Pill-Free Ways to improve Your Sex Life

“Sex is important to health,” according to the Harvard Health Letter. “Frequent sexual intercourse is associated with reduced heart attack risk.” But, as I discuss in my video Do Men Who Have More Sex Live Longer?, that seems to be the perfect case of reverse causation. They’re implying that more sex leads to healthier arteries, but isn’t the opposite more likely—that is, healthier arteries lead to more sex? Blood flow in the penis is so reflective of blood flow elsewhere that penile Doppler ultrasound can predict cardiovascular disease. However, low frequency of sexual activity may predict cardiovascular disease in men independently of erectile dysfunction. This suggests that sex may be more than “just fun” and may also be therapeutic, or at least so says an editor of the Journal of Sexual Medicine and colleagues in discussing whether or not “frequent sexual activity can be prescribed” to improve general health. In men, they suggest it’s because more sex means more testosterone.

When men have sex, they get a big spike in testosterone levels in their blood, but, interestingly, in contrast, they don’t get a testosterone boost when they masturbate, as you can see at 1:21 in my video. This may be because “testosterone increases with competitive success,” like if you win a sports game. While sex “is not usually regarded as a competitive event…one’s mental state following coitus could nevertheless be something like that of a winner,” as opposed to the mental state after masturbation.

As you can see at 2:00 in my video, the spike in sex hormones in the blood is so great that men’s beards actually grow faster on days they have sex. And, since low testosterone levels are associated with increased risk of mortality, this could help explain the health benefits of having sex.

So, do men who have more sex actually live longer? I searched Pubmed for sexual activity and longevity and found a study supported by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, titled “Sexual activity and longevity of the southern green stink bug”—clearly an example of our taxpayer dollars hard at work. I was less interested in whether or not screwworms live up to their namesake and more interested in a study on sex and death, in which the objective was “to examine the relation between frequency of orgasm and mortality.” The researchers found that men with “high orgasmic frequency” appeared to cut their risk of premature death in half and, apparently, the more, the better: There was an associated 36 percent drop in mortality odds for every additional 100 orgasms a year. “Conclusion: Sexual activity seems to have a protective effect on men’s health”—but, apparently, not if you cheat. “Unfaithfulness in men seems to be associated with a higher risk of major cardiovascular events,” like heart attacks and strokes. “Extramarital sex may be hazardous and stressful because the lover is often younger…[and] a secret sexual encounter” may be more stressful.

In a large autopsy series, the majority of cases of sudden death during sex occurred in men during extramarital intercourse. The absolute risk is low—“only one out of 580 men might be expected to suffer a sudden death attributable to sexual intercourse”—but for those at high risk, research shows that “[s]ex in familiar surroundings, in a comfortable room temperature, and with the usual partner adds less stress to the heart” and may be safer.

Speaking of safe sex, you thought drinking and driving was bad? “While it is generally assumed that sexual behavior happens in parked cars, there is little discussion…in the research literature of sexual activity in moving vehicles.” About one in five college students report engaging in sex while driving, nearly half while going more than 60 miles an hour. Researchers suggest maybe this is something students should be warned about in health class.

When done right, though, love may protect your lover’s life. Given the benefits of sexual activity, “intervention programmes could also be considered, perhaps based on the exciting ‘At least five a day’ campaign aimed at increasing fruit and vegetable consumption—although the numerical imperative may have to be adjusted.”

What are some pill-free ways to improve your sex life? Exercising, quitting smoking, not drinking too much alcohol, not weighing too much, and eating a healthy diet. But what does it mean to “eat a healthy diet”? As I discuss in my video Best Foods to Improve Sexual Function, heart-healthy lifestyle changes are sex-healthy lifestyle changes, which have been demonstrated in studies from around the world, including in women. “Sexual function in women is significantly affected” by coronary artery disease, atherosclerotic narrowing of blood flow through our arteries, including the arteries that supply our pelvis. So, high cholesterol may mean “lower arousal, orgasm, lubrication, and satisfaction,” and the same holds for high blood pressure.

