Sensitive question-Stronger erections omni v vegan?

[VeganRachel]

I understand, but please bear in mind how it comes across asking someone as a matter of course if they are a troll. It's certainly not polite to ask someone "are you a thief" without pretty good grounds, and this is a directly comparable scenario.


It might seem like a minor point, but actually I don't like confrontation at all, and certainly not with selective groups. However, I do try to encourage debate and when anyone - not just a vegan - makes a claim as fact, I am prepared to challenge it. If they cannot back up the claim, I dismiss that claim. If they can back it up, I accept it as a demonstrated fact.

Of course, debates centre around facts and opinion. One is provable and absolute, one is subjective and relies on concensus. I'm well aware of that and challenge accordingly. You claimed a factual link between diet and erectile performance, I challenged that and the evidence falls short of proven fact. If you had claimed it as an opinion and pointed towards two closely linked bodies of evidence (diet vs arterial narrowing and arterial narrowing vs erectile performance), I would have accepted it as a legitimate and valid hypothesis with a high probability of being true. In fact, that is the point the scientific community is at right now.

If you make a claim, expect it to be challenged. If you state an opinion, expect to be able to back it up but be aware the evidential bar is lower.


Yes, veganism is beneficial in many ways. However, stating body odour is one of them is once again no more than opinion. It will change someone's body odour, but whether that is "better" or "worse" will depend on the preferences of the people around them. If we as a species can't agree on whether coriander or garlic are pleasant tastes or not, how can we expect to get universal agreement on a person's scent? Understandably, a lack of washing is pretty commonly recognised, but that's not what we're on about here.


Linking back with my earlier point, ethics and morality are not fact; they are opinion. For something to be held as morally right it is only necessary for the majority of society to agree. Even with a significant minority agreeing, that's grounds enough for robust debate. My requirement for facts to be backed up by evidence doesn't in any way ignore the moral and ethical aspects of an argument and I strongly encourage such aspects to be included.


You know I'm going to challenge this too, especially when arguably the most comprehensively violent and compassionless historical figure ever was largely vegetarian. If there are studies, please provide at least one scientifically reliable example.

What I strongly suspect, but without corroboration, is that many compassionate humans adopt a vegetarian or vegan diet on compassionate grounds, hence a link between diet and compassion. If that's correct, you have your cause and effect round the wrong way.


Of everything you have written, this perhaps gets to the heart of it all. I do not doubt for one moment your emotion, your compassion or (implied) your passion. They are very real strengths and I wouldn't want you to lose any of them. I only disagree with the way you are channelling them.

The suggestion that eating meat is going to somehow emasculate an omnivorous man is clearly a strong piece of ammunition - if it's true. However, if it's challenged and found to be unproven, that man can legitimately discount it. It doesn't matter if it's "probably" true or "might be" true; it'll be discarded out of hand along with all the other "facts" claimed to be true at the same time. That means you have wasted your ammunition.

If, on the other hand, you only claim as fact what can be backed up, the same omnivorous man has no alternative but to either accept or ignore - the former is a win for you, the latter is a fool's way out for him. Either way, your ammunition is not wasted.

You claimed earlier that I am curious. You are right. I have also not come on this forum to argue for or against veganism or any of its related values, but rather to listen to solid argument and to learn. I urge you to throttle back on the unproven claims (or at least include provisos when you do so) because your moral and ethical arguments are not only valid but strong.

I also dislike humans making untrue statements, so we have something in common.
I will attempt to channel better and not insult anyone else, I promise. However, it is true that medical scientists are biased
in favor of big business and big animal ag. Some videos/info. are below as examples.
In terms of human body odor you have your opinions. However, cadavers located outside have a noxious odor which is comprised of
cadaverine and putricine (dead animal smells outside in the woods, etcetera. Once you smell it, you know something died). Those stinky
smells are OUTSIDE in the fresh open air.
Humans eat cadavers and they are trapped in the human body for about 4 days, without air, where they rot and stink. And some may ever come out of our body. Very similar to cadaverine and putricine odors. Again, more info below.
Plant foods contain fiber, while animal foods, do not. They act like cement in the human body.
If you think eating cadavers do not make the human body smell, thats' your belief. But ask women and see what they say. Sadly, women get used to those odors as if they are normal. Combine testosterone with cadaver or rotting dairy smells, and, ugh! it is in all of your fluids and body cavities. Its' not just testosterone that often leads to stinky body odor. From my own personal experiences, omnivore women who eat dead animals/dairy/eggs/fishes, no matter what they look like on the outside, how fit they are, how young they are, have putrid and stinky fluid smells. These odors, aroma's, skanky smells, are the result of what they eat.
I was with a friend three years ago and as he was speaking to me, a noxious odor emanated from his mouth. It was gross like a sewer. He was not overweight, did not smoke, drink, eat garlic, coffee, or take drugs and (he was not vegan--not that vegans don't have an aroma). He was in his 50's. I had to back away from him it was that bad.
All this is off-topic but needs to be shared. My links/opinions are not meant to insult anyone or their choices, but we are what we eat. Cheers.

