TO ALL DELUSIONAL DUMBASSES WHO SAY CIRCUMCISION CAUSES LOSS OF SENSITIVITY

[Gengar]

my dick is beautiful

that uncut dick of yours is utterly disgusting, mirin ur ability of not puking when u look at it tho.

 

[Gengar]

ur a fakecel gigachad?

i wish i was

I used to be a porn addict my dick is fine it's cause you're cut

if you used to be a porn addict then you werent really an addict. its been ongoing for me, tried to kick it since 2012 to no avail

 

[Deleted member 9670]

that uncut dick of yours is utterly disgusting, mirin ur ability of not puking when u look at it tho.

still haven't posted any studies

 

[Deleted member 3583]

i have a rl friend who got circumcised and he says theres no loss in sensitivity. keep coping though.

no loss of sensitivity indeed. you made him cum in only a few minutes!

 

[Be_ConfidentBro]

 

[Gengar]

no loss of sensitivity indeed. you made him cum in only a few minutes!

cope

still haven't posted any studies

yeah i posted a drawing. dont be retarded. youre just coping at this point.

 

[Deleted member 9670]

cope

yeah i posted a drawing. dont be retarded. youre just coping at this point.

you have no idea how the peer review system works

 

[Gengar]

you have no idea how the peer review system works

youre just unwilling to accept youre wrong, its ok dude.

 

[Feminineboi]

thats cuz you wont. you fell for memes on here lmao. you wouldnt lose it

Ah yes. I wouldn't lose it but I would be able to bear my exposed cock head rubbing against my underwear all day, I see

 

[Gengar]

Ah yes. I wouldn't lose it but I would be able to bear my exposed cock head rubbing against my underwear all day, I see

yes

 

[Dutcher]

https://manhoodcanada.com/ OP explain why I have very little sensation and last long af despite not masturbating but experienced increased sensation from wearing a fake foreskin

I mean I’m all for studies but they sell products pal

 

[magnificentcel]

Circumcised men are the biggest copers on earth

 

[Dutcher]

Circumcised men are the biggest copers on earth

You have 1/10 of a frenulum shut the fuck up

 

[Gengar]

Circumcised men are the biggest copers on earth

youre a braindead teenager lol, no one takes you srsly when u say this

 

[Deleted member 9670]

Circumcised men are the biggest copers on earth

that's right op is clinically retarded

 

[Gengar]

that's right op is clinically retarded

youre coping because you have an ugly dick and i dont. i took away your only cope.

 

[Deleted member 9670]

youre a braindead teenager lol, no one takes you srsly when u say this

If you post the individual studies I can explain to you how the methodology is flawed

 

[Dutcher]

Never saw debunking for this though

 

[Gengar]

If you post the individual studies I can explain to you how the methodology is flawed

nothin flawed about it. the 5.1" avg we got was a review as well and theyre accurate. stop coping already lol

 

[Deleted member 9670]

youre coping because you have an ugly dick and i dont. i took away your only cope.

women prefer uncut dicks. only in america and certain cultures they are conditioned to be disgusted by them

 

[Deleted member 9670]

nothin flawed about it. the 5.1" avg we got was a review as well and theyre accurate. stop coping already lol

5.1 inch is cope worldwide average is 5.5

 

[magnificentcel]

You have 1/10 of a frenulum shut the fuck up

I’m circumcised but I’m not in denial like all of you copers

 

[Gengar]

women prefer uncut dicks. only in america and certain cultures they are conditioned to be disgusted by them

women dont prefer uncut dicks you coping moron. exposed head is way more pleasurable for them lol. im not conditioned to think uncut is ugly, i literally saw pics of it and was immediately disgusted

 

[Deleted member 9670]

nothin flawed about it. the 5.1" avg we got was a review as well and theyre accurate. stop coping already lol

the 5.1 study wasn't bonepressed thats why it was lower

 

[Dutcher]

can't expect much from OP tbh, 25 and failed out of uni several times despite studying humanities

maybe if he had his foreskin he wouldn't have PIED as well
View attachment 844425

brutal existence... @Introvertednarc thoughts?

