5 ms·
Hopefully they will never discover that this is due to excessive wanking.
by raxxorraxor 4y ago
Hopefully they will never discover that this is due to excessive wanking.
- zug_zug 4y agoNot sure if you're joking, but that's something they control for (when you last ejaculated) when measuring sperm counts
- raxxorraxor 4y agoI was joking. Round 1 has a different consistency than round 5. Perhaps the test subjects aren't entirely honest...
- MonkeyMalarky 4y agoPornhub causing the fall of civilization and not nuclear proliferation or global warming? That's a new one.
- giraffe_lady 4y agoYou clearly don't hang out with enough catholics & evangelicals. In all seriousness this is a mainstream-ish opinion in some religious circles.
- TheLoafOfBread 4y agoWell I would expect that when you are using something often, then it will go stronger like muscles. So more wanking -> more sperm count. But I am just guessing here.
- swader999 4y agoIt definitely messes with your dopamine levels.
- seydor 4y agoMeanwhile nothing is more pro-procreation than showing people the most fun ways to do it
- thepasswordis 4y agoAnd yet: the catholics and evangelicals seem to be having no trouble conceiving.
- thepasswordis 4y agoFor the people downvoting this: https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2015/05/12/chapter-3-demographic-profiles-of-religious-groups/ https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2015/05/12/chapter-3-de... It’s true. Christians are the most likely group to have kids. The most likely Christians are Mormons, then Catholics, and Evangelicals are tied for second. The group least likely to have kids are agnostics, with atheists being very slightly more likely.
- O__________O 4y agoAppears unlikely that frequent masturbation affect male fertility: https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/male-infertility/expert-answers/male-masturbation/faq-20058426 https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/male-infertil...
- propagandist 4y agoIt must be environmental.
- canadiantim 4y agoI’m sure it’s a combination of factors
- seydor 4y agoit can't really be genetic
- wongarsu 4y agoMaybe with longer lifespans, people making conscious choices which partner to have children with, and IVF being an option, there just isn't that much evolutionary pressure on sperm counts. Something that reduces your sperm count by 50% but makes you 10% more attractive could absolutely be an evolutionary advantage in the developed world. Not that I think this is what's going on, but I think rejecting it outright is too hasty.
- yamtaddle 4y agoIVF and things like caesarians & other prenatal care are surely having an evolutionary effect. Fertility and ability to give healthy live birth used to be the most fundamentally important evolutionary pressures for us (and basically every other species), and now we can opt out of them. IDK how long we'd expect it to take for most of humanity to become dependent on a high-tech society to reproduce, under those circumstances, but it'd seem really weird to me if that's not the direction we're going. But maybe that takes hundreds or thousands of years to have a pronounced effect, rather than tens.
- unbalancedevh 4y agoFrom TFA: "But the transmission of these exposures doesn’t stop there—the epigenetic effects of these exposures may be transmitted from one generation to the next, not just from the mother but possibly from the father too. It may be due to factors in the father’s sperm that disrupt the reproductive development of male fetuses in the womb, Levine notes."
- seydor 4y agoi would think it trains to produce more. Woody allen was wrong?
- mensetmanusman 4y agoThat solves the Fermi Paradox.
- wongarsu 4y agoHas masturbation notably increased over the years? Of course the availability of pornographic material has increased, but previous generations seemed to do fine with sears catalogues so I'm not sure that is a big factor.
- sschueller 4y agoIt will probably turn out that the opposite is true.