Slashdot Mirror
Reliable Male Contraceptive In the Works
Hugh Pickens writes "The BBC reports that recent tests in China indicate a monthly injection of testosterone, which works by temporarily blocking sperm production, could be as effective at preventing pregnancies as the female pill or condoms. In trials in China only one man in 100 fathered a child while on the injections, and six months after stopping the injections the mens' sperm counts returned to normal. The lead researcher said that if further tests proved successful, the treatment could become widely available in five years' time. Previous attempts to develop an effective and convenient male contraceptive have encountered problems over reliability and side effects, such as mood swings and a lowered sex drive. However, despite the injection having no serious side effects, almost a third of the 1,045 men in the two-and-a-half year study did not complete the trials; no reason was given for this."
however their recent child support filings may lend a clue.
This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
That only matters if you actually have sex, so /.'ers should be fine.
But really, screw those odds. Or rather, don't.
2.5 years of *injections* and 1/3 did not complete the term of the trials. Not surprising. Make it in pill form and you may have a higher completion rate...
And this story was posted to /. why?
1% got pregnant, that seems pretty high for contraceptive. It would have to be used with other means
I stand corrected, the pill is 92-99.7% effective, about 5% of couples will get pregnant. So it seems this way is pretty darn effective.
I didn't found something funny to put here.
And as a useful side-effect, those pesky testicles will shrink and get out of the way.
I tipped 20% IN CASH at a restaurant last night before I pulled out my wallet and paid with my credit card.
Anyway... about the story... I think it's a good idea.
I know of a 100% guaranteed method. :)
But where is the male morning after pill?
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
When researchers don't address a loss of a 3rd of their sample they are not doing their job. Something is fishy from that end.
Also who wants only a 1/100 chance of NOT getting your SO pregnant? For most Americans that would be on the order of once year (assuming the women is only fertile for a few days a month).
Immensely effective but I'd trust the results more if it came from...well not-China. They have huge heads and trust like to fake results as often as money grubbers here.
iburnaga.blogspot.com
So, instead of wearing a condom (which also protects wearer from STDs) guys will start taking monthly medical appointments so he can be pricked with a needle?
Riiiight... I can so see that happening.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
Assuming no user error, and over 10% for real life usage.
I'd be willing to take a pill everyday, but I HATE needles. I'll just stick with condoms for now.
Not that one ought to just whip it out if you're on these injections anyhow - I'm pretty sure they can't block disease like a condom can.
Oh yeah, I'm reassured now.
100% success rate was reported as none of the men in the study became pregnant.
Less Chinese being born, less tech jobs can be outsourced to China.
It's not the medical relevance - it's economy.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
We already have a reliable male contraceptive. It's called RISUG.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RISUG
99% effective rate on such a small population sample is worrying. Assuming it is pure testosterone, what are the side effects? It may be a naturally produced chemical in men, but it has been shown to have serous side effects in large doses. It is also one of the main ingredients in steroids. My best guess is that the roughly 400 men who dropped out of the study had side effects. How embarrassing would it be to have to admit that you were having a side effect to testosterone?
I did RTFA and it really doesn't say much more then the snippet.
Is that what you do? Is it gay sex?
Are they fucking serious? If injecting yourself with testosterone in any amount was safe every gym rat on the planet would already be doing it, AND SO WOULD EVERYBODY ELSE.
There is no way that the long term effects are acceptable.
"almost a third of the 1,045 men in the two-and-a-half year study did not complete the trials; no reason was given for this"
Nobody told them WHERE the injection goes.
It's supposed to be completely automatic, but actually you have to press this button.
A lowered sex-drive is also very common among women taking the pill.
If you don't believe me, ask your girlfriend/wife to stop taking it for a while and post the amazing results here on this thread.
Bodybuilders well know that after testosterone is discontinued you will have man's breasts in no time.
Well, after that you of course won't need to have females to play with titties.
