What did @thebossticks actually say?
The creator claimed that "40% of men by the age of 40 have a rectal dysfunction" and that by 50, the number hits 50%. They also linked this directly to muscle quality, saying "the more jacked you are, the better your erections." That second claim is where things get genuinely interesting, and honestly, not entirely wrong. But the framing of the first set of numbers is sloppy enough to matter.
To be clear: the creator appears to mean erectile dysfunction, not rectal dysfunction. That mix-up is worth noting because it muddies an otherwise real conversation about men's health. The underlying data they're gesturing at is real. The way they're presenting it is a little loose.
Does the science back this up?
Partially, but the numbers need context. The most cited source on ED prevalence is the Massachusetts Male Aging Study (Feldman et al., 1994, Journal of Urology), which found that roughly 52% of men between 40 and 70 reported some degree of erectile dysfunction. But that included mild, moderate, and complete ED lumped together. Complete ED affected about 10% of that group. The "40 by 40" framing the creator uses isn't standard in the literature.
A 2018 review by Selvin and Burnett in Urology found age-adjusted prevalence of ED at around 18-25% in men under 60, climbing sharply after that. So "40% at 40" is on the high end and probably reflects a looser definition. The "50 at 50" claim is closer to supportable if you include mild dysfunction, but calling mild ED the same as ED without qualification is misleading. These distinctions matter clinically.
What did they get wrong (or right)?
The muscle-erection connection is where the creator actually has something worth saying. They got this mostly right. Research supports a link between physical fitness, muscle mass, and erectile function, though the mechanism is more about cardiovascular health and testosterone than being "jacked" per se.
A 2018 study by Hackett et al. in the Journal of Sexual Medicine found that low free testosterone correlates with both reduced muscle mass and erectile dysfunction. Androgen signaling affects smooth muscle in penile tissue directly. Separately, Esposito et al. (2004, JAMA) showed that aerobic exercise and weight loss in obese men significantly improved erectile function scores without any medication. So yes, physical fitness matters. But "the more jacked you are" oversimplifies it. A lean, cardiovascularly fit man will likely outperform a powerlifter with poor metabolic health on this metric.
The numbers themselves, the "40 by 40, 50 by 50" framing, appear to be a mnemonic that circulates in men's health content online. It's not a finding from a single clean study. Using it without that caveat is misleading.
What should you actually know?
Erectile dysfunction is genuinely underreported and undertreated. If you're in your 40s and experiencing issues, this isn't a punchline. ED is often an early signal of cardiovascular disease. A 2010 meta-analysis by Guo et al. in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology found that ED is associated with a 44% increased risk of cardiovascular events. That's not a reason to panic. It's a reason to talk to a clinician.
On the testosterone side, low testosterone (hypogonadism) is a real, diagnosable condition that affects libido, erections, energy, and body composition. It is not simply a consequence of being out of shape, though lifestyle factors do influence testosterone levels. Treatment options exist and are regulated. What they are not is a guaranteed fix for all forms of ED, which can have vascular, neurological, psychological, or hormonal causes. Anyone claiming otherwise is selling something.
- If you're experiencing ED, a blood panel including total and free testosterone, LH, and FSH is a reasonable starting point.
- Lifestyle interventions, specifically exercise and weight management, have genuine clinical evidence behind them.
- ED before age 50 without an obvious cause warrants cardiovascular screening.