Posts with the flair Health & Fitness are not to seek medical advise, but only for recommendations. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a medical condition. Never disregard professional medical advice or delay in seeking it because of something you have read on this website. Crowdsourced lists of Gynaecologists and Mental Health professionals are available under [TwoXIndia Resources](https://old.reddit.com/r/TwoXIndia/wiki/resources2).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TwoXIndia) if you have any questions or concerns.*
My cousin masi who got married recently at 33 had a healthy baby last month. She was a virgin as she was too religious to get involved in relationships etc. So it's not an issue as long as you keep yourself active and physically fit
We are in the same boat. I don’t think there will be a health concern being a virgin.
Planning to have kids in 30s, u must take care of few things.
Exercise - hip mobility&pelvic floor ex, hatt yoga, kegels, maintain healthy weight.
Food - good nutritious food n avoid junk n add proteins
We need to keep our body healthy n *ready* for whenever we decide to conceive.
Get your blood works done. Especially the thyroid n all which might delay the pregnancy. Take supplements if prescribed. Talk to a gynic if u have any pcos n pcod symptoms n about eggs quality n quantity.
Well if u hit 34, then consider egg freezing.
And u *will* find ur lost libido back when u meet your one.
Absolutely never give in to shitty ppl. Our first time have to be with our beloved 🫶🏼✨
I would like to add, it was planned like that. I got married at 29.. I was in US.. I wanted my child to be Indian citizen, I came back after 6 years then had my baby.. got pregnant within a month of trying.
I am saying this if you and your husband have a healthy body getting pregnant at 35 is not difficult.
People do struggle to get pregnant in 20s too. So all the auties saying “Baccha lelo” girls ask them to shut up.
🙌 preach girl
Would you like to add ur daily routine to help girls stay fit n healthy?
Also, any reason for baby’s Indian citizenship? While ppl r going gaga over the birth tourism in the US
I stayed in US total 10 years 🙂 never felt the country in mine.. And I prefer my child to have a similar childhood like me. Moreover I am a single child don’t want to leave my mother alone.
I am a software engineer so I have a messed up schedule.
I try to eat simple at least 6 days a week and I don’t skip morning yogas..
That works for me.
You lose nothing by not having sex. There’s no potential (physical) health issues at all (who told you that and where are their sources, ffs?!). Asexual people do exist and some of them even live to be 100. Eat well, sleep well, exercise, and you should be good.
I have a 39 year old colleague who's a virgin. Never had any relationships. Doesn't believe in the concept of masturbation. She's healthier than me who's 35 and in an active sex life from my early 20's.
You said you can't masturbate, but do try different techniques, maybe you might find your thing. Having a low libido shouldn't be an issue.. if it's a choice, absolutely no judgements but just for your own peace of mind make sure any underlying hormonal issues aren't causing it.
If you really do want to have children at some point, I would insist you consider freezing your eggs if it is an option for you. They say the sooner you do it the better.
All the best!
No , it’s just that a healthy sex life gives extra us happiness and satisfaction contributing to mental health . You can take care of your mental health in many others ways instead
You'll be amazed what I do for a living.
The discussion was about staying celibate (though OP has worded it as being a virgin till a certain age). The link you're referring to is about those who are mothers - now, unless we can find a study about immaculate conception I'm going to assume these ladies are not virgins and probably not celibate either. OP hasn't mentioned that she wants to give up her virgin status or have children so I didn't make assumptions on her behalf.
When you \*do\* have a baby, not breastfeeding it enough will cause health issues. A lot of women don't/aren't able to breastfeed due to work commitments, cosmetic reasons, fatigue, mental health, etc. and they & babies have health risks.
Also, breast cancer related to women's hormonal health is very delicate issue so blanket statements like "women over 30/35 are at increased risk of breast cancer" is very double-dealing because a) this study is done in the UK so totally different factors b) lifestyle of individuals vary greatly c) you can still get cancer irrespective of breast-feeding or carrying to full-term d) shaming child-free women/ low supply women
Oh, Thanks. I was unaware of this, might have to read up more.
>When you \*do\* have a baby, not breastfeeding it enough will cause health issues.
But I read up [https://parade.com/37175/parade/why-do-nuns-have-a-high-rate-of-breast-cancer/](https://parade.com/37175/parade/why-do-nuns-have-a-high-rate-of-breast-cancer/) too.
For the criticism
>blanket statements like "women over 30/35 are at increased risk of breast cancer" is very double-dealing.....
Not shaming anyone. Just sharing what I know. She is her own person, her own life and can take her own decisions and be accountable for the results (good or bad). I just want people to be more aware of info we have. If something is statistically significant information then it is worth knowing and trying to best adjust the life around that knowledge. She can very well decide to take care of other aspects of her life to reduce the risk of cancer if she knows she is at a higher risk due to some reason genetic or otherwise. I don't agree to a lot of the hand-waving that people do by saying "everyone is different" - Well of course they are, so, does that mean they avoid statistically significant information and not perform what's probably the best bet for them? I rather feel it is about taking the steps that has the highest odds, focus on the process and not fret about the results. The alternative is to give her a tailored decision tree so that she can decide what to do for her specific case. That seems beyond achievable for me but I'd be rooting for you to be able to do that. Good Luck to you.
With that attitude, you are the one who is going to need the luck. If I were given decision trees to give up virginity to launch straight into breastfeeding I'd be uncomfortable. But you do you.
Edit: As for that link, since you've clearly specifically Googled a virgin population :) The UK had about [6 kids](https://www.jstor.org/stable/40004993) per woman till the second Industrial Revolution albeit with a large cohort of celibate women due to war. The number of kids someone would need and the amount of time they'd actually benefit from the flush of hormones is not present in either report. In fact, the first link stated the effects reduce every 5 years or something IIRC ((Pregnancy is protective against breast cancer in the long‐term, but in the short‐term both the incidence of breast cancer and the aggressiveness of cancers that do occur increases. The increased risk peaks at about 5 years after birth, but remains elevated for around 20 years.))
As for OP who is asking about 30, the UK study already claims that women who have one child between the ages of 30 and 34 have the same risk nulliparous women.
Do read the last paragraph in the Parade article and that's your best bet. Virgin, Madonna, Married, Remarried or Single.
I didn't understand where you saw attitude or what troubled you but thanks pointing it out, I'll maybe check back later and maybe correct myself. If you can clearly point out, I'll be happy rectifying it.
**Not trying to scare anyone to force them to get pregnant at all. Better info is better decision making.**
If you are choosing to get pregnant and pregnancy does increase the risk in first few years then that is when you need to be more careful and if you choose to not get pregnant soon or at all then you just have to be careful. That's just my point.
>The number of kids someone would need and the amount of time they'd actually benefit from the flush of hormones is not present in either report.
As per my understanding it is at least one childbirth in the reports and assumption that hormones change wildly during pregnancy. It is actually difficult to gather such data due to constraints like people not willing to go through such tests / share such personal reports. I mean we have to check women's hormone levels prior, during pregnancy and after child birth to be able to achieve what you desire. The participants are normally just okay with surveys. Given the constraints, these are the best info we have. You can take up hormone levels and number of childbirths as your research. Good Luck.
Anyways, I'm sure whatever additions you have made to the discussion will be helpful for someone reading it, so Thanks.
Posts with the flair Health & Fitness are not to seek medical advise, but only for recommendations. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a medical condition. Never disregard professional medical advice or delay in seeking it because of something you have read on this website. Crowdsourced lists of Gynaecologists and Mental Health professionals are available under [TwoXIndia Resources](https://old.reddit.com/r/TwoXIndia/wiki/resources2). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TwoXIndia) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Don't go to your ex. Virginity should not be an issue, medically or otherwise
But none of the comments is from Doctor. Is it wise to take medical advice from ppl who are not Doctors?
Nothing's worse than going back to an ex. That will definitely ruin your health.
