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."

17 of 519 comments (clear)

  1. quit rate... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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...

  2. Re:Possibly because it worked? by JamesP · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'd bet on 'not wanting to be repeatedly poked with a giant needle'

    I remember seeing videos of some trials, it was really scary.

    (was very afraid of needles, now so, so, still, not 'omg I'm getting a shot this is so cool!!')

    --
    how long until /. fixes commenting on Chrome?
  3. Re:1% ! by Bibz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Maybe they just wanted to have childs...
    2.5 years is a long time and they probably changed their mind

    --
    I didn't found something funny to put here.
  4. There's one major problem with this..... by benwiggy · · Score: 5, Insightful
    "Have you got any protection?"

    "Don't sweat it, babe, I've had the injection. Honest."

    "Oh, OK, then. On you go."

    1. Re:There's one major problem with this..... by Sockatume · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you're sleeping with with someone you can't trust to be on contraception, you should be using a condom to protect from STDs anyway.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  5. Re:Possibly because it worked? by SausageOfDoom · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Irrelevant - any good journalist knows that 33% is statistically insignificant...

    It really frustrates me whenever the media do a science story, especially one regarding medicine. In their desperation to focus on the human angle and "won't anybody think of the children" - and of course, increase number of readers - they completely ignore any basic scientific analysis.

    A classic example was the MMR-gives-you-autism scare - they make a sensational headline from a report without investigating the background of Wakefield (the author who made the public statement that started it - he received money from lawyers trying to build a case), without giving any consideration to the statistical significance of his findings (the paper looked at 12 patients), and completely ignoring the fact that the paper said it couldn't link MMR to autism. Even though it has now been proven that there is no link, the doubt lives on in the public mind.

    Perhaps this is due to scientific journalists having no real understanding of science. Perhaps they do, but have a better understanding of how their job depends on selling a story. Either way, they must take more responsibility for their power over the public.

    Returning to the MMR story, Wakefield has been widely discredited and hauled in front of the GMC and could be struck off. Meanwhile, what has happened to the journalists who built the story into the frenzy that led to measles and mumps outbreaks in the UK? Nothing - they're still writing stories like this.

  6. Won't Someone Think of the ... Men by value_added · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Quoth the article:

    Family planning campaigners welcomed the news and said they hoped an injection would give couples more choice and enable men to take a greater share of the responsibility for contraception.

    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:

    "It would empower men to make a decision which involves more than just a condom. At the moment the onus is on the woman and men do not have that much choice.

    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.

  7. Re:1% ! by sukotto · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The once a month injection is a deal-killer for me though.

    --
    Come play free flash games on Kongregate!
  8. Re:1% ! by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A vasectomy is more effective.

    what is it with wacked out guys that refuse to get one because "I'm less of a man If I do that"...

    Are most guys that uneducated or dumb? If you do not want any children, get the fricking snip and get it over with. your life is better snipped!

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  9. Re:Citation by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've always thought that condom success rate depends on intelligence and your actual practices.

    I and a lot of friends used condoms and experienced 0% failure rate (no pregnancies).

    OTH, with birth-control pills, we had a failure-- but it wasn't the pills.

    The lady in question admitted a year or two later that she was lying and had stopped taking the pill because she had decided she wanted to get pregnant. She also later decided she only wanted the money and not the males interference with raising the child.

    As a guy, you know when you are using as condom, but you never really know when you are a using a pill.

    So these shots would be good because you would *know* you were covered from your side.

    --
    She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
  10. Re:Possibly because it worked? by DrLang21 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not that I can provide serious input to testosterone injections specifically, but what doesn't increase the risk of cancer? Living in California, I am beginning to think that we have some miasma that turns everything into a carcinogen. I recall hearing about a study that showed repeated injections of saline caused cancer in some laboratory mice. My suggested hypothesis: Too much of anything is bad for you.

    --
    I see the glass as full with a FoS of 2.
  11. Re:Huh? by wisty · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "The best contraceptive I've found is an "Excellent" karma rating on /."

    Oh really? Let's try an experiment:

    Linux is less stable than Windows, and always has been.

    C++ is more elegant than C.

    Even power users are faster in a GUI than command line.

    Mac users enjoy being marginalized.

    HTML should never have gotten more popular than gopher.

    So do you think that the karma burn will increase my chances of re-producing?

  12. This is an interesting development, but... by MoxFulder · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... 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!!

  13. Re:Possibly because it worked? by SausageOfDoom · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When a registered medical doctor stands up in public and says "MMR is dangerous: 2/3 children who get autism get it due to MMR (based on my sample group of 12 people)", and that story is then carried on the front page of irresponsible newspapers, his peers *should* be standing up and attacking his credibility.

    Any scientist worth their salt knows that correlation is not causation, and assumptions cannot be made on a sample group of 12. For any scientist to stand up and claim something so important and dangerous based on the facts before him defies belief - either he was incredibly incompetent, or incredibly motivated to come to the conclusion he had drawn. It turned out to be financial motivation that made him suppress the facts, but either way it had turned out, it was incumbent on his peers to discredit him as quickly as possible. Without contradictory investigations, it had nowhere to go other than a personal attack on the man and his methods. And I say fair enough.

    Unfortunately it was too juicy a story for the facts to get in the way, so paranoia and sensational headlines meant the story dragged on for years, largely ignoring the many subsequent investigations that disproved Wakefield. This has led to a lot of fud amongst the general public, and has clearly had an effect on immunisation rates.

    That is somewhat different to people saying "We've made a scientific breakthrough", others saying "Oh, really, thought that was impossible, let's have a look", then "Ah, yes, see, you're wrong". It's not as if the public would have gone out and gambled their lives on whether or not cold fusion was possible.

  14. Re:Possibly because it worked? by Deagol · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A LOT of males have low testosterone starting at 43-- some earlier. It's an easy test to get.

    So yet another natural progression of the aging process has become an illness to be cured?!? What a messed up world we live in. :(

    News flash for all you ladies and gents out there... you were never meant to look/feel/act in your forties (and beyond) as you did in your teens and twenties. You'll be slower, weaker, more passive (less aggressive), less beautiful/handsome (by pop media standards, of course), hairier, more wrinkled, less mentally sharp, slower to heal, harder of sight and hearing, and you won't have sex like rabbits. These are generalizations, of course.

    It's one thing to help you along as you age (glasses, hearing aids, canes, etc.), but this ever-growing trend in trying to dodge time's arrow every step of the way (cosmetic surgery, perpetual drug regiments, etc.) is sad commentary on a society that supposedly believes in an afterlife. Enjoy your life, in all its stages, then move along -- this world was never meant to be your home forever.

  15. Of course they would. In droves. by Uberbah · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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

    • Have an abortion without the father's knowledge or permission
    • Give the baby up for adoption without the father's knowledge or permission
    • Raise the baby in secret and never tell the father
    • Raise the baby in secret, and then go after the father for child support years later when he has no chance of gaining custody

    Whereas your conversation with your son will go more like this:

    • Sorry son, but 9 months of her life trumps 18 years of your life
    • Your only "right" was the right not to have sex, now deal with the consequences (though this never applies to the woman for some reason)
    • You can spend a vast sum of money suing for custody if 1-4 above don't happen

    The Male Pill will finally give men the same control over conception that women have, if not the same rights & choices after conception happens.

  16. Naturalistic fallacy by Fred+Ferrigno · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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).