masturbation cuts cancer risk. . . in men

I’m growing very fond of the BBC’s science reporters. They find all the most interesting studies to report on. According to new Australian research, masturbation is preventative medicine for men.

They found those who had ejaculated the most between the ages of 20 and 50 were the least likely to develop the cancer.

The protective effect was greatest while the men were in their 20s.

Men who ejaculated more than five times a week were a third less likely to develop prostate cancer later in life.

Why, you ask?

The researchers suggest that ejaculating may prevent carcinogens accumulating in the prostate gland. . .

But animal studies have shown carcinogens such as 3-methylchloranthrene, found in cigarette smoke, are also concentrated in the prostate.

Conservatives who continue to thrust a celibate, rather than abstinent or sexually-responsible lifestyle, on youth are going to have to edit the section on the dangers of masturbation.

Related posts:

  1. The Politics of Treating Cancer

2 Responses to “masturbation cuts cancer risk. . . in men”


  • Uh, conservatives have preached abstinence and a sexually-responsible lifestyle.

    When did conservatives say masturbation was dangerous?

    If you’re going to criticize, can you atleast get the basic facts correct?

  • abstinence-only education frequently also excludes masturbation as an acceptable practice.

    Shelby Knox just testified in front of Congress about her abstinence only education in high school; she blogs about the experience here
    http://www.takeissuetakecharge.org/blog/index.php?/archives/151-Shelby-Knox-blogs-the-House-Hearings-Assessing-Abstinence-Only-Programs.html

    Some of her blog entry below:
    “What did the secularized abstinence-only program for students in my school district look like? Well, it was taught by the same pastor who officiated at my religious purity pledge ceremony. Many of the students were already having sex and needed information to protect their health. But our teacher only mentioned condoms to talk lengthily, and inaccurately, about their alleged “ineffectiveness,” explaining in graphic detail, and with even more graphic pictures, the sexually transmitted diseases students could get if we trusted our health to a “flimsy piece of latex.”

    “But back in my high school class, where we were all too intimidated or embarrassed to ask for clarification, it seemed as if sex with a condom was equivalent to sex without one. Our teacher also touched on the ills of masturbation and warned against the dangers of homosexual sex.”

Leave a Reply