Escort warns of deadly bedroom trend that's become popular with couples: 'It's scary'
An escort has issued an urgent warning about a potentially deadly bedroom trend that is becoming popular with couples.
Katija Cortez, 29, from Sydney, Australia, was only a teenager when she first experienced the 'scary' sex act in an unexpected move from her partner.
Now she says those who like to spice things up in the bedroom should avoid choking—a common kink that's known to increase the risk of lethal brain damage.
The Australian sex worker has said she has seen a surge in requests for the act and believes this is a result of men watching it in porn.
'When I was younger, a lot of guys had started doing it, which I think definitely came from seeing it in porn. Choking during porn is very, very common,' she told news.com.au.
She stressed couples should clearly communicate beforehand to be as safe as possible.
'Just like movies, porn stars are trained professionals working in controlled environments where many things are all agreed upon beforehand. Even porn actors discuss dos and don'ts before a scene,' she said.
She added: 'It needs to be understood that this particular kink can be scary and should not be done without asking.'
You don't have to be particularly strong to cause a major injury, according to Professor Heather Douglas of Melbourne Law School.
'Only a small amount of pressure can cause serious harm, and potentially death.
'Particularly concerning is that this behaviour can lead to brain injury and the more often people engage in strangulation, the more likely brain injury is.
'Often, people will be unaware of this.'
It comes as 35 per cent of 16-34 year-olds reported being strangled or choked at least once during consensual sex, according to a recent poll.
Some 50 per cent of those who engaged in the act said they have a visible neck injury after.
Women who had been choked four times over the previous 30 days experienced changes in their brain structures that affected ability to perform memory tasks, according to research by Dr Debbie Herbinick, a sexual and reproductive health specialist.
The act of choking restricts blood flow to the brain, which can cause it to stop operating at normal capacity immediately.
If the oxygen deficiency continues, it can suffer necrosis, or tissue death, within five minutes, leading to brain damage.
Even just 10 seconds of choking can cause a person to pass out, studies have shown.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
8 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Aussie scientist breaks down what CHOICE's bombshell sunscreen SPF results REALLY mean - and it might surprise you
An Australian scientist has weighed in on CHOICE's bombshell sunscreen report - from breaking down exactly how the SPF testing process works to reassuring the public that the results aren't as alarming as they initially seem. The consumer advocacy group released their investigation results last week, reporting that 16 out of 20 popular sunscreens tested failed to meet the SPF protection claims on their labels, including big brands such as Cancer Council, Neutrogena, Ultra Violette, Coles and Woolworths. The controversial revelation has sparked outrage, with many consumers now questioning whether their favourite sunscreens are truly safe to use. However, respected beauty scientist Dr Michelle Wong, who holds a PhD in chemistry, told FEMAIL: 'I don't think we need to be that worried. These results are actually pretty reassuring in terms of the overall high standard of Australian sunscreens. 'It's tricky to measure SPF consistently because a lot of different things can affect the results. When applied properly, the difference between SPF 30 and 50 is not that big, and is very adequate for high exposure situations. However, higher SPF gives more room for error with underapplication.' When asked about Ultra Violette's Lean Screen SPF50+ being the worst scoring sunscreen in the report - after it returned an SPF of just 4 - the cosmetic scientist explained that mineral sunscreens don't tend to hold up well in lab tests compared to chemical formulas. 'It's difficult to say without further investigation, but my educated guess is that the issues with this particular sunscreen, which contains uncoated zinc oxide particles, wouldn't necessarily apply to their other products, which are mostly chemical sunscreens,' she told FEMAIL. She further explained that the structural make-up of mineral sunscreens means they're more prone to being 'easily disturbed by things like heat, interactions with packaging, and even just gravity' - and that this could have impacted on it's poor score. Scientist Dr Michelle Wong has weighed in on CHOICE's bombshell sunscreen report - from breaking down exactly how the SPF testing process works to reassuring the public that the results aren't as alarming as they initially seem Australian consumer group CHOICE claimed in a bombshell report that Ultra Violette's Lean Screen SPF50+ Mattifying Zinc Skinscreen, which retails for $52, returned an SPF of just 4 during its first round of rigorous testing Nevertheless, when asked whether people should continue using this particular sunscreen in light of the report, Michelle said: 'I would personally use a different sunscreen in high UV exposure situations until more information comes to light.' She did however add that she felt 'reassured by the fact that Ultra Violette are taking prompt steps to investigate this discrepancy'. FEMAIL contacted CHOICE for comment on Michelle's video about the wide variations that may have affected the SPF testing results. Instead, a CHOICE spokesperson directed FEMAIL to its website, saying: 'You can find all the information on how we tested sunscreens in the following article, which addresses some of the thoughts raised within Michelle's video.' The article, titled 'How we test sunscreens', explained that 20 selected sunscreens were sent to an external laboratory based in Sydney, accredited to test sunscreens in accordance with the Australian/New Zealand Sunscreen Standard, as required by the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA). 