Sex workers in the Bolivian city of El Alto have gone on hunger strike to demand a solution to the month-long doctor's strike which has forced the closure of public hospitals across the country.

About a dozen male and female sex workers, many with their faces covered, crowded into the lobby of a neighbourhood health centre on Sunday, vowing to continue their action until the situation is resolved.

At times they chanted "Useless minister, we want a solution!", a reference to Bolivian Health Minister Juan Carlos Calvimontes.

The workers claim their personal health, as well as that of the wider community, is at risk as they are not receiving their weekly check-ups at local public hospitals and clinics because of the doctor's strike.

Bolivian doctors are on strike over the length of their working hours.

"We used to have our weekly check-ups, but now that there's a strike, it's been more than a month since we've been checked," explained Lilli Cortez, president of the Organisation of Night Workers, a local group formed by sex workers to defend their rights.

"There could be an outbreak of STDs (sexually transmitted diseases) or HIV/AIDS if the women aren't checked," she added.

There are about 45,000 sex workers registered in Bolivia.

The country's laws require that they undergo free weekly check-ups in order to work on the streets and in brothels.

"We hope this will be solved once and for all because they are playing with our lives, with our health," said Jacqueline, one of the sex workers participating in the hunger strike.

"You can't play with health," she said. "It's a time bomb that is going to explode at any moment. The lives of the entire population is at stake here."

According to authorities in El Alto, a town 12km from the capital La Paz, there are about 2,500 bars and brothels in the local area, only 350 of which are legal.

Source: Aljazeera

Meet Ed Houben,  a unique kind of hands on sperm donor who sleeps with women to help them conceive naturally. So far has recorded fathering 87 children and five more kids are on the way.

Houben, 42, looks more like the Dutch historian that he is rather than a sex machine, something that he readily admits. He also admits that he “barely had sex” when he began donating his sperm a decade ago.

“Ten years ago, I was not exactly David Hasselhoff in Baywatch,” he confessed to ABC News by phone from his home in Maastricht, Holland.

Houben initially donated his sperm the traditional clinical way at a sperm bank, but soon reached the bank’s legal limit for donations. He then went private, offering his services on the internet. And like many of the online donors, he also became an experienced practitioner in “natural insemination”- in other words,  sex.

“From my own experience, statistically natural insemination is faster,” Houben says, referring to records that back his claim. “If people are coming all the way from Italy, they don’t want to be trying for three years.”

Houben points out that while it’s easy to accuse donors of looking for cheap sex, most of the women he sleeps with aren’t people he would choose as sexual partners.

“This isn’t Heidi Klum coming round and saying: ‘Let’s do it’,” he says. “It’s genuine people who I would never want to hurt. I have a good old fashioned Catholic guilt feeling and I would be a candidate for therapy if I did this for the wrong reasons.”

“In the old days I would gladly travel,” he says, “but my job has changed and I have to be around much more. Now people to come to me.” He still makes exceptions, however, if his recipients are entering a peak fertile period.

Houben is aware that his method may be controversial for some.

“I can easily imagine that not everyone agrees with everything I do, but so far I’ve seen happy people and happy children. If you saw them, you wouldn’t question what I’m doing,” he said.

His clients come from all over the world. Houben claims biological offspring in Australia, Israel, Britain, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, Belgium as well as Holland. His oldest child is 9 while the youngest is a newborn.

He is by no means a world record holder. Houben says he once watched an episode of “Oprah” about a man who had fathered 200, a number he says he’ll never catch. But he has been called Europe’s most prolific sperm donor, and he’s happy to accept the title.

Houben meets 10 to 15 women a month.This week he’s seeing only one woman from Germany, and is using time off to be with his girlfriend. He’s genial, bright and witty on the subject of his pastime, but what his recipients value most of all is his commitment.

