Wasn't this class of medication originally for cardiovascular issues, and the whole ED mitigation was a happy marketable accident?
Somehow reminds me of another joke...
What do they call a testicle transplant in the US?
"Shooting someone else's children"
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S205011611...
Slightly off topic, but this is why I don't really trust these "no tolerance" claims. That claim is usually very specific, while people's understanding of "tolerance" is often quite a bit wider.
I take 3 medications which each make "no tolerance" claims based on scientific studies. But my subjective experience is that all of them do build tolerance in some way - the subjective effect does wear off with time and taking a break does reduce the tolerance. One possible cause is mistaking the intended effect (ED) with side-effects (boner all day).
However, it seems that there was at least theoretical consideration that it could be used to treat ED
A nice overview is here:
Each to his own I guess..
...so yes, probably.
I think that's the case for Cialis but Viagra should make you "pop" regardless of what activity you're doing.
It takes about an hour to take effect (usually less for me) and lasts a little over 4 hours with some lingering effects for several hours later, with diminishing effects towards the 4 and above hours.
If I’m sexually stimulated during that time physically and or mentally, everything works like it should (erection). If during that time even when I would normally see peak effects around the 50 min to 90 min mark I’m driving or doing taxes or whatever non-sexually stimulating activity one might do, no erection at all.
No it doesn't. It simply makes the effect of sexual stimulation more effective. If you body is not trying to engorge the penis it has little to no effect on that part of you.
At least that is my experience of taking it.
Adult males in their 30s or older very rarely just get a random erection with no physical or mental stimulation while going about their business.
Bodybuilders (in the months before competing, while cutting) can't get it up even if they wanted to.
Normal natural bodybuilders get them if they have a low enough BF%.
I mean, steroids are worse but you can get perfectly disfunctional naturally .
Was news to me to read in a sibling that it also requires mental stimulation. I thought it was purely a physical inducement by the drug, as many drugs for other purposes induce a physical response without requiring mental effort.
Aside from the lifting the desk part, that's exactly how I imagine it working - and how it should work. You mean it also requires special sexual arousal? Well, even that it shouldn't be that difficult.
Most male bodybuilders wear loose shorts (or e.g., track pants) for workouts, the tight trunks being worn on the contest stage.
Marketing is the key to business success. (Talking to you, tech people)
“ Panelists pointed to flawed studies that could have skewed the results, missing follow-up data on patient outcomes and a lack of diversity among participants. The vast majority of patients were white, with only five Black patients receiving MDMA, raising questions about the generalizability of the results.
“The fact that this study has so many white participants is problematic because I don’t want something to roll out that only helps this one group,” said Elizabeth Joniak-Grant, the group’s patient representative. “
Hopefully the VA can lead the way.
https://apnews.com/article/mdma-psychedelics-fda-ptsd-ecstas...
drug research is worse than training an LLM. you feed it to random people and then compare effects with initial conditions and of something looks good you try with more control.