I want to know .....can ..not masturbating lead to prostrate cancer

Discussion in 'Rebooting - Porn Addiction Recovery' started by Chizzzzzz44, Jul 22, 2020.

Can not mastrubating lead to prostrate cancer

  1. Yes

    3 vote(s)
    12.5%
  2. No

    21 vote(s)
    87.5%
  1. FutureKing

    FutureKing Fapstronaut

    140
    315
    63
    The studies say "Slightly higher/lower chance of" not "Will lead to." Very important difference in wording.
     
    vercent99 and Zarkh like this.
  2. Zarkh

    Zarkh Fapstronaut

    Correct.
     
  3. thinking_differently

    thinking_differently Fapstronaut

    1,219
    28,586
    143
    Now I understand we’re trying to have a discussion here but,
    Not enough of us(I think none at all) here have proper medical Education and Experience. While one or two studies say one thing, the Conscience of a few screams against it.
    In fact, the Professionals studying this today themselves are trying to understand the results, and are far from understanding the complete set of causes of Prostrate Cancer.
    Anyway, there will be multiple other factors influencing this.

    So my point is that it’s too soon to say whether Masturbating WILL or WILL NOT Help in reducing risks of Prostate Cancer. Any person with a genuine scientific temperament would say that he/she cannot comment on the validity of this claim.

    Till we understand the mechanism of the process, we stick by our own beliefs.
     
    tF5vGt0N likes this.
  4. kropo82

    kropo82 Fapstronaut

    It depends on context. Sometimes 0.04% is rounded down to zero, sometimes not. There is no universal rule for that. When we are discussing increased risk of death, I would not equate 0.04% and 0%.

    I personally have never seen anybody on NoFap who eats pomegranates. What conclusions can we draw from that? None. Lack of evidence is not evidence of lack.

    I did. Don't worry, my first degree was in mathematics so I can follow your calculations. Would you please answer this questions: what study does the reduction of 36% that you use in your calculation come from? No prevaricating, just give us the reference for that percentage value.

    There are thousands of threads on these forums, way too many for anyone to read them all. This thread is about the links between masturbation and prostate cancer. If you do not think those links are worth discussion then why read and post in this thread.
     
    Arkimedo likes this.
  5. Zarkh

    Zarkh Fapstronaut

    @thinking_differently @kropo82 MidOFeed's calculation had a mistake. I'm sorry I noticed the mistake just now. Either way, the chances are pretty low.
     
  6. kropo82

    kropo82 Fapstronaut

    Question:
    No answer:
    Question:
    No answer:
    @Zarkh, please answer this question: where does the value "36%" in your post come from? Which study?
     
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2020
  7. vercent99

    vercent99 Fapstronaut

    428
    403
    63
    can't get cancer if you die from malnutrition am i right boys
     
    StarRider likes this.
  8. ANOTHER ONE RISES TO THE CHALLENGE! Will he finally defeat veganism for good? Welcome sir. I thank you for participating. Now, please, if you will, cite a credible source that concludes veganism causes malnutrition. I can give you six unbiased sources in favor of veganism right now. But I just want one from you.
     
    Zarkh, Furrious and kropo82 like this.
  9. vercent99

    vercent99 Fapstronaut

    428
    403
    63
    there is a reason for the term "hidden hunger" in wealthy western countries, especially specifically among vegans

    but keep eating grass if you want, i will stick to meat

    and dont forget that veganism causes so many deaths of animals as well they poison rats and other animals for their crop fields
     
  10. 70% of grain, 75% of sobyean, and 36% of corn is used as livestock feed.
    https://www.onegreenplanet.org/environment/livestock-feed-and-habitat-destruction/
    And on top of that we kill 70 billion farm animals each year. So a large percentage, if not the majority, of animal deaths resulting from pesticides, crop harvesting, poisoning or other methods, are because we use those crops to feed the other 70 billion animals which we will ALSO kill.

    What's YOUR solution? We know that a conversion to a vegan diet will reduce the amount of farmland used globablly by a significant margin, and is far more ethical than any other option. And to say that vegans don't care about animal deaths caused by farming practices is nothing more than a strawman. Vegans like myself want to reduce those deaths as well. No ethical vegan says "it's okay to kill animals for plant production" - not a single one.

    Not only is this a misinformed argument (took me a 5 second google search to find this info), but it is a bad faith argument as well. You don't actually care about animals suffering for our pleasure, otherwise you wouldn't bring up the poison argument. You are trying to play an ethical "reverse uno" card. And it's only because you likely realize you hold an unethical position. The reality is that within your moral system, animals suffering their whole lives for your temporary pleasure is 100% justifiable. And you want to call veganism, the complete antithesis to that immoral position, unethical.

    And on a side note, every person eats grass. Grass grains include wheat, rye, etc. Let's talk about actual evidence to support why veganism is unhealthy. Do you happen to have any?
     
    kropo82 likes this.
  11. vercent99

    vercent99 Fapstronaut

    428
    403
    63
    "At least 100 mice are killed per hectare per year (500/4 × 0.8) to grow grain. Average yields are about 1.4 tonnes of wheat/hectare; 13% of the wheat is useable protein. Therefore, at least 55 sentient animals die to produce 100kg of useable plant protein: 25 times more than for the same amount of rangelands beef"

    mhmmm...

    Also, what you consider ethical is subjective. I don't put animals on an equal level as humans, because they simply aren't equal to us.

