Asprin is an aphrodisiac! Really!!!

[Moontanman]

I can see how this could be true in some persons, blood flow the the penis and mechanisms to prevent the blood from flowing back into the body is what allows the penis to become erect.

 

Aspirin helps increase blood flow, it's why it can help a person who is having a heart attack. In some people due to problems with blood flow to the penis, aspirin could help increase this blood flow if the blood flow is impeded by something that aspirin has an effect on.

 

Since prostrate cancer surgery blood flow to my penis is impaired, unfortunately aspirin doesn't seem to help the blood flow to my penis, yes i tried it, but I see no reason why it couldn't work in some people...

 

it would be interesting to see if aspirin helps increase blood flow to the clitoris, helping the clitoris become erect would allow for better sexual arousal and function in woman as well...

Edited July 7, 2012 by Moontanman

[raid517]

It has no effect at all (for me) in erectile dysfunction. The only effect it has is in significantly enhancing the pleasure of climax itself. My GP (and I) hypothesised that it might be something to do with improved blood flow - and therefore enhanced neurotransmitter transport between the penis and brain. However this was of course an entirely speculative suggestion.

 

There still really hasn't been time for anyone to give this a real go. Try the few days on and few days off approach over the space of 3 or 4 weeks. This will give you an opportunity to compare the subjectivity of your experience, between those days when you take it and those days when you don't.

 

In a sense this really is the downside to being unable to conduct a clinical trial. As much as you tell people that too short a period of usage will not be sufficient to provide a useful comparison, since initially it might seem too subjective to tell, as nor would too long a period of usage, since eventually the effect wears off, it's clearly still extremely difficult to control the conditions in which people take it, as people will often simply ignore this advice.

Edited July 7, 2012 by raid517

[John Cuthber]

"Also it is you, and not I who suggested the importance of doing a full scale formal trial. (A trial which you have subsequently dismissed as 'pointless'.) "

No, a proper trial wouldn't be pointless.

However the one that you suggested that I did would be pointless.

That's why I'm not going to bother.

 

" A pill that anyone can already buy for pennies is likely to be of little interest to a great many funding bodies. "

I think that it's fair to say that at best aspirin doesn't work this way for everyone.

However if it were proven to have this effect then it would trigger research into other similar chemicals to see if they worked better, for a wider selection of men and so on.

The funding companies are quite prepared to spend money on these sorts of thing. they are called "lead compounds" (lead as in the verb rather than heavy metal).

 

Perhaps most importantly

 

"Anyway I get it that you don't like this idea "

Nope, not at all, and I can't see where you got the idea that I don't like the idea.

I'd be delighted if this were true.

 

What I don't like is the notion that you can forget about science, and make a claim without proper evidence.

You have made the extraordinary claim that a widely used drug has a clear effect that nobody noticed.

Where is your extraordinary evidence?

 

Also are you sure about "Nor did I deride you from not doing an experiment. "?

Given that you wrote the following.

 

" I cannot understand why you will not even contemplate trying it - and would prefer instead to just sling as much mud at it as you possibly can? "

"even though you have shown a willingness to do so without even as much as trying it for yourself"

"Just refusing to try it, dumping on the idea and coming here to complain about why you don't like it (although that is still far from clear at this point)"

I explained why it would be pointless- it wouldn't be double blind for a start.

 

 

Incidentally, the effect of aspirin on the blood is largely on the clotting.

Clearly useful if you have a heart attack.

As I understand it, if anything it tends to increase blood flow which, paradoxically, will reduce erections. What holds them up is restricted outflow. If you increase the flow they disappear.

 

Having said that, the supposed effect isn't about erections so...

Edited July 7, 2012 by John Cuthber

[raid517]

I'm not 'dismissing science' lol. I have already explained at length the reasons why it is impractical for me to conduct any such clinical trial. They are not just limited to the practicality of persuading a company to investigate the effect - which is likely to prove vastly more time consuming and difficult than you imagine, but are also due to my own lack of time, resources and specific expertise in this area. (And also because I simply have no interest in pursuing it as a formal research topic in my own career, as I have other areas of research I would prefer to pursue more). However I have already said that anyone who cares to, can do anything with it that they please - this includes (and is not limited to) conducting a full scale clinical trial - and development of analogues should they have both the desire or expertise to do so.