His clients are offered the option of the traditional sperm donation, but he said many prospective parents find it “very impersonal, cold and clinical” to get sperm from a clinic. “They appreciate being able to see who the biological father of their child will be and that any future offspring will be able to contact me,” he said.

Houben also points out that he does not get paid for his sperm.

According to his own data, Houben succeeds in producing a child 80 percent of the time.

All his recipients must show medical records showing they are free from diseases and they don’t use illegal drugs.  He may also turn down clients if they smoke, drink or are obese.

“I think an unhealthy lifestyle is one of the greatest dangers for a child’s future,” he said.

Houben has his own medical paper work with a semen analysis (spermiogram) with a very good 100 million sperm count. “According to World Health Organization, my sperm is above average quality,” he boasts.  A sperm count that does not go beyond 20 million indicates a man is far less likely to get a woman pregnant.

As it’s illegal to sell sperm in Holland, so Houben’s donations are a vocation not a career.

Donor numbers have been declining dramatically in Holland since anonymity for sperm donors was ended in 2004. Those affected by the shortage the most, particularly lesbian couples, single women and those starting a second family have been turning to the internet. For them the options are costly private treatments of artificial insemination or the do it yourself approach. And there is no doubt that the online sperm donation scene is growing. Houben started placing ads on a growing number of websites and online forums to continue his “mission” after he had filled his state allowance of 25 pregnancies.

SpermaSpender.de. in Germany is one of the websites Houben uses to connect with childless women desperate to conceive. It is a user friendly website that works like a dating site, only women are registered as “looking for a donor” and men as “donors.” SpermaSpender.de has more than 20,000 members from all five continents, including thousands of donors.

“We have around 180 pregnancies a year,” claims Joacim Welz, owner of the website. “Every second day I get a baby.”

Last May, Houben invited more than 20 of the children he’s helped create to his home for his once a year reunion.

“I always felt the child should have a right to know where it comes from,” he says, and adds that he hopes that his openness on the subject will help to tackle the stigma surrounding sperm donation.

He gets parents to sign documents waiving legal claims to child support, but experts say these would be invalid in the hands of a good lawyer. “If I were a millionaire, I would support them all, but I am not,” Houben says.

He’s not sure how long he’ll continue adding to the world’s population, but he can’t see a reason to stop yet. Houben does have a Spanish girlfriend now – someone who originally came to him looking to get pregnant – and she is happy for him to continue.

“But,” says Houben “we might start living together and have a family together. And then that’s the end.”

Source: ABC News

A judge ordered that a 17-year-old alleged rape victim continue to be held in a juvenile detention center while the option of fitting her with a GPS monitoring device is being investigated.

The unidentified girl has been at the Sacramento County Youth Detention Facility for nearly two weeks. A judge ordered the girl to be locked up on a material witness warrant in order to ensure she will appear in court for her alleged rapist’s trial.

“I can’t tell you how terribly sorry I am you’re in the circumstance you’re in,” Judge Lawrence G. Brown told the girl, who stood inside of a courtroom cage, the Sacramento Bee reported.

Brown told the girl he needed “to have every confidence you would in fact make your court appearances.”

The alleged victim did not show up at a preliminary hearing for Frank William Rackley or at the Feb. 28 trial, causing prosecutors to re-file the case and set an April 23 trial date.

A judge signed off on the teen, who is reportedly in the state’s foster system and has a history of running away, being held on a material witness warrant on March 14.

“The last thing we ever want to do is put a victim or a witness in custody, but when you have serious crimes of violence and a multiple offenses, you have to balance the protection of the community here,” Sacramento County Assistant District Attorney Albert Locher told ABCNews.com.

Rackley’s DNA was found on the girl after a rape examination, prosecutors said, according to The Associated Press.

The ex-convict has a criminal history in the area dating back to 1992, including a previous arrest for rape. Those charges were dropped, according to court documents.

Locher said the girl’s testimony was imperative and cited the potential public safety issue if Rackley is let go on the charges.