    Secondly, we are on top of the food chain whether you like it or not, so it's nature. Now I know you will say our artificial factory methods isn't natural and I will return to you because nature/God/etc, gave humans the intelligence to upgrade from primitive hunting to factory farms as it is more consistent, saves time, etc.

    Lastly, again, there is a term called "hidden hunger" which is about lack of nutritions which is really common with vegans.

    Death isn't pleasant but it is part of nature, just like animals eat other animals, where you don't bat an eye hypocritically.
     
  12. Candun

    Candun Fapstronaut

    624
    852
    93
    Factory farming is cancer, completely unethical.
     
    FellatiousD likes this.
  13. Quitterrr

    Quitterrr Fapstronaut

    192
    346
    63
    Oh hey they doctor, I would like to ask how does not masturbating cuz cancer?
     
  14. Ok this is good, we're getting to the main points. First I will address your point that vegans do not care about animals killing other animals. Personally, I don't like killing or suffering at all. But the reason it's morally acceptable for animals to kill other animals is because they are not moral agents, that is, they generally don't have a sense of right and wrong the way we do. Another reason is that most carnivores cannot live without meat - it is imperative to their survival. Humans have a choice, and we also have moral agency. The problem with eating meat is that it causes unnecessary suffering - animals do not have to die for humans to live.

    Now you will probably dispute that last claim and say something about "hidden hunger." I have no clue what that is, but if you have any evidence to bring forward which counters veganism from a health perspective, please do so. However, most research indicates that vegan diets tend to be lower in saturated fat and cholesterol and healthier overall. Also, a widely cited figure is that vegans have an average life expectancy of 9 years over non-vegans.

    Now for the "might makes right" argument. I don't care whether something is natural or unnatural, it doesn't matter at all in the context of this discussion. The fact of the matter is that we have a choice of what to eat, and we also have a responsibility to be as ethical as possible. Just because you can do something, and just because humans have always done a particular thing, does not mean that we should do it. You also said that factory farming is more consistent and saves time. It's actually incredibly wasteful, accounts for a huge percentage of air and sea pollution, and requires much more land and resources than plant farming.
     
  15. Discouraged

    Discouraged Fapstronaut

    167
    120
    43
    nofap can cause cancer but the mechanism is not understood

    read 'the function of the orgasm'

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orgas...ok Die,inhibitions; the capacity to discharge

    Within the work of the Austrian psychoanalyst Wilhelm Reich (1897–1957), orgastic potency is the ability to experience an orgasm with specific psychosomatic characteristics and, among others, requiring the ability to love.[1]

    For Reich, "orgastic impotence", or failure to attain orgastic potency (not to be confused with anorgasmia, the inability to reach orgasm) always resulted in neurosis, because during orgasm that person could not discharge all libido (which Reich regarded as a biological energy). According to Reich, "not a single neurotic individual possesses orgastic potency."[2]

    Reich coined the term orgastic impotence in 1924 and described the concept in his 1927 book Die Funktion des Orgasmus, the manuscript of which he presented to Sigmund Freud on the latter's 70th birthday.[3] Though Reich regarded his work as complementing Freud's original theory of anxiety neurosis, Freud was ambivalent in his reception.[4] Freud's view was that there was no single cause of neurosis.[5]
     
  16. Quitterrr

    Quitterrr Fapstronaut

    192
    346
    63
    "mdoes not masturbating cause prostate cancer?" Absolutely mind blown
     
  17. thinking_differently

    thinking_differently Fapstronaut

    1,219
    28,586
    143
    Umm..
    @kropo82 Please correct me if I’m wrong:

    Isn’t the observation in that study by English Biologists that Masturbating will reduce chances of developing Prostrate Cancer?

    This does not imply the inverse of the statement i.e. Not Masturbating WILL increase chances of Prostrate Cancer.

    A=Masturbating; B=Event of Decrease in Chances of Prostrate Cancer;
    A—> B
    Dosen’t mean:
    ~A—> ~B


    So to answer @Chizzzzzz44 question(Title asks whether Not Masturbating will lead to Prostrate Cancer)

    No, it will not. There’s no known evidence for this. Not Masturbating will not increase Chances Of Prostrate Cancer.
     
    Quitterrr likes this.
  18. kropo82

    kropo82 Fapstronaut

    I do not think that is a good representation of their logic. It's more that those who ejaculate frequently have a lower rate of prostate cancer than those who do not (at least in the study I mention earlier). I don't think they set up the implication you are using either way. (N.B. In a later study they do look for the underlying cause, and find something interesting, here.)
     
  19. thinking_differently

    thinking_differently Fapstronaut

    1,219
    28,586
    143
    Of course, Mathematical Logic cannot be extended to Biology. It’s just to Convey The central idea of my argument.

    Okay,
    You can’t deny that:
    It is true that there is no known evidence that NOT Masturbating Will INCREASE chances of developing Prostrate Cancer.
     
  20. kropo82

    kropo82 Fapstronaut

    @thinking_differently, I think you are making an unhelpful and ill founded distinction. If you want to lay it out mathematically this is the evidence that the paper provides:

    P(pc|fe)<P(pc|ie)

    where pc is prostate cancer, fe is frequent ejaculation, and ie is infrequent ejaculation. I do understand simple mathematical logic, I just do not think your logical model of what the paper is saying is either valid, correct, or useful.
     

Share This Page