Submitted by John G. on
Printer-friendly version

The fellow's symptoms are those described in Cupid's Poisoned Arrow and of my own experience. Interesting, treating the symptoms by injecting a hormone that stimulates production of testosterone (I am sure there are no side effects there, ha, ha). Ah, mainstream physicians and researchers, strident defenders of the status quo, that ejaculation is an unalloyed good.

This condition is dubbed POIS

by sufferers. Like extreme PMS, perhaps post-O symptoms are on a spectrum. Who knows? Alas, we have heard that POIS is being investigated by a team that includes a very dubious "scientist," who claims - most unconvincingly -  to have debunked porn addiction based on her heavily (formally) criticized research, among other endeavors. Does not bode well for the men suffering.

Same Patient

Marnia, the NY Post article is based on the paper you linked to; the NY Post article linked to the Bolanos/Morgantaler paper in their second paragraph, last sentence.

Poor fellow, treated with a variety of psychotropic drugs, yuck. I stand by my experience that organic non-allergenic food (vegan for me), exercise, and Karezza are a highly-effective, side-effect-free treatment for POIS.

Disclose your findings

Hi there Marnia
Thanks for the posts
Just a quick question, in recent times, has your research and conclusions via your book been studied and been taken into account, or has it been discounted as woo woo or what, cause if you and your husband submit your findings, with proofs, then surely they would even just consider diving deeper into your explanations and maybe do some research on it so that karezza method becomes mainstream, at least from a medical perspective, and later as marital advice etc?


Recently a couple of papers have appeared

that indicate researchers are slowly starting to ask better questions. That's the good news. But science (I have painfully discovered) does not work in the simple way you suggest.

Most sex research is done by sexologists/psychologists. These researchers do not seem to want to change course when evidence is presented that their assumptions may be mistaken or inadequate. They have been barreling down the "more orgasm is always better" trail for more than half a century...firmly convinced that their views are "sex positive" and thus beneficial.

In some cases, their resistance extends to mischaracterizing findings, blocking solid papers that challenge assumptions during the review process, defaming those who present contrary evidence, refusing to research key questions, and so forth. This slows progress.

With regret, I've come to the conclusion that science is not going to "rescue" humanity when it comes to understanding sex better. We will have to conduct our own informal experiments and share our experience with each other via other channels - when those bruised by the errors seek answers.

That said, I try to post research that may be of interest. No reason to exclude it from the discussion.


Yes it's a pity when anything is slowed down due to stubborn resistance, but eventually water channels through Rock, so we can only persist with practice and through personal evidence and proof, change perceptions and eventually findings.

Stay the course and persevere with practice

Jaco Joubert

It's not so much

money that's the issue as desire to conduct the research. That's completely lacking in the sexology profession, and there are historical reasons for that.

But after watching that profession "research" porn's risks, I'm just as happy if they stay out of the area of researchering karezza. And it's not all their fault. They completely lack the tools for investigating such things. They have to look down such narrow tubes that they miss the Big Picture consistently.

That doesn't keep them from opining, however. Biggrin

It is really interesting to

It is really interesting to see dogma play out, from an outside vantage point.

There was a researcher who created a machine to make three specific artificial dolphin-like sounds. She took it underwater and tried to "teach" some dolphins her made-up sounds as labels for a couple of objects, hoping to record the dolphins reproducing the new sounds in connection with the seaweed, the ball, and etc.

The dolphins fairly quickly lost interest, and didn't repeat her sounds.

When I heard about this, I thought there may be many reasons dolphins are not interested in communicating in that way, and I hoped they weren't TOO insulted. For one thing, they continually hear, from _one another's_ sonar, what other members of the pod are paying attention to. They might have no use for referring to objects with nouns. They might use language to communicate about moods, abstract ideas, art, spiritual things, or other dimensions of reality. They might be musicians. Or, maybe a rule of their language is to never repeat the same thing - always improvise a new mode of expression.

Maybe we're sending the wrong kind of people to approach dolphins - instead of scientists, we ought to send poets. (I loved Susan Casey's book Voices in the Ocean. Sensitive readers: beware of the parts about Japan and Taijo)

I feel like it is similar with sex research. The current "scientific" approach, by focusing on anatomical mechanics and utterly obvious stuff, tends to insult the species under investigation (us, mostly) and flatten the higher dimensions of sexual experience where the really interesting insights lie.

For now at least, we're the researchers, and the quest draws out and requires all of our finest human capabilities