Material witness warrants are subject to judicial review every 10 days.

The girl’s next hearing was moved up to April 16 while authorities consider whether she can be released under the alternative scenarios proposed by her lawyer.

Source: ABC News

When many an actress or actor are asked on a talk show or in a magazine what it was like doing a sex scene in the project they’re promoting, they always respond with something like, “Oh, my co-star is just so great and made me feel really comfortable, and the crew is so professional, blah, blah, blah, so it really isn’t a big deal, just another day at work.” Yeah, right. I don't think it is at allanother day at work, which is why their agent probably negotiated detailed language in their contract saying what could and could not be shown: It is very common to see deal terms in an actor’s contract such as, “You can show breast but no nipple; above-the-waist and side of buttock only; and artist has approval of body double, if used.” And I don’t care how professional a crew is, I find it hard to believe it isn’t awkward to be naked and get busy in front of them; otherwise, why would sex scenes always be filmed on a “closed set,” with only essential personnel allowed during filming? For me, it is incredibly uncomfortable to even watch a sex scene in a movie theater: I always make sure to allow myself no movement or facial expression when one unfolds, in case someone looks over at me and misinterprets my countenance or a shift in body position as an indication that I’m deriving any kind of pervy/Paul Reubens–like pleasure from what is taking place onscreen — I can’t even imagine what it is like for the actors performing the sex scene to have to do that in front of even a reduced crew of union members, who may act impassive but certainly aren’t thinking that it’s just another day at work. So this week, I interviewed two actresses and one actor about their experiences with this odd area of filmmaking to find out what the experience is really like. To gain the most candid responses, I agreed to not use their real names, but I will say that they have all appeared in many films and you have most likely seen each of them onscreen a number of times.

What was it like the first time you did a sex scene?

Betty: I had to call at least four girlfriends, two sisters, and devote a therapy session to it, and of course starve myself for days leading up to it. And when I went to work that morning the wise costumer told me that I would be the most powerful woman on the set once I was naked, because there was probably no crew person willing to do what I was doing. I found that really encouraging. But after the first half-hour of shooting, anxiety and adrenaline gave way to boredom and by the time we came back to the scene after lunch, I hardly bothered putting on the robe between takes.

Veronica: It wasn't just me and one other person, it was four of us in a group sex scene. Before we started, everyone had their bathrobes on and everyone was very tense. Right up to the point when they started to roll film, and when I would have to take my clothes off, I thought I was going to throw up. But once the director yelled action, I was fine. I wasn't even aware of set anymore, I was in the moment. After we finished it was awkward and I was thinking, Was his dick touching my leg, and where is my robe?

Archie: The first time I had to do a sex scene was awkward, to say the least. The actress and I both had a crush on each other, but were too nervous to ever do anything about it. When it came time to shoot the scene, however, I got nervous, and as a result, never got an erection. Because we both secretly liked each other, the actress was furious at my lack of erection and took it like a rejection. Things were always a little dodgy after that between us.

Have you ever been involved with someone romantically before you had to do a love scene together, or have you started a relationship with someone after shooting a love scene?

Betty: I did have a huge crush on a guy I had onscreen sex with and we skipped lunch to rehearse the scene; we did not invite the director. And while I thought it was going to turn into a romance, he was trying to reconcile that week with his estranged wife, so it didn't. She ended up leaving him anyway for a big star, so we should've had our fling. It's possible, of course, that he was just not that into me.

Veronica: Like all actors, I have had an on-set romance and have had a relationship with the actor with whom I was supposed to be in love with. If the producer and director have done their job well, they cast actors who have chemistry, so it makes it easy to fall for them. 

Archie: I once did a sex scene with a girl I had just started to date on the film we worked on. But it ended up being really awkward, because it felt like we were letting strangers into the bedroom. It also was odd because I became aware of the notion that we were just cliché actors doing what was expected of us; and worse, the notion that both of us started the relationship — more her, I know I'm pointing fingers — in order to help our "performances."  