Putrefying Protein and “Toxifying” Enzymes | NutritionFacts.org

Certain gut bacteria can “retoxify” carcinogens that your liver successfully detoxified, but these bacteria can be rapidly suppressed by simple dietary changes.

nutritionfacts.org

Bowel Wars: Hydrogen Sulfide vs. Butyrate | NutritionFacts.org

Sulfur dioxide preservatives in dried fruit, sulfites in wine, and the putrefaction of undigested animal protein in the colon can release hydrogen sulfide, the rotten egg gas associated with inflammatory bowel disease.

nutritionfacts.org

Food Mass Transit | NutritionFacts.org

Most women experience a four-day intestine transit time; likely too long to meet the target 200 gram (half pound) minimum fecal output for cancer prevention.

nutritionfacts.org

How Many Bowel Movements Should You Have Every Day? | NutritionFacts.org

Most people have between 3 bowel movements a day and 3 a week, but normal doesn’t necessarily mean optimal.

nutritionfacts.org

Stool Size Matters | NutritionFacts.org

Larger bowel movements are associated with lower risk of appendicitis, colon cancer, constipation, and diverticulitis.

nutritionfacts.org

Breast Cancer and Constipation | NutritionFacts.org

The reason why women who have more frequent bowel movements appear to be at lower risk for breast cancer may be because bile acids absorbed from our intestines concentrate in the breast and have a estrogen-like tumor promoting effect.

nutritionfacts.org

The effect of meat consumption on body odor attractiveness - PubMed

Axillary body odor is individually specific and potentially a rich source of information about its producer. Odor individuality partly results from genetic individuality, but the influence of ecological factors such as eating habits are another main source of odor variability. However, we know...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Why Vegetarians Don’t Have To Worry About Bad Breath (colgate manufacturers toothpaste and toohbrushes)

Are You a Vegansexual? - Earth in Transition

Latest word to enter the scientific vocabulary: Vegansexual. The term was coined in New Zealand after much media attention was given, four years ago, to a study that noted that an increasing number of vegans said they engaged in sexual relationships and intimate partnerships only with other vegans.

www.earthintransition.org

https://foodethics.univie.ac.at/fil...k_wiss_dialog/Potts_2011._Vegan_Sexuality.pdf ( 15 pages to read if interested)

 

[VeganRachel]

I understand, but please bear in mind how it comes across asking someone as a matter of course if they are a troll. It's certainly not polite to ask someone "are you a thief" without pretty good grounds, and this is a directly comparable scenario.


It might seem like a minor point, but actually I don't like confrontation at all, and certainly not with selective groups. However, I do try to encourage debate and when anyone - not just a vegan - makes a claim as fact, I am prepared to challenge it. If they cannot back up the claim, I dismiss that claim. If they can back it up, I accept it as a demonstrated fact.

Of course, debates centre around facts and opinion. One is provable and absolute, one is subjective and relies on concensus. I'm well aware of that and challenge accordingly. You claimed a factual link between diet and erectile performance, I challenged that and the evidence falls short of proven fact. If you had claimed it as an opinion and pointed towards two closely linked bodies of evidence (diet vs arterial narrowing and arterial narrowing vs erectile performance), I would have accepted it as a legitimate and valid hypothesis with a high probability of being true. In fact, that is the point the scientific community is at right now.

If you make a claim, expect it to be challenged. If you state an opinion, expect to be able to back it up but be aware the evidential bar is lower.


Yes, veganism is beneficial in many ways. However, stating body odour is one of them is once again no more than opinion. It will change someone's body odour, but whether that is "better" or "worse" will depend on the preferences of the people around them. If we as a species can't agree on whether coriander or garlic are pleasant tastes or not, how can we expect to get universal agreement on a person's scent? Understandably, a lack of washing is pretty commonly recognised, but that's not what we're on about here.


