Masturbating more can dramatically reduce risk of prostate cancer | Metro News


I had this in my Draft folder and forgot about it until this week. It seems at least once or twice a year I run across something like this:

Masturbating a lot can significantly improve your health

 

Source: Masturbating more can dramatically reduce risk of prostate cancer | Pink News

Of particular note was this:

“Ejaculation frequency is, to some extent, a measure of overall health status in that men at the very low end of ejaculation – 0 to 3 times per month – were more likely to have other (medical problems) and die prematurely from causes other than prostate cancer,” lead author Jennifer Rider told the AP.

So, those of you who read this blog for the chastity and OD articles, take note:

The scientists found that men in their 20s who ejaculated at least 21 times a month were 19 per cent less likely to develop prostate cancer than those who did seven times a month or less.

You don’t have to masturbate: having sex with a partner would do the job too, as long as you climax.

21 times a month? Dang…

  • Out of the 30,000 men studied, 1,041 developed prostate cancer after ejaculating 4 to 7 times a month.
  • Of the men who ejaculated 21 times a month or more, 290 developed prostate cancer.
  • So to be in the safe zone that’s more than every other day, if you’re counting.

I’m pretty sure that most readers haven’t had 21 orgasms in the last year, never mind month…

 


While I’m thinking about this, Mrs Edge hasn’t been so generously inclined lately.

Sonia-2

Tally me banana: Part 2


Having now modified my new A080 chastity device to be wearable, it’s time to get to the part that everybody wonders about: the stats.

20160529_102851

The A080 shown next to The Fort for comparison. Just a little smaller than the CB3000, and about the same as the CB6000-S, although it’s hard to tell because of the CB6000 aerodynamic nose, as opposed to the rounded end of the A080.

The A080 is a little shorter than the old CB3000, with a slightly smaller inner diameter. Because of the odd shape and difficulty in agreeing where to measure to, it’s hard to compare them directly, but it’s probably closer in size to the CB6000-S — the shorter version of the CB6000. The inside diameter is about 1-5/16, slightly smaller than the 1-3/8 of the CB-X devices.

The cage, cuff ring, and locking pin all seem to be stainless steel — although my guess is that for $25 it’s made from the inexpensive 18-8 alloy 302 or 304 instead of the more expensive (and more chemically inert) 316, as are the devices made by Mature Metal. However, since 304 is approved for some medical use, and is found in commercial, industrial, and home kitchens all over, 304 stainless steel should present no problems for anyone wearing it.

20160529_133813

My A080, modified and assembled with the lock, just tipped the scales at 6-3/8 oz.

Readers will remember that my Fort device weighs in at almost 6-1/2 oz for the cage alone, and over 12 oz for the assembled cage, ring, spacers, and lock. In contrast, the polycarbonate CB3000 cage is a light 1-3/8 oz. The A080 cage weighs an easy 3 oz, and the rest of the components only bring the unit up to whisker over 6 oz, or just about 2-1/2 oz more than the assembled plastic CB3000. Since I use that heavy stainless steel ring for both the Fort and the CB3000, the A080 ended up feeling surprisingly lightweight.

The flat, wide cuff ring bears more weight than the more rounded plastic version, or the thinner stainless steel ring that I made, and that may account for how well it supports the device. Of course, metal cages are mostly air, so there’s not as much to support. That said, I still am not crazy about the edges of the cuff ring; even though they are well buffed, I’d prefer something with slightly more corner rounding.

 

20160529_133545

The assembled A080, shown next to The Fort. The open cage design is a lot easier to maintain, and is less than half the weight of the cast stainless steel Fort.

I wore mine all day doing yard work, and even in loose shorts it did not feel strained, nor did I have to stop to adjust myself frequently — something I need to do with the Fort, simply because it weighs a lot more, and it drags things down. Relaxing in the evening was similarly comfortable. I will note that I could barely wear the device as shipped because the slop and loose fitting parts caused a lot of pinching and catching. Anyone picking up this, the A081, or one of those devices with a similar locking arrangement would do well to file a flat section on the head of the locking pin to make for a better fit, and to put some spacers (rubber O-rings or anything else) to help to keep the cage from moving up and down or twisting sideways.

20160529_132317

Filing a flat onto the head of the locking pin will help it to seat flush with the locking tabs on the cuff ring, and prevent the device from shifting.

Sleeping in the device was interesting. The plastic CB3000 pretty much goes wherever my nighttime hydraulics point it, as opposed to The Fort, which weighs everything down like an anchor. The lighter A080 was somewhere in between; I felt it a few times in the night, but is was never uncomfortable enough to wake me up.

And speaking of not being woken up, this cage is one of the shortest things that I own, and I imagine that it helped to keep those middle of the night erections from pulling the cuff ring away from my body. I don’t remember having any of those “Ow, my testicles are being ripped from my body,” moments. This could be the length, or the wider, flat cuff ring.

