First published brain study on porn users released today.

Done in Germany (way to go Europe). Published in JAMA Psychiatry, which is the cream of the crop when it comes to journals.

An article about it: Porn may be messing with your head
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/05/28/us-porn-brain-changes-idUSKBN0E82BK20140528

The abstract: Brain Structure and Functional Connectivity Associated With Pornography Consumption: The Brain on Porn http://archpsyc.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1874574

Note that they have "Brain on Porn" in the title



COMMENTS: the study found several brain changes, and those changes were related to how much porn was consumed.

I don't have the full study, but here's what is known -

The more porn the subjects used, the less gray matter in the striatum - which is a complex set of structures that includes the reward center (ventral striatum), and the dorsal striatum, which also goes by several names.

This correlates to fewer nerve connections (dendrites & axon terminals) in reward related areas. Anyhow - less gray matter in the striatum mean less reward activity, and correlates with a decline in dopamine signaling. Desensitization....perhaps.

By the way, less gray matter in the striatum also occurred in men with "psychogenic ED". See this - Macrostructural alterations of subcortical grey matter in psychogenic erectile dysfunction (2012) http://yourbrainonporn.com/macrostructural-alterations-subcortical-grey-matter-psychogenic-erectile-dysfunction-2012

A second finding was less connection between the reward centers (striatum) and the frontal cortex - this may indicate hypofrontality.

But the third finding can be confusing - it looked at cue reactivity when viewing sexual image (I think). My impression is that heavy porn users experienced less reward activity. This may be the opposite finding of the Valarie Voon study - which found greater cue reactivity.

I was always concerned with the Voon study because I thought guys with severe addiction might have less activation to vanilla porn images. Anyhow, we need more info, and I've asked for thoughts from experts in the field.

By the way, the Voon study shouldn't be too long...I hope.



UPDATE. Got the full study

It appears that the Voon study examined activity in the front part of the striatum (nucleus accumbens), which lights up for triggers; whereas this new study measured activity in the back part of the striatum, and it found desensitization.

Simple
- Valerie Voon study found sensitization.
- This German study found desensitization.

FROM THE CONCLUSION OF THE STUDY - http://archpsyc.jamanetwork.com.sci-hub.org/article.aspx?articleid=1874574

Taken together, one may be tempted to assume that the frequent brain activation caused by pornography exposure might lead to wearing and downregulation of the underlying brain structure, as well as function, and a higher need for external stimulation of the reward system and a tendency to search for novel and more extreme sexual material. This hypothesized self-perpetuating process could be interpreted in light of proposed mechanisms in drug addiction where individuals with lower striatal dopamine receptor availability are assumed to medicate themselves with drugs.

 

Interesting. Personally I have no doubt that I´m desensitized

 

dam thats good news tho people are looking into it

 

Now, I'm paranoid that I have psychogenic ED :-\

 

PIED is psychogenic in a effect as it originates in the brain. The point is that men with non-organic ED have similar brain changes as heavy porn users. This is significant.

 

Right, so how do I know I don't have psychogenic ED? I've rebooted 90 days before, and while I did notice improvement in my libido, I never felt that "insane horniness" some describe. How do I know that it's porn addiction and not psychogenic ED?

Thanks for responding!

 

Desensitization? Sounds like that may be all it is in the study, which they find nothing wrong with. These authors were pretty aggressive about saying their findings had nothing to do with addiction (Internet or Sex). Specifically, from the study:

we set out to investigate the neural correlates associatedwith frequent—not necessarily addictive—pornography use in a healthy population (so people viewing porn were "healthy" by their definition) -pE2

The Internet Sex Screening Test and SexualAddiction Screening Test showed no relationship with any of the brain differences (like Steele et al) -pE3

Used standardized sexual images, just like Steele et al. -pE3

Reported viewing hours were related to depression and alcohol use, which cause the same relationships they noted in brain volume (in other words, it may have nothing to do with the erotica viewed) -pE3

Higher activation for sex cues relative to neutral, just sexual magnitude was relatively lower for those who viewed more (the same difference noted in Steel et al)-p E4

