Talk:Retrograde ejaculation

"One day your face will stick like that"
Seriously?... citation needed indeed. 24.84.44.248 (talk) 04:02, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Reduction in Fertility
"Retrograde ejaculation is considered harmless as the only negative effect is the loss or reduction in fertility" I would not find a loss or reduction in my fertility "harmless". Howboutpete 14:27, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Speak for yourself, man. I, for one, think it's a great thing. ... besides, it's either this or a vasectomy. Yay for side effects!Kyalisu 16:14, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

I write here as one who has to experience retrograde ejaculation (often involuntary), due to a past, damaging bacterial prostatitis. In no way can this be considered harmless. It may be so for some, for me it is knife-edge pain that lasts for hours after the event. It is both physically demanding and damaging and is not, or only poorly understood by women irrespective of their education and empathy....! In addition one has to go through the misery of urinating the sperm and their carrier fluids at the next voiding. Lumpy urine, what a delight. This now seems a permanent part of lifes rich tapestry for me!

Celsius100 (talk) 10:18, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Antipsychotic action
I couldn't find english references about the antipsychotic action in causing retrograde ejaculation -Mormegil 01/12/2007 21.22 UTC

Alternative Medicine
I'd read about the concept of ejaculating causing lost of vital energy or Chi from old biographical works from the late 19th century, so the belief is well-established. Obviously, in reality sperm is lost at the next urination after a retrograde, rendering this concept bogus (no offense to Taoists).

However I don't know of any sources confirming the line "It is believed the sensation of sperm passing through the urethra causes intense physical sensations that can drain the body of 'sexual energy.'"

Can someone provide a source for this? Even so, it strikes me as desperate back-pedaling in the face of scientific evidence.Legitimus (talk) 15:54, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * This alternative medicine section suffers from a significant misunderstanding of the taoist teachings and techniques. Taoists do NOT advocate the retrograde ejaculation whatsoever, as mentioned above this does indeed result in loss of sperm and seminal fluid and thus accomplishes nothing.


 * The correct technique is taught to maintain the delicate state between orgasm and ejaculation, to the specific state where one is experiencing orgasm but does not fall over the edge into ejaculation - either outwardly OR retrograde.


 * Retrograde ejaculation only occurs as a result of a mistake while practicing the technique, be it a loss of concentration, improper management of energy flow channels in the body, etc. The correct taoist teachings have been misrepresented in this article, please research! Therealthingy (talk) 02:17, 13 August 2008 (UTC)


 * That makes more sense. You've probably noticed that section does not have sources, so do you have a recommendation for a reliable website? Legitimus (talk) 11:59, 13 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I can recommend "The Multi-Orgasmic Man" as a source here, however it is a book in plain English and is not constructed on the Taoist/Tantric teachings. Also I don't have a copy of it at the moment so can't cite a source. Oldmaneinstein (talk) 15:50, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Does it hurt?
Or cause any bad effects? NGC 2009 04:24, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * No, it's painless. Sensation probably feels weird though.  And it's not really that harmful overall other than fertility purposes.

I read through this article and was also left with the question whether this was in some way unhealthy. I think that needs its own section in this article, something like "Effects on health." I used to do this as a kid to reduce the mess (figured it out myself), and I never felt any pain or anything. The fact that a medical term exists to describe a phenomenon does not make that phenomenon a bad or unhealthy thing. Dcs002 (talk) 13:21, 19 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes and no. I did this regularly over the course of a couple of decades, and periodically suffered a few instances of urethral/prostatic rupture - brief slight (1-2 day) bleeding, disturbingly pleasant stinging sensation while it healed, and not a little anxiety. Last time (roughly fifth rupture) was heavier and took a week or so to heal. Also, I think my urethra enlarged, so the operations that involve high pressure hydraulics aren't as forceful as they used to be. I know Wikipedia's not the place for original research, and I don't know how common rupture is - I'm guessing it's not the sort of thing guys want to talk about much, and I'm leaving this comment anonymous - but it would be good if the article could convey some recommendation against the practice and perhaps a healthier alternative like a supply of face flannels suitably folded. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.16.75.210 (talk) 16:17, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

"Men often notice during masturbation..."
I have a few issues with this sentence in the article as well as the source cited. I cannot take issue with the truth of this statement, however I fail to see the relevance/contribution to the article. Furthermore upon reading the entirety of the cited link, nothing could be found relating to the statement the source is supposed to corroborate. I bring this up in the discussion section because while the citation does not fit, it is overall a good citation on the topic, cites further sources, and I am loathe to edit or remove a sentence that is technically true simply because I do not see its immediate relevance to the topic on hand. Perhaps with a considerate edit this source (#2) and this sentence can be conveyed with greater clarity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.236.230.21 (talk) 06:42, 19 September 2013 (UTC)