Linking back with my earlier point, ethics and morality are not fact; they are opinion. For something to be held as morally right it is only necessary for the majority of society to agree. Even with a significant minority agreeing, that's grounds enough for robust debate. My requirement for facts to be backed up by evidence doesn't in any way ignore the moral and ethical aspects of an argument and I strongly encourage such aspects to be included.


You know I'm going to challenge this too, especially when arguably the most comprehensively violent and compassionless historical figure ever was largely vegetarian. If there are studies, please provide at least one scientifically reliable example.

What I strongly suspect, but without corroboration, is that many compassionate humans adopt a vegetarian or vegan diet on compassionate grounds, hence a link between diet and compassion. If that's correct, you have your cause and effect round the wrong way.


Of everything you have written, this perhaps gets to the heart of it all. I do not doubt for one moment your emotion, your compassion or (implied) your passion. They are very real strengths and I wouldn't want you to lose any of them. I only disagree with the way you are channelling them.

The suggestion that eating meat is going to somehow emasculate an omnivorous man is clearly a strong piece of ammunition - if it's true. However, if it's challenged and found to be unproven, that man can legitimately discount it. It doesn't matter if it's "probably" true or "might be" true; it'll be discarded out of hand along with all the other "facts" claimed to be true at the same time. That means you have wasted your ammunition.

If, on the other hand, you only claim as fact what can be backed up, the same omnivorous man has no alternative but to either accept or ignore - the former is a win for you, the latter is a fool's way out for him. Either way, your ammunition is not wasted.

You claimed earlier that I am curious. You are right. I have also not come on this forum to argue for or against veganism or any of its related values, but rather to listen to solid argument and to learn. I urge you to throttle back on the unproven claims (or at least include provisos when you do so) because your moral and ethical arguments are not only valid but strong.

Here are examples of medical, etcetera industry-profit driven biased science articles, advertising, and conclusions. (Imagine a study that REALLY concluded that the saturated fat and cholesterol in flesh and blood directly causes E.D.--it would cost big meat Billion$ and Trillion$ of dollars of sales to most males (and women)!. Big meat, the new tobacco, would have a massive interest in making sure the scientists who draw that conclusion are threatened, or, the study is scrubbed, or at the very least, that the study conclusions are watered down with typical wishy-washy phrases like: possibly, could, may, might, weak link, occasionally): cheers.

How Big Meat Manipulated the Science | NutritionFacts.org

Big Meat downplays the magnitude of meat mortality.

nutritionfacts.org

Wisconsin Milk Marketing Board Accused of Making Illegally Deceptive Claims | NutritionFacts.org

A two-part investigation (1 & 2) released last week by the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism revealed that the Wisconsin Milk Marketing

nutritionfacts.org

Eggs and Cholesterol: Patently False and Misleading Claims | NutritionFacts.org

Egg industry claims about egg safety found to be patently false, misleading, and deceptive by the U.S. Court of Appeals.

nutritionfacts.org

Egg Industry Caught Making False Claims | NutritionFacts.org

On the basis of concerns from the American Heart Association and consumer groups, the Federal Trade Commission carried out successful legal action—upheld

nutritionfacts.org

Fish Oil in Troubled Waters | NutritionFacts.org

Major fish oil manufacturers and drug stores are being sued for failing to disclose the PCB pollutants in fish oil supplements.

nutritionfacts.org

Big Food Using the Tobacco Industry Playbook | NutritionFacts.org

The processed food industries now use tactics similar to those used by cigarette companies to undermine public health interventions.

nutritionfacts.org

 

[VeganRachel]

If you have to resort to accusing someone of being evil "working for animal agriculture", then your argument is weak....

I asked a question. There ARE many animal ag trolls all over the internet and even in this forum. If that made any opinions I have weak, well,
I wanted to know the truth and asked. Bloodnook is not, but there are also humans who may say they are vegetarian or vegan who use their own definitions of what (animal) to consume, and are not what they say they are. I might also challenge them by asking them what their definition of both were. My comment was not meant to insult, but if It did, i apologize.

 

[VeganRachel]

I just thought of something--I haven't known any male vegans for some time, but thinking back,they did not smell attractive at all, in fact the two that stick in my mind were stinky. That's as far as I knew them. Just anecdotal.

