From: ben.sansing@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Ben Sansing)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.bodyart
Subject: RE: TATS AND CHLORINE
Date: 10 Apr 92 09:11:00 GMT
Reply-To: ben.sansing@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Ben Sansing)
Organization: The Courts of Chaos * Jacksonville AR USA * 501-985-0059

clueles@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (Lee M. Thompson-Herbert) writes
>If you're going to bring medical texts into this, it would help if
>you
>_read_ them before spewing here.  _You_ were the one blathering
>about how piercings cause nerve damage.
>
>I'm going to phrase this simply, and if you want more details,
>go find yourself a good neurology text book and _read_ it.  Non-central
>nervous system neurons are _quite_ capable of regenerating (there
>are some experimental ways of inducing CNS neurons to regenerate,
>but they're iffy and far from widely used).  That ring in the piercing
>is _stimulating_ the nerve endings around the wound.  That stimulation
>goes on 24 hours a day, since the ring is always there.  Stimulation
>usually causes the undamaged neurons in the area to undergo dendritic
>branching.  The stimulation _also_ will sometimes prevent a damaged
>neuron from dying off.  So, not only do most of the damaged nerves
>regenerate, but the undamaged ones in the immediate area also multiply.
>This is why many people report an _increase_ of sensitivity in
>healed piercings.

Good points. I was probably somewhat overzealous in my first few posts,
and some people took them to mean I was saying "All piercings are bad".
That was not what I was saying at all. I was just somewhat alarmed at
all the people who were reading about others' piercing experiences and
then trying it at home (probably under less than sterile conditions).
I'm sure professional piercers are quite careful (They'd have to be,
otherwise they'd get lawsuits).
  I have talked to a neurologist since my last few posts, and she said
basically what you have said here. Increased sensitivity may result, if
the pierce is done right (and taken care of while it heals), but if it's
clumsily done or not sterilized or whatever, infection, loss of
sensitivity, and what I've been generically calling "nerve damage" is
going to be a good bet. If a penile piercing is done wrong, for
instance, the results can include impotence (the penis won't get erect
anymore). Scarring is another possible result (and scar tissue tends NOT
to be very sensitive).

>The cases your wife is seeing are ones where 1) the position of the
>pierce was badly chosen, 2) the pierce was done by someone who's
>probably never attempted a pierce before and 3) it's likely that
>the pierce was not done
>under sterile conditions.  Saying that all pierces are likely to
>cause nerve damage is like saying that stitches to close a gaping
>wound are always bad, when all you've ever seen are field stitches
>done by a non- trained person who didn't bother to wash their hands,
>sterilize their instruments, or even disinfect the wound before
>putting in the stitches.

Repeat - I was *NOT* saying that all piercings cause damage. Most of
them *DON'T*. 99% of the women I know have pierced ears. That's
commonplace (about 50% of the men I know have one ear pierced, BTW). I
know several folks with pierced nipples (and/or genital piercings of one
sort or another) and they are fine, and happy with the piercings. On the
other hand, I know a guy who has a BAD slur in his speech and some loss
of muscle control in his tongue from having it pierced by a "buddy" at a
party when they were both stoned, and I know another couple of folks
whose "self-piercings" turned into areas of bad scar tissue and are
definitely NOT sensitive any more.

Of course, I fully expect someone to respond to this and call me a liar.
That is to be expected, from what I've seen on this conference so far.
So be it.

Thanks for your intelligent and level-headed post.
                                                                                                                            
Newsgroups: rec.arts.bodyart