Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ejaculation frequency and prostate cancer (2022)

health.harvard.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 305 posts

Re: Ejaculation frequency and prostate cancer (2022)

#281

Post by fennecfoxy »

opamp wrote: post #248
thepasswordis wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey man good luck! I know some people who have tried and tried before it finally all clicked. One person I can think of now has 4 kids! It can be tough. I'm sure you don't need any advice. Kids are the best, most meaningful thing you will ever do. Its worth it to keep trying.

> Kids are the best, most meaningful thing you will ever do. Just coming in from the other side, but this is not universally true. Mine has been an absolute nightmare, and I’m in pretty intense therapy trying to keep it all together. My relationship with my wife has been wonderful before and after, so that wasn’t a factor. I’m not trying to dissuade people from having children, but we were completely unprepared for h…

Thank you. I'm a gay man & I'm sick of being told that the most fulfilling and meaningful thing I'll ever do in life is have children; which I cannot do nor do I want to.

Really, our planet could do with fewer people. If people want something fulfilling, they should do whatever makes them happy. That's what fulfilment and contentment is.

Re: Ejaculation frequency and prostate cancer (2022)

#282

Post by fennecfoxy »

TheFreim wrote: post #263
latchkey wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Kids are the best, most meaningful thing you will ever do. Heavy dose of "in my opinion..." Kids are absolutely the last thing I've ever wanted in my lifetime. Am I supposed to take your statement as I'll never do anything meaningful? Come on.

> Am I supposed to take your statement as I'll never do anything meaningful? No, you probably aren't to take that statement that way since the statement never said any such thing. He said "most meaningful" which necessarily implies that there are other meaningful things, just lower in a hierarchy of meaningfulness. Respectfully, you seem quite bitter by reading into what was said, perhaps some introspection about the…

>perhaps some introspection about the reason for this reaction would be in order Perhaps that reason is that many people gay or straight do not want children and being told that our alternative goals aren't the "most" fulfilling ones is pompous and haughty?

Re: Ejaculation frequency and prostate cancer (2022)

#283

Post by fennecfoxy »

sph wrote: post #49
altdataseller wrote: post #3

Dont show this to the nofap community

When I'm in the mood of reading a bunch of smug nerds pontificating and preaching, I click on any popsci or diet-related article on HN. Never fails to entertain. Nofap like many things has been turned into a brand, and even politicised to the point some idiots attack it saying it's far right ideology. On the other hand there are teenagers with serious porn-related issues that think nofap will turn them into superhuma…

It's also bc having a high libido/being horny all the time is still very stigmatised. As a gay man this is one of the many major differences I see between the gay & hetero communities; in the gay community we generally celebrate libido & sexual freedom.

Re: Ejaculation frequency and prostate cancer (2022)

#284

Post by birksherty »

ddrdrck_ wrote: post #256
fancybouncy wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if I may give you a piece of advice, ask yourself whether you can guarantee that your kid will be happy to have been forced to come to life, or if you are selfishly taking a bet at someone else's expense.

If I may ask, would you have preferred to not come to life, if you had the choice?

I would have chosen not to be born.

People here are privileged, live in a better country, good income etc. Because they have better life, they expect others also to say it's great. Many children are born without proper thinking by their parents, for selfish reason and suffer every day.

Re: Ejaculation frequency and prostate cancer (2022)

#285

Post by birksherty »

thepasswordis wrote: post #173
danielvaughn wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My wife and I have been trying for a kid for a while, and though I’m healthy, over the past 9 months I’ve gone down a rabbit hole on the professional literature around men’s health. I don’t know how it compares to anything else, but the variance of the data is what struck me the most. That, and the low-resolution around a lot of the studies that have been run. I get that science is hard, but I would expect a LOT more…

Hey man good luck! I know some people who have tried and tried before it finally all clicked. One person I can think of now has 4 kids! It can be tough. I'm sure you don't need any advice. Kids are the best, most meaningful thing you will ever do. Its worth it to keep trying.

Many people all over the world suffer because their parents give birth without proper thinking by their parents, for selfish reason (to have meaning themselves).

Do whatever people want with their own life. But when it involves bringing someone else to life without their consent and no going back, there should be some checks and bounds and should not be for selfish reasons.

