Don't be a coomer

[Sitaruîm]

all orgasms trigger prolactin whether sex, wetdream or masturbation. i think some claim sex increased prolactin more, but that's probably due to a variety of reasons. there's supposed to be a quick spike and a quick drop in prolactin after any form of orgasm. in unhealthier people, proactin doesn't go up as much, but stays mildly elevated for a longer period of time which causes all the issues. prolactin causes the refractory period, so in a healthy person it would be minimal whereas as you get unhealthier the refractory period lasts longer.

both sex and masturbation seem to decrease energy temporarily, it may simply be that the body needs lots of resources to create sperm/semen,

Sex increases prolactin acutely so your levels stabilize faster, fapping raises them chronically. If you fap at least a couple of times a week you may end up with chronically low dopamine. Do we want that?

 

[Dr. B]

Sex increases prolactin acutely so your levels stabilize faster, fapping raises them chronically. If you fap at least a couple of times a week you may end up with chronically low dopamine. Do we want that?

thats not confirmed, it likely has to do with how long the build up of sex or masturbation is, or comparing people with different pre existing health status. how would fapping possibly chronically raise prolactin but sex doesn't? it simply doesn't make sense, it's like saying drinking milk will have a massively different effect on the body depending on whether you hold the cup and drink it yourself, or have someone else pour it in your mouth for you.

there is a reason boxers, athletes etc chose to do actual semen retention as apposed to just avoiding masturbation and continuing sex, if your aim is to improve hormonal status in some way your results won't change much whether it's sex, masturbation, a robot device that touches you, using the shower water stream etc.
those things are correlation not causation, unhealthier people are more likely to masturbate compared to healthier people, and unhealthier people will have chronically elevated prolactin levels compared to healthy people. it doesn't mean being unhealthy makes you masturbate more, or that masturbation is the cause of the elevated prolactin.

probably all forms of sexual activity have some sort of energy depleting effect due to resources needed.

 

[miquelangeles]

thats not confirmed, it likely has to do with how long the build up of sex or masturbation is, or comparing people with different pre existing health status. how would fapping possibly chronically raise prolactin but sex doesn't? it simply doesn't make sense, it's like saying drinking milk will have a massively different effect on the body depending on whether you hold the cup and drink it yourself, or have someone else pour it in your mouth for you.

there is a reason boxers, athletes etc chose to do actual semen retention as apposed to just avoiding masturbation and continuing sex, if your aim is to improve hormonal status in some way your results won't change much whether it's sex, masturbation, a robot device that touches you, using the shower water stream etc.
those things are correlation not causation, unhealthier people are more likely to masturbate compared to healthier people, and unhealthier people will have chronically elevated prolactin levels compared to healthy people. it doesn't mean being unhealthy makes you masturbate more, or that masturbation is the cause of the elevated prolactin.

probably all forms of sexual activity have some sort of energy depleting effect due to resources needed.

High prolactin is also associated with sensations of despair, unrelated to orgasm.
It was found that in newly caged wild monkeys prolactin started to rise as soon as the animals realized they were trapped, and the highest prolactin was in monkeys that had been captive for months, compared to those that were recently caged.
Some researchers say that monkeys masturbate often when in captivity, and rarely when in the wild.

 

[BestSinceDAYONE]

all orgasms trigger prolactin whether sex, wetdream or masturbation. i think some claim sex increased prolactin more, but that's probably due to a variety of reasons. there's supposed to be a quick spike and a quick drop in prolactin after any form of orgasm. in unhealthier people, proactin doesn't go up as much, but stays mildly elevated for a longer period of time which causes all the issues. prolactin causes the refractory period, so in a healthy person it would be minimal whereas as you get unhealthier the refractory period lasts longer.

both sex and masturbation seem to decrease energy temporarily, it may simply be that the body needs lots of resources to create sperm/semen,

Pretty sure Peaters have no problem with jerking off since it lowers cortisol and there are other things that we can use to lower prolactin

 

[miquelangeles]

Pretty sure Peaters have no problem with jerking off since it lowers cortisol and there are other things that we can use to lower prolactin

But there are other things that we can use to lower cortisol.

 

[TheSir]

are u doing anything a **** hair close to what tesla was inventing at the height of his genius

Heh, just thought you'd find it interesting since you're clearly looking up to him.

 

[Dr. B]

Pretty sure Peaters have no problem with jerking off since it lowers cortisol and there are other things that we can use to lower prolactin

i think there were some semen retention studies, maybe on mice, something about complete sexual abstinence causing increase in testosterone up to 7 days.
but also something about increasing androgen receptor density or sensitivity...

