dude your girlfriend isn't attracted to you which is why she isn't getting wet.

Lmao ruthless.

Here is a tip OP, eat the box bro.

Wow I'm really sorry! I just assumed most posts on here are from men! Again I'm really sorry! If it helps any, I don't use lotion for my eczema anymore because it dries my skin out even further and increases my visits to the dermatologist so they can have me try this "new" lotion because the previous wasn't working out so well... I hope this helps with your dry vagina issues :)

Use water-based lube, if not already.

Now if you couldn't produce any moisture, the product would be a life saver, like when a doctor has to enter a patient and the patient isn't exactly excited about it. However, if somebody who has no real issues uses this product constantly, their body may scale back moisture product leading to complications should the lube run dry.

This is a simple observation from years of eye drop use. My eyes used to water just fine, used eye drops for years and now they don't produce moisture near as frequently on their own which is a bitch in the wind or sun.

This is no conspiracy though. This is simple cause and effect. It's just kept off the packages for the most part cause of corporatism. If every product informed you how it would be robbing you of a tangible skill or crucial bodily reaction, you may not take it. Just like headache medicine, I love the stuff, but it tends to allow one to ignore the reason they are getting headaches in the first place.

Should I save that for my posthumous famous quotes book?

1) You'd be better off alone.

2) You'd be more likely to find cause looking toward certain birth control pills/devices.

3) You really are better off alone. :)

Chemical Birth control.

Diet.

Landscape.

Toxic partners.

= population control?

Affects female lubrication.

Ignore u/oglog's useless insult. Taken like any other medication or pharmeceutical, your thesis is correct. Take statins* for a year of life, and doctors advise correctly that one should refrain from stopping medication and consult them first (to slowly lower dose; usually one is on statins for the rest of their life.) Why? Our bodies reach a homeostasis which allows it to not deal with an unnatural condition through it's own methods, and simply come to rely on external aid. The same with depression medication, stimulants, ADHD meds etc.

In order to find a logical syllogism between vaginal lubrication and manufactured dependency, we simply have to find or fund a study which figures out whether or not women who use artificial lubrication are less apt to naturally produce lubrication. The case of statins and many other drugs and external aids are proven but I am unaware (haven't researched) vaginal lubrication. If this interests you, I'd suggest you look into this.

* I don't support most, if not all, of doctor's medications which veil the true cause behind disorder.

Lol. Let me guess, you have absolutely no background in science yet you've done a lot of 'research'?

You've guessed wrong. Although not trained in the medical field I have a degree in mechanical engineering, and went to grad school for aerodynamics.

Compared to the general public, I feel I am more qualified to dig into research of all types. Even a bachelors in engineering better prepares one to interpret statistics, conclusions, the method of science etc.

But I never professed I was an expert at anything in this post, and openly stated where more research would be needed. Why are you being a dick?

Why am I being such a dick? You're right. It's probably misplaced onto you. I'm sorry.

That said, since you asked, I'm being a dick because I am SO TIRED of Internet and Facebook science, in which people post nonsense theories they've claimed to have 'researched' under the guise of science.

This is most often done by people with no scientific background but with a inflated sense of intelligence (see Dunning-Kruger Effect). I mistakenly put you in this class. I'm sorry.

That said, I think an even more dangerous group of pseudo-science exponents are those (like you) with a little training in science. These folks have the vocabulary to be convincing and sound authoritative to the layperson but lack the judgement and training on when to speak up.

I guess at core, my problem is this: every time 'science' is invoked to support some crackpot theory (e.g. anti-vaccines, Sandy Hook truthers, etc.), the public respect for science dips just a tiny bit. This simply cannot happen, since we absolutely need the public to trust scientists going forward. So ... Please leave the science to actual, trained scientists.

That's almost all OK with me. It seems you still think I'm rolling with pseudo-science. So maybe i can explain and you can clarify where exactly you get this idea from?

The base supposition I sought to invoke was that our body is a complex regulating system, and in some cases, pharmaceuticals and medicines throw off it's homeostasis. This is, after all, why drug (and not even all of them!) users go through withdrawals, why antibiotics throw off the immune system of the digestive tract, why abruptly stopping anti-depressent regimen often causes ill-received side effects, no? What followed was not even a concrete answer to the OP; I just suggested that if it's anything like the instances of homeostasis above, then it makes sense (but would require real research) to confirm whether or not our lubrication systems might be affected by applying artificial lube.

These statements are not nearly as complicated as you apparently first made them out to be. Are you suggesting they are crack-pot theories (akin to anti-vaccine or *gasp* Sandy Hook Truthers)? Not true? Or you just needed to explain why you first responded that way to my post? (A general hatred of pseudo-science)

An example that I would have suggested to OP anecdotally (if I had to) is that of our lips (I guess we can consider that an erogenous zone?)

I have some friends and personal experience which tend to agree that although applying lip balm makes them feel better at the moment of application, it seems they just become drier as a result (once the lip balm dissipates)

But I didn't feel like rolling with the potential false equivalence. Again, I'm not up on the science of vaginal lube, just thought I'd offer my knowledge on homeostasis and suggesting next steps if he/she was legitimately curious about this.

If your entire comment revolved around statins and my footnote claim that I don't personally support them and the science behind them, then let me know.

Short answer (but PLEASE read long answer): I definitely over-reacted a little bit because I am SOOOOOO tired of internet pseudo-science, especially on /r/conspiracy and similar subreddits.

Long answer: Some of your statements (e.g. "our bodies reach a homeostasis") are based in truth. However, where I object to what you wrote is that you are way too firm in some of your statements. Let's take two examples:

1. "Taken like ANY other medication". This is not how ANY other medication works; this is how SOME other medications work. I think it's irresponsible to say "any".

2. "The same with depression medication, stimulants, ADHD meds etc." These other cases are not THE SAME. They may be SIMILAR, but without a detailed understanding of the molecular mechanisms of these drugs, I think it's irresponsible to say "The same".

In the end, you are obviously smart, and you use very scientific vocabulary (e.g. 'statins', 'homeostasis', 'logical syllogism'). As a result, I think that the layman (or the average redditor) is likely to consider you an informed source. I believe there's a responsibility that goes along with being (or acting like) an informed source, and that responsibility means that you shouldn't use broad terms like "ANY" and "The SAME" when they don't apply.

This is most often done by people with no scientific background but with a inflated sense of intelligence (see Dunning-Kruger Effect). I mistakenly put you in this class. I'm sorry.

Just, lol.

Ummm ... At me? Or with me?

At you of course.

Because I pointed out the amount of pseudo-science on /r/conspiracy. Yeah, I'm the joke.

What about the pseudeo science elsewhere? Please point that out as well, because that goes unchecked and supported by the establishment.

Good on you. Engineering is way harder than medicine and you learn more science than "doctors," who are essentially just trained obamacare bots at this point trained to mindlessly carry out the wishes of pharma and big govt.

I'm tempted to believe a large portion fall into this category within the medical field for sure.

Are you a fellow engineer?

What if you couldnt take them anymore? Or if you were forced not to have the statins? Would your body be able to go back?

That might be a question for a medical doctor or I'd have to research some papers on why they give that advice. Perhaps it's part of the machine which makes people convinced they are relying on their pharmaceuticals, but I'd expect there to be an abnormally high (higher than one's already abnormal) cholesterol level if your diet remains the same.

Lmao ruthless.

Here is a tip OP, eat the box bro.

Use water-based lube, if not already.