This webmd article seems to be pretty balanced: https://www.webmd.com/prostate-cancer/ejaculation-prostate-cancer-risk Interesting part: Not all studies have found a benefit. The 2016 study got attention because of its size (almost 32,000 men) and length (18 years). But some smaller studies have not shown the same good results. A few even found that some men, specifically younger men, who masturbated more had slightly higher chances of prostate cancer. Some researchers wonder if a man’s age may affect whether more ejaculation helps. Like most of the people who have debunked the prostrate cancer ejaculation study, I tend to believe that this one as well as most cancers are more related to diet, and toxin exposure that to anything else. I'm following the NSNG diet by Vinnie Tortorich who had leukemia, and has been in remission for 10 years by cutting out sugars, carbs. I've heard a lot of similar testimonies how carnivore based diets work well with that. Here's the video that got me started:
Fake studies get paid for. But the surface of the internet wont tell. You forgot the corona pandemic ;-;
But use your logic abit, why does everyone says they got stronger immune after nofap? I guess you're not attacking the clarinet that is connected with The CNS. Its the same giving you broccoli to eat saying its healthy but i GMO'd it. Who is the fool
But ofcourse the drug snorted mastarbation slaves would say "diet does nothing" I cured myself with exotic fruits and vegetables you would say mr to. I dont know someone would spend tons on papaya or wild grown dandelion.
What is "mr to"? The main theory I've heard from multiple experts is that Sugar/carbs feeds cancer cells, while if your body goes into ketosis, then your body will naturally feed on and destroy the cancer cells. This will also reduce inflammation, which should help with an enlarged prostrate. So whatever gets you there is good.
But some have. Really though this demonstrates the problem with the research system. Studies that haven't been reproduced should never be published. In my opinion, studies should be reproduced at least three times before they're published. The trouble is the system does not allow for such a careful approach. I'm mainly opposed to conspiracy theories but with the way research culture is it's not surprising that people start to believe in them. It's probably best to be sceptical about the results of any studies even if you like the results.
Experts are alone its not the mainstream media. They said smoking is healthy back then. For every dis-ease there is a cure. Who says no i dont allow you to listen to. "Treatment. There are no cures for any kinds of cancer, but there are treatments that may cure you. Many people are treated for cancer, live out the rest of their life, and die of other causes. Many others are treated for cancer and still die from it, although treatment may give them more time: even years or decades" Treating the symptoms not the CAUSE.