Have you ever done a love scene with someone whom you really didn’t like?

Betty: Yes. It was pretty gruesome. Like being in a bad relationship, thinking,What am I doing in bed with him? And it happened to be on a soap, so that's like being stuck in a bad marriage.

Veronica: I have had to do sex scenes with people who on some chemical level I was repulsed by, and that was hard work. I had to do many sex scenes with a guy who was very nice but I was repulsed by him. It was really hard. The majority of the time you're not attracted to the people you have to have a sex scene with and it is tough.

Archie: I have been fortunate to have never done a sex scene with someone I didn't like. However, sex scenes with someone you're not attracted to are pretty unpleasant, and not to be looked forward to at all.

Have you or the person with whom you’ve been doing a scene ever become, uh, aroused?

Betty: Not to mention any names, but one actor came on me during the take. I had to surreptitiously wipe myself off with the sheet. Fortunately, I liked the guy. I found it a little flattering and a little creepy. We never talked about it, so I can't tell you if it was Method acting on his part or if he just found me pretty, but I suspect I'm not the only actress who's had this experience. But I can tell you that twenty years later, when I run into him, my first thought is, There's the guy that had on-camera sex with my abdomen.

Veronica: Usually when there is nudity involved there is no arousal, people are too freaked out. You're more likely to get acorn syndrome than anything else. I’ve had instances when they've been clothed and got hard, but not while naked. And for me, I don't think there was an occasion when I was fully turned-on, but there have been instances where it was pleasant as opposed to me chocking back my vomit.

Archie: Arousal during a sex scene, ironically or not, is pretty much the only thing that can make it truly enjoyable. It's hard to categorize it as "work" if you're lucky enough to attain this kind of Nirvana on a set. And usually, let's be honest now, who is going to be offended if someone knows they turn you on? Everyone's got an ego: especially actresses. The offense for many actors, I'll bet my boots, is actually when the actor fails to get aroused — actors are already so insecure that for some, that's all the confirmation they need to realize the entire universe is pitted against them.

Do you feel that it is unfair that when it comes to nudity, women are so much more exposed than men?

Betty: I dunno. Men are sometimes as freaked having to go shirtless as women are getting naked altogether. For me, once I was down to my undies, or a string bikini, I might as well go for broke. What's a nipple or two between friends? Several times I'd be in some flesh-colored bodysuit or G-string, but they'd keep catching the edge of it on-camera, so I'd just take it off to expedite the filming process. Since I never did an X-rated movie, I trusted that whatever body parts they caught on film that they didn't want, they'd deal with in editing. But unfair? Probably, but there are so many unfair things about being a woman in film — and other industries — what's one more? 

Veronica: No, I guess not. Let's face it, for male nudity to be anything meaningful they have to show their dick. A woman doesn't have to go all the way for it to be a big deal. Guys have so much at stake: "Is it big enough, is it shaped well, is it all shrunk up?" It is harder for a guy to be aesthetically pleasing when naked, in my opinion.

Archie: I don't think it's unfair that women show more nudity in movies at all. As a dude, the truth is that a man's package is way more, well, visible. You're never going to see much more than a bit of muff from a woman in a scene, and that is really little more than the coming attraction for what really lies beneath. On the other hand, once you see an actor’s dong, you've got a pretty good idea of the kind of firepower he's packing.

Source: Volture

An Ohio State Senator is turning the tables on men seeking to regulate women’s access to reproductive health. Sen. Nina Turner (D-Cleveland) has introduced legislation regulating men’s access to erectile dysfunction drugs. The Dayton Daily News has the details :

Before getting a prescription for Viagra or other erectile dysfunction drugs, men would have to see a sex therapist, receive a cardiac stress test and get a notarized affidavit signed by a sexual partner affirming impotency, if state Sen. Nina Turner has her way.

