Slashdot Mirror
Male Birth Control Shot Found Effective (bbc.com)
An anonymous reader quotes the BBC:
A hormone injection has been shown to be a safe and effective method of contraception -- for men. U.S. researchers say the jab was almost 96% effective in tests on around 270 men who were using it, with four pregnancies among their partners. However, a relatively high number developed side effects, including acne and mood disorders... Because men constantly produce sperm, high levels of hormones are needed to reduce levels from the normal sperm count of over 15 million per milliliter to under one million/ml.
One professor pointed out that despite the side effects, "75% of the men who took part in the trial would be willing to use this method of contraception again."
One professor pointed out that despite the side effects, "75% of the men who took part in the trial would be willing to use this method of contraception again."
and taking into account the risks (unwanted pregnancy) i'd say 96% effectiveness is really, really horrible.
Unless i'm mistaken in my interpretation of statistics, this is a complete failure. In this case, i'd like to know the chance that intercourse will lead to pregnangy, using this method (and only this method)
Looking for people to chat about multicopters, coding, music. skype: gtsiros
That means I'd have 14 babies a year! Not effective at a!!
How often do fags reproduce?
Per my gay friends, they keep trying to have kids, even several times a day, but still no pregnancy has resulted.
While sad of no offspring, both partners often report enjoying themselves each and every time.
This is probably some of the least relevant news I've seen here, and that's really saying something.
I'm just waiting for someone to wave the "techies are virgin beardos" flag.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Unfortunately for you, it's spread through maternal lines.
Ezekiel 23:20
The sexual liberation movement has finally succeeded, after half a century of effort.
Ezekiel 23:20
The Worlds press is carrying this story but almost all have missed that the trial has been stopped due to unnacceptable side-effects
Of the 300+ patients,
- 1 committed suicide
- 1 attempted suicide
- many being treated for clinical depression
- 8 were left infertile a year after stopping the drug.
75% may be willing to continue, but not at that cost
I'm almost 40 now and we have one kid, and I don't want more. I'm thinking about vasectomy, any experiences here?
Yes. Ask the doc for a fan. Needless to say, the smell of cauterization isn't a pleasant one, especially when you know what's being burned.
No, don't let that concern or dissuade you, the overall procedure isn't that bad at all, and they obviously numb you up...it's a walk-in, walk (slowly) out, done in about 30-45 minutes procedure.
Then go fill your script for a mild painkiller, and ensure your Netflix account is in order. Prepare to catch up on [your favorite series] for the next 3 days as you rest in bed. I got introduced to Deadwood during my stint before Netflix was around. Took Friday off from work, was fine by Monday.
So haven't we learned from the pill that fucking with a body's hormone levels has a certain tendency to lead to bad things and that it gets worse at higher levels?
Is the intention here to hit equality by making men as miserable as women?
There's certainly no reporting bias here - among 270 men in the trials, 11 simply didn't reach the chosen threshold of 1/15th normal sperm count in six months, 8 didn't recover within a year after stopping the treatment, 20 dropped out because of side effects while many more reported them (to the degree they stopped taking on new participants - back in 2011), 4 achieved pregnancies within a year while under the chosen threshold. All durations reported are in "up to" form, and the fertility of their partners was not indicated (around 10% have issues while trying, per womenshealth.gov). Only 66-69 of them (by somebody's rounding) stated they would refuse to ever attempt the method again, "so perhaps the side-effects weren't all that bad after all" according to Alan Pacey (whose connection to the study was left unclear). It's unclear if this was before or after they learned of how well other subjects did. The article also carefully describes the women only as "partners", despite heterosexuality being quite relevant to the study. The journalist went with "safe and effective", quoting "extremely effective" also from Allan Pacey, while not addressing the "need for ... reversible" part. I'm mildly curious where the "safe" came from.
The worst part? Compared to regularly used hormonal treatments for women, this probably is "safe".
When I was in the military (mid 1990s), several of the senior enlisted guys went that route. None of them reported any complications, and recommended it to others who "had enough kids already".
We were stationed in Kaneohe, Hawaii, so they called themselves the 'Kaneohe Klipper Klub'.
Just make sure it's with a good doctor, and a clean clinic. You don't want to get an infection in that area.