 

[BestSinceDAYONE]

i think there were some semen retention studies, maybe on mice, something about complete sexual abstinence causing increase in testosterone up to 7 days.
but also something about increasing androgen receptor density or sensitivity...

Testosterone increases after 7 days then goes back to baseline...

Also, remember that for prostate cancer it is actually better to jerk off 21+ times per month (or ejaculate)

 

[TheSir]

Testosterone increases after 7 days then goes back to baseline...

Also, remember that for prostate cancer it is actually better to jerk off 21+ times per month (or ejaculate)

Note that the study in question did not continue much beyond 10 days in order to find out what the long term effect of abstinence on testosterone is (other studies have found elevated levels still at three week mark). Moreover, the metabolic factors that come at play in ejaculation are far more all-pervading than a single androgenic hormone.

The prostate cancer association does not come from a causative study and as such is not much of evidence at all. The researchers simply found that health and libido correlate (i.e. high libido and low cancer incidence tend to co-occur and vice versa), which is an expected finding to begin with. In other similar studies prostate cancer risk did correlate with increase ejaculatory frequency in young males in particular. Celibate priests have also been found to have significantly lower prostate cancer mortality from the general population.

 

[miquelangeles]

Testosterone increases after 7 days then goes back to baseline...

Also, remember that for prostate cancer it is actually better to jerk off 21+ times per month (or ejaculate)

That if you get your advice from Men's Health magazine.
Higher quality studies have shown increased rates of prostate cancer with masturbation frequency, especially in young men.

 

[miquelangeles]

Testosterone increases after 7 days then goes back to baseline...

Also, remember that for prostate cancer it is actually better to jerk off 21+ times per month (or ejaculate)

Men Should Ejaculate at Least 21 Times a Month To Slash Their Prostate Cancer Risk

Hé has his n=1,he is the no fap evangelist.i did no fap for 7 years,as I felt absolutely crap after masturbation and it wasn’t pleasurable anymore, because it didn’t make me more masculine a single atom Yeah, anecdotal evidence isn't evidence at all, especially when you pick and choose a few...

raypeatforum.com

 

[Dr. B]

That if you get your advice from Men's Health magazine.
Higher quality studies have shown increased rates of prostate cancer with masturbation frequency, especially in young men.

i doubt the ejaculation causes prostate cancer, its more likely a symptom of it, like prostate center maybe irritates the prostate in a way that leads men to then masturbate more.

Note that the study in question did not continue much beyond 10 days in order to find out what the long term effect of abstinence on testosterone is (other studies have found elevated levels still at three week mark). Moreover, the metabolic factors that come at play in ejaculation are far more all-pervading than a single androgenic hormone.

The prostate cancer association does not come from a causative study and as such is not much of evidence at all. The researchers simply found that health and libido correlate (i.e. high libido and low cancer incidence tend to co-occur and vice versa), which is an expected finding to begin with. In other similar studies prostate cancer risk did correlate with increase ejaculatory frequency in young males in particular. Celibate priests have also been found to have significantly lower prostate cancer mortality from the general population.

from what i remember the testosterone did decrease beyond the 10 days but androgen receptor density or sensitivity went up, which means the lower testosterone level was nullified due to the higher density. when I did semen retention for the first 3 months I got significant benefit as far as energy levels even noticeable strength gains in the gym but after that time period, the gains didn't increase, however, they didn't get worse either.

its possible prostate cancer while developing could lead people to masturbate more but its extremely doubtful that simply the act of masturbation, even at high frequencies, or lack of masturbation, somehow causes or increases prostate cancer, unless you use very far fetched logic like saying masturbation means you spend more time on the computer which means you aren't driving the car and at risk of getting in a car crash therefore masturbation equals longer lifespan or lower risk of car crash.

 

[TheSir]

from what i remember the testosterone did decrease beyond the 10 days but androgen receptor density or sensitivity went up, which means the lower testosterone level was nullified due to the higher density.

