How Long Is Too Long for a Couple to Go Without Sex? ... and why those who have more may not be any happier.

“How often do you and your partner have sex?”

It’s a question that comes up often, albeit tentatively, exposing some of our deepest insecurities about our intimate relationships.

Few of us haven’t wondered at some point: How much sex should we be having? What if we’re having less sex than our friends? Is our relationship doomed if we aren’t having enough sex? And what is enough sex anyway?

These questions are inherently flawed, because how often we are having sex doesn't address whether or not that sex is good, bad, or dissatisfying. Nevertheless, the frequency with which we are sexually intimate can play a role in both our sexual and relationship satisfaction. So how often are most couples having sex? And what does that mean for our relationship quality and satisfaction?

The Most Common Response

Before addressing the different frequencies of sexual activity, and what that means for our relationship and sexual satisfaction, it's worth noting the most common frequency of sexual activity that average couples report having in bedrooms across the nation.

In a study of over 26,000 Americans, which was published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior, participants reported having sex 54 times a year, which averages out to approximately once a week.1 This reported frequency was found to be about nine sexual interactions a year lower since a similar study was conducted in 1990. The sample included those who were single, dating, married, and cohabitating. When the authors looked at married couples specifically, the average sexual frequency was slightly lower, at 51 sexual encounters a year, or just less than once a week on average.

The Happiest Response

How happy are couples that have sex at the national average of about once a week? While most of us might be inclined to believe that more sex is related to more happiness, research suggests there is a point of diminishing returns. In a study of over 30,000 Americans, published in the journal of Social Psychological and Personality Science, researchers examined the relationship between how often couples reported having sex and whether that related to their reported level of happiness.2 The researchers concluded that couples who were having sex once a week were the happiest, while couples who reported having sex two, three, or more times a week were no happier than those having sex once a week. They still reported being quite happy, but the research suggests they were just as happy as couples who had sex at the national average.

So couples having sex at the average of once a week are happy. And couples who have sex more often than that are just as happy. But what about those of us having sex less than once a week?

The Potentially Problematic Response

The study described above, which focused on sexual frequency and happiness, did conclude that those who were having sex less than once a week reported lower levels of happiness than those having sex once a week (or more).2 But according to other studies and experts on the topic, there is a considerable range of lower than average sexual frequencies. In one of the few studies on the topic of "sexless marriages," 16 percent of the 6,029 participants reported not having sex over the last month.3 The lead author of this study, Dr. Donnolly, has similarly estimated that 15 percent of couples have not had sex in the last six months. Using a slightly different unit of measurement, the author of the book Sex Starved Marriage, Michele Weiner Davis, defines a "sexless marriage" as one in which couples have sex 10 times a year or less.

The Reason You're Not Having Sex Matters More

The frequency with which we have sex receives a lot of attention, because it's the easiest way to measure and compare our sex lives to our peers. But having lots of bad sex isn’t going to make anyone happy, nor is it going to leave you feeling satisfied. It's important to recognize that the reasons we aren't having sex matter more than how often we are having it. That is, if we are fighting or falling out of love with our partner, not having sex could be a symptom of a much larger problem. However, if we are simply busy, sick, navigating parenthood, or identify as asexual (and the list goes on), then it may be more circumstantial and nothing to panic over.

It's important to remember that good, satisfying sex, even if it's once a month or less, may be preferable to having sex once a week when it's not eliciting sexual pleasure or feelings of intimacy and closeness.

Source of Information:- ncbi.nlm.nih.gov + journals.sagepub.com

References

1. Twenge, J.M., Sherman, R.A. & Wells, B.E. Arch Sex Behav (2017) 46: 2389. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-017-0953-1

2. Muise, A, Schimmack, U. & Impett, E., Sexual Frequency Predicts Greater Well-Being, But More is Not Always Better, Social Psychology and Personality Science, 7, 4, 295-302. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550615616462

3. Donnelly, D. (1993). Sexually inactive marriages. The Journal of Sex Research, 30, 2, 171-179. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499309551698

Love pinching babies’ cheeks? Study explores basis of ‘cute aggression’

If you’ve ever felt a powerful impulse to squeeze a cute puppy or pinch a baby’s cheeks, you’ve felt what researchers refer to as “cute aggression.” A recent study conducted at the University of California, Riverside researchers attempted to figure out exactly what causes these bizarre, yet fairly common urges.

Cute aggression is characterized by an individual’s desire to squeeze, pinch, or even bite animals or humans without intent to harm. This behavior has been studied many times before, usually in the realm of behavioral psychology. But UCR assistant professor of special education and licensed clinical psychologist Katerine Stavropoulos went farther than previous research into the scientific explanation for this behavior.

