In article <pcook.38.784222116 at med.umich.edu>, pcook at med.umich.edu
>I am not disputing the usefulness of the neuroscience newsgrp! I am
>simply suggesting that users making requests for information cover
>some of the basics of the topic before making the request (any review
>article is a great platform from which to launch the request.) When a
>foundation for the request is established then the text of the request
>should reflect the foundation for a specific question.
This may be a bit presumptuous, but I have the feeling that my question
about the half-life of endorphins may have been one of the "requests for
information" that prompoted this discussion. I must confess, my question
had nothing to do with my research (I'm not longer directly involved in
research, I direct the research grants department of a foundation that
provides grants for research on Alzheimer's Disease).
The question arose from a discussion with some friends of <throat clearing
and blushing> sado-masochist sex. The argument was made that participation
in S/M provides pleasure in the form of elevated endorphin levels that
remain elevated for several _days_. Based on what I could remember from my
grad school coursework, I found this hard to believe. I figured this
newsgroup would be the perfect place to go for a more definitive answer.
I apologize if my inquiry was misplaced. Perhaps I should have tried one
of the alt.sex groups, but I doubt I would have gotten much useful
information there. And to the folks who did answer the question, my
American Health Assistance Foundation
(this posting has nothing whatsoever to do with my employer)