"The brain regions found in the present investigation are associated with relatively frequent, but not by definition, addictive pornography consumption." pE6

"The present results clearly showedthat the observedstructural correlates associated with moderate pornography consumption are not a mere byproduct of an accompanying Internet addiction" pE6

"Future research is needed to disentangle the causal relationship between the observed functional and structural effects and pornography consumption." -p E6

"We chose to refrain from diagnostic categories or normative assumptions and instead investigated the pure dosage effects of PHs in a healthy sample. At the current state of research, normative statements are not warranted" pE6

"Future studies should investigate the effects of pornography longitudinally or expose naïve participants to pornography and investigate the causal effects over time to provide further evidence for the proposed mechanism of intense exposure to pornographic stimuli" pE7 In other words, they clearly state they did NOT show sexy pictures caused any brain changes

Sounds like a replication of Steele et al. and demonstration of non-pathological habituation. Another blow to "addiction"

 

Is this Gary's Stalker again ? Lol...

 

Is that actually a real guy?

 

You're OBVIOUSLY His BIGGEST Fan ! ;-)

 

Could these brain changes explain some of the other claimed effects of excessive porn use such as depression, social anxiety, etc.?

 

I'm not a fan of anyone who takes one quote to try to trick people into thinking those authors were supporting addiction. I know not everyone will have the time (or be able) to get and read the actual study, so it's a shame he tried to intentionally misrepresent their conclusions. Those poor authors! All that work to show it wasn't addiction and some rando says "it's addiction"? That clearly was not the conclusion of the paper, not even close. Just be aware whoever that person is (or isn't...mwah hahaha!) they are definitely trying to lie to you when they pull junk like that.

 

Awwww....that's soooooo CUTE ! Your LOVE for Him is SO obvious !

P.S. You should try to hide it a little...your kinda killing the thrill of the chase ! *wink wink*

 

The authors say it could be the other way around. For example, depression is associated with smaller caudate, hours of viewing is associated with depression. It could be that depression is the main factor/correlate and people who are lonely/sad/unpartnered just seek out more sexy pictures. In other words, it's unlikely the brain changes happened and CAUSED depression or picture use. Not sure if that helps. The study raised some interesting questions, but the authors were very clear that what they studied didn't show any causality.

 

Can anyone answer this??? Kind of worried.

 

What a load of crap.

This poster reminds a lot of Prause, who occasionally posts on YBR to promote her so-called research or to spin others research. She has probably been working on her silly little list all day long, ever since the new study was released. If you want the real details of the Kuhn study, see my comments here - http://yourbrainonporn.com/brain-structure-and-functional-connectivity-associated-pornography-consumption-2014

If you want the real details of Steele et al. see - Nothing Correlates With Nothing In SPAN Lab's New Porn Study (2013) http://yourbrainonporn.com/nothing-correlates-nothing-span-labs-new-porn-study-2013

Addiction like brain changes and less sexual response in the striatum -- all correlating with the amount of porn use.

=================


Let's be clear - This study did not find habituation. Habituation, or getting bored with a stimulus, doesn't cause shrinkage of a part of the reward center. (the dorsal striatum). Lead author Simone Kühn said - "That could mean that regular consumption of pornography more or less wears out your reward system."

In addition, this study found significant alterations in the reward center to frontal cortex connections - another solid addiction marker.

It also found the more porn used, the less reward activation when sexual images were flashed on the screen. A possible explanation is that heavy users eventually need more stimulation to fire up their reward circuitry. Said the researchers, "This is in line with the hypothesis that intense exposure to pornographic stimuli results in a downregulation of the natural neural response to sexual stimuli."

The Steele (actually Prause study) study was an EEG study that in no way compares to this study in design, methodologies or results. You can see my comment about it here - http://www.yourbrainrebalanced.com/index.php?topic=11401.msg285026#msg285026

Besides attempting to spin this current study. Prause has misrepresented her own study, and misrepresented Valerie Voon's soon to be published study.

