added that he knew very few abstinent young men, and himself only considered abstinence good before full development, and intercourse not dangerous in moderation even before then.  Brieger knew cases of abstinence without harmful results, but himself thought that no general opinion could be given.  Juergensen said that abstinence in itself is not harmful, but that in some cases intercourse exerts a more beneficial influence.  Hoffmann said that abstinence is harmless, adding that though it certainly leads to masturbation, that is better than gonorrhoea, to say nothing of syphilis, and is easily kept within bounds.  Struempell replied that sexual abstinence is harmless, and indirectly useful as preserving from the risk of venereal disease, but that sexual intercourse, being normal, is always more desirable.  Hensen said that abstinence is not to be unconditionally approved.  Rumpf replied that abstinence was not harmful for most before the age of thirty, but after that age there was a tendency to mental obsessions, and marriage should take place at twenty-five.  Leyden also considered abstinence harmless until towards thirty, when it leads to psychic anomalies, especially states of anxiety, and a certain affectation.  Hein replied that abstinence is harmless for most, but in some leads to hysterical manifestations and indirectly to bad results from masturbation, while for the normal man abstinence cannot be directly beneficial, since intercourse is natural.  Gruetzner thought that abstinence is almost never harmful.  Nescheda said it is harmless in itself, but harmful in so far as it leads to unnatural modes of gratification.  Neisser believes that more prolonged abstinence than is now usual would be beneficial, but admitted the sexual excitations of our civilization; he added that of course he saw no harm for healthy men in intercourse.  Hoche replied that abstinence is quite harmless in normal persons, but not always so in abnormal persons.  Weber thought it had a useful influence in increasing will-power.  Tarnowsky said it is good in early manhood, but likely to be unfavorable after twenty-five.  Orlow replied that, especially in youth, it is harmless, and a man should be as chaste as his wife.  Popow said that abstinence is good at all ages and preserves the energy.  Blumenau said that in adult age abstinence is neither normal nor beneficial, and generally leads to masturbation, though not generally to nervous disorders; but that even masturbation is better than syphilis.  Tschiriew saw no harm in abstinence up to thirty, and thought sexual weakness more likely to follow excess than abstinence.  Tschish regarded abstinence as beneficial rather than harmful up to twenty-five or twenty-eight, but thought it difficult to decide after that age when nervous alterations seem to be caused.  Darkschewitcz regarded abstinence as harmless up to twenty-five.  Fraenkel said it was harmless for most, but that for a considerable proportion of people intercourse