"they" did not smell attractive at all. Are you referring to omnivores or vegans???. Sadly animal flesh does rot and smell in the human body.
see my latest posts at the end of the forum for multiple videos and information from nutritionfacts about
smells in the human body. They are quite revealing. cheers.

 

[VeganRachel]

The changes arose mostly from circumstance. I was raised on meat, meat, meat. Then early in life a group of friends introduced me to vegetarianism, so I tried that for various reasons. A few years after, lactose intolerance, and a nasty health scare, turned me into an ovo vegan. Then I found myself turning back to meat, but not nearly at the previous levels, which then lasted for a few years. Then I bounced around between ovo vegan and vegan for a number of years, trying mostly to reduce meat intake. Throughout all of these changes, my overall meat intake has reduced to nearly zero, with only very few infractions, mostly for family holiday meals or the very rare "trapped" circumstance where I don't think "standing firm" would serve me well. That's why I registered as "flexitarian," though 99.9% of my days I never eat a molecule of meat. But I will succumb if I need to.

thanks for sharing. Imagine a world that is 96% vegan, where meaters occasionally drift back into veganism....

 

[VeganRachel]

Again, the term is whole food plantbased diet, not vegan diet.
No need to add vegan to this as it is not a requirement.

When I hear 'plantbased" it reminds me of the word flexitarian, where the eater themselves defines what it means.
Vegan is clear if you believe the definition--no animal flesh, organs, dairy, eggs, fishes, shellfish......no leather, wool,
silk, etcetera. This does not mean all vegan eat whole foods or healthfully. But "plantbased" implies to me that the
eater consumes mostly plants, and is not by definition, following a vegan dietary choice.

 

[silva]

"they" did not smell attractive at all. Are you referring to omnivores or vegans???. Sadly animal flesh does rot and smell in the human body.
see my latest posts at the end of the forum for multiple videos and information from nutritionfacts about
smells in the human body. They are quite revealing. cheers.

I was referring to male vegans I've known--didn't know intimitly, but they definitely had body odor, and users of Dr Bronner castile soap.One was a house mate and did shower

 

[Danielle]

I was referring to male vegans I've known--didn't know intimitly, but they definitely had body odor, and users of Dr Bronner castile soap.One was a house mate and did shower

its not easy finding good vegan deodorant

 

[silva]

When I hear 'plantbased" it reminds me of the word flexitarian, where the eater themselves defines what it means.
Vegan is clear if you believe the definition--no animal flesh, organs, dairy, eggs, fishes, shellfish......no leather, wool,
silk, etcetera. This does not mean all vegan eat whole foods or healthfully. But "plantbased" implies to me that the
eater consumes mostly plants, and is not by definition, following a vegan dietary choice.

Well wfpb is pretty clearly whole plant foods.
There is truly little difference in comparing overall health of vegan and omnivores as there is nothing to distinguish WHAT they eat
The lack of animal products in ones diet does not magically make you healthier, nor does the inclusion mean your more subject to disease
The way of eating proscribed by wfpb physicians is whole foods--nothing processed, no sugar, no oil, or very little.
The people who follow wfpb diets for their health have truly transformed their lives with this kind of diet, as well as reversed or managed diseases. This has nothing to do with them vegan, and many are adamantly NOT vegan
There is also a way of eating known as Whole 30, which allows meats. This diet is likely to be more healthful than those of most vegans
My point is that you are conflating a wfpb diet with vegan which does not imply WHAT is eaten.
Really, you are not helping vegans

 

[silva]

its not easy finding good vegan deodorant

Well according to the OP they shouldn't need it
I'm about to plop down some money on that Lume!

 

[Danielle]

Well according to the OP they shouldn't need it
I'm about to plop down some money on that Lume!

I smell like onion and garlic without it, especially after a day of working out in the heat.
My bf mostly smells like shredded cheese, lol. Not even the good cheese!

 

[majorbloodnok]

I also dislike humans making untrue statements, so we have something in common.
I will attempt to channel better and not insult anyone else, I promise.

I agree, and thank you.

...
However, cadavers located outside have a noxious odor which is comprised of cadaverine and putricine (dead animal smells outside in the woods, etcetera. Once you smell it, you know something died). Those stinky smells are OUTSIDE in the fresh open air.

Yes.

...
Humans eat cadavers

No. The term "cadaver" is used for a dead human body, particularly in scientific terms one destined for dissection and/or research. Eating one would be both illegal and medically unsafe, and the practice is vanishingly rare.