Given this, putting women on a more plant-based diet may help with sexual functioning.   Researchers found that improvements in female sexual function index scores were related to an increased intake of fruits, vegetables, nuts, and beans, and a shift from animal to plant sources of fat. The same for men: a significant improvement in international Index of Erectile Function scores. In fact, the largest study on diet and erectile dysfunction found that each additional daily serving of fruits or vegetables may reduce the risk of ED by 10 percent. But why? It may be due to the anti-inflammatory effects. Two years on a healthier diet resulted in a significant reduction in systemic inflammation, as indicated by reduced levels of C-reactive protein. Fiber itself may play an anti-inflammatory role. Those who eat the most fiber tend to have significantly lower levels of inflammation in their bodies, as you can see at 2:06 in my video. The opposite was found for saturated fat, “associated with an increased likelihood of elevated CRP”, C-reactive protein levels.

We’re used to seeing changes in inflammatory markers over weeks, months, or years, but people don’t realize that the level of inflammation in our bodies can change after only a single meal. For example, there’s a pro-inflammatory signaling molecule in our bodies called interleukin 18, thought to play a role in destabilizing atherosclerotic plaque. As such, the level of interleukin 18 in the blood “ is a strong predictor” of cardiovascular death.

What would happen if you fed people one of three different types of meals: sausage-egg-butter-oil sandwiches, cheeseless pizza with white flour crust, or the same cheeseless pizza but with whole-wheat crust? Within hours of eating the sausage sandwich, interleukin 18 levels shot up about 20 percent, an effect not seen after eating the plant-based pizza. In contrast, those eating the whole food, plant-based pizza made with the whole-wheat crust had about a 20 percent drop in interleukin 18 levels within hours of consumption, reinforcing dietary recommendations to eat a diet high in fiber and starches, and low in saturated fat to prevent chronic diseases.

But the billions in profits are in pills, not plants, which is why the pharmacology of the female orgasm has been studied ever since 1972 when a researcher at Tulane University implanted tubes deep within the brain of a woman so he could inject drugs directly into her brain and was able to induce repetitive orgasms. A man who had electrodes placed into similar parts of his brain was given a device for a few hours that allowed him to press the button himself to stimulate the electrode. He pressed the button up to 1,500 times.


For more on male reproductive health, see:

Also check out my other men’s health videos, such as:

What effect might that inflammation directly following an unhealthy meal have on our artery function? Check out my three-part endotoxins series starting with The Leaky Gut Theory of Why Animal Products Cause Inflammation.

And why exactly is fiber anti-inflammatory? Watch my video Prebiotics: Tending Our Inner Garden.

In health,

Michael Greger, M.D.

PS: If you haven’t yet, you can subscribe to my free videos here and watch my live presentations:

Medical Meat Bias

When famed surgeon Michael DeBakey was asked why his studies published back in the 1930s linking smoking and lung cancer were ignored, he had to remind people about what it was like back then. We were a smoking society. Smoking was in the movies, on airplanes. Medical meetings were held in “a heavy haze of smoke.” Smoking was, in a word, normal. Even the congressional debates over cigarettes and lung cancer took place in literal smoke-filled rooms. (This makes me wonder what’s being served at the breakfast buffets of the Dietary Guidelines Committee meetings these days.)

I’ve previously talked about a famous statistician by the name of Ronald Fisher, who railed against what he called “propaganda…to convince the public that cigarette smoking is dangerous.” “Although Fisher made invaluable contributions to the field of statistics, his analysis of the causal association between lung cancer and smoking was flawed by an unwillingness to examine the entire body of data available…” His smokescreen may have been because he was a paid consultant to the tobacco industry, but also because he was himself a smoker. “Part of his resistance to seeing the association may have been rooted in his own fondness for smoking,” which makes me wonder about some of the foods nutrition researchers may be fond of to this day.