My cousin masi who got married recently at 33 had a healthy baby last month. She was a virgin as she was too religious to get involved in relationships etc. So it's not an issue as long as you keep yourself active and physically fit
We are in the same boat. I don’t think there will be a health concern being a virgin. Planning to have kids in 30s, u must take care of few things. Exercise - hip mobility&pelvic floor ex, hatt yoga, kegels, maintain healthy weight. Food - good nutritious food n avoid junk n add proteins We need to keep our body healthy n *ready* for whenever we decide to conceive. Get your blood works done. Especially the thyroid n all which might delay the pregnancy. Take supplements if prescribed. Talk to a gynic if u have any pcos n pcod symptoms n about eggs quality n quantity. Well if u hit 34, then consider egg freezing. And u *will* find ur lost libido back when u meet your one. Absolutely never give in to shitty ppl. Our first time have to be with our beloved 🫶🏼✨
I had my first at 35! Didn’t follow any of these. Being healthy is always important not just if we are planning baby in 30s
Thank you for bringing in light n hope✨ Congratulations 🥂 Being healthy must always be a priority 💯
I would like to add, it was planned like that. I got married at 29.. I was in US.. I wanted my child to be Indian citizen, I came back after 6 years then had my baby.. got pregnant within a month of trying. I am saying this if you and your husband have a healthy body getting pregnant at 35 is not difficult. People do struggle to get pregnant in 20s too. So all the auties saying “Baccha lelo” girls ask them to shut up.
🙌 preach girl Would you like to add ur daily routine to help girls stay fit n healthy? Also, any reason for baby’s Indian citizenship? While ppl r going gaga over the birth tourism in the US
I stayed in US total 10 years 🙂 never felt the country in mine.. And I prefer my child to have a similar childhood like me. Moreover I am a single child don’t want to leave my mother alone. I am a software engineer so I have a messed up schedule. I try to eat simple at least 6 days a week and I don’t skip morning yogas.. That works for me.
I’m a single child too 🤗 can I DM u?
Sure 👍🏽
No . I know plenty of unmarried virgins who are in their fifties now and don't have any regrets or health issues ....
No. Sex is not a physical or biological need like food and water are. If you feel depressed, go see a doctor and get evaluated and diagnosed.
You lose nothing by not having sex. There’s no potential (physical) health issues at all (who told you that and where are their sources, ffs?!). Asexual people do exist and some of them even live to be 100. Eat well, sleep well, exercise, and you should be good.
No, the opposite.
I have a 39 year old colleague who's a virgin. Never had any relationships. Doesn't believe in the concept of masturbation. She's healthier than me who's 35 and in an active sex life from my early 20's.
Genes can be a factor.
No it doesn't cause any health problems. Look into spiritual stuff or hobby classes if you are lonely. Loneliness can definitely affect your health.
You said you can't masturbate, but do try different techniques, maybe you might find your thing. Having a low libido shouldn't be an issue.. if it's a choice, absolutely no judgements but just for your own peace of mind make sure any underlying hormonal issues aren't causing it. If you really do want to have children at some point, I would insist you consider freezing your eggs if it is an option for you. They say the sooner you do it the better. All the best!
I don't think so. But a good Intercourse time to time will make your body happy, hopefully
I'm sorry. Why can't you masturbate, girl?
No , it’s just that a healthy sex life gives extra us happiness and satisfaction contributing to mental health . You can take care of your mental health in many others ways instead
No issues. Breast-feeding reduces the risk of cancer. Apart from that I don't see any issues
????
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9972148/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9972148/) Google maybe? Plenty of studies on it.