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
The Worlds press is carrying this story but almost all have missed that the trial has been stopped due to unnacceptable side-effects Of the 300+ patients, - 1 committed suicide - 1 attempted suicide - many being treated for clinical depression - 8 were left infertile a year after stopping the drug.
75% may be willing to continue, but not at that cost
Uh, before you continue to bash this, compare and contrast the results found here with pretty much any other drug that has been approved and on the market today.
It's downright scary what regulatory agencies find acceptable for the "greater good".
I'm 39, had mine last year after having twins for a total of 4 kids. Local anaesthetics have little affect on me, so I chose to go under and was only out for 15-20 minutes and walked from recovery. Was no where near as bad as I expected and while there was a bit of pain it was mainly from the stitches. I was told it would feel like I was kicked in the nuts but it was nothing like that at all, a very mild discomfort apart from the stitches. If you are worried about it, don’t be, its a quick and relatively painless procedure.
And that's in a controlled setting. Imagine what would happen in the real world where thousands of men kill themselves every single month.
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
Here's a thought. What if, instead of an outright gay gene, being gay is caused by an unintended genetic mutation that is not directly inheritable but just happens? Consider allergies. Dad may not have allergy, mom may not have allergy, but little Tommy just decides one day that eating strawberries will kill him. Is that how choice works?
-=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
"researchers say the jab was almost 96% effective in tests"
Well, shit, that's four pregnancies for every hundred copulations; I wouldn't call a four-percent failure rate "effective". I'd call it a sure thing. It's like Russian Roulette with orgasms.
I mean, if an airplane had a "successful" landing rate of 96%, would you fly on it?
To put it another way, would you eat at a restaurant where four out of every hundred people got sick from the food? I wouldn't.
A 4% failure rate is nothing to brag about. It's better than condoms (12%) but you're still going to be making babies left and right.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
1 suicide within the trial? That is a success. 100% contraception success.
This one will sure not be able to procreate anymore.
Just do it.
It's simple, but you'll be down for a day afterwards. Frozen peas to keep swelling/pain down. Tender for a week, tops, but iirc they want you to give a sample after 5-6(?) ejaculations to check and make sure there were no misses, so 2-3 weeks before you're verified "safe" for live fire action.
So guy and girl are on their third date, they're on the cusp of sex and the girl says she's not on the pill and the guy says "It's OK, I'm on the shot".
Does she believe him? I'm guessing no, she doesn't, and this is what kills a "male pill" from a usage perspective. It's the women who get pregnant and ultimately bear the risk of pregnancy so what will make them believe a guy is telling the truth?
Some might say a vasectomy is the same thing, but most men don't get one until they're older and have had kids, so the verisimilitude of a 40-something guy saying he's had a vasectomy is much higher, especially if his partner is a woman of a similar background who may have been married.
tend to argue that sexual orientation is genetically predetermined
No-one with an ounce of sense argues that. Because the argument is irrelevant. People get to sleep with whomever they chose, provided all parties are consenting adults. End of conversation.
It is with "glutin" these days
Yes, don't go to a punk rock gig two days later and dance around all night. You'll wish you hadn't.
AC because it's a true story. Spent two days in bed with ice on my balls after that.
Also. Get it tomorrow. You (probably) won't regret it.
Vasectomies don't sound that bad but my nether regions cringe just thinking about it. I'd rather have a shot. In the arm!
At the time she went on birth control, my wife had undiagnosed celiac disease on top of the MTHFR C677T defect. Her methyation cycle has never been the same since. She’s an extreme case, but messing with your hormones is risky for anyone.
...has a 96% success rate.
tend to argue that sexual orientation is genetically predetermined
No-one with an ounce of sense argues that. Because the argument is irrelevant.
Actually argument is relevant. If it is genetically predetermined, then legislation penalizing all who discriminate (and refuse to make wedding cakes for gay couples or whatever), are justified. If it is a free lifestyle choice, such discriminatory actions (however subjectively odious) comes under freedom of speech, religion, etc..
Speak for yourself. (Honestly, isn't it time we retired this stereotype? It doesn't really make any sense anyway, all of my fellow software developers where I work are married with children anyway.)
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
It's just like climate change. They don't want to prove it beyond a doubt or the grant money stops and real solutions begin. Same with homosexuality. They wish to remain special snowflakes as long as possible.