No, thanks.
- Arwen, I'm your father, Agent Smith.
- Well, you're just Smith, but my father is Aerosmith!
After they fucked with women's hormones for decades, in the process fucking up many a life, they now turn their eyes on us?
Well, thanks, but I'll keep using condoms during the time my wife is fertile, thank you very much.
"Don't sweat it, babe, I've had the injection. Honest."
"Oh, OK, then. On you go."
Steroids are basically synthesized testosterone, and it's known that heavy users become temporarily sterile (as long as they're on the drug). And all those muscles will get you laid a lot more, so it's not really a bad side effect :-)
Contraceptive-Ninja might use Shuriken-condoms - Shrondoms or Condrikens.
There is a weird Japanese commercial in here somewhere... Maybe something with Jackie Chan.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
So if you decide you want children you have to wait 6 months for the injections to wear off, or stop taking them 6 months early, possibly having a child before you planned because your fertility returned in 2 months instead of 6.
You can advertise in this sig from as little as £99.99 a month!
It's called Neem oil, and the Indian military ran a one-year trial without side effects or pregnancies. The reason you're not going to see any Neem-based contraceptives go through the FDA process is that so far attempts to control it have been largely unsuccessful.
Next week, we'll talk about olive leaf extract...
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
You're a dolt.
At the hospital my wife works at, they are using steroids to treat a range of problems, some of them as silly as "I think my sons penis is too small" or "my daughter doesn't have breasts yet / is already starting to grow breasts." So yes, appearly T is safe in some dosages, even when mommy doesn't know what she's doing and turns up the dosage inadverently to 2.5x the amount the doctor prescribed.
Like anything, too much is not a good thing, and once you introduce blanket bans you get black market effects... just like your cocain might contain some rat poison the black market steriods could contain just about anything, or might not even be for the right species.
I thank the contributor here for showing us this news item, but the item itself is terribly flawed! How on earth may one assess the effectiveness of an injection this way! One might think that a measure of 'fertility rate change' would be included .. Sadly, none is. The unwary public is led to believe
that it might be that only 1 baby produced by 100 men equals a rate
of 1% !!! And that is fallacious at best!
Just how many men were even having sex??? how often???
with whom?? with partners also on the pill??? NO mention of complications, and we note that prostate cancer can be stimulated by testosterone...
Those who did not complete the study regimen stopped for some reason(s), none of which are given.
It refers to sperm counts , yet gives no information on pre-treatment counts, post-treatment counts, or to just what 'normal' values did at least some of the sperm counts return. Sperm counts are only significantly associated with reduced fertility if they are quite low.
This is worthless, shamefully-inadequate reporting. And that is not the fault of the /. contributor.
tkjtkj, md
"There are 11 kinds of people: those who know binary, those who don't, and those who could not care less!"
Bollocks, [Citation Needed]
If you cannot keep politics out of your moderation remove yourself from the Mod Lottery.. NOW!
This is what I would call an irritating pointless post. You started by beginning to post your initial impression - basically an ill-informed assumption. Then you thought you'd better do some research - dno't want to look ill-informed! Then the research told you you were wrong, so you changed what you were saying half way through your post. Why couldn't you have had a thought, done the research, come back with a more considered opinion, then posted that? You still would have got modded Insightful!
In trials in China only one man in 100 fathered a child while on the injections,
But was that child actually his and not the postman's or milkman's (or whatever the Chinese cultural equivalent is)?
Mother, do you think they'll like this sig?
Quoth the article:
Now assuming that "family planning campaigners" are predominantly female (a fair and perfectly reasonable assumption), contrast the above with the following opinion from fertility expert Mr. Laurence Shaw:
The difference in both perspective and opinion is somewhere between funny and tragic. If you're a woman, the former is most true (men are all-powerful and don't need any "empowerment"). If you're a man who's been involved in custody or child support proceedings, it's likely that you've been made painfully aware that the notion of men's rights is routinely ignored, dismissed as unecessary, or taken away in a gesture of deference to the "weaker" sex.
