If you like porn so much why don’t you go live there?

keep true word form spEak You’re bRanes on the spectator health

true health can be good for you so how quack still love bad health.

 

This article grossly misrepresents the current state of the science. It cherry picks a few outlying studies, and selects 3 reviews that were not actually reviews, while ignoring 9 reviews of the literature by top neuroscientists. Lets’ start with what Stuart omitted:
1) 15 studies that link porn use/porn addiction to sexual problems. List of studies here –http://pornstudycritiques.com/… – (it also contains 30 studies that correlated porn use with lower sexual and relationship satisfaction)

2) 26 neurological studies and 9 recent reviews of the literature. List here – http://pornstudycritiques.com/… So far, the results of every “brain study” (MRI, fMRI, EEG, neuropsychological, neuro-hormonal) offer support for the concept of porn addiction.

A few examples of Stuart’s Google-searched, cheery picked papers:

1) “The Emperor Has No Clothes: A review of the ‘Pornography Addiction’ model'” by David Ley (the author of the Myth of Sex Addiction). This “review” is anything but objective. In fact, it wasn’t a true review of the literature. Virtually none of its claims are supported by the citations cited, It omitted every single study that reported problem associated with porn uses. It made false claims that are unsupported by the references. It has been dismantled line by line here – http://www.yourbrainonporn.com…

2) “Pornography Addiction in Adults: A Systematic Review of Definitions and Reported Impact.” – Again, this wasn’t an actual review. It omitted all 26 neurological studies cited above. As a results, it’s conclusions are unsupported by the science.

3) “Is Pornography Use Associated with Sexual Difficulties and Dysfunctions among Younger Heterosexual Men?” – The abstract doesn’t mention a pretty important correlation: Only 40% of the Portuguese men used porn “frequently”, while the 60% of the Norwegians used porn “frequently”. The Portuguese men had far less sexual dysfunction than the Norwegians.

Elsewhere, the authors acknowledge a statistically significant association between more frequent porn use and ED, but claim the effect size was small. However, this claim may be misleading as analyzed a different way (Chi Squared), … moderate use (vs. infrequent use) increased the odds (the likelihood) of having ED by about 50% in this Croatian population. That sounds meaningful to me, although it is curious that the finding was only identified among Croats.

The paper has been formally criticized by Danish porn researcher Gert Martin Hald’s editorial comments echoed the need to assess more variables (mediators, moderators) than just frequency per week in the last 12 months:
EXCERPT: “Third, the study does not address possible moderators or mediators of the relationships studied nor is it able to determine causality. Increasingly, in research on pornography, attention is given to factors that may influence the magnitude or direction of the relationships studied (i.e., moderators) as well as the pathways through which such influence may come about (i.e., mediators). Future studies on pornography consumption and sexual difficulties may also benefit from an inclusion of such focuses.”

4) “How the popular media rushes to judgment about pornography and relationships while research lags behind” – As the other 2 reviews above, It discusses porn addiction, but purposely omits all 26 neurological studies listed in my second link. It says it analyses studies related porn use to relationship problems, but omits nearly every study listed in my first link that reported negative effects on relationships (30 studies listed). It omitted the very first cross section/longitudinal study published – Does Viewing Pornography Reduce Marital Quality Over Time? Evidence from Longitudinal Data, 2016, which concluded that porn use caused relationship problems.

5) “June 2016, a report from the Australian Study of Health and Relationships (including about 20,000 participants)”… – This was a country wide cross-sectional study. 25% of the men never used porn. The other criteria was having seen porn once in the last years – 75% of men. This tells us nothing about chronic users of porn or the age group described in the BBC article – young men who grew up using porn. That said – 12% reported having “bad effects from pornography”. 12% is quite large when we consider that this was cross-sectional, all age groups – and 25% of men and 60% of the women never watched porn. Nice job of hiding the stats Stuart!

yes nice on hollisfergus some link go to 404

and this asshole

This absurd, mindless and utterly irresponsible article assumes readers to be a stupid as its author. Ask any porn addict what porn has done to their relationships, sex life and their general psychoemotional health. Porn can be extremely dangerous for those vulnerable to its toxic affects. There are countless sex addiction centres where porn addicts work extremely hard to overcome an extreme form of sex addiction. Our culture’s obsession with scientific proof is a manipulative mechanism to seduce people into believing that only knowledge derived from scientific measurements is worthy; and therefore science should be funded with billions. Yes, scientists want to hold onto their jobs, salaries, pensions and security. Of course science brings important knowledge BUT not the only knowledge. As yet, science has not proven the existence of thoughts, but we don’t doubt they exist.

well the gov put taxpayer money in how porn mess you bran turn out they was none

science has got it bad late so far. it about the science has  christopher snowden on side of science.

 

by the way I keep the link there so to see how bad science work and and how they waste taxpayer money at the same times.

Advertisements

About heydj48

I am xbox live player. and a gaming. I bolg on msn space in 2006-2010. like outing playing game and doing some jumping other world.
This entry was posted in counterknowledge, Life and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s