I noticed an interesting correlation between the story statistics and a journal article from 2008.
Here are the latest story statistics:
||Long term pain
||Pain during/after sex
||Got a reversal
||Got an epididymectomy
||Got an orchiectomy
||Got a denervation
||Other / Unknown
Here is the data from the journal article:
(Link to article)
Looks to me like the random sampling of social media stories about PVPS is generating a pattern similar to the one published int he 2008 study.
Judge for yourself:
If this means anything, it seems likely that social media is under-representing the frequency of “Pain with Intercourse”.
Also worth noting… urologists will still vigorously deny that vasectomy has anything whatsoever to do with lower libido or erectile dysfunction. A commonly heard theme is that people who fear this are fundamentally confused about anatomy, and should be reassured that there is no physical way possible that cutting the vas deferens could have this effect. All it is is a conduit for sperm.
If they are pressed on this point, they will sometimes acknowledge that men may experience lower libido or ED after vasectomy, but they will immediately follow this up with the point that men without a vasectomy may have these conditions – or that if the vasectomy is to blame the pathogenesis must be psychological. These men with soft willies must either have some strong cultural baggage equating the ability to father children with their status as males in the society. Alternatively, perhaps they resent their wives for being pressured into the surgery.
It appears that a little more than 1/4 of men with PVPS experience lower libido and/or erectile dysfunction. I wonder what percentage of men who have an uncomplicated vasectomy experience these problems? What is the reasoning presented to argue that this should be thought of as a psychological problem?
We have lots of reports from men here who say that reversal improved their sexual dysfunction issues. Is this typical of psychological problems? Do urologists intend to argue that the men have benefited from a $10,000 placebo?
In my opinion, more study is warranted before smugly pronouncing a verdict that attempts to invalidate this concern and the experiences of the men who end up suffering this outcome.