Reporting on Masturbation-Cancer Link Is Wrong

The Australian study was a case control study. The American (JAMA) study was a prospective population (American doctors were the population group) survey study. Both studies concluded that frequent masturbation reduced prostate cancer risk by about 1/3. Thus, published data from two credible studies are consistent. The mechanism hypothesized (flushing out of carcinogens) is certainly plausible. To my knowledge, no studies have ever shown an increased risk of any malady associated with frequent masturbation.

The observation that FOX was passing off old (but important) news as a breaking story and therefore guilty of shoddy journalism is, notwithstanding the above, entirely correct.

Jerome Wilson of CA 4:12AM August 07, 2008

CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that ejaculation frequency is not related to increased risk of prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between ejaculation frequency, which includes sexual intercourse, nocturnal emission, and masturbation and risk of prostate cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Prospective study using follow-up data from the Health Professionals Follow-up Study (February 1, 1992, through January 31, 2000) of 29 342 US men aged 46 to 81 years, who provided information on history of ejaculation frequency on a self-administered questionnaire in 1992 and responded to follow-up questionnaires every 2 years to 2000. Ejaculation frequency was assessed by asking participants to report the average number of ejaculations they had per month during the ages of 20 to 29 years, 40 to 49 years, and during the past year (1991). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Incidence of total prostate cancer. RESULTS: During 222 426 person-years of follow-up, there were 1449 new cases of total prostate cancer, 953 organ-confined cases, and 147 advanced cases of prostate cancer. Most categories of ejaculation frequency were unrelated to risk of prostate cancer. However, high ejaculation frequency was related to decreased risk of total prostate cancer. The multivariate relative risks for men reporting 21 or more ejaculations per month compared with men reporting 4 to 7 ejaculations per month at ages 20 to 29 years were 0.89 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73-1.10); ages 40 to 49 years, 0.68 (95% CI, 0.53-0.86); previous year, 0.49 (95% CI, 0.27-0.88); and averaged across a lifetime, 0.67 (95% CI, 0.51-0.89). Similar associations were observed for organ-confined prostate cancer. Ejaculation frequency was not statistically significantly associated with risk of advanced prostate cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that ejaculation frequency is not related to increased risk of prostate cancer.

babz of MA 7:35PM May 12, 2008

You asked what might have changed in the last five years to prompt this article. I would guess it's a good bet that someone in PlanetOut's editorial line of command was diagnosed with, was treated for, or died of prostate cancer. Or someone close to one of those people did.

In my experience as a sex writer with an older readership, if the person in question was treated for prostate cancer then chances are about 50/50 that either he or his partner has spent quite a lot of time online trying to figure out if they'll ever be able to have sex again. Because most prostate-cancer therapy damages the body's ability to have an erection and many eliminate the possibility of erection, or ejaculation, or even plain old bladder control.

And when you're in that situation -- where you or your partner is going to live but you're facing the prospect of never having sex again *and* you're in journalism -- and you discover that something as counterintuitive as frequent ejaculation might have reduced your risk by up to a third, then yeah, you're probably going to mention it. Loudly. Even if by journalism standards it's old news.

(Quick comparison: how long ago was green tea and/or tomato sauce linked to reductions in prostate cancer? How often has corroborating research been undertaken and when was the most recent report released? How significant was the health benefit of those products? How many times in the last year has someone in journalism promoted the health benefit of those projects?)

figleaf of WA 9:37AM April 28, 2008

What in ejaculate could have changed in the last 5 years?

Jimmy Joe Johnson of CA 12:49AM April 25, 2008