Slashdot Mirror
Study Finds Porn Exposure Associated With Smaller Brain Region
New submitter Bodhammer (559311) writes "German researchers looked at the brains of 64 men between the ages of 21 and 45 and found that one brain region (the striatum, linked to reward processing), was smaller in the brains of porn watchers, and that a specific part of the same region is also less activated when exposed to more pornography." While it's tempting to cast blame, "the study doesn't confirm whether watching porn causes the changes, or whether people with a certain brain type are inherently more apt to tune into X-rated content." The study's abstract is available; the paper itself is pay-walled.
Where did they find them?
Help stamp out iliturcy.
As someone with a long history of depression and high intelligence I've spent quite a bit of time trying to understand my condition. One thing I've noted frequently is that I tend to derive less enjoyment than other people from most activities. (I think this is a cause of the depression rather than a result of it.) The most notable exception is sexual gratification, whether from sex with a partner or from masturbation. I don't find this surprising as I think that it is such a basic part of the way our brains are wired. Given that I am not in a relationship more often than I am, I frequently watch porn to masturbate.
So in my case, I'd say it seems likely that a deficiency in the part of the brain associated with reward processing causes a greater exposure to porn.
in exchange for instant gratification of a primal nature?
Almost certainly.
Hahaha. But don't assume. OP left out something that is important to keep in mind here: most people in modern society watch pornography to some extent. They even admit to it in polls (which means the polls probably don't count everybody who really does).
Putting 2 and 2 together, that means that the people with the larger brain region are the abnormal ones. You should be asking what THEY "give up" in exchange for this deviance (from the norm, that is).
Consider another well-known disease that involves a missing compound needed for metabolism - diabetes. Supplying insulin helps a diabetic patient, but doesn't "cure" the disease.
It certainly seems plausible that by identifying people who lack the enzyme and either a) providing the enzyme or b) warning them of the problem, many cases could be avoided. People who lack the enzyme but abstain from alcohol seem to be okay generally, so that would seem a reasonable strategy. However, digestion of food creates alcohol, so that's an area where further study may be needed.
The other thing is, once you take care of the enzyme in an active alcoholic, you're left with just a regular drug addict - alcohol is a drug, of course. You've treated the thing that makes alcohol addicts different from other addicts, but they're still an addict. We know also that alcoholism includes some positive feedback cycles. People often have a drink when negative events happens in their lives. When they drink excessively, that causes more negative events. The alcoholic typically ends up in a cycle of dependency. Indeed, it seems that many people identified as alcoholic have only the psychological dependance and are not lacking the indicated enzyme. Enzyme therapy therefore wouldn't be expected to work in these "type II" drinkers. It may turn "type I" (enzymatic alcoholics) into type II (psychologically dependent), but that doesn't seem to be a huge win. Enzyme therapy would probably need to be combined with treatment for the psychological side as well
Looking at it another way, there are two primary issues with alcoholics. A) when they drink, they can't stop and B) they start drinking, even given the knowledge of B. Treating A doesn't fix the odd metal obsession that we see manifested in B.