New Male Birth Control Pill Succeeds In Preliminary Testing (time.com)

"A second male birth control pill succeeded in preliminary testing, suggesting that a new form of contraception may eventually exist," reports Time: The new pill, which works similarly to female contraception, passed initial safety tests and produced hormone responses consistent with effective birth control in 30 men, according to research presented by the Los Angeles Biomedical Research Institute and the University of Washington at the Endocrine Society's annual meeting. (The study has not yet been published in a peer-reviewed journal.) It's early days for the drug -- which has not yet been submitted for approval by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) -- but co-principal investigator Dr. Christina Wang, lead researcher at LA BioMed, says it's an important step toward effective, reversible male hormonal contraception....

Unlike a 2016 male birth control trial that famously stopped enrolling volunteers early because so many men complained of side effects, none of the men experienced serious problems, and no one stopped taking the drug because of side effects.

Comments

Vasectomy

[Kokuyo]

Works quite well for me.

Re:Vasectomy

[Anonymous Coward]

I unfortunately suffered post operation pain and loss of libido and potency that has never gone away despite repeated visits to doctors.

I know I'm in the minority, but I can't in good conscience recommend it to anyone.

Re:Vasectomy

[Joce640k]

April fool!

Re:Vasectomy

[butchersong]

I have a friend that had one and has had major issues with his testosterone ever since. He won't take TRT so essentially is a different person these days, unable to make decisions and kind of mewling in his affect. It's really depressing because he used to be such a cool guy.. I can't prove it was the vasectomy but I've seen a few studies correlating it with lower testosterone even in procedures without complications. No thanks.

Re:Vasectomy

[seoras]

Had the snip after 2 kids and my libido went through the roof, for the first 2 years, and then dropped off.
This is normal as you release testosterone in your semen but after the snip it has no where to go but into your blood so your body lowers your output in response causing your libido to drop off. There's also the psychological factor of knowing you are sterile too.
The worst part though was the pain from the epididymitis caused by the sperm backing up with no where to go.
So 4 years later, after splitting with my wife who nagged me into getting it in the first place, I had it reversed.
[Ouch] Theatre surgery for 2 hours and balls like a couple of over ripe avocados for a month.
I've now got my libido back, the epididymitis does occasionally return in a mild form and I've got 6 kids...
The pill would have been most welcome alternative to what I've been through.

Re: Vasectomy

[cory2253]

yup. Kaiser. 15 dollars, 1/2 hour, no swimmers all set.

So?

[argStyopa]

All the effort in the world isn't going to change the fact that women bear the physiological brunt of pregnancy, so they simply cannot "trust" that men have taken such a pill.

Re:So?

[cerberusss]

That goes both ways, actually. When my ~15 year relationship broke up, I got into dating again. I'm a man, and the women I was dating were aged 35-42, and regularly viewing a potential partner as their last chance to have children. Whenever it got to sex (which is not often because I'm no ladies' man), I made super double sure to wear a condom, even though she said she'd be on contraception.

And in my (European) country, you can bet your ass you will pay through the nose for a child that you didn't choose.

Re:So?

[Joce640k]

I'm a man, and the women I was dating were aged 35-42, and regularly viewing a potential partner as their last chance to have children.

Amen.

Been there, done that

(then got the vasectomy).

Re:So?

[AmiMoJo]

The point is to give men the power to control when they have children, not to allow women to forgo controlling their own fertility.

Also remember that if you want to avoid children you really need to be using more than one form of contraception, because none of them alone are 100% effective. The female pill, for example, isn't 100% effective even if used perfectly, and it's easy to forget to take it on time, so combining it with a male pill would improve the odds for a couple.

Re:So?

[AmiMoJo]

I wonder if this might help overcome some of the distrust that has arise over the last decade. When the female pill was invented it was very liberating for women, and while things are different for men today perhaps it might also help some men who have anxiety about unwanted pregnancy.

Re:So?

[RobinH]

Even if you're in a committed long term relationship, if your only birth control is the female pill, you're putting all the responsibility on one person. In our case I would much rather have taken on the responsibility instead of her (or even better, in addition to her). Forgetting to take the pill once in a while is a common problem, and some people are more reliable than others. It's not like I could ask her every day if she took the pill - that's a surefire way to piss her off because it shows I don't trust her, even though she did occasionally forget. It makes sense for both people to have the option. If I were in those years again, and there was a reliable, safe male birth control pill with only moderate to minor side effects, I'd be on it for sure.