Omnivorous humans do, however, eat dead animals. If you want to pick a term that emphasises unattractiveness, perhaps "carcase" (or "carcass" in US English).

... and they are trapped in the human body for about 4 days, without air, where they rot and stink.

Yes, yes, no, no.

Meat from whatever source does take time to digest. 4 days is the upper end of the scale. However, the meat does not rot; it is digested - that's the point of it being consumed.

In relation to meat, rotting is the natural process decomposition as a result of bacterial activity, and, if it occurred in a human digestive tract, would cause illness and death. Digestion is the accelerated decomposition of the meat as a result of enzymes in order to break the food groups down into their useful components (ultimately ATP, although generally into glycogen and fat for intermediate storage). Specifically, the environment within the human digestive tract is designed to halt any minor amounts of rotting that may have started or, if rotting has become too advanced, to expel the offending material (vomiting and diarrhoea). However much you might like to use the unpleasant term of "rotting" to describe consumed animal flesh, it is absolutely and utterly incorrect.

As to whether digested meat "stinks" in the human gut, this is also a misnomer. Smell is the transmission of volatile compounds through the air, and if something is in an absence of air this is impossible. The waste products left over after the body has taken all the useful nutrients will, of course, be excreted and does smell, but that's not unique to meat - although it is perfectly reasonable to suggest the faeces may have a more unpleasant smell if it contains byproducts of digested meat.

In all of this, of course, the human body treats meat in exactly the same way as vegan meat alternatives. Any terms you use to try to make the digestion of meat sound unpleasant are equally applicable to the digestion of a Beyond burger. The type and relative quantities of proteins, fats and carbohydrates will inevitably result in slightly different-smelling waste at the end of it all, but neither meat nor meat alternatives rot in the gut and neither "stink" there either.

...
If you think eating cadavers dead animals does not make the human body smell, thats' your belief...

The effect of meat consumption on body odor attractiveness - PubMed

Axillary body odor is individually specific and potentially a rich source of information about its producer. Odor individuality partly results from genetic individuality, but the influence of ecological factors such as eating habits are another main source of odor variability. However, we know...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

On the contrary, I'm certain the meat WILL affect the human body's scent. The question is whether its effect is regarded as unpleasant.

The general assumption is that if there is a compound in someone's scent that also appears in your own, your nose's constant exposure to that compound will mean its smell is largely ignored, so will neither increase nor detract from that scent's attractiveness. However, a dietary difference between the two people will certainly translate into different chemical compositions of their scents and therefore differences the nose will pick up on. I've removed almost all your links, but I've left the one that has a compelling result. The study would need a far larger cohort to be conclusive, but the way the study was conducted is quite sound, and the conclusion that reducing or removing meat from a diet improves the attractiveness of the person's scent is well founded.

 

[VeganRachel]

I was referring to male vegans I've known--didn't know intimitly, but they definitely had body odor, and users of Dr Bronner castile soap.One was a house mate and did shower

I cannot comment here except to say that perhaps they were not eating healthfully, or were still clogged with the
animal junk they used to eat. Sadly there are a lot of crapopy vegn processed foods, and guys may not consume
whole healthy vegetables or fruits.

 

[VeganRachel]

Animal flesh putrefies in the human body, creating an ammonia and sulfur odor. among many others
When flesh rots "outside" as in the woods, a dead animal is decaying, it produces the noxious odors of cadaverine and putrescine.
Interestingly, humans also do that when they consume something dead. Dead flesh, rots and putrefies both inside, and outside the
human body., creating noxious odors. If the following information does not help you, believe what you want to. cheers.

cadaverine

Definition of cadaverine in the Medical Dictionary by The Free Dictionary

medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com

A colorless toxic ptomaine with an unpleasant odor formed during the putrefaction of animal tissue, 10 letters - Crossword clues, answers, solver - Word finder

The answer for clue: A colorless toxic ptomaine with an unpleasant odor formed during the putrefaction of animal tissue

findwords.info

putrescine

Definition of putrescine in the Medical Dictionary by The Free Dictionary

medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com

The biogenic amines putrescine and cadaverine show in vitro cytotoxicity at concentrations that can be found in foods - PubMed

Putrescine and cadaverine are among the most common biogenic amines (BA) in foods, but it is advisable that their accumulation be avoided. Present knowledge about their toxicity is, however, limited; further research is needed if qualitative and quantitative risk assessments for foods are to be...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