How is that 99% effective doesn't sound that good, but it depends heavily on how it was measured.
Is it 1% of couples? That would be excellent?
Is it 1% of all intercourses produced a baby? That would be about as effective abstaining when you think she's fertile, which is to say bad.
Question everything
Link is: http://www.newmalecontraception.org/vas.htm
It's the best of both worlds, and you don't have to deal with the horrible side effects of systemic hormonal treatment. Males really got the short end of the stick for so long when it comes to contraception, either condoms which are unreliable or potentially non-reversible sterilization. I really hope RISUG gets passed in Canada soon as I don't want to have to rely on methods that have been proven to be less than ideal. I've even considered a vasectomy. Although I'm young so they probably wouldn't do it, I don't think I want kids at all perhaps that will change though. The reversibility of a vasectomy isn't very uncertain though. Sucks that it's free to get a vasectomy in Canada although it's so unreliably reversible, if RISUG would be free that would make my day.
Condoms are prone to failure or women poking holes in them to get themselves pregnant without your consent. Happens more than you'd think.
It's time for a Maleism Movement.
"Evil, Manipulative Women Everywhere Suddenly Deprived of Only Method to Trap Husband"
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
There's been a male contraceptive for a long time! All you need to do is put a sharp rock in your left shoe. It makes you limp.
"Previous attempts to develop an effective and convenient male contraceptive have encountered problems over reliability and side effects, such as mood swings and a lowered sex drive."
The side effects that are very normal and accepted for hormonal birth control for women are apparently not acceptable for men?
I would really welcome more options for men to control their fertility and be able to take a more active role in preventing pregnancy while in a relationship. I'd love to stop taking my hormonal birth control, but the alternatives right now seem too uncomfortable for both of us.
What's the point of having sex with a girl if you can't knock her up? Making men responsible for birth control is the ultimate gender capitulation.
This is my sig.
By taking baths at specific high temperatures, it's possible to have temporary, reliable, and reversible infertility. That's what I plan on doing.
It's even reversible.
Once this thing is actually approved used in China, there's no reason to doubt it.
a monthly injection of testosterone
Sure, what could possibly be wrong about regularly injecting yourself with testosterone?
You just got troll'd!
They don't want to get their "Real Dolls" and other inflatable women pregnant any more than the next guy!
I only look human.
My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
"The Injection" is 99% effective; ironically, it's also useless for 99% of the people reading this thread.
For a couple trying to plan their children this is just an awful time range. If my wife stops taking birth control it only takes her body a month to return to normal and about two months to get back to normal child conceiving mode. These shots give you a six month period of you could but probably won't get pregnant. My wife was wondering if she had some problem after our latest took two months longer to conceive than the first. How many men are going to spend 6 months worrying their sperm will come back?
Not true. Moderate use of testosterone is safe with minimal side effects. Do a google search on "HRT" to see why many middle aged men are prescribed test by their doctors. The steroid users at the gym are taking 10-30x the normal amount of testosterone your body produces while HRT users are only taking about 2-3x normal. The main problem I see with this treatment is that the men would only get 1 injection per month and even with longer lasting testosterone, their levels are still going to vary wildly. What's the point of birth control if your libido crashes every 4 weeks.
Man oh man - if you think that a teenie needle injection once a mnth is a hassle wait until you have CHILDREN! From waking up every 2 hours 24 hours a day to decimating the order of your household, children make a stupid shot seem just... stupid.
Tell you what: don't worry about the needle. Just have good, natural sex, the way nature intended. Wait a few years, and then tell me if a shot is really a big deal!
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
This is stupid.
You know there are only a few days a month you can get a chick pregnant right ? If she isn't ovulating you can go to town.
such as mood swings and a lowered sex drive
Oh, Fortunately, the women's pill has no such side effect.