 

However the purpose of posting this information here, is and was to simply allow for personal self-experimentation - and as much as you have tried to p*ss all over this topic (for reasons that increasingly appear specific and personal to you), unfortunately this is something you are unlikely to be able to prevent. My goal in this regard, in this deliberately limited context, has been achieved. Anyone reading this topic now, or perhaps referencing the term 'aspirin therapy' via a search engine like Google, may stumble on this topic and do whatever they wish with this information. They may ignore it (as I suspect you should), they may try it, they may discuss it with others and encourage them to try it, or as you so ardently appear to feel is necessary, they may conduct any kind of trial they wish to investigate the validity (or otherwise) of the effect.

 

Nor is it valid to bring up the topic of erectile dysfunction (although after many years of taking aspirin I can categorically state that I have never encountered the issues you speak of) - and to somehow attempt to use this as a means to discount the effect. This has nothing whatsoever to do with erectile dysfunction. The effect is specific and limited and has been spelled out several times prior to this point. Moreover the exact physiological pathways involved can only be a matter of speculation at this juncture.

 

I think the reality simply remains that (for whatever reason) you have decided that don't like this topic - and that you probably don't like me - and therefore that the best way to approach this matter is simply to be as much a pain in the posterior to me and to everyone else here reading this topic as you possibly can.

 

Nor was I recommending that people do a 'scientific experiment', I was simply recommending a usage pattern that in my own experience provided for me the best contrast to enjoy and to notice the effect - and which would also probably serve to lessen the risks of long term aspirin usage. I do not wish others to cause themselves harm - and given the risk of serous stomach bleeding and other complications from long term aspirin use, I feel this was an entirely sensible and responsible thing to do.

 

However the fact remains that your objections have done nothing to prove, or disprove the validity of this claim one way or another. This I think will be for others to decide, in whatever form they chose to do so, whether it be through self-experimentation, or by some other more formal means.

 

I would prefer to give individuals this choice - and do not see why you feel such a strong desire to attempt to prevent this.

 

Edit: However clearly if someone could come up with a clinically proven and effective 'aphrodisiac' type drug of this nature - even if it was some form of analogue, the market would be vast. There has never been, as far as I'm aware, any significant research into this area. Other claims have been made for a number of other substances. But if anything these claims are on far less of a scientific footing than any claim made for aspirin. Aspirin has already been shown to be physiologically active in a large number of ways. I think it would probably be much less surprising than you think if yet another physiologically active pathway for this drug was found. However despite how big such a market might be, since my own research field is currently limited to animal physiology, I do not feel it is a subject I am qualified to pursue. But as I said, anyone reading this topic may do anything with it as they wish.

Edited July 7, 2012 by raid517

[John Cuthber]

"There has never been, as far as I'm aware, any significant research into this area."

Perhaps you should have looked into it before making that statement.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bremelanotide

but seriously, you didn't think people would have been looking for working aphrodisiacs?

Why on earth not?

 

Also, can you possibly get it into your head that I'm not trying to prevent this?

What I'm trying to do is stop bad science.

 

"Nor is it valid to bring up the topic of erectile dysfunction (although after many years of taking aspirin I can categorically state that I have never encountered the issues you speak of) - and to somehow attempt to use this as a means to discount the effect."

You may have noticed that I didn't raise this as anything to do with the cause of your findings. Moontanman did so.

I'm the one who said "Having said that, the supposed effect isn't about erections so... "

Edited July 8, 2012 by John Cuthber

[raid517]

"There has never been, as far as I'm aware, any significant research into this area."

Perhaps you should have looked into it before making that statement.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bremelanotide

 

Perhaps you should read the things you post more closely? The effect of Melanotan II is significantly different to that proposed (or hypothesised) here for Aspirin. Melanotan is a substance I have had read about and followed for many years (at least since 1998), firstly due to my interest in it as a tanning agent - and secondly because I became interested in it for another reason that is likely to piss you off just as much as my original statement, if I told you about it. But that's another matter. The reality is that the most recent proposed used for Melanotan 2 fall into a similar category as that of Viagra, by treating sexual dysfunction. In the case of men this is erectile dysfunction, and in the case of women, it treats a similar condition in the form of sexual arousal disorder - which in essence equates to some females inability to become sufficiently lubricated to indulge in, take part in, or enjoy sexual intercourse. Their status as an 'aphrodisiac' is however in some doubt. If you read reports of people who have used it for these purposes, many of them report the effect as being rather uncomfortable - due to it's often extended nature. Again the effect I have experienced with aspirin has no effect on sexual dysfunction whatsoever, and serves only to heighten the enjoyment of the final moments of climax itself. In this sense the effect is closer to those that might be expected for a true aphrodisiac, although again it does nothing whatsoever to increase desire, or improve sexual prowess, or treat any kind of disorder. It's effects are limited to the final few moments of the act itself.