The next day I showered, and this is where the open cage design excels. No trying to squeeze soap inside the tube, no worries about not rinsing properly, and (presumably) no funky smell when it finally comes off. I put on my skinny jeans, and went out to do some errands.

I did have some pinching and adjusting during the day, but that could have been because I chose not to put any lube around the cuff ring, and the the rubber tube around the hinge might have been making things a bit too sticky. In fact, after most of the week with tubing, I took the tubing off, just to compare the friction pulls of the rubber against the edges of the bare hinge. I’ll update on this later.

There were a few times, though, that the seam of my jeans or underwear managed to press across the rings, and I could feel the cloth against my sensitive areas. It didn’t hurt, but it was unexpected and a bit uncomfortable. I’m not sure why I’d notice it now, when I don’t notice it when I’m not wearing a device. I suspect it’s because the cage stretches out some skin in areas that are normally a bit more, umm, turtled. I’d also guess that the A081 would be less prone to this because of the orientation of the cage bars.

The A080 and A081, by the way, are made with a missing vertical front section (think of the dome for large telescopes) instead of radially extending from the center. The reason I chose this design is because over the course of the day, my urethra changes its aim. I have no idea how guys aim in a device with that tiny center hole. I like being able to use a urinal, and certainly not needing to worry about my stream dribbling all over my leg is a plus.

The A080 is probably the lowest profile, and least noticeable device that I own. I have not detected any bulge with shorts, casual pants, or tight jeans. Even my boxer briefs don’t show much — a factor of the lock hanging off the side of the device, instead of showing up as a big lump in front. For that matter, I can imagine the entire lock and pin being replaced with a two-piece security screw/bushing arrangement that would be even less detectable.

And speaking of security, Mrs Edge has been opposed to open cage designs because she imagined that access to that skin would allow me to stimulate myself too much. After several days in this cage, though, I haven’t been able to manage anything that even gets me close. The A080 is a little smaller and shorter than my other devices, so it’s possible that being scrunched up is a factor. Also, I think that ten years ago, when chastity devices were new and exciting to me, it might have been a different story. But now? Wearing a device isn’t as arousing, and I’m pretty accustomed to waiting until I have permission; the thrill isn’t there anymore. I’m not saying that nobody would manage, just that for me, it’s working as expected. I haven’t tried the Magic Vibrator on it (yet), but I may save that for when Mrs. Edge gets home. She doesn’t approve of me using it, for some reason.

Anyway, I’ve spent a lot of time reviewing the A080 because a) Mrs Edge is again off visiting family for a couple of weeks, and b) it was a holiday weekend, but it was rainy here in New England, and I was cooped up inside for most of it. So let’s get to the review:

The Good:

It’s shiny, polished stainless steel. Yes, I said that about The Fort, but even though the A080 is an open cage design, you can’t deny that the shiny metal is eye-catching. It actually looks like a nice piece of body jewelry.

It’s easy to clean, and easy to remain clean inside. There’s no question that one of the worst aspects of the closed tube designs is that they are potential bacteria traps. Even The Fort will retain a slight odor, no matter how much I flush it out with the removable shower head. The plastic devices are even more prone to odor. The A080 passes the hygiene test very nicely.

It’s lightweight. While not as lightweight as the CB-X, Holy Trainer, or silicone devices, for a metal device the A080 won’t feel uncomfortable, even if you’re wearing loose dress pants. By the middle of the first day, I pretty much forgot that I was wearing it. Even in bed (I sleep in the nude), it was barely noticeable as I moved around.

The Bad:

The cuff ring is a torture device. Chastity device manufacturers have simply not figured out that hinged cuff rings are a solution in search of a problem. Yes, you need to wrangle your junk into a solid ring. But hinged rings create chafing and pinching surfaces on the bottom and on the top. Plus, they are still difficult and fiddly to connect to the cage. And putting a bit of surgical tubing over the hinge is not an elegant solution.

The locking system is kludgy. Not just the hinged cuff ring, but the way that the cage attaches and locks to the cuff ring looks like a complete afterthought.  I can modify most devices, but not everybody has the tools or skill — nor should they need them. The sloppy fit of the pins and tabs, plus the semi-lethal padlock guarantee that somebody is going to end up getting hurt.

The stacked ring design does not feel like a boner. Oddly, Mrs Edge likes how the CB3000 and The Fort feel against her ass when we spoon at night. The smooth plastic (or metal) shape feel like an erection, and she falls asleep imagining that I’m aroused and desirous. The rings won’t quite have the same feel for her. Note that this is not necessarily a bad point, but it’s something I noticed.

The Overview:

It used to be that chastity veterans would recommend that newbs purchase a CB-X device so they could get the feel for things before they jump in and order a more expensive metal device. The A080 and A081 are roughly between $25 and $30 US, making them a good first device for guys that can manage to make some simple modifications to the locking pin.

