In which a group of graying eternal amateurs discuss their passions, interests and obsessions, among them: movies, art, politics, evolutionary biology, taxes, writing, computers, these kids these days, and lousy educations.

E-Mail Donald
Demographer, recovering sociologist, and arts buff

E-Mail Fenster
College administrator and arts buff

E-Mail Francis
Architectural historian and arts buff

E-Mail Friedrich
Entrepreneur and arts buff
E-Mail Michael
Media flunky and arts buff

We assume it's OK to quote emailers by name.

Try Advanced Search

  1. Seattle Squeeze: New Urban Living
  2. Checking In
  3. Ben Aronson's Representational Abstractions
  4. Rock is ... Forever?
  5. We Need the Arts: A Sob Story
  6. Form Following (Commercial) Function
  7. Two Humorous Items from the Financial Crisis
  8. Ken Auster of the Kute Kaptions
  9. What Might Representational Painters Paint?
  10. In The Times ...

Sasha Castel
AC Douglas
Out of Lascaux
The Ambler
Modern Art Notes
Cranky Professor
Mike Snider on Poetry
Silliman on Poetry
Felix Salmon
Polly Frost
Polly and Ray's Forum
Stumbling Tongue
Brian's Culture Blog
Banana Oil
Scourge of Modernism
Visible Darkness
Thomas Hobbs
Blog Lodge
Leibman Theory
Goliard Dream
Third Level Digression
Here Inside
My Stupid Dog
W.J. Duquette

Politics, Education, and Economics Blogs
Andrew Sullivan
The Corner at National Review
Steve Sailer
Joanne Jacobs
Natalie Solent
A Libertarian Parent in the Countryside
Rational Parenting
Colby Cosh
View from the Right
Pejman Pundit
God of the Machine
One Good Turn
Liberty Log
Daily Pundit
Catallaxy Files
Greatest Jeneration
Glenn Frazier
Jane Galt
Jim Miller
Limbic Nutrition
Innocents Abroad
Chicago Boyz
James Lileks
Cybrarian at Large
Hello Bloggy!
Setting the World to Rights
Travelling Shoes

Redwood Dragon
The Invisible Hand
Daze Reader
Lynn Sislo
The Fat Guy
Jon Walz


Our Last 50 Referrers

« Clark on Rod | Main | Does Helping the Struggling Also Ruin Them? »

November 07, 2006

Sexually Speaking ...

Michael Blowhard writes:

Dear Blowhards --

The good news is that researchers are learning that sex is good for your health. The bad news is that they're thereby turning sex into yet another burdensome health chore ...



posted by Michael at November 7, 2006


Researchers are so stupid. They needed to "do research" to figure this out?

Posted by: annette on November 7, 2006 10:45 AM

As far as I can tell from that article, the research is correlational; thus, it's equivocal on the issue of whether or not sex causes better health. Some correlational research is not equivocal, even if, strictly speaking, "correlation doesn't imply causation" -- for example, exposure to alcohol as an infant and developmental problems (since the latter cannot go back in time and cause the former), even though the research cannot be an experimental vs control design for ethical reasons.

Unfortunately in the health-sex case, it's credible that either one may cause the other. Perhaps frequency of sexual intercourse is a good diagnostic test for who was already enjoying better health, due to increased ability to perform, increased attractiveness to the opposite sex, and so on.

Now, an experimental vs control design would eliminate the ambiguity, though the subjects randomly sorted into the abstinence group would have to be handsomely compensated in order to ensure they didn't cheat.

Posted by: Agnostic on November 7, 2006 12:42 PM

"Seminal plasma contains zinc, calcium and other minerals shown to retard tooth decay. Since this is a family Web site, we will omit discussion of the mineral delivery system."


Do I smell an ADA campaign coming on?

Posted by: communicatrix on November 7, 2006 1:23 PM

Thanx for a couple or 5 of good laughs, on this cloudy afternoon.

The logic behind the ginecologist's advice is especially entertaining. And the "mineral delivery system". And the "exercise" rational. And the statement at the beginning ("health benefits to men and women"), followed by a study of male participants
No, seriously, the authors ought to book a comedy club.

Posted by: Tat on November 7, 2006 3:38 PM

You live in another country. Sex education in the Netherlands has always meant for most people that a macrobiotic witch in a stinky woolly jumper came to talk about a weird kind of PE for two people.

Ever so healthy it was.

Apart from the fact everyone already knew all the details beforehand, this was all probably a cynical lobby for abstination. Nothing worse than having sex promoted by an old and ugly woman, who was willing to answer all your questions, and spared no technical detail.

Think a Microsoft lawyer explaining love.

And just the tought about her still doing it...

Posted by: ijsbrand on November 7, 2006 4:16 PM

I'll add another factor to the growing list of why my health is screwed. Benefactors can still collect life insurance benefits, can't they, if cause of death is determined to be "cut off from marital privilege"?

Posted by: raymond pert on November 7, 2006 4:18 PM

Honestly I do not see sex becoming less popular because it is healthy.

Posted by: SFG on November 7, 2006 4:22 PM

ijsbrand - We have our own version of the little old ugly lady sex instructor in this country, so maybe it's not another country. We call her Dr. Ruth.

Posted by: ricpic on November 7, 2006 7:12 PM

We also have this cringemaking show on late night cable. (Not safe for work - or indeed for anywhere else.)

Posted by: Brian on November 7, 2006 9:00 PM

Great. Now I need to have sex after flossing and taking my cholesterol pill. What a life!

Posted by: Neil on November 7, 2006 9:40 PM

Work, work, work

Wasn't there a National Lampoon parody in the 70s titled "The Job of Sex"?

Posted by: Reid Farmer on November 8, 2006 10:50 AM

Post a comment

Email Address:



Remember your info?