\u262D = \u5350
Yes, I understand some people are allergic to them, or some really bright bulbs can't figure out how to use them, but for the overwhelming majority of us - is it really that difficult to wrap Mr. Johnston before going in?
Why must we always seek a really complicated solution to a simple problem?
-ted
My wife had a Mirena inserted four years ago. She had a few days of cramping. After that things have been fine. She also used to have terrible cramping, bleeding, and mood swings related to her period. All of that has greatly reduced as well. Also she has not gained weight like she did on an oral contraceptive (I've already mentioned the improvement of the mood swings on this IUD, the pill was the opposite). There are some risks, ask a doctor or read the warnings. The only downside during the act is that in some cases the man can feel a poke from the string, personally I would not call it painful and it is a good indication that we are going too deep and about to hurt her so it's actually a positive.
"As effective as pills, etc..." is not 100%. So this is just another partial measure.
That's the rub; abstinence is the only sure way,
In this current environment of sex-at-any-cost, the big lie is that contraception is 100%. This causes misery.
But notice that both the guy who found this and the guy writing the article both think contraception is 100% (by their actions) yet they're pointing to the "which can be as effective" and that makes it worth reporting?
People don't won't tend to see the underlying truth.
Your affusively swenstionalist article points to the existence of neem oil as a pesticide, and apparently a fairly good one (doesn't make me want to drink it btw) but does not mention at all any trials by the Indian military or it's effectiveness. The much less evangelical Neem wiki and the neem entry at drugs.com mention many medical uses, mostly for skin diseases in traditional medicine, and food additives, but makes no mention of male contraception. Female contraception tests in animals are mentioned but not any clinical tests.
I was able to find for both male and female contraception at a new age herbal medicine site http://www.sisterzeus.com/neem.html which seems to contain linked end notes but all the notes are missing. This is quite disturbing as false annotation has been a repetitive problem in the New Age movement, the most famous being the "Chalice and the Blade" scandal about 20 years ago. Google searching the two names mentioned in conjunction with neem did yield some results. Noel Vietmeyer has apparently written a book (not a paper, a book) extolling neem as a wonder plant, but he is not the one who performed the study. It is the only reference I can find. All other references seem to lead back to that one.
I can find no first hand evidence at all on the internet that the Indian military study took place at all.
The reason for discontinuation may be that, without sperm production the male "peak experience" is probably less intense.
Anyone check where they live? See if there's a large number of newspapers gathering dust in the doorway?
Or whether the subject had perhaps recently left his family, and I dunno, shacked up with his new boyfriend?
I have a contraceptive that works 100% of the time... I read Slashdot.
Ignoring the problems pointed out in other posts, would those males who should be taking it actually do so? Even if it was a patch, I'd think that normal male thought in the populations where this contraception should really be embraced would declare that decreasing your sperm count would make you "less of a man" or "less potent". Essentially it's the same people who refuse to use condoms who need this kind of thing the most, and they'll refuse to use it as well until something drastic happens.
Prolonged use of testosterone or other steroids causes testicular atrophy. Yes, that means after a couple of years of this you'll end up pretty much a eunuch.
Error: password can't contain reverse spelling of ancient Chinese emperor
"...isn't it better to take the bullets out of the gun, instead of wearing a bulletproof vest?" :D
any career involving science or computers.
It seemed to work fine back in the 80's - that's what my friends tell me anyway, not that I had any problems...
Ken
Either the IOC et all will ban this or _everybody_ will use it.
"Dr. Harman, where would you like to do the trials at?" "What country has an over population problem?" "China?" "Fantastic, lets try it there. Hopefully it works or we'll just be making matters worse."
some new World of Warcraft expansion.
I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.
...it will have *absolutely no changes on the character of the person*, to have periodical injections of hormones into the body.
Yeah right.
