Ejaculation frequency linked to prostate cancer/

  • Thread starter Thread starter Blackbog
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Blackbog

Guest
This report is about a year old, but I had heard this somewhere and recently was looking into it myself:

newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn4861

Apparently, the more you ejaculate, the less you are at risk for prostate cancer.

My question is, if this is true, what does this say about the Church’s policy on masturbation for those of us who are unmarried? If it is true, it seems that suppressing our natural urges increases the risk of prostate cancer. What good can come of prostate cancer?

Real question.
 
Go ahead and ejaculate till your eyes bleed if you think that it will keep cancer at bay, but I somehow get the feeling that the Church aint buying it, bro.👍

Sounds more like wishful thinking to me.
 
ESimmons,

Welcome to the forums!

As far as your sincere question – the answer is that one of the most basic principles of moral theology is that one cannot do something that is bad in order to obtain something good.

And the fact that something good may or may not be obtained does not in any way make less the intrinsic badness of the bad action.

Soooo. . . even though when we steal a pony we get to have a nice pony – and what could be bad about having a nice pony? 😉 – that doesn’t erase the fact that we stole, which is wrong in itself.

Basically the shorthand forumla for this principle of ethics is “the end does not justify the means.”

Does that help at all?
God Bless, VC
 
On the other hand, Church reports indicate that masturbation increases the risk of going to Hell. Which is worse, prostate cancer or Hell? Which source do you trust more, newscientist.com, or Holy Mother Church?
 
I was under the assumption that most if not all of Catholic moral theology was based around life and the preservation of life. Generally speaking, most if not all of the Church’s rules are good for you.

I found scientific research that suggests that it may not be healthy to not ejaculate. I only suggested that if it were, in fact, true, what are the implications of that? Are there other Catholic teachings that go against the general bodily health of its members?

I know it must be hard, but try and refrain from the “Which is worse, prostate cancer or GOING TO HELL?!!” replies. I get the picture.
 
ESimmons:
I know it must be hard, but try and refrain from the “Which is worse, prostate cancer or GOING TO HELL?!!” replies. I get the picture.
Click to expand...
I am sorry about my flippant response. Perhaps the research is true and that most men were meant to marry and have many children.
 
I think it’s wise not to believe any single website or “study” too quickly. There are a lot of variables and risk factors for cancer.

I found some interesting studies on the web that suggest Catholic priests actually have had a same to lower incidence of prostate cancer than the general male population:

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/…

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov…

umm.edu…

My advice is if you want to ejaculate frequently, get married ! 😃

…and if you are not married (like me) you will be happier living according to God’s commandments (without masturbation) than you will otherwise. It takes a little discipline, but it’s worth it !

🙂 Blessed is he who fears the Lord and finds delight in His commands. (Psalm 112) 🙂
 
ESimmons:
Are there other Catholic teachings that go against the general bodily health of its members?
Click to expand...
I do not know of any teachings that “go against” bodily health. That some folks in science make a claim does not mean such a claim is infallible or always true.

Not all medical therapies are morally licit.

Embryonic stem cell research is one such issue. Even if some cure may help, at what price do we pay for such a cure?

If masturbation in fact did help a cancer in some way, what price do we pay for it?
 
ESimmons:
…Are there other Catholic teachings that go against the general bodily health of its members?..
Click to expand...
I don’t think so. I think the bottom line is our spiritual health is more important than our physical, but we cannot forget that the two are connected. We are body and spirit.

Maybe you are thinking of how the Church does encourage us to include some penance in our lives?

As Paul says in the Bible, we have to be the master of our body - “bring it into submission” - not be a slave to the pleasures of the body. This does not mean the pleasures of the body are inherently evil, just that there are sinful pleasures and there are legitimate ones. We want to put God first, and our pursuit of pleasure second.

…and I think, maybe not always, but often, there is a real joy and pleasure when we understand what God expects of us and we find a way to do it.
 
ESimmons:
I was under the assumption that most if not all of Catholic moral theology was based around life and the preservation of life. Generally speaking, most if not all of the Church’s rules are good for you.
Click to expand...
Not at the expense of one’s immortal soul.

Scott
 
ESimmons:
This report is about a year old, but I had heard this somewhere and recently was looking into it myself:

newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn4861

Apparently, the more you ejaculate, the less you are at risk for prostate cancer.

My question is, if this is true, what does this say about the Church’s policy on masturbation for those of us who are unmarried? If it is true, it seems that suppressing our natural urges increases the risk of prostate cancer. What good can come of prostate cancer?

Real question.
Click to expand...
Hmmm…if that were valid you’d be seeing a very high concentrated incident of prostate cancer over the years in the priesthood.

What good can come of prostate cancer?
The same good which can come of lung cancer, heart disease, brain tumors, Alzheimers and any other ‘malady’ you’d care to mention.

The suffering which comes from the ailment can be offered for the souls in purgatory, they bring us personally closer to God and nurture our souls.
 