In females, hormonal birth control mostly works by tricking the body into thinking it's already pregnant. For humans, it's a significant evolutionary advantage not to become double or triple pregnant, so the body does most of the work for you. It's fairly "natural" because you're basically just reproducing a situation that the female body is designed for.
For males, though, there's no evolutionary reason to ever stop producing sperm. So any cocktail of hormones that shuts off fertility in males has not been through those same millions of years of QA. So I would want to see at least a couple more decades of testing on this before injecting it into my body.
Experience has taught me to be very skeptical of the pharmaceutical industry, so I also can't help but wonder if researchers are saying it's safe only because they, for example, consider a 15% occurrence of male breast enlargement and/or lactation an acceptable side effect.
Here's a thought. What if, instead of an outright gay gene, being gay is caused by an unintended genetic mutation that is not directly inheritable but just happens? Consider allergies. Dad may not have allergy, mom may not have allergy, but little Tommy just decides one day that eating strawberries will kill him. Is that how choice works?
Good point. As an additional point, I never woke up one morning and though, "Today's the day, Which shall I choose, gay or hetero?" As soon as puberty kicked in, I knew that I was interested in women, and the activities involved with them. I never chose anything.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Just because there may not be a genetic component to homosexuality doesn't mean that it isn't fixed or is somehow a choice. Neuroscientist, Simon LeVay found evidence for sexual orientation being connected to brain structure decades ago. It's entirely possible that homosexuality has nothing to do with genetics, but is rather the result of aberrations during fetal development that result these deviations from the norm.
To claim that it's a choice though is just wrong. If you believe otherwise, ask yourself if you you could change your sexual orientation. Sure, you could probably have sex with someone outside of your preferred group, but you wouldn't be attracted to them or have any imperative desire to do so of your own natural volition.
I would if I actually cared about the subject. To me, some people are straight, some people are gay, some like it all and some like none. Just the way it is and I am not the person to tell someone else who they can and can't be attracted to.
-=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
I find that the most hostile gay bashers tend to be closeted homosexuals themselves.
Instead of being angry at the mixed feelings you have, just be honest with yourself. Do you find yourself watching lots of sports involving sweaty men touching each other? Do you go to a gym and workout around other men? Do you only listen to songs sung or "rapped" by men? Are most or all of your friends men? Do you prefer the sight, sound or company of men? Do you like the cock?
Yes, that is the joke he was doing.
The subject has been studied quite throughly. There is a good scientific consensus on the issue now: There are inheritable genetic factors that influence sexuality, but they alone are not enough to determine it. Environment matters too, but the environmental factors also have not been isolated.
Sex is an act with a defined purpose, well its actually two fold, its first to procreate and second to strengthen and forge the bond between the patriarch and matriarch of the family.
For people who realize that experience and purpose is subjective, sex can actually be, you know, fun.
It took you that long? I knew I was straight at 5. And I also had no choice in the matter. That's just the way I am.
Well, yeah. Mostly I was referring to the obvious reactions one has when puberty kicks in. As a little boy I had a great appreciation for the ladies, but had no good idea about the details.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Also discovered in the study that 4 women were cheating on their partners.
Allergies are not genetic. The predisposition to develop them is.
So the shot prevents sperm production, causes acne and mood disorders... so it makes you female?
Traditionally, the problem with male pills has not been that they lack effectiveness, but that they have side effects that are considered unacceptable. One of the more common side-effects is that the damn things are too effective, as in - for some cases - they cause long-term of possibly permanent sterility
I'd rather not have anyone screwing around with my endocrine system; thanks but no thanks. I'll find some other way.
Umm, have you ever had sex? Without a condom? I'm married have two kids and had a vasectomy earlier this year... Sex with a condom is like wearing a raincoat... you can tell it's wet, but you don't really feel it... It's just not the same.
Had mine at 25 - walked in, dropped the pants, lay down for about 10 minutes of Seinfeld. Took two Advil and got a ride home. Went to work the next day with no lasting pain or issues. Definitely no regrets.
I did go to a doctor who does only vasectomies though - dozens a days, so he's likely quite proficient at it compared to some.