Re:So?

[DigiShaman]

might also help some men who have anxiety about unwanted pregnancy.

LOL, all it takes is ONE to reach the egg.

Re:So?

[alvinrod]

Unwanted pregnancy is one part of it (and smaller for a lot of people due to the option of legal abortions), but the risk of sexually transmitted diseases or infections is another and that's something that's relevant for both men and women. For that a condom still remains your best source of protection.

Re:So?

[squiggleslash]

OK, but so what? This pill isn't there for women. Women have their own pill. They're able (in civilized parts of the world, including civilized parts of the United States) to make their own reproductory decisions (and where they aren't they should be.)

This pill is for men. The problem it's solving is that men aren't, to some extent, able to have their own veto on reproduction, or at least our options aren't as good. Condoms kinda interfere with the moment and have been known to break, vasectomies are permanent, and so on. Yes, our investment in reproduction may be lesser than that of the woman whose entire body will be hijacked for nine months, but we still are invested in it, we will still be expected (rightly) to give up the next 18-21 years and a sizable amount of income bringing the kid up.

Which, if we want the kid, we will do gladly because believe me fatherhood is a wonderful thing.

Unwanted fatherhood? Not so much.

So, yes, we need a pill too. Not for the sake of the would-be mother, but for the sake of the would-be father. This is a legitimate men's rights issue. I'd like to say it's surprising it's taking this long to bring such a pill into being, but the people who claim to be all about men's rights usually, instead, are whining about paying child support and pretending feminism is preventing them from getting jobs. This is what we'd get if we focused on what we need, rather than focusing on preventing others from getting what they need.

Re:So?

[Ol Olsoc]

I wonder if this might help overcome some of the distrust that has arise over the last decade. When the female pill was invented it was very liberating for women, and while things are different for men today perhaps it might also help some men who have anxiety about unwanted pregnancy.

My guess is that it won't. A woman can have multiple partners, become pregnant, and pick which one she wishes to raise a child with. The claim would be that the birth control somehow . Not all countries allow the man to DNA test his presumed children. I'm not even certain that a vasectomy would be protection.

Yup, trust has sunk that low. And not without very good reasons.

Re:So?

[AuMatar]

This isn't the bigger problem, as having both partners on the pill reduces the chance of accident. The bigger problem is that unlike a condom, the pill does not reduce the chance of STDs. That's why the male birth control pill was never pursued as much, men already have a high 90% success contraception technique that also prevents disease spreading. And it comes without side effects from hormone therapy.

Having all 3 (condom, male pill, female pill) would be even stronger prevention, but I'm not sure I'd risk the possible side effects to get it from .01% to .0001%.

Re:So?

[cascadingstylesheet]

And in my (European) country, you can bet your ass you will pay through the nose for a child that you didn't choose.

This is true in the States as well.

Enforcement has been automated (and getting more automated) for decades, and there are all sorts of fun things like imputed income (you could be making more, so we'll assess you on that basis, etc.)

Re:So?

[ShanghaiBill]

LOL, all it takes is ONE to reach the egg.

Not true. An ovum has a protective membrane called the zona pellucida. Sperm bind to the zona pellucida in a process known as sperm binding. This triggers a chemical reaction by enzymes to digest the membrane and allow the sperm to tunnel toward the egg’s plasma membrane.

If not enough sperm reach the ovum, this reaction doesn't happen, and none can penetrate.

One is not enough. It is a group effort.

Re:So?

[MrKaos]

Yup, trust has sunk that low. And not without very good reasons.

It is time somebody told you about these: https://www.walgreens.com/stor...

Western family law can hold you responsible for the child even if you are not the birth father. Men are in a very precarious position legally because of common law relationships which hold you in the role of a "father figure" especially if the woman is living under your roof. In that circumstance you have less than three months to verify paternity. Any more than that and you are on the hook for child support payments until the child is 18.

There is very little downside for women putting men in this position and it's a big reason why men commit suicide.

Re:So?

[Mascot]

No, you should not flush your condom down the toilet. If it's not poop, pee or toilet paper, it does not go in the toilet.

Re:So?