As I discuss in my video Don’t Wait Until Your Doctor Kicks the Habit, it always strikes me as ironic when vegetarian researchers are forthright and list their diet as a potential conflict of interest, whereas not once in the 70,000 articles on meat in the medical literature have I ever seen a researcher disclose her or his nonvegetarian habits––because it’s normal. Just like smoking was normal.

How could something that’s so normal be bad for you? And, it’s not as if we fall over dead after smoking one cigarette. Cancer takes decades to develop. “Since at that time most physicians smoked and could not observe any immediate deleterious effects, they were skeptical of the hypothesis and reluctant to accept even the possibility of such a relation”—despite the mountain of evidence.

It may have taken 25 years for the Surgeon General’s report to come out and longer still for mainstream medicine to get on board, but now, at least, there are no longer ads encouraging people to “Inhale to your heart’s content!” Instead, today, there are ads from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention fighting back.

For food ads, we don’t have to go all the way back to old ads touting “Meat…for Health Defense” or “Nourishing Bacon,” or featuring doctors prescribing meat or soda, or moms relieved that “Trix are habit-forming, thank heavens!” You know things are bad when the sanest dietary advice comes from cigarette ads, as in Lucky Strike’s advertisements proclaiming “More Vegetables––Less Meat” and “Substitute Oatmeal for White Flour.” (You can see these vintage ads from 2:34 in my video).

In modern times, you can see hot dogs and sirloin tips certified by the American Heart Association, right on their packaging. And, of all foods, which was the first to get the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics’ “Kids Eat Right” logo on its label? Was it an apple? Broccoli, perhaps? Nope, it was a Kraft prepared cheese product.

Now, just as there were those in the 1930s, 40s, and 50s at the vanguard trying to save lives, today, there are those transforming ads about what you can do with pork butt into ads about what the pork can do to your butt: “Hot Dogs Cause Butt Cancer—Processed meats increase colorectal cancer risk” reads an for the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine’s “Meat Is the New Tobacco” campaign, which you can see at 3:56 in my video. As Dr. Barnard, PCRM president, tried to convey in an editorial published in the American Medical Association’s Journal of Ethics, “Plant-based diets are the nutritional equivalent of quitting smoking.”

How many more people have to die before the Centers for Disease Control encourages people not to wait for open-heart surgery to start eating healthfully?

Just as we don’t have to wait until our doctor stops smoking to give up cigarettes ourselves, we don’t have to wait until our doctor takes a nutrition class or cleans up his or her diet before choosing to eat healthier. No longer do doctors hold a professional monopoly on health information. There’s been a democratization of knowledge. So, until the system changes, we have to take personal responsibility for our health and for our family’s health. We can’t wait until society catches up with the science again, because it’s a matter of life and death.

Dr. Kim Allan Williams, Sr., became president of the American College of Cardiology a few years back. He was asked why he follows his own advice to eat a plant-based diet. “I don’t mind dying,” Dr. Williams replied. “I just don’t want it to be my fault.”


I find this to be such a powerful concept that I have come at it from different angles. For other takes, check out Taking Personal Responsibility for Your Health and How Smoking in 1959 Is Like Eating in 2019. Are the health effects of smoking really comparable to diet, though? Check out Animal Protein Compared to Cigarette Smoking.

The food industry certainly uses the same kind of misinformation tactics to try to confuse consumers. See, for example:

In health,
Michael Greger, M.D.

PS: If you haven’t yet, you can subscribe to my free videos here and watch my live presentations:

Using Green Tea to Help Prevent Cancer and Treat Cancer

Tea consumption is associated with a reduced risk of heart disease, stroke, and premature death in general, with each additional cup of green tea a day associated with a 4-percent lower mortality risk. So, perhaps “drinking several cups of tea daily can keep the doctor away,” as well as the mortician—but what about cancer?