After Stravropoulos first learned of cute aggression when reading a study by a team of Yale University psychologists in 2015, she wanted examine the phenomenon from a different perspective.

“The Yale researchers initially found that people reported feeling cute aggression more in response to baby animals versus adult animals,” explains Stavropoulos. “But even beyond that, people reported feeling cute aggression more in response to picture of human babies that had been digitally enhanced to appear more infantile, and therefore ‘more cute,’ by enlarging features like their eyes, cheeks, and foreheads.”

Stravropoloulos’ research focused on evaluating surface-level electrical activity arising from neurons firing in the brain. By interpreting that brain activity, she and her team could gauge neural responses to many kinds of external stimuli. She hypothesized that her studies of brain activity would reveal action in the brain’s reward system, which creates motivation, feelings of “want,” and pleasure, or in the brain’s emotional processing system, or both.

Researchers recruited 54 participants between the ages of 18 and 40 for the study. The participants wore caps embedded with electrodes and were shown 32 photographs divided into four categories: Cute digitally enhanced babies, less-cute non-digitally enhanced babies, cute baby animals, and less-cute adult animals.

The participants viewed the photos on a computer screen, then rated a set of statements by how much they agreed with them on a scale of 1 to 10. After assessing how cute each photo was, the participants also rated how overwhelmed by emotion they were by rating statements like, “I can’t stand it!” and “I want to hold it!”.

Participants were more likely to show cute aggression and feelings over overwhelm with cute baby animal photos compared to the less-cute adult animal photos. Interestingly, the same didn’t occur for cute and less-cute babies.

Still, ater examining brain scans of the participants before and after viewing the photos, Stravropolous and her team proved her hypothesis, that both the emotional center of the brain and the reward system are involved in feelings of cute aggression. The more infantile the object of this feeling is, the more intense the feeling.

“There was an especially strong correlation between ratings of cute aggression experienced toward cute animals and the reward response in the brain toward cute animals,” says Stavropoulos. “This is an exciting finding, as it confirms our original hypothesis that the reward system is involved in people’s experiences of cute aggression.”

She continues: “Essentially, for people who tend to experience the feeling of ‘not being able to take how cute something is,’ cute aggression happens. Our study seems to underscore the idea that cute aggression is the brain’s way of ‘bringing us back down’ by mediating our feelings of being overwhelmed.”

The study is published in the journal Frontiers in Behavioral Science.

This post was originally published April 29, 2019.

Sources:- sciencedaily.com + universityofcalifornia.edu + sciencedirect.com

New findings suggest smoking increases social isolation and loneliness

Previous research has found that people who are isolated and lonely are more likely to smoke. However, this latest study, which is the first of its kind, found that smoking itself may also lead to higher levels of isolation and loneliness.

The research, published this week in The Lancet Regional Health Europe and led by Imperial College London and UCL researchers, examined the relationship between smoking and the development of social isolation and loneliness.

It found that, over time, people who smoked saw their social contact reduce, and they became less socially engaged and more lonely, compared to non-smokers. With many people who smoke pledging to quit at the start of the new year, the authors hope that their new study will provide another incentive.

"Our research suggests smoking is bad for aspects of psychological and social health in addition to the well established physical impacts of smoking," said study author, Dr. Keir Philip, from Imperial's National Heart & Lung Institute.

"Some people think smoking is a social activity, but our study did not support this idea—smokers actually became more socially isolated and lonely than non-smokers over time."

He adds that their "findings contribute to existing knowledge in this area, and suggest the existence of a vicious cycle of smoking, social isolation, and loneliness. This research provides yet more reasons why people should aim to stop smoking this new year, and adds justification to increase support for people trying to quit."

The new study used data from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA), consisting of a nationally representative sample of 8,780 people aged 50 years and older in England. Participants' social isolation and loneliness were assessed over 12 years (at the outset, then after 4, 8 and 12 years).

The researchers found that, at the outset of the study, current smokers were more likely to be lonely and socially isolated than non-smokers, having less frequent social interactions with family and friends, less frequent engagement with community and cultural activities, and being more likely to live alone.

Smoking was also associated with larger reductions in social contact, increases in social disengagement, and increases in loneliness over time.

These results remained even after considering factors like age, sex, and socioeconomic status.

Possible factors

The study is observational so cannot determine the cause of this association, but the authors speculate that it may be due to a range of factors.

For example, smokers are at an increased risk of developing breathlessness and other physical health problems, including lung and heart disease, which limit their ability to socialize.

Equally, smoking is associated with an increased risk of mental health problems, such as anxiety and depression, which may impact the amount someone socializes.

In addition, friends of people who smoke are more likely to have smoked themselves and are therefore more likely to have died prematurely.

Other social factors include the reduced social acceptability of smoking generally, and in particular the expansion of smoke free legislation introduced to reduce the harms from passive smoking.

Professor Nick Hopkinson, another study author from Imperial's National Heart & Lung Institute, said that "most people already know that smoking is a risk to health. Our results suggest that smokers are also more likely to become socially isolated and lonely as they get older."

"These findings are another reason for the government to press on with introducing the policies needed to achieve its ambition for a smoke-free 2030. These include a 'polluter pays' levy on tobacco industry profits and raising the legal age for tobacco sales from 18 to 21 years."

"Stopping smoking can be difficult, but the NHS has a number of excellent resources; to ensure that people get the help they need. These include free and proven tools and advice that help people quit smoking for good."

More information: Keir EJ Philip et al, Relationship of smoking with current and future social isolation and loneliness: 12-year follow-up of older adults in England, The Lancet Regional Health - Europe (2022). DOI: 10.1016/j.lanepe.2021.100302

Provided by Imperial College London

SOURCES:- thelancet.com + topuniversities.com + medicalxpress.com

Why do wisdom teeth come in so late?

Wisdom-teeth removal is a rite of passage for many people in their late teens and early 20s. But why don't they come in during childhood with the rest of our permanent teeth?

The answer comes down to child development. There's not enough room in a child's jaw for wisdom teeth to come in. But as a kid grows, their jaw grows too, and there's more room for wisdom teeth to emerge, according to an October 2021 study in the journal Science Advances.

However, many modern human jaws don't grow long enough for wisdom teeth to come in without issue, which is why wisdom teeth removal is so common. Again, this is because of child development. Ancient humans ate diets full of hard nuts, uncooked vegetables, gamey meats and other tough foods. Following this diet as a youngster actually makes the jaw grow longer, Julia Boughner, anthropologist at the University of Saskatchewan College of Medicine in Canada, wrote in The Conversation. But as people in industrialized nations have shifted to eating softer foods, we've stopped maxing out our potential of jaw growth.

Another reason wisdom teeth come in during young adulthood is that they're not needed until then. When ancient people would grind down or lose their molars to tough food, wisdom teeth — the third set of molars — would take their place. "They're meant as kind of a backup for somebody who may have lost another molar tooth," said Steven Kupferman, an oral surgeon at Cedars Sinai in Los Angeles. But because most people don't lose their molars as young children, wisdom teeth wait until adulthood to arrive. In other words, if you lost your molars or ground them down as a child or teenager, your wisdom teeth are programmed to erupt to fill the gap.

The first set of permanent molars, or teeth in the back of the mouth that are designed to grind food, first come in around 6 years of age, when a child starts losing their baby teeth. Around age 12, the second molars emerge, serving as a backup to the 6-year molars in case they develop cavities, Kupferman told Live Science. Third molars, or wisdom teeth, come in around the ages of 17 to 21.

Nowadays, dentists often remove wisdom teeth because their emergence can cause pain in crowded mouths. Even if a person doesn't have pain, removing wisdom teeth in young adulthood can prevent health issues later in life, such as gum infections. Dentists and oral surgeons generally don't remove wisdom teeth as a preventive measure past age 27, because the risks of complications, such as damage to nearby nerves, increase. However, people may get their wisdom teeth removed past this age, usually due to issues such as pain.

Most people have 32 teeth, including four wisdom teeth. But some have more or less, and some people may be missing their wisdom teeth altogether, Kupferman said. Others may have a fourth molar, called a paramolar, behind each wisdom tooth. There is almost never enough space for paramolars in the modern human mouth, so they are always removed at the same time as the wisdom teeth.

Not everyone gets their wisdom teeth removed, though. "Even today, when people have teeth pulled for braces purposes, they often will keep their wisdom teeth because there's enough room for them," Kupferman said.

However, keeping your wisdom teeth can lead to issues down the line. Not all wisdom teeth pop through the gums during the late teens and early 20s. But as a person gets older and their gums recede, their wisdom teeth may peek through. In this case, the wisdom teeth come through the gums only partway, so they are prone to cavities and thus must be removed, Kupferman said.

"There are naysayers that [claim] all surgeons are just trying to make money by taking out wisdom teeth, but I think if you know any teenagers and you've seen just a few X-rays, you know that there's good reason to take out third molars," Kupferman said.

SOURCE:- livescience.com + science.org + theconversation.com