It does decrease, at least temporarily, the study is not wrong in that regard. To my understanding the process is cyclical: the body first produces more testosterone, then in absence of prolactin and other inhibitory hormones the receptors become more sensitive and soak it up, thus lowering serum testosterone. Then hypothetically later on testosterone production would increase again and the cycle would begin over, possibly becoming more intense over multiple following iterations.

its possible prostate cancer while developing could lead people to masturbate more but its extremely doubtful that simply the act of masturbation, even at high frequencies, or lack of masturbation, somehow causes or increases prostate cancer,

I assume that the worst scenario is abundant sexual stimulation without any release. This would lead to fluids building up in the prostate, stressing the gland in a way that could possibly lead to development of tumors. I remember reading a paragraph about animals eventually developing prostate cancer when subjected to frequent non-ejaculatory arousal. One yogi also shared an anecdote about testicular and prostate cancer being unexpectedly common among his acquaintances who would practice non-ejaculatory sex. If true, one should choose either frequent release or complete abstinence from arousal, also known as 'celibacy in action, word and thought'. Understandably the latter would require quite a bit of dedication, but it really seems to be the only way to make abstinence work in the long term, as even one lustful thought can be enough to set off a cascade of metabolic processes that strongly aspire to culminate in an ejaculation.

 

[Dr. B]

It does decrease, at least temporarily, the study is not wrong in that regard. To my understanding the process is cyclical: the body first produces more testosterone, then in absence of prolactin and other inhibitory hormones the receptors become more sensitive and soak it up, thus lowering serum testosterone. Then hypothetically later on testosterone production would increase again and the cycle would begin over, possibly becoming more intense over multiple following iterations.


I assume that the worst scenario is abundant sexual stimulation without any release. This would lead to fluids building up in the prostate, stressing the gland in a way that could possibly lead to development of tumors. I remember reading a paragraph about animals eventually developing prostate cancer when subjected to frequent non-ejaculatory arousal. One yogi also shared an anecdote about testicular and prostate cancer being unexpectedly common among his acquaintances who would practice non-ejaculatory sex. If true, one should choose either frequent release or complete abstinence from arousal, also known as 'celibacy in action, word and thought'. Understandably the latter would require quite a bit of dedication, but it really seems to be the only way to make abstinence work in the long term, as even one lustful thought can be enough to set off a cascade of metabolic processes that strongly aspire to culminate in an ejaculation.

that fluid buildup in prostrate should trigger more frequent wetdreams unless something else is going on. i sometimes had a wetdream two days in a row etc.

the cycle of testosterone increasing would become more intense with longer abstinence periods?

 

[TheSir]

that fluid buildup in prostrate should trigger more frequent wetdreams unless something else is going on. i sometimes had a wetdream two days in a row etc.

You're right, that's probably the intended safety mechanism to prevent the accumulation of dangerous amounts of fluids. Neither it is unheard of to leak out excess semen when going to the bathroom, or during exercise. There may be some other mechanisms at play in the possible connection between prostate cancer and arousal. But yeah, this is pretty speculative. At face value it just makes sense to assume that misuse or dysfunction of any gland or organ would increase likelihood of cancerous development within it, doesn't it?

the cycle of testosterone increasing would become more intense with longer abstinence periods?

Yes indeed. Even if just androgen receptor sensitivity kept increasing, this would, already by itself, translate to gradually stronger effects from the same serum levels of testosterone, as you probably realized. So it's not like production & utilization both have to keep increasing, even though that may possibly be the case.

 

[Dr. B]

You're right, that's probably the intended safety mechanism to prevent the accumulation of dangerous amounts of fluids. Neither it is unheard of to leak out excess semen when going to the bathroom, or during exercise. There may be some other mechanisms at play in the possible connection between prostate cancer and arousal. But yeah, this is pretty speculative. At face value it just makes sense to assume that misuse or dysfunction of any gland or organ would increase likelihood of cancerous development within it, doesn't it?


Yes indeed. Even if just androgen receptor sensitivity kept increasing, this would, already by itself, translate to gradually stronger effects from the same serum levels of testosterone, as you probably realized. So it's not like production & utilization both have to keep increasing, even though that may possibly be the case.

ah yeah, I did also sometimes have leaking of semen while urinating, and actually even touch free ejaculations especially if sitting in certain positions or laying down.
ah yeah but does androgen receptor sensitivity or density keep increasing? it may be that it keeps increasing to a point, but at a certain level, you have to retain just to maintain that level of sensitivity. youd still need to retain to maintain that level of sensitivity, but it may not keep increasing.

Ive also wondered wouldnt that mean you would respond much more powerfully to smaller doses of steroids and hormones compared to the average person?

 

[TheSir]

ah yeah but does androgen receptor sensitivity or density keep increasing?