Brutal takedown and overkill

 

[rockndogs]

I just want to be normal

 

[Gengar]

5.1 inch is cope worldwide average is 5.5

5.5 is western average you brainlet lol. given the 0.4" difference which is negligible at best shows that youre coping with your ugly penis

 

[Deleted member 9670]

women dont prefer uncut dicks you coping moron. exposed head is way more pleasurable for them lol. im not conditioned to think uncut is ugly, i literally saw pics of it and was immediately disgusted

explain how and post studies to prove it

 

[Dutcher]

I just want to be normal

SNIP SNIP

 

[Gengar]

the 5.1 study wasn't bonepressed thats why it was lower

i cant take you seriously anymore you utter retard.

 

[Deleted member 9670]

5.5 is western average you brainlet lol. given the 0.4" difference which is negligible at best shows that youre coping with your ugly penis

no it's worldwide white people ahve bigger dicks, that study includes asians and south asians which are small

 

[Gengar]

explain how and post studies to prove it

"give me studies for common sense" aspie get out the basement and talk to em yourselves lol. post results here

 

[Deleted member 9670]

i cant take you seriously anymore you utter retard.

ur just coping with small deformed dick

 

[Gengar]

no it's worldwide white people ahve bigger dicks, that study includes asians and south asians which are small

youre retarded if you think location makes penis bigger or smaller tho. it doesnt. its environmental & genetic so even asians can have big dicks like @LondonVillie

 

[magnificentcel]

5.5 is western average you brainlet lol. given the 0.4" difference which is negligible at best shows that youre coping with your ugly penis

Imagine thinking uncircumcised penises are the ugly ones.

 

[Gengar]

ur just coping with small deformed dick

how do you know how big my dick is? yours is naturally deformed because no way something that ugly isnt a deformity. tell me your size if you think you have a big dick lolol

 

[rockndogs]

But my cock is aesthetic af ngl

 

[Gengar]

Imagine thinking uncircumcised penises are the ugly ones.

why you looking at pics of dicks you fucking homo

 

[Gengar]

But my cock is aesthetic af ngl

if erect? exception then tbh. ive seen lots of uncut dicks (thanks porn) and yikes...

 

[Dutcher]

Imagine thinking uncircumcised penises are the ugly ones.

I CANT TAKE THIS ANYMORE

 

[Dutcher]

 

[Dutcher]

Alright, because there is a lot of discussion and anecdote, as well as a fair number of misunderstandings about the study, I'll try to do a quick writeup of it.

First, the study abstract can be found here.

The study was looking at the sensitivity in the penis of men who were circumcised as neonates (infants). They were testing three different hypotheses. First, that circumcised men will have higher penile tactile and pain thresholds (i.e. lower sensitivity). Second, that the differences in penile sensitivity will mostly be at the glans penis. Finally, that the foreskin area will be more sensitive for uncircumcised men than other areas.

This is largely working off of two (untested) hypotheses for why penis sensitivity might be decreased. The first holds that keratinization occurs on the exposed glans penis epithelium, reducing penile sensitivity. The second holds that the removal of the highly innervated foreskin reduces sensitivity (lots of nerves in it).

Methods##

They recruited men between 18-40 for the study. They determined initial eligibility through phone interviews (basically screening out people with STDs, sexual dysfunction, cardiovascular conditions, smokers, etc.). They tested 4 locations: The forearm 4 inches below the wrist, the middle of the glans penis, the dorsal side with foreskin retracted if present, the anterior midline shaft, the anterior proximal shaft, and for men with foreskin, the unretracted foreskin. In case those locations are hard to follow, they included a diagram (NSFW).

To determine tactile thresholds, they used a modified von Frey filament. They assessed tactile threshold by determining the lowest intensity stimulus to perceive a touch. They assessed pain thresholds by determining the lowest threshold to produce a sensation of pain.
To assess thermal sensitivity thresholds, they used an analyzed that heated at 0.5C/second, and participants were prompted to indicate when they noticed a change in probe temperature (averaged over 3 trials), or a perception of heat pain (averaged over 2 trials).

Results##

They ended up with 62 men, 30 circumcised, 32 intact, mean age 24.2, SD 5.1.
First, I am fairly irritated with their data presentation. They did not find any statistically significant differences between circumcised and uncircumcised at the same locations. They did find differences between the locations. However, they didn't provide a breakdown of the data, just a set of graphs with circumcised and uncircumcised lumped together broken down by location. They should have provided the data, even if it was not significant, but I suspect they had a tight page limit.

For the tactile thresholds, they did not find any statistically significant differences. in any of the shared locations between circumcised or uncircumcised men. They did find differences between the locations they tested (see the graph above).

For the pain threshold, they did not find any statistically significant differences between circumcised and uncircumcised men. They did find differences between locations.

For the warmth detection threshold, they did not find any statistically significant differences between circumcised and uncircumcised men. They also did not find differences between testing sites. They did a power analysis, which indicated they would need 238 participants to obtain a significant effect.

For the heat pain thresholds, they did not find any statistically significant differences between circumcised and uncircumcised men. They did find differences between locations.

Author's Discussion##

So, what did the authors conclude from this?

First, that the keratinization hypothesis (the foreskin removal causes the glans to become less sensitive) does not appear to be supported by the data. They found no between group differences in glans penis sensitivity. They do say that to truly verify this though, they will need to perform biopsies of penises to check for any keratinization.

They did find that on uncircumcised men, the foreskin was more sensitive to tactile sensation stimuli (which agrees with previous research). However, they found no differences for tactile pain, warmth sensation, or heat pain.

The authors do say that the results of the study do not support the idea that foreskin removal reduces penile sensitivity. The sensitivity at the foreskin was not significantly different from the sensitivity at the forearm (control site) for any of the modalities. Other genital sites were more sensitive to pain than the forearm, so the authors conclude that means they may be more sensitive than the foreskin, which means that removing the less sensitive foreskin may not matter (I'm not sure if I am reading this section wrong, but this seems like a bit of a dubious statistical leap to me. It is late though, and I'm operating on less sleep than I like. I welcome correction). They do say that their data is not enough to determine if foreskin sensitivity is relevant to sexual pleasure.

They do bring up that one limitation of their study is that the link between sensory testing and sexual arousal is untested, which means that the lack of significant differences in sensitivity might not translate into a lack of differences in sexual pleasure.

They do say they would like to include larger sample sizes, which would help refine the data for pain and warmth detection thresholds, as well as to test more stimulus types (such as dynamic stimuli).

My Take##

They do seem to show that the removal of the foreskin does not appear to desensitize the glans under the foreskin, which is one of the major theories currently. I'm not convinced by their argument that their data may indicate that foreskin removal doesn't affect sensitivity, but I'm also not sure if I am awake enough right now to fully follow it. They do acknowledge that the sensitivities measured may not correlate to sexual function and pleasure. I am rather irritated with their data presentation, but that is likely an issue with only being given 6 pages for their study. They still should have supplementary information or something (assuming the journal allows it).

I'll try to answer a few of the comments tonight, but I am unlikely to be up for too much longer.

 

[Gengar]

thats a really interesting perspective actually. thanks for posting!

 

[rockndogs]

if erect? exception then tbh. ive seen lots of uncut dicks (thanks porn) and yikes...

my dick is cut bro

 

[Gengar]

my dick is cut bro

jfl my bad, i thought you were uncut as well ngl. makes sense yours is aesthetic since youre cut bro

 

[Dutcher]

jfl my bad, i thought you were uncut as well ngl. makes sense yours is aesthetic since youre cut bro

When you Islamic dogs conquer Europe make sure to cut everyone of those Euro faggots dicks bro

 

[Gengar]

When you Islamic dogs conquer Europe make sure to cut everyone of those Euro faggots dicks bro

sorry bro in europe theres only high e low t islamicucks, the golden age is already gone sad to say

 

[OOGABOOGA]

I mean I’m all for studies but they sell products pal

I’m not your pal and I’m talking about my personal experience with the product, not their claims

 

[Dutcher]

sorry bro in europe theres only high e low t islamicucks, the golden age is already gone sad to say

It’s over for us all global homos won

 

[Dutcher]

I’m not your pal and I’m talking about my personal experience with the product, not their claims

Whatever you say friend