Is not masturbating linked to prostate cancer?

no that's a myth

 

I have some strong opinions here. Great question you have and I am sure many of us here share the same worries.

A few points:
1. There are several glands that empty with ejaculation. So it's NOT just the prostate that would get cancer if NoFap were your practice. Why isn't anyone afraid of seminal vesicle cancer from NoFap? Why not the Cowper's Gland?
2. Celibate men like clergymen, paralyzed men, mentally disabled men, etc. don't all seem to get higher rates of prostate cancer. If you see a guy in a wheelchair because he is paralyzed from the waste down, do you think he worries about prostate cancer?
3. Glands are not muscles. They don't need to be exercised. Do you try to "empty your pancreas" so it doesn't get cancer? Do we try to empty our pituitary gland once a month? Of course we don't. The prostate is no different, in my opinion.
4. My urologist said it's actually the OPPOSITE of what we think--excessive masturbation/ejaculation is more likely to lead to prostate cancer than lack of use would. (note, he just said more likely......be careful with that statement)

I hope that helps put your fears to rest. As for me, I have no worry about NoFap making me more likely get prostate cancer--or ANY cancer for that matter.

Trust in the miraculous design of your body. Treat it well, and it will go a long way taking care of you.

Good luck! I know I need it, too.

 

Not masturbating? Not even. Not having an orgasm in a really long time? Could be. Masturbating isn't the only way to do have an orgasm.

 

That is a useful clarification Coong. Thanks for adding that. I would also add that frequent orgasms...."Could be" as well. No one knows for certain. The actual evidence is that infrequent orgasm is not harmful to men.

I'd like to repeat what Coong says in a different way: a worry about prostate cancer is NO excuse to masturbate.

 

Oxygen also is likely to increase your risk of lung cancer, so if you want less chance of cancer, then suffocate yourself.

Same exact method of masturbation. If you want to do a destructive behavior just to lower an already minimal chance of cancer it would "prevent", then go ahead.

Honestly, many things that require us to live can also be mild carcinogens, we just evolved different behaviors or different chemical makeups to try to counteract them as much as possible, but it isn't fool-proof.

 

Brilliant post MLMVSS. You said it better and more succinctly than I could.

By the way, those concerned with prostate cancer's relationship with masturbation might consider the concept of "hormesis". Put simply, a little "bad" can actually be good for you. But a lot of "bad" will actually be bad for you. On an intuitive level, I think the concept of hormesis contributes to eventual bad decisions about addiction to porn and masturbation.

Further to MLMVSS's point: You would die without being exposed to SOME radiation. Yet, too much will kill you. You will die without any salt in your body. Yet, too much will kill you. Drinking distilled water is actually harmful to your body long-term. (that one blew me away once I learned why) etc. etc.

Let's face it, we'd all love to hear that masturbating and cumming is "medically necessary".

 

THAT IS REASSURING TO KNOW!

 

So, hypothetically speaking, abstaining from sex and masturbating your whole life can cause cancer?

 

It’s interesting to watch the media reporting about some nonsense statements. To scientifically make a statement in this subject you need a control group of thousands of men living in celibacy all their life (like monks). Unfortunately there is no such control group.

 

That is correct, it's proven that no sex will deteriorate health (cancer or some other problems) male or female.
DO NOT mistake jerking off with jerking off to porn. Just do it old style like our fathers did.
Internet porn is relatively new thing.

 

Holy shit. 0_0

Then how do you explain monks?

 

There is no study showing causation between no sex and deteriorated health.

 

PMO is a problem of the mind. It is not primarily a physical problem.
It will DEFINITELY damage your psyche in one way or another eventually.
Physically, ejaculating or not ejaculating is not a problem.
If someone Masturbated just because they had an urge, but never looked at Porn or fantasized about ANYTHING sexual when they did it, i think they would be unlikely to do it much and it would not damage them physically or help them health-wise either.
It’s what you are THINKING ABOUT when you are doing it that hurts you and your relationships, and I would take the extremely minute risk of having cancer over the guaranteed damage to my mental and emotional health and self-respect any day.

 

I believe monks masturbate. It's easy for men since for us jerking of is the same as having sex. Harder for women if they do not have toys .

I am not sure I can quote a study but when you see "bitching" woman you say "she is not getting laid enough" for a reason

 

Firstly why is it a "so called" Nocturnal emission? That makes it seem you doubt them and yet then you write that you have experienced them?

There is actual scientific evidence for nocturnal emissions, they exist, they are real.

I think if you are going to post a thread with a controversial topic like this- which would obviously frighten some Fapstronauts, you should offer up some form of evidence or links to a study- I see nothing to support this argument.

 

Well I honestly don’t give a shit about whether or not someone has sex

 

What about women who would rather eat chocolate than have sex?

 

i have heard that I'm not sure if that is a positive or negative. Depending on if she has an orgasm during sex i guess, because the passion cycle can leave her euphoric for the first day or two, and then comes world war 3