[DNS-and-BIND]

Yeah right. DNA testing not allowed? Quit your bullshit.

Re:So?

[AmiMoJo]

Which western countries are these? In all of Europe you can't be held responsible for someone else's child, although if you did contribute to their upbringing and only found out later you often can't recover that money either.

Do you have any stats for the causes of male suicide? Everything I can find that isn't an MRA blog only lists relationships as one of many causes, usually not the first in the unordered list, so I'm interested to know if this claim has any statistical basis.

Re:So?

[AmiMoJo]

A woman can have multiple partners, become pregnant, and pick which one she wishes to raise a child with.

Not sure which country you are in but in the UK that isn't the case. In the event that you are wrongly named as the parent of a child you can request a DNA test, and if the mother refuses then you are deemed not to be the father.

In order to get a DNA test you of course have to suspect that you are not the parent first. But if you do, there is pretty much nothing the mother can do to avoid the DNA test other than to accept you have no legal obligation to pay maintenance.

Having said that, I think the trust issue is mostly due to a lot of rubbish posted on the internet, not genuine concerns. This study shows that in the UK only about 2% of fathers are the victims of paternity fraud, and that's on the high end of what other studies have found.

Re:So?

[Anonymous Coward]

Socialism!

Re:So?

[liquid_schwartz]

All the effort in the world isn't going to change the fact that women bear the physiological brunt of pregnancy, so they simply cannot "trust" that men have taken such a pill.

I'd take that physiological brunt any day over vs what a man gets - ie pay tons of money for minimal rights and visitation. I'm sure I'm not alone.

Re:So?

[AmiMoJo]

It's a shame it has taken this long, but it's a much harder nut to crack than the female pill.

Re:So?

[lgw]

That goes both ways, actually. When my ~15 year relationship broke up, I got into dating again. I'm a man, and the women I was dating were aged 35-42, and regularly viewing a potential partner as their last chance to have children. Whenever it got to sex (which is not often because I'm no ladies' man), I made super double sure to wear a condom, even though she said she'd be on contraception.

And in my (European) country, you can bet your ass you will pay through the nose for a child that you didn't choose.

And when she gets pregnant anyway? Won't that be awkward. It's something like 20% of men who have a mistaken belief as to the father of their children.

Fun fact, in many US states, you can be legally required to pay child support even if you prove you're not the father (at least in some circumstances, varies state to state). At least if there's a "male pill" you can have some ground to demand a paternity test, even though that will usually end the relationship either way.

Re:So?

[liquid_schwartz]

Unsure about Europe but it's definitely a possibility in the US. Here some citations from different states: https://nypost.com/2017/07/23/... https://www.dailymail.co.uk/ne... https://wgno.com/2016/07/28/co...

Re:So?

[lgw]

In the US it doesn't work so rationally. In many states, there are limited circumstances in which you can challenge paternity, and if you miss the window (e.g., were living in a different state after the breakup and ooopsie didn't get notified) you can be on the hook for child support. 18 years.

No modern study of paternity statistics can be trusted, of course, because the issue is political now.

Re:So?

[fafalone]

"Only" 2%?? That's 1 in 50. For a huge life altering consequence, those odds are absolutely high enough to treat it as a big deal. You people who claim things like that and the 2-10% (1 in 50 to 1 in 10) percent of false rape accusations make them so rare that no rational person should ever assume that's the case are batshit insane.

Re:So?

[burtosis]

Socialism!

I'm pretty sure when everyone cooperates toward a final goal and yet a single person claims credit and takes ownership and benefits for all the work done by everyone we call it capitalism.

Re:So?

[cascadingstylesheet]

Which western countries are these? In all of Europe you can't be held responsible for someone else's child, although if you did contribute to their upbringing and only found out later you often can't recover that money either.

Unless something has changed, in pretty much all of the US, the husband is the "putative father", and even if paternity is later established to be someone else the court can leave child support orders in place if in the "best interests of the child" (e.g. if the neighborhood hood who was the genetic donor has a lower income )

Re:So?

[William Baric]

France does not allow DNA testing unless a judge orders it. There are two cases when a judge will allow the DNA testing. The first case is if the mother is trying to find out who is the father in order to get child support. In this case, the judge will almost always grant the request of the woman.