As I discuss in my video Can Green Tea Help Prevent Cancer, there is “growing evidence from laboratory, epidemiologic [population], and human intervention studies that tea can exert beneficial disease-preventive effects” and, further, may actually “slow cancer progression.” Let’s review some of that evidence.

Not only do those who drink a lot of tea appear to live longer than those who drink less, as you can see at 0:49 in my video, drinking lots of tea may also delay the onset of cancer. At 0:56 in my video, you can see a table titled “Average age at cancer onset and daily green tea consumption.” The green tea intake is measured in Japanese tea cups, which only contain a half a cup, so the highest category in the table is actually greater than or equal to five full cups of tea, not ten as it appears in the table. Women who did get cancer appeared to get it seven years later if they had been drinking lots of tea compared to those who had consumed less. Men, however, had a three-year delay in cancer onset if they had consumed more than five full cups of green tea daily, the difference potentially “due to higher tobacco consumption by males.”

Green tea may be able to interfere with each of the stages of cancer formation: the initiation of the first cancer cell, promotion into a tumor, and then subsequent progression and spread, as you can see at 1:24 in my video. Cancer is often initiated when a free radical oxidizes our DNA, causing a mutation, but, as you can see at 1:44 in my video, we can get a nice “spike of antioxidant power” of our bloodstream within 40 minutes of drinking green tea. “This increase may, in turn, lower oxidative damage to DNA and so decrease risk of cancer.”

Furthermore, in terms of genoprotective effects—that is, protecting our genes—pre-existing oxidation-induced DNA damage was lower after drinking green tea, suggesting consumption can boost DNA repair as well. We didn’t know for certain, however…until now.

There is a DNA-repair enzyme in our body called OGG1. As you can see at 2:15 in my video, within one hour of drinking a single cup of green tea, we can boost OGG1’s activity, and after a week of tea drinking, we can boost it even higher. So, “regular intake of green tea has additional benefits in the prevention and/or repair of DNA damage.” In fact, tea is so DNA-protective it can be used for sperm storage for fresh samples until they can be properly refrigerated.

What’s more, tea is so anti-inflammatory it can be used for pain control as a mouthwash after wisdom tooth surgery, as you can see at 2:41 in my video. In terms of controlling cancer growth, at a dose of green tea compounds that would make it into our organs after drinking six cups of tea, it can cause cancer cells to commit suicide—apoptosis (programmed cell death)—while leaving normal cells alone. There are a number of chemotherapy agents that can kill cancer through brute force, but that can make normal cells vulnerable, too. So, “[g]reen tea appears to be potentially an ideal agent for [cancer] prevention”: little or no adverse side-effects, efficacious for multiple cancers at achievable dose levels, and able to be taken orally. We have a sense of how it works—how it stops cancer cells from growing and causing them to kill off themselves—and it’s cheap and has a history of safe, acceptable use. But, all of this was based on in-vitro studies in a test tube. “It needs to be evaluated in human trials,” concluded the researchers. Indeed, what happens when we give green tea to people with cancer? Does it help?

Tea consumption may reduce the risk of getting oral cancer. Not only may the consumption of tea boost the antioxidant power of our bloodstream within minutes and decrease the amount of free-radical DNA damage throughout our systems over time, but it can also increase the antioxidant power of our saliva and decrease the DNA damage within the inner cheek cells of smokers, though not as much as stopping smoking all together. You can see several graphs and tables showing these findings in the first 35 seconds of my video Can Green Tea Help Treat Cancer?.

Might this help precancerous oral lesions from turning into cancerous oral lesions? More than 100,000 people develop oral cancer annually worldwide, with a five-year overall survival rate of less than the flip of a coin. Oral cancer frequently arises from precancerous lesions in the mouth, each having a few percent chance of turning cancerous every year. Can green tea help?