The Cleveland Democrat introduced Senate Bill 307 this week.

A critic of efforts to restrict abortion and contraception for women, Turner says she is concerned about men’s reproductive health… Turner said if state policymakers want to legislate women’s health choices through measures such as House Bill 125, known as the ‘Heartbeat bill,’ they should also be able to legislate men’s reproductive health.

Turner’s bill tracks FDA guidelines which recommends doctors determine whether the root cause of men’s sexual disfunction is physical or psychological. She describes her bill as an effort to “legislate it the same way mostly men say they want to legislate a woman’s womb.”

There have been similar efforts in other states. An Illinois bill would require men to watch a “horrific video ” on the side effects of Viagra. In Virginia, Sen. Janet Howell (D) submitted a bill requiring men to undergo a digital rectal exam  before recieving a prescription for erectile disfunction drugs.

Conservative commentators such as Sean Hannity have dismissed the comparison, claiming that Viagra — unlike birth control — treats a “medical problem .” Most women, however, use birth control for medical purposes other than family planning .

Source: Think Progress

Some days the American common sense deficit seems worse than others, and such was the case when XXL published a video interview with the rapper Too $hort, titled “Fatherly Advice From Too $hort — Lesson Three: The Birds & The Bees.” Which in this case apparently means advice for boys who are starting to be attracted to girls on how to “take it to the hole.” And more importantly, suggesting that groping girls and pushing them up against walls is the quickest route to male sexual gratification. As disgusting as schooling young people in sexual assault is, and as horrifying as the thought is that such advocacy of assault would constitute “fatherly advice”—and XXL has apologized profusely for posting the video, as well they should—Too $hort’s apology may be even more revealing.

“When I got on camera I was in Too $hort mode and had a lapse of judgment. I would never advise a child or young man to do these things, it’s not how I get down,” he said in his apology. “Although I have made my career on dirty raps, I have worked over the years to somewhat balance the content of my music with giving back to the community. Just coming from a man who wants to see young people get ahead in life, I’m gonna do my best to help and not hurt. If you’re a young man or a kid who looks up to me, don’t get caught up in the pimp, player, gangster hip-hop personas. Just be yourself.”

First, there’s the idea that it’s totally fine to advocate molesting young girls as long as you’re in character, because no harm can possibly be done from giving that advice. Even if it’s very, very clear that advice is comedic or performative (something that might be less clear in an interview than in a song), that still suggests that something that actually happens to women and is completely and utterly awful is hilarious to contemplate—even when the “joke” isn’t well-crafted, or crafted at all to reveal the ugliness of such attitudes.

Then, there’s the idea that private conduct is, if not more impactful than the product you sell and the entertainment industry helps you distribute widely, at least balancing it out. I think it’s great if stars want to give back to their communities. But they’re kidding themselves if they think it’s some sort of spiritual tithe for disseminating ideas that at best are demeaning and at best could contribute to someone justifying themselves when they assault someone.

Source: Think Progress

Of the millions of rape victims in Congo, only a small percentage are male.  But activists say the rape of men, boys and babies is still a weapon used in the conflict that plagues eastern Congo's countryside.  Victims are left physically and mentally devastated, and many are suicidal.

 This boy says a lieutenant in the army raped him while another man held him down.  He passed out during the attack, but when he came to, unlike most male rape victims in Congo, he went to the police.  He says the police did not believe him until he showed an officer his injuries.  He then accused the soldier publicly. He says he was terrified of reprisals, but wanted justice more.

Victims' rights advocate and lawyer Florentin Basima says he asked the court to lock up the officer, and order $10,000 in reparations.

Basima says reparations are almost never actually paid, despite court orders.  But he says in this case, the army officer was sentenced to 14 years in prison.

The case is unusual in that male victims almost never seek help.  Basima says most are psychologically and physically devastated, and too humiliated to tell anyone.  Male victims often die from physical trauma or commit suicide. 