'All 20 sunscreens initially underwent a five-person panel test in an accredited laboratory in Australia as specified by the standard, and then 18 of those sunscreens (every product except the two that returned the highest results, the La Roche-Posay and Neutrogena products) underwent another five-person panel test,' the CHOICE article stated. According to CHOICE, the products were 'blind' tested to minimise bias. The panel of volunteers selected for testing all had 'skin types that show sun-burning reactions and do not have any sensitivities to the products' ingredients. The report also detailed the stages of the testing procedure, emphasising that it was a 'tightly controlled and consistent process'. On Friday, Ultra Violette co-founder Ava Chandler-Matthews addressed the backlash following CHOICE's damning one of the brand's most popular sunscreen Ava hit back, saying the bombshell report was 'absolutely shocking,' and why she felt the need to speak up and dispute the damning claims On Friday, Ava Chandler-Matthews, the co-founder of Ultra Violette, broke her silence after CHOICE claimed one of the brand's popular sunscreens was one of the worst performing sunscreens on Aussie shelves. CHOICE experts said they were 'so perturbed' by the results of its extraordinary first experiment that it conducted a second test at an independent lab in Germany where the results came back with a reported SPF of 5. 'We obviously freaked out, [and] took it very seriously immediately. We have now done three tests on this product. Two to ISO Australian standards [International Organisation for Standardisation] and one to FDA standards,' she said. The results she said, visibly emotional, 'were all consistent SPF rating of over 60 [and] we stand behind the tests we've done'. 'My concern with this whole thing is that people will now no longer trust any sunscreen. This isn't just about us. I put Lean Screen on my own children - and I still would tomorrow,' she added. One of Ultra Violette's products was named among the 16 sunscreens that failed to meet the strict SPF 50+ standards listed on their labels. After the report came to light, Michelle made a video breaking down exactly how the SPF testing process works, explaining that it's a 'lot less precise than it might seem' - which inherently leads to 'a lot of variation with SPF results'. The Instagram video that has been viewed over 450,000 times, Michelle - who has more than 640,000 followers - ultimately reassured viewers: 'Sunscreens are very effective [and] these results do not indicate that you should lose faith in them'. Michelle explained that the structural make-up of mineral sunscreens means they're more prone to being 'easily disturbed by things like heat, interactions with packaging, and even just gravity' - and that this could have impacted on it's poor score In an explosive recent investigation by CHOICE, 20 of the most popular sunscreens on Aussie shelves were put to the test - and only four lived up to their lofty SPF 50+ claims In the video shared to her @labmuffinbeautyscience channel, she explained that the testing process is done on real people in a lab with a UV lamp - essentially measuring how much UV exposure it takes for their skin to turn pink with sunscreen, compared to without it. Even with stringent guidelines set by the TGA around the testing procedure, she added that 'a lot of little things can change the results'. These human variables can be everything from the person administering the test to the person the sunscreen is being tested on. 'Even within the one test in the one lab, it's common for the SPF result to be given as a range with more uncertainty that the label would suggest,' Michelle told FEMAIL. For example, she said it was not uncommon for a sunscreen labelled as SPF 50 to return a lab result reading anywhere between SPF 45 to 55. As she stated in her video, Michelle believed that '19 of the 20 tested sunscreens scoring above SPF 24 is really good'. She added: 'It's better than a lot of other consumer tests in the past'. Australian pharmaceutical scientist Hannah English also weighed in, detailing her reaction to the latest CHOICE sunscreen SPF report. Hannah, who has a clinical research background, agreed with Michelle's claim that SPF tests can be impacted by many 'little variables'. She said that any sunscreen brand that fell well short in CHOICE's report should be investigating 'exactly what had happened and why'. 'I don't want to assign blame to any user of sunscreen or to CHOICE either because their job is not to see the bigger picture and educate on health. They're trying to make sure that the consumer is getting what they pay for - and the consumer should get what they pay for,' Hannah said. 'So, whether or not there was some human error or not is neither here or there.' Michelle left) and Hannah Collingswood English (right) both took to their Instagram to respond to the CHOICE sunscreen SPF findings. Michelle felt the overall results weren't cause for alarm given the known the variables of the testing process. Pharmaceutical scientist Hannah agreed, and also advocated for the bigger overlooked issue of improper sunscreen application Hannah believes there needs to be clearer sun safety campaigns and better education on how to apply and reapply sunscreen correctly. 'The Cancer Council did a great job with the trend of tanning beds and Melanotan tablets (tanning pills) but we've had a bit of a gap in between that and that really scary, melanoma beach campaign you may remember from a few years back,' Hannah said. 'Even now, the campaigns we have don't necessarily speak to every skin tone. And you know, darker skin tones have a lower risk, that's true, but there's still a risk. 'I think if you sell a sunscreen product, then you have some responsibility to communicate it, how to use it properly as well. They have mandatory stuff on the label. People don't necessarily read, which is not the brand's fault either. 'There's a lot of factors, but we could do with much more education- and I think that would help more, potentially even more than further regulation.' Both Michelle and Hannah believe the biggest problem being overlooked is that Australians are simply not applying - or re-applying - sunscreen correctly in the first place. 'Most people apply about a quarter to half of the recommended amount of sunscreen, which means the protection drops to between a quarter to half of the SPF,' Michele said. 'This means an SPF 50 sunscreen would be giving roughly SPF 12.5 to 25, which is lower than almost all the sunscreens tested.' Hannah agreed, saying: 'If you're not applying enough sunscreen in the first place and not reapplying it, then you're not getting the SPF on the label, regardless.' That's why sunscreen should be considered as just one element of a broader sun protection 'layering' strategy - which also includes hats, outer protective clothing and staying in the shade where possible.
