Why does mainstream science deny it?

One thing that irritates me in many discussions these days is when people say “there are no scientific proof of that”. Just because it’s not proven to be right doesn’t mean it’s proven wrong. In my opinion, everything that isn’t proven wrong could in fact very well be true.

This was just a small input to a big question.

Have a nice day!

 

Another argument people use against NoFap is that you can't rely on "anecdotal evidence". They completely ignore that it makes a huge difference whether you hear a couple of anecdotes from other people or have made the experience yourself.

Three ideas, of course none of which is scientifically proven to be the actual reason ():

1. There is indeed a lot of pseudo-science revolving around NoFap. We build our own terms and make up our own explanations and so on. But of course that's because nobody has done this before. It is because we have to communicate in some way and exchange our experiences and what works for us.

2. One possible agenda: "Sex is good. Aim for sexual liberation. Every action inhibiting sexuality is an act of repression, either towards yourself or towards others. People who have a lot of sex are people who are in tune with themselves. People who repress their natural drives and needs might end up bigoted and tend to develop aggression towards others. Nature is good."

3. A second possible agenda: This is difficult to explain, but may be it is because NoFap promotes an idea of a relation between body and mind which is different from scientific ideology. For science, there is only your DNA, cells, brain and so on and your mind is a byproduct (mainly of the brain). I am a philosopher, I have studied the subject quite a bit and I think the whole concept is wrong* - but its emergence, on the other hand, is no coincidence, there is indeed a certain agenda behind this. What we think about sexuality is probably intimately related to what we deem to be the relation between mind and body. May be NoFap promotes an idea of sexuality which contradicts the common scientific concept of body and mind.

I can also imagine that 2. and 3. are related to each other.

*It cannot be completely wrong, as science delivers a lot of successes, but you could say the interpretation of the data and experimental results are wrong at some points crucial for determining our worldview/view of the human being.

 

https://fightthenewdrug.org/scientific-studies-porn-use-brain/

Here are soms studies that do support our addiction. I think because porn is a billion making industry, it’s a bit shady.

 

I agree on that well defined point. We are exploring a niche in science that is relatively new, and not enough scientific research has been done (in my opinion) in the field (long tern effects of porn) in order to say what is right or wrong.
The NoFap community is not very scientific, but it contains alot of experimental "data".

 

The problem is that we are vanguard of a new problem that only arose for like 10 years with limited coverage. Porn is a new demon that the world has never seen before. Sexuality has been studied and documented for eons, but porn is something new altogether. It is like the first people who said the Earth was round and not flat. Nobody believed them and said they were crazy. The same is happening to our movement. We have discovered a new problem, but since we are in the early and formative days of this problem, a LOT of people are not yet willing to acknowledge us because EVERYTHING is dependent upon sexuality. And to question porn is to question a part of male modern sexuality. All those professors and scientists that do not acknowledge us, have no idea what they are talking about, because they did not grow up with porn, they did not develop our PIED and they probably don't even know they might be addicted to it as well, and their brain is defending their own demons!

 

This is exactly it. It's taken us 50+ years as a society to start to acknowledge that processed, refined "junk" food is maybe not the best thing to be the main thing we eat (as increasing waistlines around the world indicate), and there is still much resistance to the idea -- just look at the idiotic USA food pyramid.

It will take as long or longer for the general consensus to come around to the conclusion that we already know full well: P is a plague that needs to be eradicated from the planet with the same dedication that we mustered for something like smallpox or polio. It will take time, but we will get there!

In the meantime, we can begin to educate those in our spheres of influence and raise our own children to know the truth that P is just plain bad.

 

Journalism is the science of cherry picking. All news you see have been chosen for its ability to attract readers, not necessarily for its ability to convey truth.

There are studies done that shows the harmful effects of porn. Often, these studies conclude that there is also a lot of information missing, due to this being a relatively new area of study. Journalists like to twist these words into "It's not an addiction" when the authors of the study might have said "its not defined as an addiction by the medical community yet, even though all scientific evidence point in that direction".

Remember a couple of years back, when it was "healthy" to drink read wine? All alcoholics regurgitated "that" piece of science at every opportunity. What the scientific community knew was not the same thing that landed in the news stream. There is indeed a longevity substance found in red wine (resveratrol), but you have to drink approximately 11,000 bottles of wine a day for it to have any effect whatsoever. Obviously, journalists saw no point in spelling out that truth, as it would make a lousy headline.

 

Journalism also has implicit bias, a trend that has been getting worse. Just because a reporter writes an article about a study doesn't mean he/she is interpreting it fair and square. For example, the second article from the OP, third paragraph:

"These fear-based arguments often invoke brain-related lingo, and throw around terms like dopamine bursts and desensitization to describe what allegedly happens in the brains of people who watch too much porn"

So, from this journalists perspective, anyone offering a counterargument is simply trying to incite fear, they toss around technical terms willy-nilly, and their words are just "lingo".

That's not an article that is merely curious and exploring the study from both sides giving equal consideration. That's a person who believes what he believes and is writing a opinion piece in an attempt to win a debate by criticizing opponents as unfit to argue rather than on the merits of their counter-argument.