Re: Ejaculation frequency and prostate cancer (2022)

#286

Post by ravagat »

danielvaughn wrote: post #161
TheFreim wrote: post #112

The evidence is extremely varied, and in my opinion unreliable for making serious claims. Commonly cited by those repeating these claims, which as others have pointed out is rife with issues pertaining to causality, is the 2004 study "Ejaculation Frequency and Subsequent Risk of Prostate Cancer" published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA). Here is a section summarizing what came before: > Prev…

My wife and I have been trying for a kid for a while, and though I’m healthy, over the past 9 months I’ve gone down a rabbit hole on the professional literature around men’s health. I don’t know how it compares to anything else, but the variance of the data is what struck me the most. That, and the low-resolution around a lot of the studies that have been run. I get that science is hard, but I would expect a LOT more…

Hi, look into Shettles method. 9 months in I think you can change something within your control.

Re: Ejaculation frequency and prostate cancer (2022)

#287

Post by menaerus »

lm28469 wrote: post #237
menaerus wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Basically all Mediterranean dishes are cooked on the olive oil, for which you can find many sources claiming that it is extraordinarily healthy. However, I am starting to be wary of this claim because olive oil has a _lot_ of saturated fats when compared to other food, roughly around 15-16g per 100g. To put this figure into the context: 20% cooking cream, which is usually considered unhealthy because of its high satu…

So the mediterranean diet is bad because olive oil although everything point in the other direction ? Sometimes you have to look at the bigger picture

No, I enjoy Mediterranean food and cousine every day. I almost exclusively use olive oil as well.

What I meant is what I tried to communicate in my last sentence: olive oil does not appear to be that healthy when put into the perspective with other food we use in kitchen.

With that in mind, I think that general recommendation and hype around the olive oil can be dangerous if not taken carefully.

Re: Ejaculation frequency and prostate cancer (2022)

#288

Post by menaerus »

omniglottal wrote: post #250
menaerus wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, as if the American Heart Association was the only organization in world to examine the effects of saturated fats to our health, and as if the last study on that topic has been done half a century ago. Thanks for your advice but unless you're willing to share that "ton of info" to support your rather absurd claim, I'll stick to my common sense.

Someone just pointed you toward "a ton of info" that you could find if you only bothered. You chose to patently disregard with the audacity of suggesting it's up to them to hold your hand and spoon-feed you this info that you're intentionally choosing to ignore. Do us a favor and re-read the guidelines regarding "good faith" and until then, get off this site.

I bothered and it's nonsense. Hence I asked for more information to share so that i can better understand the point being made. And now with that said, why don't you f off please? Thank you

Re: Ejaculation frequency and prostate cancer (2022)

#289

Post by menaerus »

bumby wrote: post #240
haspok wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> By knowing for the fact that saturated fats are unhealthy This is simply not true, much less a "fact". This myth most probably comes from the good old American Heart Association who base their opinion of a study way back in the 1960s which was since proven to have been of extremely low quality. There is a ton of info about this online (including scientific studies, not just blog posts), pro and contra, you can read…

Olive oil is not a saturated fat, so you may be conflating some things here. Besides, the AMA also uses the research from all the other decades from the 1960s until now to make their recommendations.

It very much is saturated fat when compared to other food that we take, and which is exactly why I wanted to convey in my original comment that it doesn't appear to be that healthy when you put things into perspective.

Re: Ejaculation frequency and prostate cancer (2022)

#290

Post by twawaaay »

valenceelectron wrote: post #280
twawaaay wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regardless of the type of diabetes you have, your body needs to clear sugar from bloodstream. It really does not matter how this happens, exactly. Insulin performs other functions in your body... but ability to clear sugar is the absolutely most vital concern. If you can do things that either prevent or clear blood sugar levels from your bloodstream you can technically live without the need for insulin at all. With a…

I'm afraid but this is a very simplistic view and not how it actually works. You cannot keep your blood sugar stable by eliminating intake of carbohydrate. Something every diabetic who goes into weight lifting learns really quickly (and is well established in literature and known by doctors): protein will increase your blood sugar. It is a very delayed response (3-5h+) and its amplitude is low but it will happen. The…

> Something every diabetic who goes into weight lifting learns really quickly (and is well established in literature and known by doctors): protein will increase your blood sugar.

It is true that EXCESS protein will be converted to sugars. As long as you limit your protein intake it will be used exclusively for housekeeping. That's why keto diet is not only carb elimination, it is carb elimination WHILE restricting protein to about 30% of your calorie intake.

It is exactly this reason why keto diet is so hard to maintain -- because you have to fill the rest with fat and this is a hard thing to do.

> Please understand that diabetes is an old and very well researched condition.

It is funny that you mention it, because do you know what was the actual first treatment for diabetes? Before they were able to produce insulin?

It was actually eliminating carbs from the diet. Yes, in the past, keto diet was the main (and the only) way to treat diabetes.

Post reply on HN