Study suggests no advantage in abstaining from sex to preserve sperm

MSNBC ^ | 29 June 2003

[demlosers]

ASSOCIATED PRESS

MADRID, Spain, June 29 — New research suggests there is little value in couples abstaining from sex to improve their chances of conceiving by saving sperm for the woman's most fertile time of the month.

In a study to be presented Monday at a European fertility conference, Israeli scientists provide the strongest evidence yet that men with low sperm counts can significantly reduce sperm quality by holding back for longer than a day or two.

They found that the performance for men with normal fertility tests remained the same whether they abstained from sex for one, two or 10 days before providing a sample.

''Long residence in the male reproductive tract might in some cases mean the sperm do worse, perform worse, than they could do if they abstained less,'' said the study's leader, Dr. Eliahu Levitas of Ben-Gurion University in Israel.

[Bluntpoint]

I knew it. I knew it.

[ex-Texan]

Contrary to the long alleged rumors from fighters' training camps, hiding in the woods is not really helpful? DUH! Mike Tyson salutes the writer.

[alloysteel]

But I thought abstinence was to conserve the life force, to give the performing athlete a keener competitive edge, and accentuate the vitality of the sperm, by allowing it to properly mature....

And it meant nothing, all this time?

[johniegrad]

Oh sure. She's had me waiting here for a year and for what?

[EGPWS]

Study suggests no advantage in abstaining from sex to preserve sperm

I myself see no advantage to having these studies.

[Bluntpoint]

Are you using that Dixie cup? Could I borrow it for just a minute?

[EGPWS]

Are you using that Dixie cup? Could I borrow it for just a minute?

What's a dixie cup? I seem to recall that term from my younger day's in the early sixties.

If you are interested in borrowing from me...you'll have to "drink" from lead crystal! :)

[DannyTN]

It doesn't really address if there is an athletic advantage to abstaining.

This theory is that the body uses the best nutients for sperm production and abstaining gives the body a nutritional break.

I wonder if they can debunk that one as well.

[Bluntpoint]

What is a Dixie Cup? Let me see if I could give you a sample... I mean example.................. I will need to borrow your copy of "Biguns."

[vetvetdoug]

The authors in this study were a bunch of Johnny Cum Lately's for sure. This factoid has been known by the veterinarians in the equine and bovine breeding services for the last couple of decades with enough data and research that one could fill a library. Why don't they get off their butts and correlate the amount of spermatozoa with the scrotal circumferance of the donor? They will find out the one's with the biggest cojones have more sperm and higher quality spermatozoa than those with little bitty ones.

[Bluntpoint]

"I wonder if they can debunk that one as well."

Well, I'm working on that as I type this missive.

[Bluntpoint]

"scrotal circumferance"

Interesting... Very interesting.

[bandleader]

Whew!,Thank God for modern medical science!!!!!!!!!

[bandleader]

Tyson doesn't want to have consentual intercourse(sexual).He doesn't think it's any fun unless he TAKES IT!!!!!!!!!

[bandleader]

Yeah,I wonder if this one rates Senator Proxmire's "Golden Goose"?

[bandleader]

Did your ACNE re-appear?

[Bluntpoint]

"Yeah,I wonder if this one rates Senator Proxmire's "Golden Goose"?"

How about the Golden Money Shot?

[johniegrad]

No. However, I'm going to double my chances. The Supreme Court said there's nothing wrong with that.

[mrsmith]

Bah, this "study" is just part of the Commie conspiracy to destroy our precious bodily fluids...