5 ms·

Nicole Prause did no myth busting, and your blaming of "right-wing elements" on disagreements with her is downright disingeneous. See https://www.yourbrainonpo

• smt88 6y ago
  Your comment is exactly what I was expecting when I wrote mine. I'm not surprised to see it or the downvotes. Your Brain on Porn is written by a non-scientist with an axe to grind. > countless of self-reports by men in various "NoFap" communities make a pretty good case the porn-addiction is not a myth. Self-reports and anecdotes are not controlled, blinded studies. They're not scientific. They tell us nothing. If that kind of data were scientific, then we'd all be 100% certain that drinking certain herbal teas cures 50% of the flu, or that marijuana use has a causal relationship with using cocaine. Sex and porn addiction may or may not be a myth, but the thing that Prause debunks in her various research is that the availability of porn and sex causes those addictions. What researchers have found is that excessive, obsessive, and/or life-damaging usage of porn and sex are due to existing mental health issues. You don't have a healthy, happy man in a relationship suddenly see extreme porn for the first time and then stop going to work.
  • mikevm 6y ago
    > Your Brain on Porn is written by a non-scientist with an axe to grind. This is plainly ad-hominem and argument from authority. There are also plenty of scientists who publish junk papers, with poor methodology and/or statistics. > What researchers have found is that excessive, obsessive, and/or life-damaging usage of porn and sex are due to existing mental health issues. You don't have a healthy, happy man in a relationship suddenly see extreme porn for the first time and then stop going to work. This is nonsense, and it is quite clear that you have not read much about this. These issues are mainly affecting men who have been watching porn since an early age. Plenty of stories here: https://www.yourbrainonporn.com/rebooting-accounts/ https://www.yourbrainonporn.com/rebooting-accounts/ > Self-reports and anecdotes are not controlled, blinded studies. They're not scientific. They tell us nothing. This is dogmatic and silly. There are various fields where the science is lagging behind and it takes quite a while to catch up. Let me post a quote from Gary Wilson's book (which I highly recommend, despite him not being a scientist): ---------------------- > Quitting internet porn is the equivalent of removing refined sugar or trans-fats from your diet. It is simply the elimination of a form of entertainment that no one had until recently, and everyone got along without. As one porn user said, > Here is the schema: > 1. Exciting, but bad-in-long-term behaviour is introduced for money. > 2. People get hooked. > 3. Precise, scientifically backed-up research takes decades to kick-in. > 4. Hooked people start to get educated. > 5. They start behaviour-elimination. > > Problem is that this whole cycle is so damaging. Cigarettes were (widely) introduced in the early 20th century and took decades to regulate. We now know that certain types of foods are harmful. Yet, with food we are still in phase 2-3. Guess where we are with pornography? The useful scientific research is not even a few years old. > A consensus about the risks of high-speed internet porn could be decades off despite the efforts of urologists such as Cornell Medical School professor and author Harry Fisch, MD, who warns that too much porn use can make it ‘significantly more difficult’ to get aroused and stay aroused during real sex.[181] Most of society will need a lot longer to get up to speed. ---------------------- > If that kind of data were scientific, then we'd all be 100% certain that drinking certain herbal teas cures 50% of the flu, or that marijuana use has a causal relationship with using cocaine. The difference is that stopping using porn and waiting for your symptoms to improve is different from taking supplements. You just eliminate a single variable and watch the results. > Sex and porn addiction may or may not be a myth, but the thing that Prause debunks in her various research is that the availability of porn and sex causes those addictions. Sorry, but once again, she did not debunk anything with that 2015 study of hers, in fact its results suggests that porn does affect the brain. I've already linked to criticism of her research, and you have clearly not addressed any of it. P.S. I'm an atheist and don't have any moral issues with porn, so I have no axe to grind here.
  • dang 6y ago
    Please follow the site guidelines when posting on divisive issues. There's no need to start with a swipe. The second bit ("non-scientist with an axe to grind") arguably breaks the guideline against name-calling in arguments, too. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
    • smt88 6y ago
      Your overall point is taken. Flamewar ended. As far as name-calling, it was not my intention at all. If you aren't familiar, the creator of YourBrainOnPorn is literally not a scientist (he neither studies nor practices a science) and doesn't claim to be a scientist. In describing him as I did, I didn't see any distinction from the descriptions on HN about anti-vaxxers or climate-change deniers.
• dang 6y ago
  Please don't break the site guidelines when posting on divisive issues. We don't need this sort of flamewar here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html