: Too much time in the lab? Science finally discovers the G Spot : Discussion in TER General Board, posted by THRUSTER

1,983,027 Total Reviews 3,895 New Reviews

11,076 Users Online

TER General Board

Tree
Flat

Too much time in the lab? Science finally discovers the G Spot

THRUSTER 78 Reviews 1223 reads

posted 17 years ago

"Researchers say they have identified the first physical evidence for the existence of what some consider the gateway to female sexual pleasure.

"Dr Emmanuele Jannini, of the University of L'Aquila in Italy, found anatomical differences between women who can achieve the heightened states of sexual satisfaction linked to the controversial erogenous zone and those who cannot.

"The discovery could lead to the development of treatments to help women increase levels of sexual arousal and pleasure.

"Dr Jannini told New Scientist magazine: "For the first time it is possible to determine by a simple, rapid and inexpensive method if a woman has a G-spot or not."

"Named after German gynaecologist Ernst Gräfenberg who first hypothesized its existence in 1950, the G-spot is said to be an area a couple of inches inside the vagina behind the pubic bone.

"However a lack of physical evidence led some scientists to dispute that there was any such thing.

"Dr Jannini took ultrasounds of nine women who said they had vaginal orgasms and 11 who said they did not.

"They found the tissue between the vagina and the urethra, thought to contain the G-spot, was thicker in the first group."

Katielady200617 years ago836 reads

While that's great, I can't help but think that the research money would be better served in findi

cures for cancer/AIDS/ or any of the other horrible ailments that people die from these days...

Katie

Reply Quote Report

CynicalSOB17 years ago913 reads

Re: While that's great, I can't help but think that the research money would be better served in f

Unfortunately, in today's world, scientific research is driven profit motives far more than they are by any sense of altruism or quest for a cure. There is alot more money to be made by creating sexual enhancement drugs, and much less chance for lawsuits due to fatalities from morning wood.

There are substantially more lawsuits filed annually against cancer and AIDS doctors than doctors who service erectile dysfunction.

Just look at how the pharmaceutical market boomed after the development of Viagra, Cialis, etc. And look at the billions now going into developing a female-specific version of Viagra.

Besides, if they did develop a real cure for cancer, it would kill a $400 BILLION dollar a year industry. Cancer treatment is big business, a golden goose laying hundreds of thousands of eggs for the health care industry every month.
They need people to continuously get sick and die. So it is not in the best interests of the medical business to develop a cure.

But the company that can produce a pill to guarantee a mans erection or a womans orgasm has created a cash cow with no real downsides. Viagra and Cialis both cost over $10 a pill via prescription, yielding a profit margin of almost 10,000% (thats Ten Thousand Percent) per pill once the research costs were recovered.

It's all about the bottom line and satisfying the stockholders. The corporate suits in their fancy boardrooms don't care about the common people, just themselves and their wallets.

Reply Quote Report

SquirtingGoddess17 years ago221 reads

Yeah, those pesky researchers

tend to stick within their area of expertise. -e

Reply Quote Report

ed200017 years ago493 reads

No disrespect intended, but

some people do what they do, not for the money involved, but for the passion they have for the task, the effort, the desired result, the unanswered question, for the answer itself.

Reply Quote Report

Nicole K17 years ago1027 reads

Re: Too much time in the lab? Science finally discovers the G Spot

Hmmm...why would researching the physiology of female eroticism be characterized as "too much time in the lab?" To my mind, it's about time that we delved into more study of the female body.

Go on, enjoy the double entendres above , but all titillations aside, women's health is far too often neglected in medical research.

In fact, it wasn't until the early 1990's that clinical health studies - about such important matters as heart disease and even estrogen's effect on the body - began to consistently include women. Bernadine Healy took over as head of the NIH and helped change all of that. Still, look at the fact that there is still no male birth control pill and yet Viagra and a host of other "male enhancers" fill the shelves to see our cultural bias exerting a very unscientific influence over research.

So, perhaps I have gone off on a more serious tangent, but to answer your rhetorical question...No, it's not too much time spent in the lab. I hope they dedicate more time to the study of female sexuality among other important issues.

Abrazos,
NK