40.png
YinYangMom:
Hmmm…if that were valid you’d be seeing a very high concentrated incident of prostate cancer over the years in the priesthood.
Click to expand...
On a related note, it has been known for centuries that religious sisters have a higher rate of breast cancer.
What good can come of prostate cancer?
The same good which can come of lung cancer, heart disease, brain tumors, Alzheimers and any other ‘malady’ you’d care to mention.

The suffering which comes from the ailment can be offered for the souls in purgatory, they bring us personally closer to God and nurture our souls.
Click to expand...
I’ll start smoking.
 
ESimmons:
This report is about a year old, but I had heard this somewhere and recently was looking into it myself:

newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn4861

Apparently, the more you ejaculate, the less you are at risk for prostate cancer.

My question is, if this is true, what does this say about the Church’s policy on masturbation for those of us who are unmarried? If it is true, it seems that suppressing our natural urges increases the risk of prostate cancer. What good can come of prostate cancer?

Real question.
Click to expand...
Real answer: It would seem that God in His infinite wisdom (and good humor), is giving all those morally upright single men an expiated journey through this life to the next. What a deal, since in this life their is much suffering to be had, so why prolong the agony if you can get a fast ticket to the check out to eternal bliss (provided of course that you do it God’s way, i.e., no M … :tsktsk: ).

I love how science always eventually comes around to confirming God’s immutable laws for good, wholesome, morallyupright living. 👍
 
40.png
Benedictus:
On a related note, it has been known for centuries that religious sisters have a higher rate of breast cancer.

I’ll start smoking.
Click to expand...
Centuries? Where did you get this information? How much higher?

As far as smoking goes, the poster did not mean we should seek disease, only that we should seek to live for God. When we live for God, we offer any sufferings that come our way up to Him so that He can turn them into good.

When we live for God, we do not attempt to possibly avoid, through frequent sinful acts, some sort of disease that may come our way.
 
1753
**A good intention (for example, that of helping one’s neighbor) does not make behavior that is intrinsically disordered, such as lying and calumny, good or just. the end does not justify the means. **Thus the condemnation of an innocent person cannot be justified as a legitimate means of saving the nation. On the other hand, an added bad intention (such as vainglory) makes an act evil that, in and of itself, can be good (such as almsgiving).39

1755
A morally good act requires the goodness of the object, of the end, and of the circumstances together. An evil end corrupts the action, even if the object is good in itself (such as praying and fasting “in order to be seen by men”).
The object of the choice can by itself vitiate an act in its entirety. There are some concrete acts - such as fornication - that it is always wrong to choose, because choosing them entails a disorder of the will, that is, a moral evil.
 
I do not know about the nuns with breast cancer claim; however, I do remember the news reporting that having children (the physical act) decreases women’s risk of breast cancer and long-term lactation further decreases the risk. I just saw a news report that said it appears starting smoking before a full-term pregnancy is more likely to cause breast cancer than starting smoking after pregnancy and birth because of the protective benefits to breast tissue from pregnancy.

What does this have to do with masturbation and prostate cancer?

It appears that it is healthy for the male body to ejaculate and for the female body to be pregnant and give birth. So isn’t it rather selfish to go off in a corner and take care of your own self and deny some woman the health benefits of your ejaculation? The two were made to complement each other. In other words, science is again proving the church correct. Married monogamy is a beautiful thing and proper and fitting for one context. (However, unmarried sex brings a number of verifiable physical and emotional --and spiritual-- health risks such as STDs, early death, related drug and alcohol problems, mental disturbance, etc.) So it appears that your study proves just how important the church’s teachings on monogamous married relationships is!
 
40.png
Benedictus:
On a related note, it has been known for centuries that religious sisters have a higher rate of breast cancer.
Click to expand...
I’d need to see evidence of that. Those are probably old statistics. With all the research done of late and the statistics currently available I would not buy that claim at all. Breast cancer is so random that’s why they’re having such a difficult time stopping it. The closer they get to finding a common denominator new cases crop up which blows their theories.
I’ll start smoking.
Click to expand...
I’ve known quite a few people who died from lung cancer and never smoked a cigarette in their lives.

But if you’d like to start, start.
 
40.png
YinYangMom:
I’d need to see evidence of that. Those are probably old statistics.
Click to expand...
Well, it has been proven that breastfeeding significantly reduces the risk of breast cancer. A nun is unlikely to breast feed any children, while the average woman, especially in times past was likely to breast feed a number of children.

A Google Search yields a lot of results.
I’ve known quite a few people who died from lung cancer and never smoked a cigarette in their lives.
Click to expand...
You’re looking at the situation backwards.
 
40.png
Forest-Pine:
I

It appears that it is healthy for the male body to ejaculate and for the female body to be pregnant and give birth. So isn’t it rather selfish to go off in a corner and take care of your own self and deny some woman the health benefits of your ejaculation? The two were made to complement each other.
Click to expand...
Good point.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top