Viagra Linked to Much Lower Risk of Death in Men

Living longer AND having fun

Woo hooooo!!!

This doesn't tell anything except that men who are well are more likely to use Viagra than men who are not well, because the latter are not up to worrying about sex.

Bad. Study.

That’s because viagra was first introduced as a vasodilator, in order to treat cardiovascular diseases.

During the medical trial, it was noticed that men who were affected with ED, were suddenly popping boners, & the rest was history.

Just an FYI… Viagra works very well for women, too. Obviously, women are going to pop boners, but it makes sex so much more pleasurable than it already is (with the right lover - duh).

See your doctor before popping these bills for popping up your sex life.

Viagra can cause some serious side effects, and isn’t to be taken Willy nilly by everyone.

Young men who don’t have ED, shouldn’t pop these pills, for example.

People on blood pressure meds should be cautious about using Viagra because it might cause hypotension: low blood pressure

[quote]Obviously, women are going to pop boners,

As a gay man, I admit to not being fundamentally familiar with the woman’s body, but I don’t think this is true.

LOL, R6. I just noticed my error.

Women Are NOT going to pop boners.

However, viagra increases blood flow to the nether regions of both men AND women.

I gotchu, r7, just having a little fun.

No worries, R8. I know.

I’ve only popped the pills a few times, myself, because I understood the enhancement effect for women, too.

The experience was amazing. I really enjoyed it, but I know how to orgasm with a partner who knows what he’s doing, regardless of the pills, so I decided to remain au natural!

But the pills work! I recommend them for women who cannot orgasm via penetration only. However, that being stated, most women cannot or actually, do not know how to orgasm via penetration only. If you don’t know how to, the pills will feel great, but won’t make you orgasm.

If you know how, the pills can and do make sex mind blowing.

What do they mean with this part "However, being a simple retrospective look at a population already taking the drug, the study could not show causation."

0/10

[quote]This doesn't tell anything except that men who are well are more likely to use Viagra than men who are not well, because the latter are not up to worrying about sex.

[quote]Bad. Study.

It sounds like they used a matched cohort for the study and that the men not taking Viagra were as healthy as the men taking Viagra.

[quote]The study controlled for age, medications, disease history, and smoking status.

Clinical trials are the gold standard, but just because it's an observational study doesn't mean it's a "bad study". It just means that it was a preliminary look at a hypothesis that could be done without the high costs of conducting a randomized clinical trial. It probably won't lead to a clinical because as someone noted above, Viagra was originally studied as a cardiovascular drug and that's how they discovered its effects on erectile dysfunction.

If you're gonna read a headline or a news article, you can't just say "Bad. Study."

You only get to do that if you went back to the scientific publication and pointed out something specific in the study design that would lead you to believe it was a bad study. Otherwise, you're just being an armchair epidemiologist.

Everyone thinks they can comment on any research since the COVID pandemic started and everyone magically became clinical investigators overnight.

R12, I'd ask you to marry me but after a few months you'd get exhausting

I wanted to know who funded this study.

The makers of Viagra, perhaps?