used here seems to pertain specifically to the practice of gokkun, which is apparently mostly only found in Japanese porn. Whereas the article mostly discusses consumption of "normal quantities" of semen, as in fellatio.

I think there must be an illustration corresponding better to the content of the article. Perhaps File:Wiki-cumshot.png this one, or something along those lines? Moxfyre (ǝɹʎℲxoɯ | contrib) 04:09, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

The illustration on this page is unnecessary and excessively vulgar. Why would this need to be illustrated at all - the description is more than adequate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.195.24.182 (talk) 06:12, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

I have to agree—that image is utterly out of place here. Even if there's some merit to providing an illustration here, this illustration is utterly divorced from reality. (I cannot help but wonder how long it would take for an individual to produce such a prodigious quantity to fill such a container.) Why not illustrate it with a man drinking out of a shoe? Or a chicken drinking out of a soda bottle? This illustration is both meaningless and vulgar. --WaldoJ (talk) 22:19, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

• I'm not really sure what Wikipedia etiquette here is, but I'm going to remove the image based on the comments above. 150.101.157.20 (talk) 04:59, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Note to future editors - this discussion refers only to the image "Wiki-gokkun.png".  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 19:20, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

synthesis

• Dental health: Seminal plasma contains minerals such as zinc and calcium, both of which are known to inhibit tooth decay, both internally and externally.

• Musculoskeletal support: Seminophagia provides the body with testosterone, which is important to maintain muscle and bone strength. While women need a smaller proportion of testosterone than men, it is just as important to female health as it is to male. Testosterone reduces the risk of heart attack, protects against stroke, and can even treat diabetes. Testosterone is particularly important after menopause. When testosterone levels in the blood increase in testosterone-deficient women, bone density usually improves, and women generally report that they feel better.

The above is either not reliably sourced or is synthesis. It is unscientific to assume that the existance of hormones or minerals in semen automatically means it has the same properties as those ingredients, with no study of dose-response or metabolism. They should only be added when scientific sources are given showing the action of semen directly, not guessing from its ingredientsYobMod 18:15, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Zinc oxide, which is root canal dental paste, contains both zinc and calcium. www.reference.md/files/D015/mD015034.html -- The amounts of calcium and zinc in semen may be considered subtherapeutic but are still at least marginally beneficial.JGabbard (talk) 19:12, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

The testosterone paragraph is not intended to be a comprehensive statement of therapeutic regimen but simply an indicator of some degree of benefit, be it lesser or greater. Additional facts and research as to precise therapeutic dosages would certainly be welcome to supplement the information. Notwithstanding, room for expansion of an incomplete thought in an article does not render the basic concept inaccurate or worthy of removal. Saying "New York is half way around the world from Hong Kong" is generally true, regardless of whether or not the exact distance is noted. Paragraphs with references are restored, with a call for further discussion and elaboration on this point.JGabbard (talk) 19:12, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Article name

The question of what this article should be titled was raised on my talk page. An argument has been made that most reliable sources call it spermaphagia or spermophagia. There has been some objection to using one of those names, but I have not seen an argument for the current title based upon reliable sources. Could we perhaps list sources that use each name here? The article should be titled with whatever name the is used by the preponderance of scientific literature. LadyofShalott 19:13, 12 August 2009 (UTC)