Elliot wrote:The ancient Chinese may have come up with theories about ejaculation being harmful, and sex emptying your kidneys of jing, but modern science has proven it just isn't true. Yet many people here seem to want to look back to a less sophisticated time and follow outdated practices apparently not proven useful for anything. It's very strange.
Hard to say who came up with it since the same methods are found in numerous different nations and cultures such as Indian aruyvedic medicine.
You should really post the modern scientific studies that are researching 'jing'. It doesn't sound remotely plausible that something that doesn't even exist in modern medicine is being studied.
And even if it were then in order to truly study the effects of it's loss we would be talking about lifelong studies since as Kreese already mentioned 'jing' isn't something that can be really quantified until you're close to zero at which point it's really too late to do anything about anyway. It is something that exists in you from the day you were born, you will never feel it's surplus, only when it's gone.
The only possible modern studies that could be said to be studying the equivalent to the chinese 'jing' (without the knowledge that there is a correlation of course) is the western studies that are being done with the 'polyamines', in which case they have proven without a doubt that
there is a significant loss via ejaculation in men and menstruation in women, but the studies can't measure the total amount in the body and they are also being constantly supplemented from ingested proteins converted to amino acids to polyamines (jing from food and air), so individual to individual there are variations in the amounts being measured:
http://books.google.com/books?id=x7x49C ... t#PPA24,M1.