![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
|
![]() | Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline
Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically
review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Retrograde ejaculation.
|
Seriously?... citation needed indeed. 24.84.44.248 ( talk) 04:02, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
"Retrograde ejaculation is considered harmless as the only negative effect is the loss or reduction in fertility" I would not find a loss or reduction in my fertility "harmless". Howboutpete 14:27, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Speak for yourself, man. I, for one, think it's a great thing. ... besides, it's either this or a vasectomy. Yay for side effects! Kyalisu 16:14, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
I write here as one who has to experience retrograde ejaculation (often involuntary), due to a past, damaging bacterial prostatitis. In no way can this be considered harmless. It may be so for some, for me it is knife-edge pain that lasts for hours after the event. It is both physically demanding and damaging and is not, or only poorly understood by women irrespective of their education and empathy....! In addition one has to go through the misery of urinating the sperm and their carrier fluids at the next voiding. Lumpy urine, what a delight. This now seems a permanent part of lifes rich tapestry for me!
Celsius100 ( talk) 10:18, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
I couldn't find english references about the antipsychotic action in causing retrograde ejaculation -Mormegil 01/12/2007 21.22 UTC
I'd read about the concept of ejaculating causing lost of vital energy or Chi from old biographical works from the late 19th century, so the belief is well-established. Obviously, in reality sperm is lost at the next urination after a retrograde, rendering this concept bogus (no offense to Taoists).
However I don't know of any sources confirming the line "It is believed the sensation of sperm passing through the urethra causes intense physical sensations that can drain the body of 'sexual energy.'"
Can someone provide a source for this? Even so, it strikes me as desperate back-pedaling in the face of scientific evidence. Legitimus ( talk) 15:54, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Or cause any bad effects? NGC 2009 04:24, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
I read through this article and was also left with the question whether this was in some way unhealthy. I think that needs its own section in this article, something like "Effects on health." I used to do this as a kid to reduce the mess (figured it out myself), and I never felt any pain or anything. The fact that a medical term exists to describe a phenomenon does not make that phenomenon a bad or unhealthy thing. Dcs002 ( talk) 13:21, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
I have a few issues with this sentence in the article as well as the source cited. I cannot take issue with the truth of this statement, however I fail to see the relevance/contribution to the article. Furthermore upon reading the entirety of the cited link, nothing could be found relating to the statement the source is supposed to corroborate. I bring this up in the discussion section because while the citation does not fit, it is overall a good citation on the topic, cites further sources, and I am loathe to edit or remove a sentence that is technically true simply because I do not see its immediate relevance to the topic on hand. Perhaps with a considerate edit this source (#2) and this sentence can be conveyed with greater clarity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.236.230.21 ( talk) 06:42, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
|
![]() | Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline
Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically
review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Retrograde ejaculation.
|
Seriously?... citation needed indeed. 24.84.44.248 ( talk) 04:02, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
"Retrograde ejaculation is considered harmless as the only negative effect is the loss or reduction in fertility" I would not find a loss or reduction in my fertility "harmless". Howboutpete 14:27, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Speak for yourself, man. I, for one, think it's a great thing. ... besides, it's either this or a vasectomy. Yay for side effects! Kyalisu 16:14, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
I write here as one who has to experience retrograde ejaculation (often involuntary), due to a past, damaging bacterial prostatitis. In no way can this be considered harmless. It may be so for some, for me it is knife-edge pain that lasts for hours after the event. It is both physically demanding and damaging and is not, or only poorly understood by women irrespective of their education and empathy....! In addition one has to go through the misery of urinating the sperm and their carrier fluids at the next voiding. Lumpy urine, what a delight. This now seems a permanent part of lifes rich tapestry for me!
Celsius100 ( talk) 10:18, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
I couldn't find english references about the antipsychotic action in causing retrograde ejaculation -Mormegil 01/12/2007 21.22 UTC
I'd read about the concept of ejaculating causing lost of vital energy or Chi from old biographical works from the late 19th century, so the belief is well-established. Obviously, in reality sperm is lost at the next urination after a retrograde, rendering this concept bogus (no offense to Taoists).
However I don't know of any sources confirming the line "It is believed the sensation of sperm passing through the urethra causes intense physical sensations that can drain the body of 'sexual energy.'"
Can someone provide a source for this? Even so, it strikes me as desperate back-pedaling in the face of scientific evidence. Legitimus ( talk) 15:54, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Or cause any bad effects? NGC 2009 04:24, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
I read through this article and was also left with the question whether this was in some way unhealthy. I think that needs its own section in this article, something like "Effects on health." I used to do this as a kid to reduce the mess (figured it out myself), and I never felt any pain or anything. The fact that a medical term exists to describe a phenomenon does not make that phenomenon a bad or unhealthy thing. Dcs002 ( talk) 13:21, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
I have a few issues with this sentence in the article as well as the source cited. I cannot take issue with the truth of this statement, however I fail to see the relevance/contribution to the article. Furthermore upon reading the entirety of the cited link, nothing could be found relating to the statement the source is supposed to corroborate. I bring this up in the discussion section because while the citation does not fit, it is overall a good citation on the topic, cites further sources, and I am loathe to edit or remove a sentence that is technically true simply because I do not see its immediate relevance to the topic on hand. Perhaps with a considerate edit this source (#2) and this sentence can be conveyed with greater clarity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.236.230.21 ( talk) 06:42, 19 September 2013 (UTC)