I am going to spend some time trying to figure out how to make a nice solid cuff ring for the cage, which will give me a customized clone of a Mature Metal device. Yes, I could just buy a Mature Metal device, but the $300 price tag means I’ll have that much less to spend on bicycle components. Since we are not doing the 24/7/365 chastity thing, the A080 offers a nice compromise on an open cage design, even if I have to do most of the work myself.  That said, while it’s a fun project to turn one of these into a better device, I don’t think that I’d recommend it to anyone who does not have the time or the tools to make similar modifications.

 


Mrs. Edge has already seen my Tumblr.

Well… maybe not *all* my Tumblrs…
Found-Tumblr

Tally me banana: Part 1


A081

The A081 looks similar to some of the Mature Metal designs.

A080

The A080 is similar to other devices on the market, but looks to be a bit more modifiable for the gearheads.

I’ve had a lot of questions from people who are curious about those really cheap Chinese made chastity devices that are sold on Ebay or the Chinese version DHGate.com. Over the last few years, I became curious, myself; I spent some time looking at the surprisingly wide variety of devices available, and two in particular caught my eye (the A080 and the A081), mainly because they seemed to be copies of those made by Mature Metal. The MM devices are custom made, or at least, made in a range of sizes that you can pick, and can be further modified by request. The Chinese devices (sold by a bewildering number of different vendors) appear to be made in two or three different sizes, and the only custom option is the size of the cuff ring (ranging from 1-1/2 to 2″).  After several weeks of deliberation, I thought it might be interesting to buy one of those devices just to see if I could modify it into something better; maybe not as nice as the custom devices, but something that is comfortable, convenient, and secure.

20160529_103726

This is the side-to-side “slop” in the hinge. While it won’t move that much while assembled, the amount of space will lead to chafing and pinching.

I ended up ordering the style called, for reasons unclear to me, the A080. The A081, while looking more like the MM design, has a distinct 90º bend between the opening and end, which I knew would be a problem.  One of my criteria for devices is that I should be able to use a urinal, and I didn’t relish the idea of fishing the the thing out of my pants, and contorting things in order to aim appropriately. The A080 is closer to 60º (similar to the CB3000), and more workable.

20160529_133037

The cage itself was surprisingly well made. It was polished, the welds were solid, and it was well cleaned, without traces of polishing compound in between the rings.

Now, I’ve had mixed success in the past ordering Chinese products, including another chastity device. But I figured that for the $27, including shipping, it wouldn’t be a major expense (like The Fort, from a few years ago).  The ordering process was simple, and the expected delivery date promised to be between May 23rd and June 25th — a rather liberal range. Surprisingly, I received it on May 27, just about 2 weeks after I ordered it. The box was plain, and there wasn’t any identification on it. I opened the box, and the device was wrapped in bubble wrap, with a small plastic wrapped box containing a brass Wolfdog padlock with 3 keys.

My first impression was that the cage section was surprisingly well made. It was highly polished, and very clean, without traces of the polishing compound between the rings. The rings themselves were smooth, and look to be machine welded stainless steel. The end of the cage is similarly clean and polished, and the small bars were fairly consistently spaced. It looks like the pieces were all assembled and welded on a mass-production fixture, and the welds themselves may have been automatic (as opposed to hand done). The tab on the top that connects the cage to the cuff ring is a thick gauge and not prone to bending or twisting. The weld here was clean and the tab is pretty straight. All in all, I was really impressed with the quality of the cage.

20160529_132825

Not everybody will have a workshop where they can make these little modifications.

The cuff ring, however, was a disappointment, especially having seen the nice work of the cage. The joint/hinge holding the two sections together are loose, allowing far too much torsion — which would translate to chafing and pinching, if they hadn’t included the bit of surgical tubing that one is expected to slide over the section to cover the hinge.

20160529_103914

The nice job on the cage section was offset by the really poor design on the cuff ring and locking pin. You can see how the head of the pin hits the flat plat that holds the cage to the cuff ring tabs.

The cuff is held together by tabs slotting into the rectangular hold in the metal tab on the cage. Naturally there is a lot of play here, as well, and the way that the locking pin holds the sections together will most assuredly pinch skin, hair, and chafe. I know this for a fact because just 30 minutes wearing it was enough for me; I removed it and started thinking about how to make it more comfortable.

Let’s start with the locking pin. The pin itself just fits into the holes in the tabs on the lock ring, and the lock fits into the hole at the end. That leaves over 1/4″ of play, and at this point I should note that the Wolfdog lock is crap. The edges and corners are literally sharp enough to cut skin. I didn’t bother filing off the edges; instead, I drilled out the 3mm hold to fit the somewhat larger shackle of my Masterlock. I added some of the spacers that I made for my CB3000 and my Fort, but it was still too jangly for me. Back to the workshop, I carefully filed a flat on the head of the locking pin to make it lay flush against the tabs. That made for less play, but I knew I could do better.

