Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Why We Can't Have the Male Pill (bloomberg.com)

Posted by msmash on from the calling-'em-out dept.

Reader joshtops shares a report: For years, headlines have promised an imminent breakthrough in male contraception. Time and again, these efforts have fallen short. Last October, for instance, researchers reported that a hormone cocktail they'd been testing curbed sperm production and prevented pregnancies. But they'd had to halt the study early because men were reporting troubling side effects, including mood changes and depression. "The joke in the field is that the male contraceptive has been five years away for the last 40 years," says John Amory, a research physician at the University of Washington School of Medicine who has been working on the challenge for two decades. A new form of male birth control would be a public-health triumph and could snag a significant piece of the contraceptive market -- which is expected to surpass $33 billion by 2023, according to research firm Global Market Insights Inc -- or possibly expand it further. In a 2002 German survey of 9,000 men in nine countries, including Brazil, France, Germany, Mexico, and the U.S., more than 55 percent of the respondents said they'd be willing to use a new form of male birth control. A later study by Johns Hopkins University estimated that the demand could yield 44 million customers in those nine countries alone. And yet major pharmaceutical companies have mostly abandoned the chase.

5 of 347 comments (clear)

  1. Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Penguinisto · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Pill generally works for most women (and in some cases helps them stay 'regular'), a not-insubstantial number cannot go near the things without causing massive problems (irritability, fertility issues later down the road, etc). That said, it's fairly predictable, and you're not introducing anything more than just more hormones at the right times.

    It's tougher with men, since we don't have predictable cycles to monkey with (sperm production is more or less constant until the guy is well past old age), unlike eggs (which are already present at birth), sperm is made on-demand, and various hormonal interdependencies with brain chemistry is likely way more complex.

    --
    Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    1. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yeah, our gynocentric society is really keeping all the womens down despite our entire civilization being built around "Women are Wonderful"...

      Get fucked.

      Says no one who has ever been in a corporate board meeting and noticed the centers of power are all under MALE control!

    2. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Pascoea · · Score: 1, Informative

      Funny that, you don't have to be the biological father to pay child support.

      While I don't disagree it sucks for the dude involved, being forced to pay for a child that is not his, I want to point out a couple of things about this case: Based on the court doc, they were married in 96, under two years later the kid was born, they weren't divorced until 2001. That would lead me to believe that for 3 years he raised the child as his own. The 2001 divorce filings "incorporated a revised marital settlement agreement acknowledging Richard as the father of the couple’s minor child and requiring him to pay child support." It wasn't until 2003, while his ex was suing him for non-payment of child support, that he contested paternity and subsequently attempted to claim fraud against her.

      The judgement you referenced only stated that the statute of limitations for fraud had run out, and therefore he could not seek reparations. This other doc is an interesting read, paraphrasing a portion of it says: Because he signed the 2001 divorce decree acknowledging he was the father, he is the father for all intents and purposes of the law. Essentially legally adopting the child. If he would have presented the paternity tests at that time, or within a year, he would have gotten out of the support payments. Because he waited 2 years he's SoL.

      Again, shitty for the dude involved and it sucks that he's stuck paying a shit load of money for a kid that's not his, but the facts and the laws are what they are.

  2. Or, you know, the working alternative - CONDOMS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    A pill doesn't solve all the problems with sex, just birth control.
    A condom isn't perfect, but it's a heck of a lot better than a non-existant pill with the added benefit of preventing STDs.

    I'm disappointed that the male contraceptive that basically glued the vas deferens closed but could be dissolved by another solvent hasn't taken off: https://wired.com/2011/04/ff_vasectomy/

    1. Re:Or, you know, the working alternative - CONDOMS by ranton · · Score: 4, Informative

      Birth control is not just for one night stands. Sometimes wedded couples decide they have enough kids at whatever number they have and would like birth control that doesn't make the wife throw up and allows them to have sex. A LOT of married men would gladly take birth control over expensive constant buying of condoms.

      And they all have that option already: a vasectomy.

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke