Protocols, Parameters, and Procedures
study was conducted by having the male Research Subject
sit in a chair facing an infrared pupilometer. The
pupilometer was attached to a framework with a chinrest.
A blood pressure cuff was attached to one arm, and a pulse
monitor to the large toe of the left foot. Eight numbered,
sterile specimen containers were placed within easy reach
of the Subject for use in separately collecting each ejaculation.
A TV and VCR were also present in the small room, operated
by the Subject via remote control. The Subject was
alone in the room, observed at all times by the Rutgers
researchers via a window from an adjoining room. Additionally,
instrument and sensor readings were gathered by the researchers
from this location.
two minutes throughout the study, the blood pressure cuff
would inflate automatically. At each inflation of
the cuff, the Subject was expected to place his chin in
the chinrest of the pupilometer, audibly stating his perceived
level of arousal from 0 to 10, then remain still as his
pupil diameter was recorded. This exacting set of
understandably distracting procedures was also repeated
at each orgasm, with the added procedure of requiring the
Subject to also collect each ejaculation in the appropriate
the Subject was capable of performing at all was remarkable,
given the necessary procedures required of him. In
his own words, here is a brief excerpt of his own recollections
of the study:
procedures required by the experiment proved to be just
as distracting as I had anticipated. The pressure
from the inflation of the blood pressure cuff on my arm
every two minutes became progressively more uncomfortable
as the continual breaks in concentration to use the pupilometer
and declare the appropriate arousal number became more
distracting. These inconveniences coupled with other
difficulties, including a faulty VCR, made for additional
distractions, which took up the majority of the first
30 minutes to correct. Despite these difficulties,
I was ultimately able to concentrate sufficiently on the
video I had prepared to exhibit the multiorgasmic response
pattern I was there to document.
the most uncomfortable aspect of the entire experiment
was by far the climate within the room itself, which,
without air conditioning, quickly grew almost unbearably
hot and stuffy. Of all the inconveniences, it was
this which finally caused me to call a halt to the proceedings
after only about an hour.
the sixth orgasm, the heat and humidity within the small
room was stifling. With sweat rolling down my face
and stinging my eyes, I let the researchers know that
it was just too uncomfortable to continue. Following
another 10-minute period, during which time I rested as
my physiological readings continued to be monitored, the
door was finally opened allowing some relief from the
oppressive heat and humidity."
the study, the 35 year-old male Subject -- despite the distraction
of attached instrumentation, required verbal feedback, and
the absence of a female partner -- experienced six natural
and fully ejaculatory orgasms within a 36-minute timespan
with no decrease in erection or ability to continue. (In
other words, with no male
refractory period in evidence.) No voluntary techniques
of any kind were employed nor was the ejaculatory process
interfered with or interrupted in any way. No substances,
special regimens, exercises nor diets were employed.
According to the male Subject of this study, he has always
possessed such a capacity (since early childhood).
here to view a
graph of the Study biometrics
ejaculate volume results of our study are as follows:
other study on male "multiple" orgasm to also document
ejaculate volume was the Kothari
Study (1989), wherein a male Subject was monitored as
he coincidentally also experienced six ejaculatory orgasms.
The key difference between the two studies being that the
Kothari Subject admittedly used ejaculatory-control techniques
so as to keep from experiencing full orgasm (i.e., full, uninterrupted
ejaculation). As the Rutgers Subject does not experience a
refractory period following full orgasm, no such inhibitory
techniques were needed or used.
is additionally verified by comparing the Kothari ejaculate-volume
data side-by-side with the same data acquired in this Rutgers
Here, unlike the ejaculate volumes of the Kothari Study, the
first ejaculation of this study dwarfs in volume that of the
Kothari Subject, clearly indicating that full ejaculation
has taken place. And yet, four minutes later, a second
orgasm and ejaculation occurs. Though the ejaculate
volume of the subsequent orgasms is greatly diminished (which
is to be expected, as the greater volume is usually expelled
during the first full ejaculation), it is the volume of the
first which proves the Subject's claims that no ejaculatory
control techniques are employed, yet no refractory period
is in evidence.
It is important to recognize that the low subsequent ejaculate
volumes (Orgasms 2 - 6) are not at all indications of either
decreased orgasmic experience or diminished intensity of
pleasure. Volume of ejaculation in natural male orgasm
will vary dependent upon two major factors, only:
volume of accumulated semen present in the seminal vesicles,
and degree of arousal prior to orgasm.
both the Kothari Subject and the Rutgers Subject ejaculated
a total volume of only about one millileter variance between
thus, for the first time in history, an adult male is scientifically
documented experiencing one full natural orgasm after another
without interruption, without withholding ejaculation, and
yet without any evidence of a Male Refractory Period (MRP),
selected quotes and highlights from the Study.
reprint of the Study (published in the Journal of Sex Education
and Therapy; Vol. 23, No. 2) can be ordered through the American
Association of Sex Educators, Counselors, and Therapists (AASECT).
ad the entire STUDY