http://rt.com/news/270181-porn-addiction-new-study/



Although we've been told that pornography is an addiction, it turns out that isn't the case at all. A new study says the brain activity of “porn addicts” actually decreases when viewing X-rated images.

The research, published in the journal Biological Psychology, “provides clear evidence that porn does not look like other addictions,” Dr. Nicole Prause, sexual psychophysiologist, neuroscientist, and lead author of the study, told Medical Daily.

Prause and her colleagues examined 122 men and women, 55 of whom reported a “porn problem.” While an EEG recorded the participants' brain activity, the volunteers viewed photos categorized as pleasant, neutral, and unpleasant. Half of the pleasant photos were erotic.

In particular, the researchers were focused on something called the “late positive potential (LPP),” which is a common measure for the intensity of the brain's emotional response at a given moment.

“The size of the late positive potential reflects the intensity of an emotional response,” Dr. Dean Sabatinelli, co-author and an associate professor at University of Georgia, explained in a press release.

So, for example, if someone addicted to nicotine were to view a photo of a cigarette, their LPP would intensify. The same goes for cocaine addicts, who would experience an “increased LPP to cocaine-related pictures,” the study notes.

But that simply doesn't happen with porn. In fact, those who identified themselves as porn addicts showed a lower – not higher – late positive potential when viewing sexually explicit images.

Even those who said they had experienced “major problems” with their porn usage “showed decreased brain reactions when shown the sexual images, rather than heightened activity,” according to the research.

According to Prause, this finding “means it is not appropriate to call porn addicting from a scientific perspective.”

While the study notes that“porn addicts”may experience problems as a result of their habits, the researchers stress that they do not appear to have the same neurological response as other addicts.

“Many people have misinterpreted our research as saying that people are faking these problems,” Prause told The Daily Beast. “We have never made that claim.”

The study size was the largest-ever of its kind, consisting of more than double the number of participants compared to the most recently published research.

Commenting on the larger size of participants, Prause said that “larger samples increase confidence in results.”

The findings align with the stance of the American Psychiatric Association (APA), which has agreed there is not enough evidence to support diagnoses for sex and porn addiction.

Meanwhile, “porn addiction” continues to be “treated” in various recovery centers around the world, many of them run by religious organizations.

I wouldn't know, I am not into porn.

Prolly cuz all the blood rushes to the 'OL PP.

Does having a blow up doll count?

So all the people that say "I'm addicted to the forums!" are full of crap and lying?

Forums are like social porn, IMO.

Other than that

I wonder how much being surrounded by people, or the subjects knowing they were being watched and monitored, had an effect on the results.

I mean boys were mercilessly teased at the onset of puberty whenever they got a boner in school.
Social shame.
Parents teach their kids to not masturbate in public and it's reinforced heavily.
Sex is private and taboo. You're supposed to control your urges.
...Unless you're alone, then go monkey paw crazy if you want.

It just seems like the setting itself is anathema to the desire to masturbate.

I would like them to hook up a heavy smoker to the machine and show them pictures, only the machine they are hooked to is in the middle of an island of gasoline that will ignite if they light a cigarette or even think about lighting a cigarette.
I wonder what would happen then.

It seems to me that simply showing pictures of random "pleasant" things doesn't constitute pornography - and the scientific community's definition of "erotic" may not satisfy a lot of people. (The picture of the bashful lady in the tasteful pose in the original post, for example. I can't see myself becoming addicted to that.) If they also mixed in "unpleasant" and "neutral" images, the subjects may have been actively turned off by some images, putting them "out of the mood", or even not realizing that what they were looking at qualified as "porn".

For addictions, I think you have to look at the subject in their native environment, so to speak. If it's really an addiction, you have to look at more than just the alleged power of their emotional reaction to the object of their addiction. From what I have heard, a lot of drug addicts hate their addiction, but they still do it because, y'know, they're addicted. You have to look at more conditions than simple "emotional" reactions, like whether or not they are putting their addiction ahead of other, more important things in life, like family relationships or a job.

Having a lower "LPP" (which personally I've never even heard of before - what happened to the good old measurements of things like dopamine and endorphins?) doesn't mean the person isn't addicted to something. Aside from the potential emotional hate for the object of the addiction, perhaps the reason why people are addicted to porn is because it puts them in a relaxed, peaceful-minded state, like marijuana. I'd compare these results to the results of those who are tested for a marijuana addiction, or some other drug or activity that helps you relax or become more clear-minded. Perhaps painkillers ("Paging Doctor House...").

This experiment doesn't prove that pornography can't be an addiction - it doesn't really prove much either way, I think. (And not just because of the small test group.) Whenever you start mixing the sciences, you get into trouble, because what could be valid results for one, can be misinterpreted or ignored if you have to read it in the context of another.

Patient:
"Doctor, since my wife left me, my tallywhacker turned orange."

Doctor:
"This is serious. It could indicate a pre-cancerous condition.
What have you been doing since your wife left you?"

Patient:
"Nothing special.
Just watching porn and eating Cheetos."