Daily Mirror
2 days ago
- Daily Mirror
Neighbours star shares update on seven month old son after brain tumour surgery
Australian model, Erin McNaught, has revealed her seven month old son has undergone surgery to remove a brain tumour after heartbreakingly noticing a 'rapid decline in his health and happiness' Former Neighbours star Erin McNaught has told fans her baby son, Obi, has undergone surgery to remove a tumour on his brain following "the hardest few days". The brave tot was diagnosed with cancer, aged just seven months, after Erin noticed a "rapid decline in his health and happiness". Thankfully, the mum-of-three, 43, said Obi's medical team were "very happy" with how the major operation went this week as she updated followers while thanking them for their support. Taking to Instagram, sharing a snap of herself kissing little Obi, whose head was wrapped up in bandages, in hospital following his operation, she said: "Today Obi had the surgery to remove the tumour. The amazing team here are very happy with the way it went." Earlier this week, the former Miss Universe Australia and her music producer partner Stace Cadet shared Obi's devastating diagnosis. The couple, who welcomed their first child together in October last year, issued a tearjerking joint statement on Thursday morning, as they opened up about their son's health concerns. "For the last few weeks we have noticed a rapid decline in Obi's behaviour and happiness," the statement began. It continued: "He was having problems eating, sleeping and most recently, keeping his head straight." The couple explained that after noticing Obi change so quickly, they booked him in for an MRI scan under the advice of their doctor. The scan, conducted earlier this week, tragically revealed that a large tumour was situated on the right side of his brain. "At about 6:00pm Tuesday night we met with a neurosurgeon who broke the heartbreaking news," Erin and Stace continued, adding: "We are absolutely shattered and the last few days have been our hardest days." Following Obi's operation, the proud parents praised the team at Queensland Children's Hospital, who are now working with Erin and Stace to devise a treatment plan. "Our team at the Queensland Children Hospital have been incredible and remain hopeful that we can remove the mass and get Obi healthy and happy pending the results," they concluded. The post was met with lots of well wishes from from family, friends and fans, including Erin's ex-husband, British musician, Example, who she shares two children with - sons Evander, seven, and Ennio, five. In November 2007, Erin was cast as Sienna Cammeniti in Neighbours. She said she was "nervous" about joining the show because it was "a big change" to the modelling work she was known for. However, after she began filming her first scenes on 17 December, by March 2008, she revealed her contract had been extended three months before leaving the iconic Aussie soap in July 2008.
Scottish Sun
3 days ago
- Scottish Sun
Lower back pain can be eased with walking – but there's a golden number of minutes to reach per day, study finds
Walking is already known to help reduce lower back pain by improving blood flow and strengthening muscles in the back STEP TO IT Lower back pain can be eased with walking – but there's a golden number of minutes to reach per day, study finds Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) GOING on a daily walk for a specific number of minutes could slash your risk of chronic lower back pain, a large new study has revealed Every year, around 9.5 million Brits suffer from the agonising condition, making it one of the most common causes of disability. Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up 2 Back pain impacts around 9.5 million Brits each year Credit: Getty 2 Walking for a certain number of minutes can cut your risk of chronic lower back pain by a quarter. Credit: Getty In many cases, lower back pain starts suddenly and improves within a few days or weeks. But if it sticks around for more than three months, it's classed as chronic, according to the NHS. In some cases, it can be considered a disability. This is when it can make everyday things like bending, lifting, or standing for long periods much harder. It typically hits in later life, affecting people over 50 as the spine naturally wears down. But younger people aren't immune, those with physically demanding jobs or sedentary lifestyles can suffer too. Now, researchers from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology have found that walking around 100 minutes a day can cut your risk of chronic lower back pain by a quarter. They found that the amount of walking mattered more than how fast or vigorously people walked. Walking is already known to help reduce lower back pain by improving blood flow, strengthening muscles, and promoting flexibility. Their large study, published in JAMA Network Open, tracked more than 11,000 adults over four years, using tech to measure daily walking volume and intensity. They discovered that people walking between 101 and 124 minutes a day had a 23 per cent lower risk of developing chronic lower back pain, compared to those walking less than 78 minutes. The popular sleep position doctor warns should be avoided and could be the cause of your back and neck pain Walking 125 minutes or more daily also lowered the risk by 24 per cent, while higher walking intensity made less difference once total walking time was accounted for. 'These findings indicate that public health strategies promoting walking may help reduce the burden of chronic low back pain," the authors said. It comes as Australian study, published earlier this year, found that nine out of ten treatments for back pain are no good. The NHS recommends anti-inflammatories, stretching, ice and heat packs to alleviate back pain. If there is no improvement, it urges patients to see a GP.
