Impotence and bicycle riding

(PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per Paul Cassel:
He said
sometimes in very dedicated bicycle riders, it can be long term too, but
it's not a common among hobbyists.

There have been several threads on this in rec.bicycles.tech.

Try Googling a little and you might find at least one of them.

My recollection is that the consensus was that the problem is way
overstated.

OTOH, I can say with some certainty that cycling is definitely a
risk factor for prostatitis. That from a urologist and personal
experience. Doesn't keep me off the bike - but it's there.

My post was about women, not men.

Thanks, Diane. That was what I was looking for.

-paul

"Paul Cassel" wrote in message
. ..
Thanks, Diane. That was what I was looking for.

-paul

Didn't catch that one about women riders in the original post.

There are a number of contributing factors that could cause nerve problems
due to compression in the perineal region in both men and women. That's
the area between the pubic bone and tail bone.

I think ignorance or lack of experience about saddle shapes and position
adjustments is a major issue in these problems.

I've watched people riding in discomfort, refuse any assistance in
adjusting their saddle. Is it the old adage "Keep riding, your rear end
will toughen up." or some kind of macho/machisma thing?

Modesty is another issue. I ran a bike shop around the time Avocet
introduced their first anatomically designed saddles in the mid 70s. Some
people, both men and women were uncomfortable discussing simple anatomical
information like ischial tuberosities and the points of contact on the
seat.

Seat discomfort is probably the biggest reason why people abandon cycling.
Lot's of people bought nice bikes only to have them sit in their garage or
basement. I've asked many of these folks why they don't ride and their
response was that their seat hurt them. Most were unwilling to take the
time to experiment, mentioning things like "toughing up their backside was
not something they wanted to work on".

Everyone's anatomy is different and it's difficult for a novice rider to
find a saddle that fit's them and to have it properly adjusted. Some
riders think that a really soft saddle is the answer but for many after a
few miles they're uncomfortable from sinking into the padding or gel.

I look at the fly weight round top racing saddles that are popular today
and think about Torquemada and the Inquisition. Brooks are just the right
shape for me. I need a saddle that's wide and flat in the rear. I used to
ride women's MTB saddles on some of my off road bikes just for that
reason.

Chas.

"(PeteCresswell)" wrote in message
...
Per * * Chas:
I've gone back to
the old fashioned 2 bolt adjustable seat posts and I use a dial
protractor
and meter stick to make sure that all of my saddles are adjusted to the
same height and angle. One degree of tilt or 1/8" in height can make a
big
difference in comfort for me.

I'll second both of those assertions.

With seat angle, I find a clear diff just from a turn or so of a
two-bolt saddle's adjustment screw.

With height, there's maximum pedaling efficiency... and then,
about a quarter or even half inch down there's minimal exposure
to UT issues.
--
PeteCresswell

It's not easy to get precise angle adjustments with most of the single
bolt seat posts.

I gave up racing about 30 years ago due to knee problems. At that point I
was riding 54-55cm frames with the seat up about 8" and all the way back.
The leg extension felt really great for climbing and sprinting.

Today I ride 55-57cm frames with the seat 3-4" lower and all the way
forward. I like a frame with a steeper seat tube angle 74° or 75°. With
the seat forward there's less pressure on the UT area. I ride Brooks Pros
and WTB Pure V Race saddles. They help a lot.

Chas.

"Paul Cassel" wrote in message
. ..

I post with some trepidation as I'm looking for a serious answer. I dread
some of the responses, but OK, I asked for it. I'm really curious.

-paul

So you see, there was nothing to fear!

Is RBT not the best-behaved Usenet newsgroup?

J.

* * Chas wrote:
"Paul Cassel" wrote in message
. ..
Thanks, Diane. That was what I was looking for.

-paul

Didn't catch that one about women riders in the original post.

There are a number of contributing factors that could cause nerve problems
due to compression in the perineal region in both men and women. That's
the area between the pubic bone and tail bone.

I think ignorance or lack of experience about saddle shapes and position
adjustments is a major issue in these problems.

I've watched people riding in discomfort, refuse any assistance in
adjusting their saddle. Is it the old adage "Keep riding, your rear end
will toughen up." or some kind of macho/machisma thing?

Modesty is another issue. I ran a bike shop around the time Avocet
introduced their first anatomically designed saddles in the mid 70s. Some
people, both men and women were uncomfortable discussing simple anatomical
information like ischial tuberosities and the points of contact on the
seat.

Seat discomfort is probably the biggest reason why people abandon cycling.
Lot's of people bought nice bikes only to have them sit in their garage or
basement. I've asked many of these folks why they don't ride and their
response was that their seat hurt them. Most were unwilling to take the
time to experiment, mentioning things like "toughing up their backside was
not something they wanted to work on".