The second case is if a man wants to prove he's not the father in order to get out of child support. In this case, the judge will allow the DNA testing, but only if the man never acted as the father of the child. If the man acted as the father of the child at any point in time, even for a very short period, then the judge will refuse the DNA testing. The reason for this is that the "well-being of the child" is more important than anything else... and obviously the mother needs the man's money to make sure her child has the best future possible.

Re: So?

[cyber-vandal]

Interesting choice of words ;-)

Re:So?

[liquid_schwartz]

Yes, our investment in reproduction may be lesser than that of the woman whose entire body will be hijacked for nine months, but we still are invested in it, we will still be expected (rightly) to give up the next 18-21 years and a sizable amount of income bringing the kid up.

You grossly underestimate the impact of child support vs the "hijacked body". Also the hijacked body narrative is a negative viewpoint. The positive viewpoint is that they feel the newborn kicking, get an intimacy during feeding, etc. There are positives that get overlooked all too often.

Re:So?

[Creedo]

Also the hijacked body narrative is a negative viewpoint.

Yeah, it is. Kind of the point.

The positive viewpoint is that they feel the newborn kicking, get an intimacy during feeding, etc. There are positives that get overlooked all too often.

Sex is pretty awesome and intimate for a woman, too. IF it's consensual. If not, not so much, eh?

Re:So?

[Shotgun]

No. That is socialism. At least the horse in Animal Farm said it was so.

Re:So?

[thedarb]

Fuck, I wish I had mod points! That was funny!

Re:So?

[squiggleslash]

You grossly underestimate the impact of child support vs the "hijacked body".

What do you "vs"? Do you think the mother is not going to spend two decades on supporting the child?

Basically the only way the parents get out of child support is if they both agree to put the kid up for adoption. That's it. Otherwise both parents end up supporting it in some shape or form until the child is an adult.

Usually, if adoption isn't the route taken both parents will give up the next 20ish years to support the child. On occasion, the parents will decide they can't live with one another, and will usually, but not always, have the child to be directly supported by the mother, and indirectly supported by the father (via what you're misleadingly referring to as "child support" - payments to the family.)

Assuming the pregnancy is taken to term, it's adoption, or both parents spend the next two decades supporting the kid. The "hijacked body" is in addition to two decades of child support, not instead of it.

Re:So?

[Anonymous Coward]

So, yes, we need a pill too. Not for the sake of the would-be mother, but for the sake of the would-be father. This is a legitimate men's rights issue. I'd like to say it's surprising it's taking this long to bring such a pill into being, (...)

No, it's not. I'd say it's actually quite suprising that they DID manage that. In females there is aleady a whole, finely tuned, natural mechanism to prevent ovulation while the female is pregnant, and so it's easy to stop ovulation - all the contraceptive pills do is just hijack the mechanism and just simulate the "I'm pregnant, stop ovulating!" hormonal signal for the ovaries. There is no such mechanism for men - no hormonal signal that would ever stop sperm production exists. Men are programmed by nature to always be fertile and to try to impregnate anything and everyhting that is at least somewhat similar to a fertile woman - and with a wide margin of error at that. And stopping that is much harder than preventing woman fertility.

Re:So?

[argStyopa]

I just wanted to say thanks for the comment.
As a man who's been with the same woman since I was 17 and she 16, and never had another partner, I'll admit, honestly - the value of such a pill to men didn't even OCCUR to me.

Thanks!

Re:So?

[MrKaos]

The very fact that this has been modded down shows us that the information contained is valuable. The fact that it was posted on April 1st shows us how men are being treated.

Re:So?

[tsa]

And what does a horse know about people? /s

Re:So?

[MrKaos]

For a second I thought you were a idiot before remembering it's April 1, almost got me. :)

Shaming, the tactics of a toxic feminist. I'm surprised you didn't add the "What kind of man" question.

Re:So?

[Ol Olsoc]

Which western countries are these? In all of Europe you can't be held responsible for someone else's child, although if you did contribute to their upbringing and only found out later you often can't recover that money either.

Do you have any stats for the causes of male suicide? Everything I can find that isn't an MRA blog only lists relationships as one of many causes, usually not the first in the unordered list, so I'm interested to know if this claim has any statistical basis.

If you read French, here is the statute. https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr...

https://www.ibdna.com/paternit... > I believe you told me before that you are too busy to red my citations, but here is the rationale.