What Animal Protein Does in Your Colon | NutritionFacts.org

There’s a take-off of the industry slogan, “Beef: It’s What’s For Dinner” – “Beef: It’s What’s Rotting in Your Colon.” I saw this on a shirt once with

nutritionfacts.org

and....https://nutritionfacts.org/video/bowel-wars-hydrogen-sulfide-vs-butyrate/

Flashback Friday: How Many Bowel Movements Should You Have & Should You Sit, Lean, or Squat? | NutritionFacts.org

Most people have between 3 bowel movements a day and 3 a week, but normal doesn’t necessarily mean optimal. Squatting and leaning can help straighten the anorectal angle, but a healthy enough diet should make bowel movements effortless regardless of positioning.

nutritionfacts.org

Breast Cancer and Constipation | NutritionFacts.org

The reason why women who have more frequent bowel movements appear to be at lower risk for breast cancer may be because bile acids absorbed from our intestines concentrate in the breast and have a estrogen-like tumor promoting effect.

nutritionfacts.org

Fifty Times Lower Colon Cancer Risk | NutritionFacts.org

Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States, after lung cancer. The rates of lung cancer around the world vary by a

nutritionfacts.org

 

[majorbloodnok]

Animal flesh putrefies in the human body, creating an ammonia and sulfur odor. among many others
When flesh rots "outside" as in the woods, a dead animal is decaying, it produces the noxious odors of cadaverine and putrescine.
Interestingly, humans also do that when they consume something dead. Dead flesh, rots and putrefies both inside, and outside the
human body., creating noxious odors. If the following information does not help you, believe what you want to. cheers.

This is precisely why you need to tighten up on your terminology.

I said flesh left outside will rot (or putrefy if you prefer) and gave details to demonstrate. I also said flesh in the gut is digested, and illustrated why rotting and digestion are very specifically different things. The very first line in your latest reply says, “Animal flesh puttrefies in the human body”. No it doesn’t and repeatedly saying it won’t make it true.

All humans have a scent containing an ammonia smell. Eating protein - particularly meat - will increase that since all protein contains nitrogen. I don’t disagree with you on that point, since it’s demonstrable scientific fact. However, the human digestive process does not produce putrescine or cadaverine as digestive byproducts.

By all means attack the practice of meat consumption for any of the many valid reasons. However, constantly making claims that are factually incorrect will simply open you up to ridicule and have the valid parts of your argument ignored in the process.

 

[Brian W]

The widely held myth that meat hangs around longer than other foodstuffs probably stems from the fact a high-protein diet results in a lot of leftover ammonia, which must be removed in the form of urea by the kidneys. This uses extra water and if you don’t drink more to compensate, the dehydrating effect can result in constipation. But in a normal, omnivorous diet, the meat will complete its journey through your digestive system in 12 to 48 hours, along with everything else.

How long does meat sit in your gut? | BBC Science Focus Magazine

 

[xilex]

Interesting topic!
I'm a vegan newbie, so I haven't noticed any changes yet, but it is great to know I can expect them

 

[jerfer]

interesting post, i would like to hear more about it

 

[Brian W]

As a vegan who recently faced ED, I discovered stress and unhealthy habits were underlying factors. While dietary choices can play a role, it's essential to consider overall well-being. Adopting a balanced lifestyle, including stress management, exercise, and proper nutrition, contributed to positive changes for me. Additionally, I found gel to be effective in improving intimate health. It's important to find the causes and explore solutions that align with your individual needs.

Personally, I think that if we weren't so obsessed with sex and more able to accept the realities of life, we could solve so many problems instead of "needing" gels, creams, tablets or any other aid to bolster our unrealistic expectations of excitement.

 

[VeganRachel]

It seems that you've convinced yourself that a vegan diet improves erections.

btw, YouTube is a very poor/unreliable source for accurate information.

YES I do for many reasons. E.D. is also psychological, but I am talking about the PHYSICAL issues related to foods.
I am not implying someone will become a perfect lover just becaue they eat beans and broccoli. But body scent, matters.
Cholesterol and saturated fats clog the arteries, slowing down blood flow and oxygen. E.D. is a warning sign for heart
arteries clogging a few years later.
Even the Gladiators were called "barley men", so they fought better on beans, barley, fruit, and ash. Common sense implies
they also had more energy in other ways as well...see my videos above for other opinions.