This might be a wild guess, as I have no proof, but the correlation between the anti-baby-pill and and the rise of feminism is pretty disturbing...
Mind you that I am a strong defender of equal rights (the intonation is on "rights"), as I have never understood why there were different rights in the first place. It just makes no sense. So I thing it was great that they stopped accepting that shit.
What was not that great, was that women themselves somehow acted, as if some female *qualities* were something bad that they needed to fight.
We're *not* the same. We share similarities, and have differences. And it is perfectly fine this way.
Women for example just love different things than men. If we like to build machines, and they like to care for people, then why force us into the opposite, just to be "equal"?
Or to think further: If you force anything into something, to fight being forced into something, something is very wrong.
One thing that comes to mind, is that those pills simulate being pregnant. And if you know how most animals act when they are pregnant... I mean things like wild cats chasing huge bears up into the trees, and small critters attacking you because you are too close, you know that this state makes one very defensive. Which is just right when there are kids to protect. But without kids very likely misdirected.
So what I really would like to know is: What are the real effects on the psyche of a woman, when she is on that stuff. Because I would really hate to know, that my GF is sad or angry for no reason (according to herself), just because of that stuff. I could not do that to her, just for sex. At least I would take my share of it. And ideally, nobody would have to.
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
Growing a some perky A cups, fat redistribution to female patterns, softer skin, are some of the unmentioned side effects...and my favorite the irresistible urge to watch LifeTime Movie Network...you always were sort of femmy anyway. Might as well give in.
After reading the headline I thought this post was going to announce the native Linux version of WOW. Who'd even have time for sex after that?
"When you see a unixer brainwashed beyond saving, kick him out of the door." - Xah Lee
"Recent trials with newer, long-acting forms of injectable testosterone, which can be administered every 8 weeks, combined with progestogens, administered either orally or by long-acting implant, have yielded promising results and may soon result in the marketing of a safe, reversible, and effective hormonal contraceptive for men."
Male hormonal contraceptives: current status and future prospects. Amory JK. Department of Medicine, Center for Research in Reproduction and Contraception, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195, USA. Treat Endocrinol. 2005;4(6):333-41.
That's 4 years old, probably 5 given writing time. And it's a review article, meaning everything it talked about is older yet. So what's the news? Male contraceptive? No. Testosterone based? No. "In the works"? No. About all that's left is "The Chinese managed to replicate 5+ year old research." Getting slapped up on /. I can understand, but BBC should be ashamed. It took me all of 5 minutes to find this on PubMed, which is open access, so they could have too.
"I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
... I doubt that women will accept it.
Even if it has no side effects and if men are able to accept the stigma of being temporarily infertile, I expect that women won't trust this treatment.
Just think about it: who bears most of the risk in case of pregnancy? Women. It might be unjust, but in most societies, men can walk away and abandon women they've gotten pregnant easily without serious social stigma or financial repercussions. Women either have to get an abortion (stigmatized, traumatic, and in many places illegal/expensive/dangerous) or raise a child alone (stigmatized/expensive/time-consuming).
With the pill or condoms, women are either controlling the birth control themselves, or can verify its use on-the-spot. With male contraceptive injections/pills,
I foresee a big problem with women not trusting that men are really taking this. Heck, in the pilot study 1/3 of the men just stopped taking it for no apparent reason!!
My bicyles
I don't see this development as being a good thing for women.
People lie to each other where sex is concerned. It will always be true that the woman will be the one getting pregnant in an unwanted pregnancy. The only way for a woman to be assured of having control of her life is for her to take the issue of contraception into her own hands.
Unfair? Yes, but that is just the way it is.
If a small dose of testosterone makes men temporarily sterile, then what happens to athletes who use steroids?
Women who estrogen risk increased cancer, so wouldn't a testosterone based male contraceptive put men at risk?
I thought working in software was the most reliable male contraceptive.
