Of The Many James Bonds We've Seen, Which Ones Would Likely Have An STI?

Better start mixing some antibiotics into those vodka martinis.

James Bond has been going around ordering vodka martinis, murdering baddies, and sleeping with beautiful women for over five decades and soon-to-be 25 films now.

It’s a pretty full on lifestyle to embrace and the effects of it all is bound to catch up to 007 at some point, particularly with the excessive amount of sexy forking he’s done over the years.

Since we’re all about important investigations here, we decided to look into the question of how likely Bond will have an STI given the amount of bedroom action that’s gone on.

Did he or didn’t he use a condom after this?

For the purposes of this investigation we’ve decided dive separately into each official Bond actor and gauge the likelihood of STIs for each incarnation of the character, used data from the UK since he’s British, and assumed that he didn’t use a condom since he’s definitely the type of irresponsible jerkass who wouldn’t bother with one and we definitely didn’t see Q give him in any of his gadget briefings.

Sean Connery

Over the course of six films, Connery’s Bond has had sex with a total of 15 women. Taking into account that the average number of female sexual partners for UK man in a lifetime is between three to nine, this means the Scottish 007 is batting well above average and is likely to to be riddled with chlamydia.

Chances of an STI – Very high.

Yes, you should definitely be worried.

George Lazenby

Aussie Bond was only around for one film but he got his rocks off quite a bit as he hooked up with three women over the course of On Her Majesty’s Secret Service.

That puts him on par with the average UK man in terms of sexual partners. While the risk of an STI is decent, he does fall in love with Tracy and the couple end up marrying (albeit very briefly).

Assuming that Bond actually bothered to get himself checked before tying the knot with arguably the only woman he loved, then he’s surprisingly in the clear here relatively speaking.

Chance of an STI: Low.


Roger Moore

Hoo boy, this one is a doozy.

Moore Bond slept with a whopping 19 women over the course of seven films and several countries, making this 007 the sluttiest and grossest incarnation of the character in MI6 history.

No need to dig too deep into this one, he’s definitely a walking health hazard.

Chance of an STI: Absolutely riddled with STIs.

Nothing to smile about, champ.

Timothy Dalton

Dalton Bond was in just two films so he “only” got to sleep with four women, putting him in “average” territory here. But unlike Lazenby Bond, it’s unlikely Dalton Bond could be bothered to get himself checked or pick up a bunch of condoms so he’s playing with fire here.

Chance of an STI: Around average but definitely not inconsiderable.

Hey, it’s your own stupid fault for being irresponsible and not having safe sex.

Pierce Brosnan

Brosnan Bond had four films to himself and managed to sleep with 10 women in that time, putting him above average in terms of female partners.

It’s not on the level of Connery or Moore Bond but he’s wading into dangerous territory here. He also dropped the lamest pun ever uttered onscreen – “I thought Christmas only comes once a year” – which is just a rotten cherry on top of an STI-riddled cake.

Chances of an STI: High.

Worst. Bond. Pun. Ever.

Daniel Craig

Over the course of four films (so far), Craig Bond has managed to seduce six women into bed or the shower with him. Okay, seduce is probably too nice of a word given how gross his encounters with Sévérine and Lucia Sciarra were but that’s another story for another day.

We don’t know how much sexing he’ll get up to in Bond 25 just yet, but we’re hoping it’s a big fat zero because his current bedroom tally of six women without a condom just irresponsible. Hopefully he used some of his retirement time between Spectre and Bond 25 to see a doctor.

Chances of an STI: Pretty high.

It had better be a condom and some antibiotics.

Charlie Sheen Is An Awful Human Being But He's Done More For HIV Education Than The UN

Albeit, unintentionally.

Let’s get one thing out of the way first: Charlie Sheen is a pretty shoddy human being.

His infamous, headline-grabbing personal and professional dalliances could fill a novel, he accidentally shot a former fiance and allegedly assaulted another. Oh and he’s an anti-vaxxer so he’s got that going for him too.