Peace,
-Quinn

 

I think you referenced the first article out of context. It's not saying porn isn't addictive. It's saying that the dopamine released when watching porn is not addictive. It seems to be a popular misconception that a) people are addicted to dopamine and b) dopamine is the 'pleasure chemical'. Otherwise I agree with you and the other posts.

 

We live in an extremely misogynistic society, those values are deeply ingrained and anything that supports that status quo is going to get a lot of airplay. The liberal and conservative views on this are just two sides of the same coin. The conservatives believe that females should be chaste, wives and mothers, that they should be subject to the authority of the husband. The liberals believe women should be wildly sexual and available to men as prostitutes, porn stars, etc. That women are only free when they can make themselves available for sale to men. Both view women as a commodity for male consumption.

 

It is in the financial interest of the pornographers to keep us addicted to pornography, just like it is in the financial interest of the tobacco companies to keep us addicted to nicotine.

I hate the "sex-positive" argument. Where in NoFap does it say that we are anti-sex?

Sex is good. Porn is bad.

If I say that cheeseburgers are bad; does that mean that I am anti-food?

 

Never thought about it that way, but now it makes alot of sense!

 

Why exactly do people want this "mainstream" acceptance? Lets say you have it, what exactly changes?
I assume people think this would mean someone else will come up with magical solution to your problems?
Does it mean your doctor will now write you have "Porn Addiction" in your medical file?
Do you think society will begin to change rapidly and your life will get better?
I just do not get it. What do you want from this acceptance?
You know exactly what your issue and symptoms are - why do you need acceptance?

 

Because mainstream science prefers data and evidence to arrogant speculation and presumption.

Read the articles, read them with the intent to understand, not argue. You might learn something helpful.

 

Porn addiction is new. People will deny it until 100% certain proof is brought, which will happen eventually.

 

THE AUTHER OF THE ARTICLE HAS A PRO-PORN BOOK. Lol, that should tell you all you need to know. Someone who literally stands to gain.
There is so much wrong with his critique and conclusions that i simply do not know where to begin or if it even deserves the energy. This is a pathetic excuse of an article that is entirely biased in its own right. There is no journalistic integrity here. "many doomsayers claiming" "fear-based arguments often invoke brain-related lingo" "Porn addiction advocates will surely cry" "I’m sure others will argue that looking at an erotic still-picture is somehow different from looking at high-speed Internet porn.” WOW This not journalism, this is an opinion piece.

@Headspace said it accurately. The entirety of western anatomical science and neurology is based on compartmentalization and labeling various parts of the body as independent from one another. Here is the arm, separate from the leg, separate from the mouth, separate from the brain. While linguistically true it isn't at all accurate because the human body is a system as a whole. What happens in your teeth for example effects the nervous system and can lead to issues elsewhere. In this regard Western medicine is leaps and bounds behind holistic and homeopathic remedies that take into account the entire anatomical structure as one complete system. This applies equally to the brain and body especially in relation to addictions and psychology.

 

Because science is rigged. They are bought of, they are part of the new world order and just make you confident to use the drugs the system provides. It's like global warming, there is no scientific proof that humans are responsible for it, especially, there is no quantification. I mean nobody can say how much global warming is actually caused by us and how much is part of a natural cycle. It is not possible, still you hear something about the 2 degree goal and how many years we have left to save the plant, it is BS.
But both are there for the same reason: the elites want control on the society. And this can be done if they weaken the individuals and if they build up some thread that justifies cutting down freedom.

 

Great thread.

I heard about nofap years ago. Maybe when it was first starting.
And I rejected it.
It was being mocked and ridiculed on other forums. Mostly over claims of magic powers or being a religious anti-masturbation movement.

I felt that I had been led astray before so was quite skeptical of claims made. My first research online about delayed ejaculation treated it the exact same as erectile dysfunction suggesting a range of causes such as guilt about sex, disgust at partner, performance anxiety, being overly focused on erection/ejaculation during sex, even underlying homosexuality and all other sorts of unconscious reasons.
It wasn't until years later I learned about A-typical masturbation techniques causing this. Some guys can develop to masturbate with a hard grip, very fast, or prone. They condition their ejaculation response to these stimuli. So when having normal intercourse it can feel too slow and loose.

So the thinking on things about masturbation and porn problems can change over time. And it's people that are experiencing these difficulties that are driving these changes.
as I said there is a widely held belief that we're all a bunch of ultra religious types who want to shame others into no masturbation by making false claims about ill effects to drive our agenda.

Unfortunately it's also political.
We're branded as conservative right, anti-porn and anti-women.
In this polarizing world once you are seen as the right you're thrown in their with the climate change deniers and young earth creationists.

And look, I'm going to be quite frank here, and I am in no way espousing these examples I'm just using them for illustrative purposes, we know that there is many subjects that are just too sensitive politically to be research funded and will automatically have an army of detractors denouncing it outright purely on political ideology grounds. As I said climate change is one of them: anthropogenic vs natural causes and the degree in which one has a greater effect. "the bell curve" race and IQ being another. These are only a couple of examples, there are many more. But many people are being deplatformed or losing their jobs over opinions or statements they have given.
Nofap has been labelled "religious right" and woe betide any researcher in our left leaning universities who would put their head above the parapet to champion this.

 

Not to mention that there is a difference between one or two anecdotes, and entire forums devoted to it. It's the same deal with antidepressant withdrawal; the medical community is just so ridiculously slow and obstinate.