Not sure about the contraceptive aspects, but it's widely sold as an insect repellent/insecticide/insect growth regulator at organic gardening supply places. I've also heard it has some anti-fungal properties. Can't attest to that one personally, but it does work pretty well to keep Japanese beetles off your roses.
I've also heard that in India they mix bits of neem seed with grain to keep pests out of it... seems like it's probably not toxic to people.
No one here will ever need this.
That is all.
Hormones change your behaviour. My girlfriend became REALLY moody on the first pill they gave her (oestrogen and progesterone, iirc), then on the second pill (progesterone only) she became clingy and not really interested in sex any more. We thought it was just that she had "grown up", but then she stopped taking the second pill (for other reasons)Now we're back on condoms, she's like her old self again.
I wouldn't want more testosterone - I'm angry enough already. Once I have kids I'm going for the snip.
bricks?
Spread the word fellas, there's a 100% birth control. It's called butt-sex. Tell your girlfriends!
Right now, women have all reproductive rights and choices (abortion) while men only have responsibilities (18 years of child support).
Say you have 17 year old fraternal twins, a boy and a girl, and both of them conceive with their respective girlfriend/boyfriend. You can tell your girl that legally she has the right to
Whereas your conversation with your son will go more like this:
The Male Pill will finally give men the same control over conception that women have, if not the same rights & choices after conception happens.
The No Child Left Behind funding should go towards things like this. Make sure every child is an intentional pregnancy, and you have a huge drop in apathetic parenting, meaning kids will have a better chance they'll be learning at home, not just at school. Sure, it won't be perfect as there will always be parents that change their minds too late, or that just don't know what they're doing, but I would expect a significant improvement. I believe the problems with our education system are most often with the parents, not the teachers, so as hard as it may be to get people to seriously consider this, it likely would be a more effective use of our tax dollars. It's not like we're seeing results from giving the money to our school administrators.
My webcomic
99% protection! then in 100 days we will surely get a child
I think there needs to be some trials to see if it was actually the high levels of testosterone that causes the infertility or the high levels of lead and melamine that they probably added in to save money.
Reversible Inhibition of Sperm Under Guidance (RISUG), formerly referred to as SMA, is the development name of a male contraceptive developed at IIT (Delhi) in India by Dr. Sujoy K Guha. It is currently undergoing Phase III clinical trials in India. It has been patented in India, China, Bangladesh and the United States. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RISUG
Gasoline on a fire will actually put it out if you throw enough on that the liquid gasoline smothers the fire before it becomes gaseous and is ignited in air. But I suspect that you meant that oestrogen make prostate cancer grow rapidly - that is untrue and in fact oestrogen used to be used as a treatment for prostate cancer but it had undesirable side effects.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostate_cancer#Prevention has more info.
The wrong levels of testosterone (high or low) will indeed make one more emotionally volatile and have other bad effects. Injecting testosterone will lower natural production and can make the testes change noticeably. Testosterone injection is intra-muscular and I would expect that the reason most users complain is that 1) they puncture the skin too slowly (it stretches and hurts) rather than using a controlled jab, and 2) they inject too quickly. Liquid testosterone is about the consistency of liquid honey... forcing that into a bunch of muscle fibres at a high rate probably damages them, and 3) because it is thick you use a fairly large diameter needle. Testosterone is available in pill form but it is apparently harder on the liver to take it this way.
Testosterone deficiency can be caused by a lot of things, including sleep apnea which can screw up your endocrine system in general - if one snores a lot it may be worth getting checked out. OTOH exercise can increase natural levels.
I am not a doctor.
The tyrant will always find a pretext for his tyranny - Aesop
... that being a geek with a bad case of Asperger's Syndrome traits isn't contraceptive enough? Actually it's more like contra-female....
you were never meant to look/feel/act in your forties (and beyond) as you did in your teens and twenties.
We were never "meant" to receive organ transplants either. The entire field of medicine is basically devoted to opposing to the natural course of life. Hell, most of human history is devoted to that goal.
