Hello Jim, very interesting your answer. It is not my idea to seems offensive to your answer, but I would like to make some small criticisms of a practical nature.
1. Do you have any proposal of meaning or purpose that you could share? Or what is your personal purpose or purpose?
2. The phenomenon of self-referentiality (I hope you have understood correctly) that you mention regarding the nature of the subject suffering from ED or SD, seems to be a sufficient reason for you to remove this kind of patient from the field of injections. That is, it would seem that you (I understand that this is only a forum) makes an abstract or theoretical division between patients in the realm of the trt itself and patients with emotional problems immersed in the self-referential dynamics that you aptly describe. But this division, from what criterion arises in practice? Will it be from a criterion that gives primacy to sexuality both genital and emotionally? Or is it only genital? (Apparently because if this was your answer, you would also have to consider the raw emotional factor in your answer, without academic statements, since you know perfectly well that each drug has an idiosyncrasy and therefore an associated emotional content ).
3. I am interested to know your proposal or the bottom line that you handle, due to the reasons given in the previous question.
4. Do not misunderstand me I am also an idiot, but sometimes your proposals sound like trt is a "sectarian question". In Chile, the only solution available, in general, is viagra or injection.
Thank you.