"The reasons for which the Government said the ban should remain were related to the preservation of peace within French families. According to some online articles, Germany, has also banned (or plans to ban) paternity testing for similar reasons. French psychologists suggest that fatherhood is determined by society not by biology. For this reason, the President’s wife Carla Bruni describes her father as the man ‘from whom she takes her name’. She is friends with her biological dad too but she doesn’t refer to him, or think of him as, her father.

So the woman retains her money supply, the Child is raised by someone other than the father, and the guy who the wife fucked and got pregnant with is ruinning around, legally allowed to fuck any woman and father children that he never has to spend a cent for.

Who has the better deal? I don't know about you, but I don't think it is wise and proper to force men to pay for children their wives purposely have with other men? It is the law, enforceably by a year in priison if you don't raise your cuckhold children, so apparently a lot of people believe that.

Ah..... male privilege in it's highest form.

Re:So?

[Ol Olsoc]

Unless something has changed, in pretty much all of the US, the husband is the "putative father", and even if paternity is later established to be someone else the court can leave child support orders in place if in the "best interests of the child" (e.g. if the neighborhood hood who was the genetic donor has a lower income )

You can even be held liable if you are a sperm donor. https://montesfamilylaw.com/ca...

And here is the bill they are workin on passing (SB 115) http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/...

In Canada, Sperm donors are not allowed anonymity, which means that a sperm donor is easy to find. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada... . And don't for a minute think that the known Sperm donor will not be sued for support. The child and th emother are the Important parties.

And some women are demanding the absolute right to find and know who donated sperm https://www.wbur.org/npr/14047...

tl;dr version - a man would have to be a fool do donate sperm, and not that smart to enter into a marriage contract these days of institutionalized cuckholdery.

Re:So?

[Ol Olsoc]

Actually ,even France allows paternity testing, with a legal order.

There are time lines involved, but well, that is a problem of the opposite, too much trust.

Yes they do, but good luck with that, as the law wants to alwayts dwetermine paternity, which in modern days has nothing to do with who the man who sired the child is.

Re:So?

[Ol Olsoc]

Yeah right. DNA testing not allowed? Quit your bullshit.

Even though you are a ra bit rude here - just for you - a link. https://www.ibdna.com/paternit...

Paternity tests must be ordered by a judge, and since the concern is for the support of the mother and child, they are loathe to do that.

But yes Virginia, a man doing a home DNA test kit can be punished by a year in jail.

Re:So?

[Ol Olsoc]

If the man acted as the father of the child at any point in time, even for a very short period, then the judge will refuse the DNA testing. The reason for this is that the "well-being of the child" is more important than anything else... and obviously the mother needs the man's money to make sure her child has the best future possible.

If the goal is to keep men out of marriage and away from relationships with women, they are succeeding.

Re:So?

[Ol Olsoc]

A woman can have multiple partners, become pregnant, and pick which one she wishes to raise a child with.

Not sure which country you are in but in the UK that isn't the case. In the event that you are wrongly named as the parent of a child you can request a DNA test, and if the mother refuses then you are deemed not to be the father.

In order to get a DNA test you of course have to suspect that you are not the parent first. But if you do, there is pretty much nothing the mother can do to avoid the DNA test other than to accept you have no legal obligation to pay maintenance.

I'm in the USA. I'm not certain where you get your information from, but we have a lot of men paying child support for children that are not theirs biologically.

https://www.abc15.com/news/nat...

Florida: https://www.myfloridalaw.com/c...

In 2014, a rape victim was forsce to pay child support! https://www.usatoday.com/story...

He was 14, she was 20. She raped him, became pregnant, and the law says that he must support the child that his rapist mothered.

Here's Wikipedia on the subject : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Now if you want to know why a lot of men are pissed, we live in a country where bullshit like punishing rape victims is sancioned by the threat of jail time as long as they are males, and as I wrote, you can be forced to support a child that your wife just felt like fucking someone else for fun. It's real, and it carries the force of law. The only part the internet plays is giving us the links to the examples.

Re:So?

[Ol Olsoc]

"Only" 2%?? That's 1 in 50. For a huge life altering consequence, those odds are absolutely high enough to treat it as a big deal. You people who claim things like that and the 2-10% (1 in 50 to 1 in 10) percent of false rape accusations make them so rare that no rational person should ever assume that's the case are batshit insane.