You can see all the details on how she miled the public with her statements in the above link. Her only legitimate finding was that subjects had higher EEG readings when viewing porn - which is exactly what one would expect. In contrast to the Prause press release, there were no other findings for her July 2013 study. The relationship between the SDI and P300 readings was statistically insignificant when the entire SDI was calculated. You know, the masturbation questions - also.

The other unbelievable lie is posted on her website - SPAN lab http://www.span-lab.com/
QUOTE - 4/1/2014 Laboratories converge against the "addiction" model of sexual image viewing in APA monitor article.

It's a two part lie:

1) Prause is claiming that her single flawed study refuted the addiction model. It did not. It's findings (higher EEG readings for porn) supported the addiction model.

2) Prause is claiming that Valerie Voon's upcoming study refutes the addiction model. She links to an article about her and Voon, which you can read and see that this is a lie. A link to several sources about Voon's study - http://www.yourbrainonporn.com/cambridge-university-brain-scans-find-porn-addiction

Prause is the only one who believes her own nonsense. She appears desperate. She is willing to misrepresent her own stdudy results; lie about Voon's studies, and seemingly make up crap. Not only that, but she spends her off time posting on YBR and other forums under various aliases to dispute the model of porn addiction.

Prause can keep churning out her brain wave studies that show nothing at all, but are promoted as dismantling the "porn addiction model", but reality, and legitimate studies, will soon make her irrelevant. More studies are coming...more than she knows about.

EDIT - I guess she is now at least two new people on YBR -
1) txfba
2) toiuf

How sad. And how desperate and unhinged must one be to take the so called "battle" to a forum of guys trying recover from porn-induced sexual dysfunctions?

 

Huh? Here's what I'm refuting -

This is a lie. They had virtually noting in common.

- Prause study was EEG, German study was fMRI

- Prause study looked at electrical activity of the cortex, German study examined the structures of the reward circuit and connectivity between the reward circuit and frontal cortex

- Prause study had males, females and homosexual all watch the same heterosexual images, German study only used heterosexual males.

- Prause study did not examine the structure or functioning of the brain. The German study did

- Prause misrepresented her findings, the Germans did not.

I'll say this again and I want you to refute it. The only Prause finding was higher P300 (EEG) when viewing sexual images. That's it. This finding is the same finding that would occur if one was addicted to porn. So the Prause study supports the addiction model.


In fact, commenting under the Psychology Today interview of Prause, Psychologist John A. Johnson said:

"My mind still boggles at the Prause claim that her subjects' brains did not respond to sexual images like drug addicts' brains respond to their drug, given that she reports higher P300 readings for the sexual images. Just like addicts who show P300 spikes when presented with their drug of choice. How could she draw a conclusion that is the opposite of the actual results? I think it could be do to her preconceptions--what she expected to find."
LINK - http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-sexual-continuum/201307/new-brain-study-questions-existence-sexual-addiction/comments#comment-556448

In other words she lied.

A peer-reviewed paper has completely dismantled the Steele/Prause study and exposed it for what it is. ‘High desire’, or ‘merely’ an addiction? A response to Steele et al. by Donald L. Hilton, Jr., MD, (2014) http://www.socioaffectiveneuroscipsychol.net/index.php/snp/article/view/23833/32589

In other words, "good evidence on both sides" is a lie. The only evidence Prause cites is her own study, and it actually supports the addiction model.

So far the preponderance of evidence demonstrates that visual stimuli has the ability to cause addiction This is well established with 60 internet addiction brain studies - all of which found the same fundamental addiction related brain changes as seen in drug addicts See the studies here - http://yourbrainonporn.com/list-internet-video-game-brain-studies

Now we have one solid stdudy published in JAMA, and several more to be published by Voon - all evidence FOR the addiction model. Silly attempts at spin on anonymous forums will not change reality.

Bottom line - you have NO evidence on your side.

PS - are you brave enough to discuss your study (Steele) and all of its' flaws? - Nothing Correlates With Nothing In SPAN Lab's New Porn Study (2013)
http://www.yourbrainonporn.com/nothing-correlates-nothing-span-labs-new-porn-study-201