In my limited knowledge, I'm not sure if there is a difference between the two. Isn't it the increase in receptor density/amount that leads to the functional increase in sensitivity to a hormone? A singular receptor would readily receive what ever fitting molecule came to it, with no ability to modulate its sensitivity to the molecule. I could be wrong.

you have to retain just to maintain that level of sensitivity. youd still need to retain to maintain that level of sensitivity, but it may not keep increasing.

Chances are that there is some physiological cap, it's not typical that some metabolic process in the body would just strengthen ad infinitum.

Ive also wondered wouldnt that mean you would respond much more powerfully to smaller doses of steroids and hormones compared to the average person?

Yeah that's a good question, I've been wondering about it too. If all we've been discussing applies, I don't see why it wouldn't be true. Perhaps the difference between a retaining and a non-retaining bodybuilder (both roided) could be profound? Anecdotally I've heard some long time retainers lament how people refuse to believe that they're natural due to how great their muscle mass is.

Another interesting tangent is the extraordinary physical feats of the ancients. Greeks for example could routinely navigate a ship in a manner that not even the best rowers in today's world can replicate, even though back then the average man was significantly smaller in size. There is a stone from those times, onto which is carved "x lifted this" -- I recall this stone weighs more than what the modern top powerlifters can lift. It makes me wonder if sexual moderation had anything to do with it, as back then it was mainstream knowledge that orgasm weakens one. The difference could be explained by gradual degeneration brought on by agriculture too.

 

[Dr. B]

In my limited knowledge, I'm not sure if there is a difference between the two. Isn't it the increase in receptor density/amount that leads to the functional increase in sensitivity to a hormone? A singular receptor would readily receive what ever fitting molecule came to it, with no ability to modulate its sensitivity to the molecule. I could be wrong.


Chances are that there is some physiological cap, it's not typical that some metabolic process in the body would just strengthen ad infinitum.


Yeah that's a good question, I've been wondering about it too. If all we've been discussing applies, I don't see why it wouldn't be true. Perhaps the difference between a retaining and a non-retaining bodybuilder (both roided) could be profound? Anecdotally I've heard some long time retainers lament how people refuse to believe that they're natural due to how great their muscle mass is.

Another interesting tangent is the extraordinary physical feats of the ancients. Greeks for example could routinely navigate a ship in a manner that not even the best rowers in today's world can replicate, even though back then the average man was significantly smaller in size. There is a stone from those times, onto which is carved "x lifted this" -- I recall this stone weighs more than what the modern top powerlifters can lift. It makes me wonder if sexual moderation had anything to do with it, as back then it was mainstream knowledge that orgasm weakens one.

I doubt they were both smaller in size yet stronger, the smaller in size thing is probably a fake medical industry lie, they were probably larger in size, even if they were shorter they would have had to be more muscular being that strong.

I did hear that race horses arent allowed to have sex until theyre no longer racing. and I heard the greek athletes didnt stop retaining until they were older and out of athletics.
how long have those long time retainers been retaining? how big and lean are they, do they look like juiced people?

 

[Twohandsondeck]

Another interesting tangent is the extraordinary physical feats of the ancients. Greeks for example could routinely navigate a ship in a manner that not even the best rowers in today's world can replicate, even though back then the average man was significantly smaller in size. There is a stone from those times, onto which is carved "x lifted this" -- I recall this stone weighs more than what the modern top powerlifters can lift. It makes me wonder if sexual moderation had anything to do with it, as back then it was mainstream knowledge that orgasm weakens one. The difference could be explained by gradual degeneration brought on by agriculture too.

If humans suffer even just 20% of a similar consequence as Pottenger's cats, it's not far fetched to imagine just how much more physically and mentally adept people used to be before soil wrecking, mercury poisoning, aluminum stuffing, pesticide spraying, have-kids-with-no-animal-organ-nutrition-on-board'ing, billions-of-hertz-radiation-exposure'ing, iron loading, seed oil saturating, and antibiotic'ing--

I rest my case on that broken sentence as example A

 

[Dr. B]

If humans suffer even just 20% of a similar consequence as Pottenger's cats, it's not far fetched to imagine just how much more physically and mentally adept people used to be before soil wrecking, mercury poisoning, aluminum stuffing, pesticide spraying, have-kids-with-no-animal-organ-nutrition-on-board'ing, billions-of-hertz-radiation-exposure'ing, iron loading, seed oil saturating, and antibiotic'ing--

I rest my case on that broken sentence as a living, modern example.

also vaccines, fluoride in water, iodides in salts/foods... also iron added to foods etc...

can you describe Pottengers cats again? they deteriorated on what kind of diet, and improved from a raw milk/meat diet?