20160529_132400

I filed a flat on the head of the locking pin to make it sit more flush with the locking tab; something that most people could do if they order this or similar devices. The pin is still a sloppy fit, though, so we went back to the drawing board.

I have some extra stainless steel pins and spacers from my other devices. The locking pin was slightly larger than the one that came with the A080, and fit nicely through the tab holes, while the head just cleared the tab. I filed down a flat on a couple of the spacers to keep the device from twisting on the opposite side. Marking the length, I drilled a hole for my lock, and cut the end off and rounded it over. To keep the cage from having too much play on the cuff ring, I put a rubber O-ring against the head for pressure, pushed the pin through the holes, put on the spacer with the flat, and then another O-ring to provide some tension for the lock. Not perfect, but I ended up with a lot less play, and some testing demonstrated no pinching, which was the important thing.

20160529_132913

My final version: one of my own locking pins cut short and rounded off, with a spacer that was filed to contain the flat bar over the locking tabs. This keeps it from flopping around too much. The O-ring at the head of the pin provides some tension to keep the arrangement from making jingling sounds.

At some point I’ll look at how to attach the cage to a solid ring, because (in my opinion) the hinged rings are too prone to chafing and pinching.

20160529_104024

The Wolfdog padlock should not go anywhere near sensitive areas of your body. The edges on this one were literally sharp enough to tear the paper towel.

Having now modified the device to be wearable, I’m going to stop here and get to the stats in Part 2.

 

 


When I told her I bought another cage, Mrs Edge just rolled her eyes, and then warned me that I should make sure that it was as comfortable as possible before I handed her the key.

Man Receives First Penis Transplant in the United States – The New York Times


I’m sorry.

I read the article about a man who, in the course of being treated for injuries sustained from an accident, ended up that doctors discovered he had a cancerous growth on his penis. He was treated to the first successful penile transplant in the US.

Source: Man Receives First Penis Transplant in the United States – The New York Times

No, I’m not sorry about that. I mean, it turns out that’s a pretty good thing.

No, the part that I’m sorry about is that I’m reblogging this simply because 3/4 of the way through the article, I saw the name of the team leader and the director of the hospital’s regional urology program.

Dr. Dicken Ko.

I’m so sorry. I can’t stop snickering.

That is all.


This caption is not at all related, but for some reason I find it kind of hot.

 

 

Study: Ejaculate More, Have Less Prostate Cancer Risk


Can we all stand to read yet another article on this topic?

From a March Medscape article:

Study: Ejaculate More, Have Less Prostate Cancer Risk

A study on ejaculation and prostate cancer risk, which made a big splash at last year’s annual meeting of the American Urological Association (AUA), was published online March 29 in European Urology.

“This large prospective study provides the strongest evidence to date of a beneficial role of ejaculation in prevention of prostate cancer,” write the researchers, led by Jennifer Rider, ScD, MPH, a cancer epidemiologist at the Boston University School of Public Health.

Okay, good. We’re done now, and we can all get back to… wait, what’s that?

“Association does not mean causation, so one has to be cautious about interpretation,” Janet Stanford, PhD, MPH, a prostate cancer researcher at the Fred Hutchison Cancer Research Center in Seattle, who was not involved in the study, said about the observational data.

Really? It would have seemed obvious that more ejaculation is healthier.

After potential confounders were controlled for in multivariate analyses, the relative risk for prostate cancer was about 20% lower in men who ejaculated at least 21 times a month than in men who ejaculated four to seven times a month. For high-frequency ejaculators, this risk reduction was seen in all three time periods (P trend < .0001 for all).

But… there’s always a but, isn’t there?

Notably, there was no association between ejaculation frequency and high-grade, advanced, or lethal disease. The reason for this exception is not known.

The risk reduction effect seen in the study is “modest,” according to Dr Rider’s team and Dr Stanford. And they acknowledge that other studies have pointed to sexual activity as a possible modifiable risk factor for prostate cancer development.
Wait, so there’s a difference but not much difference, is that what you’re saying, Doc?

The researchers speculate what could be at work, mechanically, and offer one explanation: the prostate might accumulate potentially carcinogenic secretions that can lead to prostate cancer. This idea, known as the prostate stagnation hypothesis, has been around for decades, Dr Rider reported.

That theory might have parallels in folk wisdom. When these results were reported last year, a Medscape reader commented that the results make common sense, and urged his fellow male readers to “keep the pipes clean boys!”
So, a study of almost 20 years and over 30,000 men concludes that… it depends.

Ejaculation? Well, here’s somebody that doesn’t seem to be very worried about it.