While we must understand that not everything can be perfect, we must remember that allowing a false accuser to go unpunished is like saying that it's okay to hand out capital punishment to innocent people.

In either case, a crime has been committed, and allowing a guilty party to escape justice is then approved.

I don't think so. I fully support women who claim rape and shown to be false should go to jail for the crime of rape, then be registered sex offenders upon their release.

This doesn't mean not enough evidence for a conviction, this means provable false statements, and intent.

Re:So?

[Ol Olsoc]

(((That's our goal!)))

It is a completely un-natural situation to be certain, but we live in un-natural times.

Re:So?

[AmiMoJo]

The situation in France is that private testing is banned, which is not unusual because by its nature it involves two people one of whom is a child and thus unable to give informed consent. Consent and privacy are protected in the EU.

However, in the case where the father questions paternity and does not want to support the child a DNA test is possible. Refusal to take a DNA test, e.g. if the mother refuses to give consent, is generally taken as an admission of paternity fraud.

Re:So?

[AmiMoJo]

The US legal system is screwed up in many ways, and I agree that child support/paternity fraud seems to be no exception.

So the next question is what to do about it. It seems that all these cases would be resolved in favour of the the man in the UK, so maybe you could look at how we do things and use that as a model.

Re:So?

[MrKaos]

Which western countries are these?

America , UK, Canada , Australia and, NZ because they have similarly structured Family law courts.

White men are the highest suicide rate in the Western world at 77% in the US, that's a lot of evidence against the existence of white male privilege.

Divorced men (not just white men) are eight times more likely to commit suicide than divorced women. It's called divorce rape for a reason. Being married is a very risky proposition for a western man, you can literally have everything you have worked your whole life for, taken from you.

so I'm interested to know if this claim has any statistical basis.

It does.

Family law in western society make it easy for women to behave very badly on the way out of marriages. I've had women lawyers tell me how weighted against men family law is so it is little wonder that men are checking out when they discover they are sold a lie that they invested all their time and life into.

Re:So?

[AmiMoJo]

I'm not unsympathetic, but that letter to the BMJ doesn't back up the claim. It notes a higher suicide rate among divorced men than among divorced women, not among men who are victims of paternity fraud. Also note that it's a letter, not a peer reviewed study, and while it does cite some compelling evidence it is not rigorous.

Again, just to be clear, I do think there is a problem with lack of mental healthcare for divorced men and, in the United States, problems with the legal system. I'm just saying that this doesn't prove the point made.

As for the "white men" suicide statistic, I'd be very careful with it. Consider first that "white" is poorly defined and self-reported, and that particularly in the United States you can't decouple other factors such as economic status, education level and the like.

Again, not saying suicide amongst white men isn't a problem, merely that the statistic is dubious (google didn't turn it up, what is your source?) and thus basing policy decision on it may be a mistake.

Re:So?

[BranMan]

Or football

I don't like chemical ...

[Qbertino]

... birth control. It messes with the ladies hormones and probably messes with male hormones too. And it exposes you to STDs just as much.
Condoms are the way to go. No condoms, no sex would be my rule as a lady. When I'm out for the hunt (not right now, found the right one and she's a keeper) I *always* have 8-10 condoms with me. It's the only way to roll IMHO.

My 2 cents.

Re:I don't like chemical ...

[DontBeAMoran]

Actually, you have to unroll condoms.

Re:I don't like chemical ...

[William Baric]

Not only does the condom kill the mood, but since I was not mutilated (circumcised) the condom cuts so much of my sensation that I don't find sex enjoyable. I'd much prefer a blow job or even a hand job than sex with a condom.

Re:I don't like chemical ...

[Daralantan]

probably messes with male hormones too.

I seem to recall the original testing of the male birth control pill ended because some of the side effects were apparently several of the men became incredibly suicidal while on it?

Re:I don't like chemical ...

[TeknoHog]

Try female condoms. You'll have more sense of moving because the condom is now fixed against the vaginal wall. They also make the whole deal more sanitary in case she's having her period.

Re:I don't like chemical ...