 

Research into drugs to treat various kinds of sexual dysfunction, has however been ongoing since even before Viagra was discovered.

Edited July 8, 2012 by raid517

[John Cuthber]

"Perhaps you should read the things you post more closely? The effect of Melanotan II is significantly different to that proposed (or hypothesised) here for Aspirin."

 

Are you saying it's not in the same area?

The fact that it's status as an aphrodisiac has been questioned means that they are researching that very issue.

 

If you mean the very specific area of "aspirin as an aphrodisiac" (and I remind you, that's what you called it in the thread's title) then I'm sure you are right: nobody will be looking at that. Understandably in my view.

 

And I still wonder how you can think that drug companies are not researching anything and everything that would enhance sexual pleasure.

 

And, once again, could you stop presuming to know what I think. You keep getting it wrong.

Any evidence for this "for another reason that is likely to piss you off just as much as my original statement"?

[raid517]

"Perhaps you should read the things you post more closely? The effect of Melanotan II is significantly different to that proposed (or hypothesised) here for Aspirin."

 

Are you saying it's not in the same area?

The fact that it's status as an aphrodisiac has been questioned means that they are researching that very issue.

 

If you mean the very specific area of "aspirin as an aphrodisiac" (and I remind you, that's what you called it in the thread's title) then I'm sure you are right: nobody will be looking at that. Understandably in my view.

 

And I still wonder how you can think that drug companies are not researching anything and everything that would enhance sexual pleasure.

 

And, once again, could you stop presuming to know what I think. You keep getting it wrong.

Any evidence for this "for another reason that is likely to piss you off just as much as my original statement"?

 

Perhaps I should have been clearer for you. I should have said that Melanotan 2 is not currently under investigation to be used as an aphrodisiac at all - it is being investigated as a drug therapy intended to treat "sexual dysfunction" - and that *therefore* your claim (or at least suggestion) that it should be regarded as an aphrodisiac, is open to question. It's use as a true aphrodisiac is therefore not currently under active formal investigation. No doubt if it became commercially available, people might be tempted to try to abuse it for this end (just as has been the case with Viagra), but it remains the fact that this is not an area of active consideration for this particular substance.

 

Nor did I say aphrodisiac research wasn't ongoing - I said that it was either a 'very limited, to non-existent field' and that little active research (that I'm aware of) appears to have been conducted into this field in the past. I think there's probably a genuine reluctance to formally investigate substances that simply enhance the pleasure of the sexual act itself - and that a culture exists where much of the research into human sexuality has tended to focus exclusively on treating various types of sexual dysfunction. I don't know why exactly this may have been the case. But given the rather ignoble history of this subject, where claims have been made for substances derived for example such bizarre things as rhino horn, Spanish Fly and snake blood etc, perhaps this reticence is understandable.

 

Also we already get in abundance that you don't think anyone in any circumstance should ever investigate aspirin for any of the potential qualities detailed above. (Which seems somewhat contradictory, given your previous insistence stating the importance of conducting tests in order to investigate the claim, lol). However as I have already stated, I'm perfectly fine with this. The reason I posted this item here was to allow for personal self-experimentation, in whatever way anyone reading this topic may wish. I would of course not seek to prevent anyone conducting a more formal trial. However it is entirely a matter for those reading this topic, to either use, or ignore this information as they see fit. Indeed I openly and actively encourage this. People should either take it or leave it, as almost certainly should you. Despite your frequent objections and obvious distaste for this subject, I still think that it is rather impractical if feel that there is anything you can do to prevent anyone from doing this.

 

Nor would I presume to pre-empt anything you think. I think your passionate distaste for this topic is though rather obvious and has been made plain to everyone here reading your comments. I think the point that confuses everyone is however, exactly why you have chosen to go on, and on and on about it, when your dislike (or whatever you may wish to call it), of this subject was already made abundantly plain some days ago.

 

We get it! - whatever it is exactly that you think we should get. Well done, bravo, you have proved your point! - whatever your point was supposed to be. Now why don't you do as I suggested previously (and as appears to be the only logical thing to do, given your dislike of this topic and lack of faith in any of the (informal) claims that have been made), and just go away and toddle off somewhere else and pick another topic with which to be equally disdainful?

 

Personally, I would say good luck with that, and I hope you have a long, productive and fruitful future old chum!!

Edited July 8, 2012 by raid517