is the masterbate reduce the bodyweight?

Question

Is there any relation between bodyweight and masterbation. I am masterbating twice a week. I know it is not harmful bet does it reduces a muscels of body?

Answer 1

no, get off you butt and walk for 30 minutes, masturbating burns 100 calories an hour or less

Answer 2

You lose 5mg of zinc in keeping with ejaculation. So perchance a zinc supplement may well be pronounced if it is the case. Zinc is significant whilst attempting to concieve. yet won't decrease the quantity of sperm. it is greater efficient than a strengthen.

Answer 3

Nothing wrong with this but it is not the best way to reduce body weight.

Answer 4

NOthing to worry about .......only you feel a little tired on the next day when you play... twice in a week is not at alla problem..so odnt worry for such things..

Answer 5

As a follow up to Krista....If it only burns 100 calories per hour you would probably only burn 2-3 calories.

Answer 6

None at all.

The only harm is that you may pull your penis off.

Answer 7

Masterbation IS harmful, to your mental and spiritual well-being.

From www.christopherwest.com:

We ain’t nothin’ but animals, so let’s do it like they do it on the Discovery Channel – so go the lyrics of a song by a band called "The Blood Hound Gang." The band’s name carries the same theme – we’re animals with an urge to merge, so let’s go for it whenever the urge presents itself. The idea is almost laughable, but for the fact that large swaths of humanity accept it as modern common sense.
Songs like this, backed by the media and even mental health professionals have fostered the notion that sexual restraint is inherently bad for us – and many of us have believed them. But does this make sense? We encourage self-restraint all the time: don’t hit your sister, share your toys, don’t eat the whole cheese cake.
These, and a great multitude of other restraints, are considered normal and healthy. But why do people cry "pathology" as soon as someone suggests restraint for the sexual appetite?
It’s certainly true that a puritanical and repressive approach to the sex drive is not healthy. No one (I hope) wants to return to the days of deafening silence about sex when the sight of a woman’s ankle could cause scandal. But is unrestrained libido the answer?
Our society has come to champion sexual indulgence as a right. And we wonder why molestation, rape, abortions, "fatherless" children, adultery, divorce, pornography, and STD’s are rampant. Could it be because human beings, both men and women, are behaving like animals?
When push comes to shove, do some people really believe "we ain’t nothin’ but animals"? If a woman says of her date, "He was an animal," we know immediately what she means: he did not respect her as a person; he treated her as an object to satisfy his own instincts. If we "ain’t nothin’ but animals," where’s the problem?
Take this behavior to its extreme. Suppose a man forcibly indulges his "animal instincts" with a woman. What makes this a crime? Blood hounds can’t be charged and prosecuted for sexual misconduct. The very words "crime" and "misconduct" indicate a moral order, a meaningless concept for animals. And this is precisely the point.
So often behind the modern push to equate human beings with animals lies the subtle or not-so-subtle agenda of moral relativism, the rejection of a moral order to which all are accountable. And so often behind the agenda of moral relativism lies the desire to indulge libido without any restraint – that is, the desire to behave like animals when it comes to sex.
A world that teaches "chickens are people too" is inevitably a sexually confused world. When we raise animals to the level of human persons, we’re not really dignifying animals, we’re debasing ourselves. And one of the first human mysteries to be debased in the animals-are-persons and persons-are-animals world-view, as the above song points out, is sexuality.
Although biologically similar, the joining of man and woman in "one flesh" is worlds apart from the copulation of Fido and Fidette – at least its meant to be! Fido and Fidette are merely following an instinct intended to continue their species. Man and
woman are meant to be loving one another in the image of a life-giving God, something impossible for a being ruled by instinct.
Because of the effects of original sin, we often experience our sex drives acting upon us as if we were animals. But if we are ever to find happiness, we must, with the help of divine grace, raise our behavior above – far above – what the musk oxes and jack assess are doing on the Discovery Channel.

Me:
While the Bible does not mention masterbation by name (did the word even exist then?), it certainly does mention lust as a sin TIME and TIME and TIME again. Jesus told us it was a sin of adultry to lust after another person. Masterbation REQUIRES lust. Masterbation INCREASES lust. Masterbation is the physical act of the internal lust in the actor. I think its easily covered in the Bible. If it wasn't a sin, why would we be so disgusted with the thought of Christ doing it? Why would we be so ashamed of doing it ourselves. Certainly society tells us that it is "normal" or even "expected." This shame is the Holy Spirit speaking to us in our conscience. God doesn't want to weigh you down with law, He wants to free you from the Law with Love. When you turn over your life to God (and all of it--including your sex life), He will bless you tremendously. You will become so that the thought of sinning by masterbation (or by adultry...etc) have become so repugnant to you that you'd rather be crucified. This process takes time. You will fall more than once on your path to union with God. But even Jesus fell more than once (3 times) on the road to Calvery and you can do all things in God who gives you strength! That's not good news, that's AWESOME news!
Thanks for reading and God bless!

Answer 8

no
bet dont do tat

Answer 9

no- but you will go blind.