Just make sure it's with a good doctor, and a clean clinic. You don't want to get an infection in that area.
Definitely don't ignore this - the better your doctor, the easier your recovery will be.
From the article: ..so for one in 67 people it fails. Thats WAY too high to be described as "effective".
"around 270 men who were using it, with four pregnancies among their partners...."
"Eight men had not recovered their normal sperm counts a year after the study ended.....
The researchers stopped taking on new participants in 2011 after concerns were raised about side effects such as depression and other mood disorders, as well as muscle pain and acne.
Such side effects caused 20 men to drop out of the study and were reported by many others,"
That doesn't sound like "safe" to me.
It also misses the bigger picture. How many women are going to trust that the guy they just met at the bar is telling the truth when he says he got the male birth control shot? Exactly. Nearly all women are going to insist on some other form of birth control that they can be sure of, making this a secondary form of birth control at best (at worst it'll be a way for guys who never got the shot to trick gullible females into having unprotected sex).
Even if this were 100% safe, the only real-world use this would see is among males wishing to avoid a paternity suit (or at least diminish the odds of one being successful). There might be some married couples where the female can accompany the male to the doctor's office to make sure he actually got the shot. But those cases would be better served with a vasectomy.
Whatever you do, don't go to wikipedia about a subject like this.
Completely useless PC crap.
I suppose it keeps 'them' busy and out of other trouble. Almost completely useless.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Your wife is reading over your shoulder?
I can't think of another explanation for parent post. It's an obvious lie, he's not even tempted?
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
I wish they would mention this in the MSM article. Source: https://www.endocrine.org/news...
The hormones that were injected are Norethisterone enanthate and Testosterone undecanoate.
It's been well known in bodybuilding circles that anabolic steroids make you infertile. I'm curious if they were checking the blood work of these guys.
For the men who were still sterile afterwards, i'm wondering if they referred them to an endocrinologist. A round of injection the folicle stimulating hormone may resolve their low sperm counts.
Make no mistake about it gentlemen, this male "birth control" is very much a cocktail of anabolic steroids. It sounds like a few of the guys very much had "negative" roid experiences.
Technical subjects are mostly right.
Even with tech there are exceptions...Wikipedia thinks CNC stands for 'Computer Numeric Control' not 'Continuous Numeric Control'. And now they have a cite circle, so no fixing it.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
However, a relatively high number developed side effects, including acne and mood disorder
Which sounds about the same as the female birth control pill. Of course the set of side effects seem to vary depending on _which_ pill, but in the case of my wife the "mood disorders" part seems to apply to all of them...
What happens if you fuck the same person 100 times in a year (assuming at a fertile time)?
Does that mean they'll only get pregnant 4 times?
Well, actually only 2 considering the average gestation period.
the 4% that got their partners pregnant, are they sure they were the ones who got their partners pregnant?
My wife has been on birth control most of our time together so we rarely used condoms, usually only when her birth control might be compromised due to medication or other things. After the vasectomy I had three sperm count checks as I needed two checks in a row with a zero count, so took three checks to get there. My wife currently has an IUD but that is due to be removed in the next 18 months and then she shouldn't need anything else as I've been "fixed". I agree sex with a condom can be less than desirable, but if you are concerned see your doctor and get the sperm count done, if you are shooting blanks then you should be good to go, but talk to your doctor if you have any concerns.
Not relevant. Homosexuality is and has been for ages, a fact of life.
Nothing wrong, it's personal.
The problems start when sexuality of any kind are suppressed (e.g. religion, cultural). Male rejection usually stems from sexual uncertainty or fear of being hunted. Most get over it,bullying is a choice.
The better to get them treatment.
Too bad you don't live up here, you could have had one of these.
You may want to plot a flat, smooth drive from the doctor's office to home. You may also want to check your doctor's sense of humor beforehand. You will want to limit some physical activities for a week or so. Other than that, no problems for me.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Vasectomies are generally permanent. After not being connected for a while, the testes tend to shut down sperm production, so vasectomy reversals are unreliable. They're not good for the "I don't want a kid right now" phase, only the "I never want another kid" phase.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
"Computer Numeric Control" was what I was told about nine years ago when I started working with CNC machines. It made sense to me because the gcode the mills used was a Turing-complete specialized computer language.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes