Study says P isn't making men impotent

LOL .. i lost all respect for neuroscientists.
Using a reaction to porn to judge if porn addicts react normal to actual women!?

 

Haha! Why do they think we will take them seriously when the whole medical industry is in the pharmaceuticals' pockets. Of course they don't want you solving your ED by simply going off porn... they want you to buy Viagra, and lots of it. They're excited that porn has ruined young men's sex drives, because they can make boockos of money off of it.

 

I'll show them my impotent dick and let them try to jack me into an erection.

I rest my case

 

I got the impression from the article that they looked into the relationship status of the guys. I also suspect although it was not made really clear that they asked them about their real life performances. It would be odd for them not to.

 

Yes, your right. It is merely a bad article about a not as bad study.
Although it is not clear in their study, if they had even one person with actual ED. Those probably didn't volunteer. And asking about sexual performance has its flaws as well.

 

Thanks for sharing that jbastoniv.

This is why it is important that we are here on this forum, describing our own experiences!

 

Thanks for putting this here Jbastoniv.

This article is pure nonsense. Geez! What the public will do to suppress us and fool us.

Us nofappers won't fall for it. My theory: the outside world wants to keep us males from rising to our full potential and sharing the truth with the world.

 

To be fair, unless things have changed, reason magazine is a libertarian mag mostly about public policy issues.
I am guessing whoever wrote that article doesn't have a science background and surely has little PIED background and this is just one of many articles on many topics she writes.

I looked it up.

.

Elizabeth Nolan Brown is a staff editor for Reason.com, where she covers issues related to reproductive rights, gender, free speech, food policy, millennials, sex work, and criminal justice

Brown has an M.A. in strategic communication from American University, a B.F.A in theater from Ohio University, and a certificate in nutrition from Cornell. She's from Cincinnati, Ohio, and currently lives in Washington, D.C.


Someone outside of their field writing for a magazine that is focused on something else. You have to expect flaws.

 

This is the problem with some studies.

Biased and aimed at proving whatever they want to prove by excluding certain variables and changing the parameters of the argument.

Then they publish their findings as fact.

It's a bit like the climate change deniers. What is their agenda?

 

It's not a conspiracy guys, it's called science. These things take time and I'm sure there are people working on other study's or research that will disprove this in time. Sorry to sound condescending, but this stuff is important. Good or Bad, it's all a path that will take us to the final destination which will be something everyone in time will agree upon.

Btw, a study of something isn't as scientific as it sounds.

Study : application of the mind to the acquisition of knowledge, as by reading, investigation, or reflection

Research : diligent and systematic inquiry or investigation into a subject in order to discover or revise facts, theories, applications

Don't be fooled by these terms.

 

Yeah correct jbastoniv. I just get worried that people are too quick to stand up with pitch forks and start calling out perfectly legitimate sciences. We're all taking a leap of faith with PMO. I wouldn't dare say it is misguided, but keeping an open mind is always a good thing.