Now that that’s out of the way, let’s move onto the one actual good thing he’s done: doing more for HIV education than what most UN events do, albeit unintentionally.

I know, doing good things and Charlie Sheen are like water and oil: they don’t mix.

Sheen publicly announced that he was HIV positive in 2015 and had kept it secret since being diagnosed with the virus in 2011. This didn’t surprise anyone at the time given all his aforementioned personal dalliances. What did surprise everyone was the way he revealed it.

Most probably expected he would enter into a room of assembled media while borne aloft on a bed of swan feathers by a couple of greased up eunuchs as Guns n’ Roses played in the background.

Instead, what we got was a surprisingly responsible announcement where he brought his doctor with him on the air and explained in easy-to-understand language the complexity of HIV and how the virus can be made undetectable.

That’s…actually pretty cool of him.

Sheen’s HIV reveal also had the unintended side effect of raising awareness about the virus. According to a study in JAMA Internal Medicine, Sheen’s announcement corresponded with the “greatest number of HIV-related Google searches ever recorded in the United States.”

It turns out the people weren’t just looking for celebrity gossip about the weird dude who likes tiger blood. They also wanted to know about HIV, how to protect themselves from it and how to get tested.

The spike in searches and stories hours after Sheen’s big announcement was pure pandemonium. HIV symptom searches were 540% higher than normal, HIV testing searches jumped 214%, condom searches rose by 72% and the number of news stories about HIV had a 265% boost.

Researchers named this phenomenon “The Charlie Sheen Effect”, calling it the “most significant domestic HIV prevention event in the last decade”, so much so that it’s impact has eclipsed most things and events the UN has done for HIV education.

Make no mistake that this doesn’t make Sheen less of an awful person, but it does show how a celebrity can use their fame to educate people about important causes..

Perhaps Sheen’s responsible public announcement of his HIV diagnosis should be the model for what famous people suffering from illnesses should do.

Audiences care about celebrities so why not leverage that amount of pull to get more valuable learnings out in the open rather than keep everything under wraps.

The Live-Action Cats Movie Is Here Just To Serve Your Furry Thirst, Let’s Face It

The filmmakers knew exactly what they were doing.

The new trailer for the upcoming live-action film adaptation of Cats has arrived and boy is there a LOT to unpack.

The movie is based on the popular Broadway musical, has an all-star cast of heavyweight actors and musicians that includes Taylor Swift, Jennifer Hudson, Judi Dench, Ian McKellen, and Idris Elba, and is scheduled to come out on December 20.

But folks won’t be flocking to the cinema to see any of those names. They’re going for one reason: to quench that furry thirst.


Instead of using Broadway’s wardrobe of elaborate cat costumes, director Tom Hopper decided to use motion capture and CGI for the characters. The resulting look is probably best described as what would happen if science actually managed to successfully mate felines with humans.

Think human faces on seemingly naked human(ish) bodies that are covered in sleek fur and rocking body parts that don’t belong on cats. This is either the stuff of nightmares or the greatest thing ever put on film depending on whether you’re a furry.

If the thirst over The Lion King was a furry appetiser, Cats is a full on buffet. Check out the trailer here be prepared to either be freaked out or turned on.

Given the polarised (and thirsty) response to the trailer, you probably think that the filmmakers are a little taken aback by the divisive reception.

But let’s be real here, they knew exactly what they were doing and what crowd they were catering for. This isn’t about adapting a Broadway play to film. This is about quenching that furry thirst.

But look, maybe they had the best of intentions for Cats and the frothing over lean humanoid felines was just an unintended side effect. After all, this is a movie about cats that’s based on a 30-something year-old stage show about cats.

The stage show confused everyone back in the 80s, everyone in the 90s, everyone in the 00s and even still now because at the end of the day, it’s a show about goddamn cats.

Pop-up Channel

Follow Us