Abstract
Steiner et al. are concerned by the high exposure frequency we observed and question its validity because they perceive the boundaries of the semen exposure rate to be arbitrary and believe some PSA results may have been due to sample contamination. We cannot directly address the hypothesis that contamination (i.e. contact of the sampling device with semen outside of the vaginal cavity) may explain the exposures detected but the design of the device and procedures together with the rarity of self-reported problems during sampling lead us to believe this explanation unlikely. We chose quantitative criteria to specify the boundaries of a “semen exposure rate” to simplify presentation of what seems to be a distribution of exposure levels of varying intensity rather than a dichotomous exposure that should yield a PSA value below or above a threshold. (excerpt)
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
