G spot on the spot

Your piece about the ultrasound study of the “G spot” (23 February, p 6) failed to mention many of the scientific problems. First, the authors’ definition in their paper of vaginal orgasm as “the orgasm experienced after direct stimulation of the anterior vaginal wall by penetration, without concomitant stimulation of the external clitoris” is technical and impossible to confirm. Is this penile penetration or were fingers or dildo used?
In 25 years as a sex therapist, I have not met many women who knew which wall of their vagina received stimulation during penile intercourse – and how do you keep other walls from getting involved? We know a lot about the ultrasound technique, but we don’t know much about the sexual practices and experiences of the women in this study.
Secondly, the way you presented this research could encourage the dangerous wave of untested cosmetic surgeries and injections that claim to “thicken the G spot”. Commercialisation of this topic greatly exceeds its scientific basis. Media that should be scientific are promoting unsafe and untested practices.
Emmanuele Jannini writes:
• Some of our subjects were medical doctors and understood terms such as “anterior”. Though we used these terms in the paper, in real life we also used popular language to ensure all participants understood. Nothing we have published suggests the possibility of a surgical technique, so I disagree that this research could encourage cosmetic manipulation of the G spot.
New York, US