Okay the news title's not quite the same and I couldn't really put the title more befitting of Sciforums socialite class of "More reasons to be a wanker". A news article that has come from the BBC (I don't even want to image investigative reporting in regards to this) Daily sex 'best for good sperm' http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8125934.stm Simply put the more active your sexual organs are, the more refined they are for the task they do. (Just don't let it all get to your heads now.)
************* M*W: I agree and have stated this a few times. I recommend 3x per week to maintain a healthy prostate. Any method will do. However, I would the Carradine technique.
Wow! I'm masturbating as I read this! Not. Perhaps for prostate health, but quality of sperm doesn't really do anything for me. Honestly.
He was a good time! He was a very driven and determined man. I think he made a short comeback under a different name not too long ago. Got banned for being a sock puppet. Vaguely remember the name. What was the connection?
Buddha1 and Happeh? I don't think there is a connection, I think that Communist Hamster mis-remembered the name and meant Happeh. But I could be wrong. Buddha1 was the guys that claimed 95% of all males were homosexual or something equally amusing.
What's the trade off? Arthritis in both hands at an early age?Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Can I send my sexual organs out for a morning jog while I have a lay-in? Would that count as "active"?
Oli, If it works for you, it works for you. I suppose you could ask if the future will eventually devolve into a idiocracy or not, considering if the genetics is suppose to be better from "over use/greater use/more activity", the "idiots" that over breed might well sow the future Nobel prize winners.
I'll give it go Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!. Are we not moving that way as it is? It seems to be a case of "I've got the opportunity to have sex, therefore I'll breed". "Future Nobel prize winners"? Is there a category for "not putting both legs into the same leg of your trousers"? I think we'll need one in the not-too-distant future.