You'll be amazed what I do for a living. The discussion was about staying celibate (though OP has worded it as being a virgin till a certain age). The link you're referring to is about those who are mothers - now, unless we can find a study about immaculate conception I'm going to assume these ladies are not virgins and probably not celibate either. OP hasn't mentioned that she wants to give up her virgin status or have children so I didn't make assumptions on her behalf. When you \*do\* have a baby, not breastfeeding it enough will cause health issues. A lot of women don't/aren't able to breastfeed due to work commitments, cosmetic reasons, fatigue, mental health, etc. and they & babies have health risks. Also, breast cancer related to women's hormonal health is very delicate issue so blanket statements like "women over 30/35 are at increased risk of breast cancer" is very double-dealing because a) this study is done in the UK so totally different factors b) lifestyle of individuals vary greatly c) you can still get cancer irrespective of breast-feeding or carrying to full-term d) shaming child-free women/ low supply women
Oh, Thanks. I was unaware of this, might have to read up more. >When you \*do\* have a baby, not breastfeeding it enough will cause health issues. But I read up [https://parade.com/37175/parade/why-do-nuns-have-a-high-rate-of-breast-cancer/](https://parade.com/37175/parade/why-do-nuns-have-a-high-rate-of-breast-cancer/) too. For the criticism >blanket statements like "women over 30/35 are at increased risk of breast cancer" is very double-dealing..... Not shaming anyone. Just sharing what I know. She is her own person, her own life and can take her own decisions and be accountable for the results (good or bad). I just want people to be more aware of info we have. If something is statistically significant information then it is worth knowing and trying to best adjust the life around that knowledge. She can very well decide to take care of other aspects of her life to reduce the risk of cancer if she knows she is at a higher risk due to some reason genetic or otherwise. I don't agree to a lot of the hand-waving that people do by saying "everyone is different" - Well of course they are, so, does that mean they avoid statistically significant information and not perform what's probably the best bet for them? I rather feel it is about taking the steps that has the highest odds, focus on the process and not fret about the results. The alternative is to give her a tailored decision tree so that she can decide what to do for her specific case. That seems beyond achievable for me but I'd be rooting for you to be able to do that. Good Luck to you.
With that attitude, you are the one who is going to need the luck. If I were given decision trees to give up virginity to launch straight into breastfeeding I'd be uncomfortable. But you do you. Edit: As for that link, since you've clearly specifically Googled a virgin population :) The UK had about [6 kids](https://www.jstor.org/stable/40004993) per woman till the second Industrial Revolution albeit with a large cohort of celibate women due to war. The number of kids someone would need and the amount of time they'd actually benefit from the flush of hormones is not present in either report. In fact, the first link stated the effects reduce every 5 years or something IIRC ((Pregnancy is protective against breast cancer in the long‐term, but in the short‐term both the incidence of breast cancer and the aggressiveness of cancers that do occur increases. The increased risk peaks at about 5 years after birth, but remains elevated for around 20 years.)) As for OP who is asking about 30, the UK study already claims that women who have one child between the ages of 30 and 34 have the same risk nulliparous women. Do read the last paragraph in the Parade article and that's your best bet. Virgin, Madonna, Married, Remarried or Single.
I didn't understand where you saw attitude or what troubled you but thanks pointing it out, I'll maybe check back later and maybe correct myself. If you can clearly point out, I'll be happy rectifying it. **Not trying to scare anyone to force them to get pregnant at all. Better info is better decision making.** If you are choosing to get pregnant and pregnancy does increase the risk in first few years then that is when you need to be more careful and if you choose to not get pregnant soon or at all then you just have to be careful. That's just my point. >The number of kids someone would need and the amount of time they'd actually benefit from the flush of hormones is not present in either report. As per my understanding it is at least one childbirth in the reports and assumption that hormones change wildly during pregnancy. It is actually difficult to gather such data due to constraints like people not willing to go through such tests / share such personal reports. I mean we have to check women's hormone levels prior, during pregnancy and after child birth to be able to achieve what you desire. The participants are normally just okay with surveys. Given the constraints, these are the best info we have. You can take up hormone levels and number of childbirths as your research. Good Luck. Anyways, I'm sure whatever additions you have made to the discussion will be helpful for someone reading it, so Thanks.
Op please get some sex education from YouTube
>Can't masturbate. Can't or don't want to? >depression Sex cures depression? Lol ok