asfried

Lets see the data that says impeded blood flow causes impotence. Seriously, the "data" on this subject is so confused and self-contradictory that it is essentially worthless. While I agree with the CONCERN about seats, I will withold judgement until someone comes up with a powerful study that actually demonstrates a CLEAR link between seat factors and an increase in impotence. Common sense says you should ride a seat that is comfortable. If you are feeling numb or are in pain, try a different seat. Until a powerful, well constructed study demonstrates (repeatedly) some factor that definitively contributes to impotence, you are just wasting your money chasing the media hype of the week if you buy a new saddle.

antiquebiker

I personally think this is all a setup for liability lawsuits that will put our beloved saddle manufacturers out of business within about two years.

Just a natural pessimist.

RabidCyclist

I call BS !!!!! Too many men riders, too many saddles men use, too many miles ridden and not a single man rode a woman's saddle. How did we do it without buying a womans saddle**********

RabidCyclist

Yeah!! What he said!!!!!

ExMachina

Most long distance training programs I've heard of recommend working up to about 75% of your goal, one week before the event (then taper)--so a 150 mile training ride for a double century.

But that's irrelevant, as I just got a copy of the Journal of Urology article

The "events" in question were mostly all multi-day (Seattle to Portland, Ride Across Georgia, Bike Ride Across Iowa, Bike Ride Across Nebraska). For the riders, the mean training hours per week were 8.2 but with--get this--a standard deviation of 18.1! Talk about a range of training and fitness levels.

Ignoring the article's conclusions for a moment, and looking at the potential risk factors the authors tracked, you notice immediately that over 200 of the riders had a BMI of 25 or more. A BMI of 30+ was the greatest single risk area (4 or 41 riders experienced ED which is 9.8%). The second highest risk group were riders who had only done "0-1" centuries (8.7%). The third biggest risk area was having a history of hypertension (8.7%) and the fourth highest risk group were riders averaging only 15-21 kph (7.8%)

Interestingly, the 25-26kph group of riders had one of the lowest risks (1.2%). Other low risk categories included having a weight of between 77 and 82 kg (1.2% risk) and having had already ridden in 11+ centuries (1.1% risk).

So according to the raw data, ED risk is lowest among those who ride a lot, who ride fast and who are not overweight. ED risk is highest among folks with a BMI over 30, who ride slow, and who hadn't ridden long training distances before the event.

Still though, their data is all over the board and thir analysis unconvincing. Reading the paper, you can only wonder how they could overlook such basic things as pedaling style and bike fit--arguably the most import aspects of rider health (at least one paper I've seen on the subject DID make a point of insuring that its particpant were all professionally fit to their bikes).

Probably the single most damning aspect to this study is that it was self-reported to the researchers by the particiapnts via web forms. Human nature being what it is, participants naturally droped out of the study with out warning. Just one week after from the cycling event, the researchers had lost track of 17% of their participants, and after a month 26% had failed to report back (they then "imputed missing values for erectile function scores using an approximate Bayesian bootstrap method"--i.e. the guessed). Pure speculation on my part, but isn't it reasonable to assume that particpants experienceing little or no ED would be the ones most likely to stop participating?

The thing about this paper which is amazing is how the "rush to publish" really makes researches make-do with poor data. There simply is no clear cut cause effect at work here, and the authors even admit as much.

Thor29

Somewhere I recall seeing an article where Grant Petersen of Rivendell Bicycles put a broken in Brooks saddle on a machine to test for perineal pressure and it outperformed the saddles supposedly designed for that purpose. The reason a leather saddle works better is because you are supprorting more of your weight on your sit bones and there is no foam padding being stuffed into your nether regions.

ed073

Excellent post.

antiquebiker

Does anybody know what the baseline ED rate is in the general population (or non-riding population)? 1-5% doesn't seem that far from what I would expect.

asfried

The sort of poor science represented by this article goes on all the time. I remember a study a few years ago that "discovered" that nightlights in babys' rooms caused those babies to become nearsighted. Several months later (after about 500,000,000,000 evening news stories had been run warning parents to destroy their nightlights), the authors sheepishly admitted that what was really going on was that nearsighted parents need nightlights to see in the dark and that OF COURSE their babies would grow up with more nearsightedness (cause nearsightedness is genetic...). There was no cause and effect between nightlights and nearsightedness AT ALL! But did that stop the media from running a series of "how you could be harming you baby's sight" stories? Not on your life.

This sort of science is very difficult. It can take generations to figure even simple stuff out. Even then, it can take MASSIVE investments of resources and money to come up with relatively solid answers. No one will EVER really research bicycle seats and impotence in a way that will give us definitive results. In the end, we will all be left with common sense. Lots of us have said it here in this thread. If you are having symptoms of pain, numbness, etc., make a change in your seat that eliminates the discomfort. I find it very hard to believe that someone can injure themselves enough to cause impotence but not incur any other symptoms. And if you have a new problem with erections, go to a competent urologist (perferably one who rides) and discuss the problem. Most importantly, make sure you look into the really dangerous cause of impotence: cardiovascular disease (CVD). Lots of recent REALLY GOOD science has demonstrated that impotence is an early warning sign of CVD and can presage strokes and heart attacks by many months or years.

95RPM

Seconded.

puddin' legs

'So according to the raw data, ED risk is lowest among those who ride a lot, who ride fast and who are not overweight. ED risk is highest among folks with a BMI over 30, who ride slow, and who hadn't ridden long training distances before the event."


...yep.

cydewaze

I'M DOOMED!

kevmetric

I read the exact same article about 3 years ago.......what a farce.

TTfaster

Some of you seem very adamant against trusting what some of the media articles have suggested about the research regarding ED and bicycle seats. This area of research is relatively new due to the recent application of testing procedures – namely the transcuataneous oxygen sensor for penile O2 monitoring. However there has been a significant amount of research reports that are bolstering these statements reported in the media. It seems contrite to ask for data of how impeded blood flow causes impotence without taking the time to better understand the entire anatomical and physiological basis behind the studies and issues. If you are honestly interested in the topic and would like to learn more about why people are making these statements in the media, you can read “Finding the Perfect Bicycle Seat”. It discusses all of these issues and goes through the logical steps of describing anatomy, physiology, research, and the practical implications for cyclists to allow the reader to gain a deeper understanding of the issue. It’s simply not the sort of topic you can argue based on one study between many people who are probably not medically oriented without some sort of starting knowledge level. I have given lectures to local cycling groups that are usually over 1.5 hours –and we hardly even touch on the physiology and other concepts that you are asking about – it could be a semester’s worth of lectures.

For more information about the book, check out https://www.unlimitedsportsanalysis.com/

ExMachina

Well one thing that keeps me from "trusting" the media, is that usually there's someone in the background trying to sell me something...

For instance, to date TTfaster has only posted 7 times on these forums, and each time the posting was in reference to either his book or his saddle.

What’s more bothersome, is that the following is TTfaster's *first* post on these forums (Keep in mind that he posted this **before** he identified himself as the book's author):

(the thread is here: https://www.bikeforums.net/showthread...7&page=2&pp=25)

Yeah, “Sounds worth reading...”

nickgold

Okay, was I the only one to get a chuckle out of this?

"...a sheath in the perineum, called Alcock's canal..."

LOL!

And folks -- if your Johnson goes numb when you're riding, I think you need a new seat or need to adjust your position!

ExMachina

nickgold, did you also notice the name of the third author in the ED article cited earlier?

TTfaster

This place is tougher than the judiciary committee for the Robert's hearings Previous sillyness aside -it still doesn't change the information in the book or the reviews that it has received. Here's own more if you would like to hear someone else's opinion on the book.

https://www.rusa.org/newsletter/08-02-06.html

And here's a list of eleven other reviews.

https://www.unlimitedsportsanalysis.com/Presspage.html

I'm not trying to pick the pockets of the cycling community - I am just trying to educate people on this obviously important topic.

'nother

^^ yeah it is a tough crowd here, but you have to remember that we are part of a society bathing in fad diets, "the latest research", and other media frenzies, so I think anyone claiming to have groundbreaking research results should be prepared to face some skepticism, no matter how "right" their results are.

Some of us are quite weary of these studies, which, when hyped by the media claim that the sky is falling, only to be debunked by Yet Another Study some weeks later. Who are we to believe? "F*(k 'em all", I think is the conclusion many of us come to.

The other thing working against you here specifically is cycling "tradition". No one wants to be told that their beloved, well-worn-in, good-fitting (fill-in-the-blank-equipment) is all wrong. I swear sometimes I think cyclists are more superstitious than baseball players. So you've got a tough row to hoe, no matter how convincing the evidence is.

That all having been said: I'm probably going to pick up a copy of your book, 'cause I'm in the market for a new saddle and the book is pretty cheap anyway. I've had no ED* problems to speak of with my current saddle (which is narrow, with a cutout, and all sorts of other "bad" things according to what you've said here already).



*Actually the bigger problem is getting the other party to cooperate, now who has a book for that?!?!?!

jhshannon

Hey, check out this nice article that I found on the website for Bike Habitat (my LBS). It dismisses the arguments put forward in the NYTimes, which are based largely on the work of Dr. Irwin Goldstein. We should all seek alternative information and then make informed decisions about saddles and their possible consequences.

https://bicyclehabitat.com/site/page.cfm?PageID=97

happy riding!

DXchulo

Did anyone see this from Specialized at Interbike?

https://www.cyclingnews.com/photos/20...-interbike0512

Check this out- 46% blood loss after 33 seconds https://www.cyclingnews.com/photos/20...specialized-03

96% loss:
https://www.cyclingnews.com/photos/20...specialized-04

Bontrager

So what medical studies are they talking about? I haven't read many double-blinded studies on properly fitted amateur riders that said that improper fit (seat, etc) directly causes impotence.

BIGPAKO

Basura de mierda!

Mars

That was an interesting and well reasoned critique. However, it does not necessarily invalidate the study conclusions. I haven't read the original article yet and this poster does not discuss what statistical anlysis was used. One can use certain procedures to calculate the contribution a certain variable makes, amoungst other variables, to a certain outcome. So even though the riders varied on many dimensions, one can still determine if a common variable impacts something like erectile problems.

It stands to reason that someone with higher BMI (body mass index) may have more problems and still have something to do with the author's claims. A heavier man will press down harder on the seat, after all.

But even if this stduy has flaws (and every study has flaws) there is converging evidence, from many sources and techniques, that are supporting this resaercher's conclusions.

asfried

Ok, as someone with a significant medical background I will say that it is NOT contrite to question the relationship between transcutaneous O2 monitoring and ED. Actually, it seems to be a leap of faith the MAKE the association between lower oxygen levels found while riding and long term problems obtaining and sustaining an erection. Rather than making an unproven assertion about an admittedly new testing technique (of which many thousands come and go due to lack of actual clinically proven benefit or use), it might be a good idea for someone to RESEARCH the association before making claims of testing validity.
Seems to me as an academically oriented MD that the members of this forum have been doing an extremely good job of critically analysing the subject matter at hand.