Justine Masika, who heads Synergy of Women for Victims of Sexual Violence, says her organization has helped 18 male victims in the past few years.  Five of them died because they didn't seek medical treatment soon enough after the attack.

She says when men or boys are raped it is usually by another man in attempt to humiliate the victim.  But sometimes, she says, women can rape men as an act of revenge.  Female members of the many armed groups still battling in the countryside are often rape victims themselves. Masika helped one victim who was raped by female soldiers who drugged him before they attacked.

U.N. officials have called the Congo the global epicenter of rape as a tool of war.  Earlier this year, the American Journal of Public Health released a landmark study showing close to 2 million women in Congo have been raped in their lifetime.  It is one of the most complete looks to date at the prevalence of sexual violence in this country. Yet the impact on men and the numbers of male victims are still in the shadows due to the unique stigma.

Emmanuel Atibasay is a psychologist that helps victims prepare for court.  His organization has seen boys as young as two years old sexually abused.  But he says it is the men whom are harder to help.

Atibasay says male victims in this deeply conservative society lose their identity as men.  He says Congolese culture rejects homosexuality, further humiliating the male victims by bringing their sexual preference into question. 

Atibasay notes that although attacks are on men are rare, they remain a part of the war that has plagued the Congolese countryside for decades. 

Activists say the only way to end the attacks, is to end the conflict.  Army officers say while the war officially ended years ago, the fighting never really stopped.  Homegrown militias loosely integrated into the army fight rebel forces originating from neighboring Rwanda, Uganda and Burundi.  Other battles are internal, among warring Congolese communities. 

Congolese Army Colonel Seraphin Mirindi says while the social consequences of the conflict are extreme, the causes are political rivalries and bad governance.  He says eastern Congo is still besieged by war and chaos.

But with Congo about to hold its second set of elections in 40 years, political change might offer some relief to the beleaguered eastern provinces.  Tensions are high here in North Kivu province, with reports of pre-election violence and rumors that the elections are already rigged.  But Congolese aid workers say the prospect of change offers hope for victims, hope that one day the conflict and the rapes will end.

Source: VOA News

A government panel wants young boys as well as girls to get the controversial HPV vaccine, in part to prevent them from spreading the sexually transmitted virus to girls.

The HPV vaccine has been recommended for young girls to protect them against cervical cancer and genital warts for the last five years. But the vaccine has been slow to catch on — only about a third of adolescent girls have gotten all three shots.

Experts say the HPV vaccine could protect boys against genital warts and some kinds of cancers. But they also say vaccinating 11- and 12-year old boys could help prevent them from spreading the human papilloma virus to girls.

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices made the recommendation Tuesday in a unanimous vote. Federal health officials usually adopt what the panel says and asks doctors and patients to follow the recommendations.

The vaccine has been licensed for use in boys for two years but Tuesday's vote was the first to strongly recommend routine vaccination. Officials acknowledged the disappointing rate in girls encouraged them to take a new, hard look.

But if the expensive HPV vaccine has been a tough sell to the parents of girls, it may be even tougher for boys.

Last year, just 49 percent of adolescent girls had gotten at least the first of the recommended three HPV shots. Only a third had gotten all three doses.

"Pretty terrible," said Dr. Anne Schuchat, a U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention administrator who oversees the agency's immunization programs.

She attributed the low rates for girls to confusion or misunderstanding by parents that they can wait until their daughter becomes sexually active. It only works if the shots are given before a girl begins having sex.

The vaccine is approved for use in boys and girls ages 9 to 26; but it is usually given to 11- and 12-year olds when they are scheduled to get other vaccines.

The committee also recommended the vaccination for males 13 through 21 years who have not been vaccinated previously or who have not completed the three-dose series.

