43 replies to this topic

[Joe Zit]

Dan,

Your ad hominem attacks only serve to destroy your credibility and your inability to conduct a civil discourse also adds to your problem. If you think you are on to something, then why not contact competent scientific and or medical authority as there is research being done in the area of acne cure and prevention. Posting on a forum populated by laymen and amateurs gives absolutely no veracity to your theory and is instead anecdotal.

You accuse us of being "mental midgets" which again only alludes to your youth, lack of dedication to the scientific method and immaturity. From my perspective, that negates any real point that you are trying to make, which may or may not have some validity.

In short, you may have something worthwhile to share, but the way you are packaging it is extremely disappointing. I would be more open to your ideas, if you didn't take the comments made so personally. Science is dispassionate, seeking truth...but as long as you act like an angry young zit-boy, you fail to impress or to convince in any meaningful manner.

Work on your writing skills and you might at least get a respectful audience for the information you wish to impart. I'm open minded, but when I see profanity and ad hominem attacks in posts that seem contrary to mainstream dermatological and medical thought , I get very skeptical and begin to wonder what kind tinfoil the original poster is using to make his/her hat out of, Reynolds Wrap or Alcoa?

Joe Zit

[dandantheman]

Joe-

"angry young zit-boy" - ad hominem

Funny you'd try to take the high road here and talk about ad hominem attacks. The OP was concerned about this issue, and you come talk a bunch of crap trying to laugh it off like he's stupid, which you shouldn't have done. You should know better, if your latest post is any indication. Nothing you've said so far makes up for the crap you came in here with, and upon calling you out on it you can't defend it directly with anything more than "some studies out there say no". Not good enough to people who suspect this problem and have no answers that address it.

Badluckfox - You being convinced with any certainty that this isn't a legitimate problem is your folly and demonstrates how YOU do not understand how science works. It is far worse than me concluding that this is a problem from personal observations. My own case, and that of others who complain of this problem or suspect this problem, could very well be counterpoints to existing studies and lead the way toward establishment of a theory that accounts for it, or refutation of theories that claim that this is not a problem for any person.

Dermatologists I've seen have basically thrown their hands up in the air and said we just don't know enough about this subject (i.e. hormonal pathways related to sebaceous activity, among countless other things). What do you say to that? That's a dermatologist admitting that research in this area is inconclusive and we just don't know enough to be able to say one way or another. One dermatologist told me to "don't worry about it, and just act as the spirit moves you". Not something I expected to hear in the slightest. Let the spirit move me? Wtf?

Based on my own experience, both my own observations of my body, and my dealings with so-called experts, is that it's not enough for anybody to say that this isn't a problem, and me saying that isn't out of line with what I've heard from Derms.. people with degrees and certifications lining their office walls. Conversely, I'll be the first to admit that my observations are not good enough to pass off as fact for others (which is something I emphasize), nor is it good enough for me. Why the hell do you think I'm here talking about it? Why the hell do you think the OP is talking about it? Why the hell do you think there are so many threads about this subject? How do you just flat out disregard all the accounts of people saying that they suspect this correlation? To do that takes a pretty bold ignorance of science, you must admit. I'm open to the possibility that this is being caused by something else. But how can you tell me what I observe is outright false, and why would you care, given that YOU are not an expert on the subject either?? Funny you talk about sweeping generalizations and arguing on the internet - you guys are here trying to tell people that what they are perceiving in their own experience is false (talk about impossible), being overly concerned about cultural connotations of masturbation and pleasure (completely off-topic and has no bearing on the veracity of claims or observations regarding this issue), whereas others like myself are curious about this problem and notice a strong correlation which appears to be causation.

Did I say it IS causation for myself, much less everyone? I did not. I've said this multiple times - "strong correlation which appears to be causation". That is clearly an admission that I don't know with total certainty. And neither do you. So stop telling people this isn't a problem. It could very well be. As far as I can tell, it appears to be exactly the problem (but again, I'm open to other possibilities or explanations. "No it isn't" isn't good enough at this point. And calling you out on that is clearly causing you a lot of distress.)


I'll say it again:

Over several years, I've noticed that withholding ejaculation to the frequency of once per week practically eliminates significant/noticeable acne. The only exceptions for me are times of illness - much smaller and hardly noticeable acne sometimes still appears. If I am free of illness, and limiting ejaculation to once per week, acne is non-existent. If I ejaculate 2 times per week, I'm treading in dangerous water. If I do it 3-4+ times per week, I could bet all the money in my bank account that I will develop cystic and painful acne anywhere on my body.

I have NO reason to tell anybody not to masturbate or have sex. If you can do it without consequence, by all means do it as often as you feel it's necessary. I sure as hell would. I think you think I'm trying to tell people not to ejaculate, which is not even remotely what I'm here to do. Abstaining is simply an unfortunate, but seemingly lone, solution to this problem. If that wasn't the case, well, I'd either resume sexual activity to prior levels, or I'd apply some other solution that works. In a heartbeat.

You can continue to try to refute this topic, but I have no reason to continue arguing with you that this is what happens to some people. I've told you guys you are wrong in coming here telling people that this isn't a legitimate possibility for some people, and now it's up to you to accept that and move on.

[Joe Zit]

Ya know something Dan you are right, "angry young zit boy" is an ad hom. But why the attitude and all the anger? So rather than lash out, why not just say: "I know that this is anecdotal, but in the context of my experience there is seems to be a correlation between masturbation and acne flare-ups. I have discussed this with several dermatologists but they have indicated to me that there is nothing conclusive, and that it is a subject of further study."

But did you do that? au contraire....you went on a tirade, your anger manifesting itself with each post. Want credibility, want respect? Try a different approach...

Seems to me that the OP wanted some kind of concrete substantial proof, that masturbation exacerbates acne, you can't say that it does categorically, only anecdotally.and that is the crux of the issue IMO.

Joe Zit

[dandantheman]

Good points. Yes, the anonymity of the internet is no excuse to get all angry and personal and such.

What is an anecdote to others is my daily experience and it sucks. I want to defend this idea because as far as I can tell without the backing of proper scientific analysis, it is real, it is a possibility for some people out there, and anybody curious about this shouldn't be needlessly confused, or dismissed, by people who insist this isn't real. Personal experience is all I have, and I'm completely open to ANY explanation for why it occurs, even if that explanation downplays the importance or relevance of ejaculation in favor of some other major factor for which ejaculation is only a catalyst.. I don't know. All I know is what I have observed, and it sucks. And it's kind of a slap in the face when people come in and just flat out say it's not true, or that our observations are playing tricks on us.