Eventually, we're going to figure out how to forestall aging and death indefinitely. I don't expect that will happen soon enough for me, but if it does, I'll be the first in line. You'll be free to die happy, secure in the knowledge that you lived only as you were meant to (in front of a computer screen).
What we really need in the way of a male contraceptive is a contraceptive that prevents the birth of males.
The whole fucking planet is just getting to be too much of a sausage festival.
Studies have proven that guys get more tail when their percentage in the population is lower. My proposed draconian measure would come too late for many of you here, but the next generation of basement-living geeks would be scoring like never before!
Won't you all just please think of the children?
Am I being hilarious or do these words portend some other agenda? You be the mod.
Pathological kinda promises Path + Logical - but instead, you get stuck with pathetic.
Were this to cause less use of condoms, surely there would be increased spreading of sexually transmitted diseases such as HIV, hepatitis, etc?
No method of contraception other than condoms protects against this.
Rageahol!
If you get her pregnant, you pay child support. It doesn't matter how you get her pregnant. Even if her friends hold you down so she can hop on top and rape you, you still pay child support. Even if she fishes your used condom out of a dumpster near your apartment and uses it to get pregnant, you still pay child support.
Seriously: guys lose in court ALL THE TIME. There is zero defense if it is your kid.
It's crazy enough to trust a condom that you personally buy, protect from damage (keeping it in sight at all times), and flush down the toilet. Trusting anything less is WAY WAY insane.
Plus some of us think it's about more than money: kids need fathers AND mothers.
The parts that are pro are recent, the first heart transplant occurred in 1964, and modern medicine like genomics have been practical only since 1996.
We have a much, much, much longer history of being what the French call, "Des Cons."
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
Maybe I was being too ambiguous. You're absolutely right, and decently intelligent people will do exactly that.
I was speaking more towards the segment of the population that might not be considered "decently intelligent". Have you seen Idiocracy? At the beginning there's a comparison between some redneck and his X wives/girlfriends and a "proper" couple. The proper couple keep putting off having a kid for this or that reason, while Cletus produces offspring with just about everything female he can (if I recall correctly, that includes some of his own kids, and potentially himself).
The "Cletus"es of this world are the ones who need and should be using this the most, but they're also the ones who seem the least likely to use it short of being given to them for free as a patch.
What a pointless study. It's been widely known for years that steroids (which is what exogenous testosterone is) has side effects. One of which is lowered endogenous test production, and with excessive use even hypogonadism.
If you don't bother with post cycle therapy (anti-oestrogens like Nolvadex) the effects of excessive testosterone being converted into oestrogen aren't welcomed by any heterosexual male. Nobody wants them some tig ol bitties.
They're basically suggesting a small steroid cycle every month as a means of contraception. Messing with your body's natural hormone production as a means to this end is just completely impractical, undesirable and ignorant.
"ne man in 100 fathered a child while on the injections,"
So not as good as condoms.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Condoms.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
List #2 point #2. Such pithy advise applies to fathers, but not mothers.
Have you seen Idiocracy?
My favorite scene is the one with the jetski's in the pond at the Washington Mall. :)
At the beginning there's a comparison between some redneck and his X wives/girlfriends and a "proper" couple. The proper couple keep putting off having a kid for this or that reason, while Cletus produces offspring with just about everything female he can (if I recall correctly, that includes some of his own kids, and potentially himself).
Sure, but on the other hand, taking a Male Pill that doesn't reduce pleasure will make these rednecks feel like God - they can hit anything that moves, and not worry about knocking a girl up (STD's not withstanding). Real life James Bond, baby!
And if that doesn't work, it should sink in the first time their wages are garnished for child support.
If the drug is being manufactured in China, I want nothing to do with it.
but Arnold knew this in college.