Tuesday's vote follows recent studies that indicate the vaccine prevents anal cancer in males. A study that focused on gay men found it to be 75 percent effective. But while anal cancer has been increasing, it's still a fairly rare cancer in males, with only about 7,000 cases in the U.S. each year that are tied to the strains of viruses targeted in the HPV vaccine. In contrast, about vaccine-preventable 15,000 cervical cancers occur annually.

Some feel it's unlikely that most families will agree to get their sons vaccinated primarily to protect girls. The threat of genital warts hasn't been persuasive yet, either: Some data suggest that less than 1.5 percent of adolescent males have gotten the vaccine.

Its use against anal cancer may not be much of a selling point, said Dr. Ranit Mishori, a family practice doctor in Washington, D.C., and an assistant professor at the Georgetown University School of Medicine.

Some parents may say "'Why are you vaccinating my son against anal cancer? He's not gay! He's not ever going to be gay!' I can see that will come up," said Mishori, who supports the committee's recommendation.

There are two vaccines against HPV, but Tuesday's vote applies only to Merck & Co.'s Gardasil, which costs $130 a dose. The other vaccine wasn't tested for males.

An estimated 50 percent to 80 percent of men and women are infected with HPV in their lifestimes, although most clear the infection without developing symptoms or illness, according to the CDC.

Source: AP

Source: Reuters

Men get diagnosed with breast cancer at less than one percent the rate of women, according to a new analysis of cancer rates from six cities and countries.

But when they did get breast cancer, men were caught with more advanced disease, on average, and were more likely to die from it.

"It's not surprising that men with breast cancer present with later stages," said Dr. Susan Dent, from the Ottawa Hospital Cancer Center in Canada, who was not involved in the new study.

"That's just because the awareness of the fact that breast cancer can occur in men is not as acute," she told Reuters Health. "Men aren't as likely to think of it, and health care providers aren't as likely to think of men having breast cancer."

Men are most commonly in their 60s or 70s when diagnosed with breast cancer, according to the National Cancer Institute. Radiation exposure and diseases that increase estrogen levels - such as liver cirrhosis or Klinefelter syndrome, a genetic disorder - are among factors that raise a man's risk.

Dent added that men should be particularly aware of breast cancer -- and possibly consider getting screened for the disease -- if they have a family history of it, including a predisposition to cancer caused by mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, which are well-known to raise women's risk of breast and ovarian cancers.

But men with no family history should not be screened, experts agreed.

Researchers combined cancer registries from Denmark, Finland, Norway, Sweden, Singapore and Geneva, Switzerland, with cases dating back to 1970. That included about 460,000 women diagnosed with breast cancer and about 2,700 men.

Men were more likely to have disease that had spread beyond the breast by the time they were diagnosed. In treatment, they also had less surgery and radiation compared to women, but similar rates of chemotherapy and hormone therapy.

Over the entire time period, men had a 72 percent chance of surviving breast cancer in the five years after a diagnosis -- compared to 78 percent in women.

But researchers led by Dr. Mikael Hartman of the National University of Singapore found that when their cancer was spotted at the same stage and they got recommended treatment, men had a better chance than women of surviving a breast cancer diagnosis.

Hartman's team also noted in the Journal of Clinical Oncology that previous studies have shown it typically takes a few months from when men start getting symptoms until they are diagnosed with breast cancer.

"Men who develop a breast lump delay seeing their doctor longer than a comparable woman would with similar symptoms," Hartman wrote in an email to Reuters Health.

"Male breast cancer is rare but men can develop the disease and should be aware that they should seek care if a breast lump develops," Hartman added.

Because of recommendations for regular mammograms in women starting in the 40s or at age 50, depending on the country, many cancers are caught in women before they have any symptoms.

The United States Preventive Services Task Force, a federally-supported panel that sets guidelines for cancer screening, does not recommend regular breast cancer screening in men without symptoms.

"In total, male breast cancer is still a rare event," said Dent. "Never would I recommend that all men routinely go out and get screened."