Fifty-nine patients with precancerous oral lesions were randomized into either a tea group, in which capsules of powdered tea extract were given and their lesions were painted with green tea powder, or a control group, who essentially got sugar pills and their lesions painted with nothing but glycerin. As you can see at 1:23 in my video, within six months, lesions in 11 out of the 29 in the tea group shrunk, compared to only 3 of 30 in the placebo group. “The results indicate that tea treatment can improve the clinical manifestations of the oral lesions.”

The most important question, though, is whether the tea treatment prevented the lesions from turning cancerous. Because the trial only lasted a few months, the researchers couldn’t tell. When they scraped some cells off of the lesions, however, there was a significant drop in DNA-damaged cells within three months in the treatment groups, suggesting that things were going in the right direction, as you can see at 1:46 in my video. Ideally, we’d have a longer study to see if they ended up with less cancer and one that just used swallowed tea components, since most people don’t finger-paint with tea in their mouths. And, we got just that.

As you can see at 2:15 in my video, there were the same extraordinary clinical results with some precancerous lesions shrinking away. What’s more, the study lasted long enough to see if fewer people actually got cancer. The answer? There was just as much new cancer in the green tea group as the placebo group. So, the tea treatment resulted in a higher response rate, as the lesions looked better, but there was no improvement in cancer-free survival.

These studies were done on mostly smokers and former smokers. What about lung cancer? As you can see at 2:46 in my video, population studies suggest tea may be protective, but let’s put it to the test. Seventeen patients with advanced lung cancer were given up to the equivalent of 30 cups of green tea a day, but “[n]o objective responses were seen.” In a study of 49 cancer patients, 21 of whom had lung cancer, the subjects received between 4 and 25 cups worth of green tea compounds a day. Once again, no benefits were found. The only benefit green tea may be able to offer lung cancer patients is to help lessen the burns from the radiation treatments when applied on the skin. Indeed, green tea compresses may be able to shorten the duration of the burns, as you can see at 3:21 in my video.

The protective effects of green tea applied topically were also seen in precancerous cervical lesions, where the twice-a-day direct application of a green tea ointment showed a beneficial response in nearly three-quarters of the patients, compared to only about 10 percent in the untreated control group, which is consistent with the benefits of green tea compounds on cervical cancer cells in a petri dish. When women were given green tea extract pills to take, however, they didn’t seem to help.

I talked about the potential benefit of green tea wraps for skin cancer in Treating Gorlin Syndrome with Green Tea, but is there any other cancer where green tea can come into direct contact? Yes. Colon cancer, which grows from the inner surface of the colon that comes into contact with food and drink. As you can see at 4:13 in my video, in the colon, tea compounds are fermented by our good gut bacteria into compounds like 3,4DHPA, which appears to wipe out colon cancer cells, while leaving normal colon cells relatively intact in vitro. So one hundred thirty-six patients with a history of polyps were randomized to get green tea extract pills or not. Now, this study was done in Japan, where drinking green tea is commonplace, so, effectively, this was comparing those who drank three cups of green tea a day to subjects who drank four daily cups. A year later on colonoscopy, the added-green tea group had only half the polyp recurrence and the polyps that did grow were 25 percent smaller. With such exciting findings, why hasn’t a larger follow-up study been done? Perhaps due to the difficulty “in raising funds” for the study, “because green tea is a beverage but not a pharmaceutical.”

There is good news. Thanks to a major cancer charity in Germany, researchers are currently recruiting for the largest green tea cancer trial to date, in which more than 2,000 patients will be randomized. I look forward to presenting the results to you when they come in.


What about prostate cancer? See my videos Preventing Prostate Cancer with Green Tea and Treating Prostate Cancer with Green Tea.

You may also be interested in these somewhat older videos:

How interesting was that about wisdom teeth? Green tea can also be used as an anti-cavity mouth rinse, which I discuss in my video What’s the Best Mouthwash?.

Is Caffeinated Tea Dehydrating? Watch the video to find out.

In health,
Michael Greger, M.D.

PS: If you haven’t yet, you can subscribe to my free videos here and watch my live presentations: