SirBillybob

Promising.

Every Tuesday AppleTV offers a 99c rental special that usually reverts to regular low tier (now usually $6.99) the following Tuesday but sometimes extended through putting it in the 99c group batch. Today Sing Sing is 99c.

I would interpret with reservation as it doesn’t pass the smell test if you drill down further, including into the reams of supplementary data appended. The results don’t satisfy standard assumptions of causality. For the first 14 years (circa 2000-13) the Alzheimer’s (AD) number-at-risk ratio based on subgroup denominators was 3:1, loaded for PDE5i use, and there was an apparent scramble to equalize the ratio over the final 3-4 years to an eventual number-at-risk ratio that landed at 1.2:1 AFTER the Kaplan-Meier incidence curves trended to merging, thus having shown at that 14 year point no difference in Alzheimer’s incidence between PDE5i users and non-users. Hence the average follow-up period was about 6 years for PDE5i users, twice the period length compared to that of non-users because the majority of non-users with ED in the database were chased down closer to the end of the retrospective study period. Moreover, the average age of non-users was 78 at date of AD diagnosis, 2 years older than that of PDE5i users at their date of diagnosis, so PDE5i users were diagnosed at a younger age. However, one would not be inclined to say PDE5i use predisposed to younger AD onset UNLESS wanting to put forward a finding as specious as the actual biased published results. Non-users diagnosed with AD had higher rates of comorbidities (on all 18 conditions measured, and with comorbidity prevalence differentials much greater than that of AD incidence comparing the subgroups!) [comorbidities are associated with AD] as well as higher rates of illness medication treatments compared to PDE5i users. They were older and sicker and these factors alone could explain a higher rate of Alzheimer’s Disease using the person-years denominator over the shorter period of time assessed for that subgroup. For greater than mid-70’s age range the AD incidence curve begins to rise more steeply, for example age 78.5 compared to age 76.5 within the general population. Based on age standard deviation values depicted in the study herein reviewed, 68% of PDE5i users at time of AD diagnosis were age 69.5-83.7 while 68% of non-users were age 71.6-85.4 Since PDE5i’s are widely used for ED the reality that uptake would be nil in spite of ED diagnosis supports the notion that the importance and pursuit of sexual function may have been secondary for them in the context of worse health overall. More meds, more drug interaction, more onerous dosage adjustment considerations, less incentivizing for PDE5i uptake. These factors suggest the possibility of reverse causation; an association between the prodomal stage of AD and PDE5i non-prescribing as opposed to causative directionality where no uptake predicts AD and uptake is protective against AD. In sum, there would be no more reason to conclude PDE5i uptake confers Alzheimer’s risk reduction than to assert it lowers incidence of the 18 comorbidities tracked. The non-users had higher vulnerabilities to cognitive decline but never having popped Viagra or other PDE5i’s was not convincingly one of them. Latent mining the UK national database for men with ED not taking PDE5i’s in order to round out the investigative study comparator data simply yielded older and less healthy males within that subgroup.

Somewhat different in Canada, latest revision mid-Jan (see below). That said, I cannot imagine a practice in either nation suggesting zero per year as discretionary.

As it was 2 months ago, and up to a month ago if not more recent than that.

I only paid attention from mid-January to mid-February as I was periodically in other locations previous to, and following, that time frame, or it wasn’t worth a focus. The OP’s note was a prompt for curiosity. I casually witnessed working guys receiving 10 back from a 50 note given to Claudio etc when in queue; asked guys what their entry fee was, told 40; and reimbursed a select few as a favour. One fellow … bless his heart … needlessly offered 10 in change back from a 50. Perhaps an increase had been rolled back very shortly after Réveillon.

Thank goodness. Eyebrows may grow back. Fostering flambé can be bananas.

If the bell curve represents a gradient of maintenance left to right and symmetrically, then the centre of it would be considered the 50th percentile of difficulty, veering close to above average maintenance prospects. There can be zero difficulty but not negative difficulty. I’d suggest aligning with lower maintenance as opposed to the arithmetic average of difficulty if I were to use a Gaussian distribution analogy, not that I’d either employ such a parallel or have noted an association between communication stages and quality of outcum. Moreover, the 🚩 theory cannot be tested if contact isn’t made.

I think that some of the opinion and solution variance running through the topic relates to the unknown as to how exciting an actual encounter would be, notwithstanding the degree of effort to arrange it. There is usually an element of standard gamble and resource trade-off that can only be evaluated after the fact. Add to this the complexity of a bigger whispering brain on one shoulder, a smaller one on the other.

Imma do me for sure. Au contraire, you’re making oodles of time and energy to get to bye. You’d think there was a crisis; a contact number with which you repeatedly get “message box is full”. Good luck with the toothache.

Each episode is, impressively, single-shot style. Graham and Doherty are superb. Glad I’m not a parent with adolescents and watching this.

The first sentence would mean I had actually considered it an impropriety and that I’m unable to handle with equanimity life’s little speed bumps, such as somebody managing their personal paid public-facing property in the way they prefer or my flipping through a phone booth directory pages and discovering that somebody had ripped out the section on better business bureau complaint contacts. I wouldn’t consider the absence of a contact method a torrential downpour on my punting parade. If the ad were to be one of the very few that interest me there would be naughty options in terms of how to relate to it.

If they had been Caucasian I suspect we wouldn’t be privy to the ethnicity category.

Righto, also being a talcum order.

Johnsons makes sense. My point is that that particular version is inconsistently delineated within their own branding. More lack of attention to detail than wilting manners.

The punter constituency’s johnsons set the price, not Johnsons / Johnson’s … let me know when they figure out how to spell the venue. The dancers don’t set the price. Patrons’ payment of costs historically, including adjustments along the way, dictates it. I don’t go there and the currency conversion yields an absurd upcharge so I would likely try to figure out how to cum more rapidly.

A key element not discussed was the difference between generalized latent or absent orgasm in which the phenomenon is consistent in all contexts, partner and autosexual, versus situational with partner(s), versus masturbatory. One obvious way to partially rule out physiological causality is to inquire about arousal and orgasm that may be comparatively accessible autosexually. This must be handled sensitively as the partner desiring the other’s elusive orgasm will often frame the problem as a withholding once made aware of the contextual difference. Women generally won’t have attributed to them such a wilful deprivation of partners’ satisfaction with her climax, yet both genders’ common basis of anorgasmia is not having reached the threshold of arousal that promotes orgasm. Some men may have, in a sense, premature arousal in which the logical outcome should be orgasm but the robust tumescence is erroneously conflated with sufficient subjective arousal for it. This doesn’t mean they are not turned on, just not enough to arrive at the synthesis of factors culminating in orgasm. Women’s partners may activate a workhorse role if presented with the notion that she is underaroused. In contrast, anorgasmic mens’ partners faced with robust erections along with the notion of insufficient subjective arousal for orgasm may take it more personally and assume hangups related to internal prohibitions or deliberate or even subconscious suppression of what is framed, perhaps overly simplistically, as the most valued ultimate outcome. The orgasm’s enemy is the punitive consequence of its non-existence.

It’s as if a new disorder has been manufactured. We have biogenic and/or psychogenic erectile disorder intrinsic to a male. And an absurd attempt to treat a version of erectile function that is neither of the former and not reflective of pathology, but driven by commercial expectations for function. How about forgoing this kind of amateurish diagnosis, sparing the guy’s uptake of drugs, and taking a chill pill oneself? Setting up compensation contingencies for functioning that evades absolute prediction on their part seems to be a far more onerous exercise than broadening capacity for erotic enjoyment that doesn’t entirely hinge on a few cubic centimetres of intracavernosal tissue.

Paywall workaround?

Google is your friend in terms of accessing educational resources on the basics of male sexual function.

No, these encounters don’t occur in a geopolitical context of hyper medicalization and pharmacology. These dudes are not accessing and consuming PDE5i meds or combo IM prostaglandin / papaverine / phentolamine. But they belong to a minority of men with autonomously accessible erectile reliability fundamentally irrespective of interactional context. You will also see here periodic claims of escorts posting on the board that they possess such membership.

Like you, I would roll with less than optimal penile tumescence, particularly with a regular with whom enjoyment had historically occurred. I also avoid conflating the term performance with traditional bona fide erectile function because tumescence is only truly reflective of subjective sexual arousal on my side of the equation. I wouldn’t be capable of a performative erection, without all of the elements prompting true arousal, if my life depended on it. The only logical reason to use performative nomenclature with an escort is the reality that their erectile function is potentially out of sync with what promotes physical male sexual arousal in general, or specific to their arousal template. Few things are more anathema to their erectile potential than the requirement that they simulate true arousal yet sustain punitive consequences for failure to deliver. Binding physical erection to monetary compensation is just one more way of ensuring a disconnect between two functional contexts, one naturalistic, the other obligatory. It doesn’t bode well for sexual health. Grousing about inconsistent capacity to perform, without attempting to grasp the complexity of male sexual response, is nothing short of childish. Again, my view is framed within a regular repeat situation. If a new one off and no overt erection meeting the traditional threshold for various activities occurs, I won’t have actually initially dictated erectile requirements. It’s exploratory. Some guys are better at meeting my requirements for an exciting sexual encounter that doesn’t demand their penile arousal compared to others whose erectile capability is not obligatory but occurs notwithstanding, is invariant due to unique factors that guarantee consistent tumescence. But I want to avoid the problematic own goal of missing out on a good match in which erections are not uniformly on tap. I never suggest or insist on chemical intervention. Many of my regulars have consistent robust erections. Could be serendipity. I wouldn’t myself take personal credit for it, and they are not contractually bound to it. Emancipated from a demand they might actually finesse other valued components of erotic interaction.

Gaseous lying if denial of hearsay representing fact. Hot stuff in bed if pants on fire. Gaslighting if attempts to explain gaseous combustion as perceiver’s figmental mirage.