I was in a study about nine years ago in which I was given norplant implants plus weekly testosterone injections. (I think I was in Group 4 of this study or a very similar one.) The injections were annoying but not painful; I self-injected in large leg muscles (front or back). It was effective (my sperm count went to zero) and reversible (we conceived without difficulty a year or so later).
HOWEVER, the effect on my mood was not pleasant. To me, it seemed like the world was a less reasonable place. To others, it seemed like I was more irritable and less fun to be around. I don't recommend the experience!
I am confused. If you don't want babies with who you are with or more then why are you having sex with them?
I played D&D with my (future) wife in high school and we now have two kids.
My SIG is a P226
Dungeons & Dragons: Keeping guys from getting laid since 1974.
Indeed. The problem here is the euro standards for condoms and the 'standard size' is clearly too small for me.
I can still _use_ them, but there's no way to just roll them on; I have to first stretch them to get them past the widest part.
And condoms break way too easily if you're thicker than average.
Hell, the one thing I'm thankful for is that I'm not allergic to rubber. I have yet to see a condom that would be both made from a different material and big enough.
Condoms are still better than some other options though...
Contraceptive foam gave me an allergic reaction so I couldn't pee normally for a day!
Pills all caused huge mood swings. It's no fun trying to coax your wife from under the table when she's there crying for no reason. And this happened about twice a week...
Luckily the contraceptive plastic rings (whatever the real name) worked great!
Bukkake. Pull out just because you're about to bust a nut and quickly aim it in the bitch's face.
I bet they just didn't have the balls to keep it up... much easier to leave the problem with the women, isn't it? Just like there are lots of men who won't have a vasectomy for fear they will lose any of their precious masculinity... when the operation for a woman is much, much harder and more intense!
Um, boo fucking hoo. Women have all the rights, and men are sooooo oppressed. Cry me a fucking river.
How about this - as soon as a majority of non-custodial dads start doing more in terms of child support than legally mandated by the courts, then we'll have sympathy for how "unfair" the family court system is.
Yes, I know, there are a non-zero number of dads who do this, but there aren't enough in the whole country to crowd a phone booth.
The plural form of "anecdote" is "anecdotes", not "evidence".
Too bad the facts don't meet your female chauvinist storyline:
Oh, and a higher percentage of mothers owing child support are "dead beats" than fathers.
And I put "dead beats" in quotes because these people aren't actually dead beats, but dead broke. The majority of those who don't pay, can't pay because they just don't have the money.
How about this - as soon as a majority of non-custodial dads start doing more in terms of child support than legally mandated by the courts, then we'll have sympathy for how "unfair" the family court system is.
No, how about THIS: have automatic consequences for interfering with visitation rights. If a non-custodial parent (usually the father) falls behind on his child support payments, he faces garnished wages, having his car towed or license suspended, or even arrest. And states are very serious about collecting child support as they get matching federal funds. Whereas the automatic penalties for interfering with visitation are: jack and shit, and Jack left town. A custodial parent has the state at his or back for collecting support. A non-custodial parent can look forward to endless court appearances and attorneys fees to enforce visitation.
You have the right to your own opinion "paul", but you don't have the right to your own set of facts. And the fact is that fatherhood is real long on responsibilities yet real short on rights. And that's bullshit, straight up.
My permenant contrceptive was...
I had a vasectomie and the first year I could detect the difference in two ways. There was less viscosity in the fluid, and my wife stopped worrying. The latter was worth every bit of my decision to do what I wanted out of love. That love is going on to it's 41st year.
Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
It's because you have a proposition in the state that basically says every carcinogen has to be labeled. It makes sense until you realize (1) almost everything is a carcinogen, and (2) lawyers can make a living by suing people "on behalf of the state" for not labeling stuff. The result is (a) mass extortion, and (b) there are so many labels on things which maybe theoretically if you had ten billion of them in your bloodstream they'd cause cancer that the labels don't mean anything and the warnings are useless when they actually matter.