Please, lets keep our terminology correct. Upright bicycles have
saddles. Recumbent bicycles have seats.

Everyone's anatomy is different and it's difficult for a novice rider to
find a saddle that fit's them and to have it properly adjusted. Some
riders think that a really soft saddle is the answer but for many after a
few miles they're uncomfortable from sinking into the padding or gel.

I find an inch of "Sunfoam" over a sling-mesh base exceptionally
comfortable.

I look at the fly weight round top racing saddles that are popular today
and think about Torquemada and the Inquisition.[...]

I wasn't expecting a kind of Spanish Inquisition!

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

Here's a quote from a NIOSH presentation:

"There are over 40 Scientific/Medical
Studies Linking Sexual Dysfunction
and Bicycling"

More info he
http://www.serottacyclinginstitute.c...andSaddles.pdf


On Feb 17, 11:06*am, Paul Cassel
wrote:
OK, I have heard that some male bicyclists suffer from impotence. I'm
unsure if it's permanent, but when asking my buddy, the ex semi pro
racer about this, he told me that there is a nerve which bicycle seats
compress. That nerve is necessary for the sexual response. He said
sometimes in very dedicated bicycle riders, it can be long term too, but
it's not a common among hobbyists.

My wife asked me if a similar nerve exists in the female anatomy and if
it has a similar effect for avid female bicycle riders. Yeah, I know
females can't be technically impotent, but they can experience reduced
sexual response.

I post with some trepidation as I'm looking for a serious answer. I
dread some of the responses, but OK, I asked for it. I'm really curious.

-paul

On Feb 19, 9:42*pm, "
wrote:
Here's a quote from a NIOSH presentation:

"There are over 40 Scientific/Medical
Studies Linking Sexual Dysfunction
and Bicycling"

Only forty studies? No wonder cyclists pay no attention even as they
lose their functions. There are *thousands* of studies correlating
knives/calves/failure to breed -- and still the calves pay no
attention. The difference is that calves are edible, so a few of the
stupid animals are saved to breed. Cyclists are not edible, so none of
the stupid animals are saved to breed. Cows will be plentiful when
cyclists are long gone. Darwin strikes again.

Andre Jute
Psychologists and economists are just statisticians with class and
imagination

Andre Jute wrote:
On Feb 19, 9:42 pm, "
wrote:
Here's a quote from a NIOSH presentation:

"There are over 40 Scientific/Medical
Studies Linking Sexual Dysfunction
and Bicycling"

Only forty studies? No wonder cyclists pay no attention even as they
lose their functions. There are *thousands* of studies correlating
knives/calves/failure to breed -- and still the calves pay no
attention. The difference is that calves are edible, so a few of the
stupid animals are saved to breed. Cyclists are not edible, so none of
the stupid animals are saved to breed. Cows will be plentiful when
cyclists are long gone. Darwin strikes again.

From the way the turkey vultures look at us, I have to disagree about
the edible part.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

wrote in message
...
Here's a quote from a NIOSH presentation:

?"There are over 40 Scientific/Medical
Studies Linking Sexual Dysfunction
and Bicycling"

More info he
http://www.serottacyclinginstitute.c...andSaddles.pdf


It's an extremely flawed study (or report) that doesn't take into
consideration:

1. Saddle position - up,down, forward, back or angle.

2. Baseline sexuality, sexual activity and sexual interest.

3. Well established studies on the reduction of hormonal activities in
female endurance athletes that can even lead to the cessation of the
menses.

Plus a lot of other variables that either haven't been taken into
consideration or were not mentioned in this presentation.

Over the past 44 years of adult cycling I've seen large numbers of riders
who through ignorance or vanity? refuse to change or make adjustments to
their saddles.

I've always contended that saddle comfort was the biggest reason that
people abandoned cycling, especially novices.

There has been a prevailing attitude of "keep riding, you'll get used to
it" in the cycling community. I think that it's been engendered by fit
Nazi attitudes: "here's a bike that's proportioned to your physic now
adjust to it".

I just got another copy of the 1972 C.O.N.I manual, "CYCLING"
(C.O.N.I/FIAC, Rome, 1972). It was the bible for bike fitting back in the
day. The fit Nazi attitude is "this is what's best for a top ranked racer
so that's what everyone who's not a weenie should be doing". It doesn't
take into consideration the needs of casual cyclists. Not everyone aspires
to be a Class 1 racer!

I'm not denying the validity of the information in this report but I
question some of the conclusions. Also the author is pushing an agenda to
promote noseless saddles with no reference to proper saddle shape or
adjustment. Because of differences in anatomy upright cycling may not be
suitable for every rider.

BTW, I was always horniest after a long hard ride.... ;-)

Chas.