[bugs2squash]

Actually there are no active ingredients, it's just a simple 8 foot diameter 2 foot thick pill weighing 1200lbs that is gently placed on the man while laying in bed, it removes all urge to procreate almost instantaneously.

Ah, april first...

[DontBeAMoran]

"Dr. Christina Wang"

Sure, whatever.

Re:Ah, april first...

[TeknoHog]

Wang is the most common Chinese family name, meaning "King". I recall there are about 100 million Wangs around the world.

Re: Ah, april first...

[c6gunner]

I'm pretty sure it's closer to 3.5 billion.

Re:Ah, april first...

[Charstor]

Yes, likely April Fools. But, it does make me wonder why people seem more worried about pregnancy protection rather than STI protection. Wrap it, and you've come pretty darn close to 100% on both.

Re:Ah, april first...

[PopeRatzo]

"Dr. Christina Wang"

Her collaborator in the study was Dr. Ivan Jaganoff.

Re:Ah, april first...

[phrackthat]

The article was first published on March 25, so not April Fools.

April 1 again?

[Anonymous Coward]

If it's an actual thing maybe re-post it tomorrow. I think most people have given up for today.

Re:Male birth control ?

[Mascot]

You may want to google "spontaneous recanalization".

I worked some crap jobs for a while

[rsilvergun]

In my 30s and it's amazing how many guys if met who's wives for pregnant on the pill. I knew a few that out right admitted they stopped taking it without telling their partner. Often because the mother in law was anxious for grandchildren...

Re:I worked some crap jobs for a while

[McFortner]

Trust me, I could almost look at my now ex-wife the wrong way and she'd get pregnant from over 20 feet away. My little swimmers could get past any barrier put up if they so desired it.

:)

Re:I worked some crap jobs for a while

[markdavis]

>"I knew a few that out right admitted they stopped taking it without telling their partner."

I suspect it is quite common, actually (women lying about being on effective birth control). I welcome the idea of it having to truly be consensual- both parties having full control.

If you're in your 20s many doctors won't

[rsilvergun]

Give you a vasectomy. I've heard it's better now, but 20 years ago no reputable doctor would. You could go to planned Parenthood and they'd do it but the doc would be a third string or a newbie.

Re:the feminazis would be mad

[Anonymous Coward]

This is exactly why I joined the alt-right and now only have sex with other men (no homo, though). Women are scum!

Best news ever

[SmaryJerry]

I can't believe how amazing a male pull would be. Finally men could not worry about a girl deciding to keep a baby they don't want and ruining their life with child support for 18 years.. without having a vasectomy. This could be amazing if it works!

Re:Best news ever

[HornWumpus]

Allowing either parent to have a fourth trimester abortion is the best solution!

Re:I think feminism came from birth control.

[MrKaos]

This is a really interesting theory.

Re: the feminazis would be mad

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's be honest, women do entrap men. There is an entire system and industry based around this.

It's got nothing to do with politics, other than people trying to bolster women's ability to misuse both men and children by making it profitable.

Re:the feminazis would be mad

[serviscope_minor]

The internet is large and it's usually possible to find someone who'll say just about anything. Even given that I'm calling bullshit. I don't think you can find anyone making that claim.

Re: It's blocked by the VasalGel company.

[FictionPimp]

Which countries? I canâ(TM)t find any information online thatâ(TM)s says itâ(TM)s approved in any major country. I want this.

Aunt Samantha Needs You

[Shotgun]

There is only one way to conduct the next phase of testing. At some point you've got to roll it out to the real world. I guess I'll take one for the team and volunteer my services.

Re:I had a vasectomy

[Shotgun]

You seem to have a wonderful life. You screw women you don't respect and that don't respect you. Instead, you're both out to secretly manipulate each other.

Do you have a newsletter I could subscribe to?

9 months vs 216+? Boo hoo.

[Uberbah]

When an unplanned pregnancy occurs, women have all kinds of rights and choices, whereas men only have responsibilities. Women can terminate their parental obligations by getting an abortion or placing the child up for adoption - which they can do without the father's knowledge or consent - but the man has no choice but to be on the hook for the next 18+ years.

Very simple

[Anonymous Coward]

It works by making semen taste like chocolate.

Ramp up the robot production

[phrackthat]

Every major western civilized country lacks replacement level reproduction already (US population hasn't tanked due to immigration). If real male contraception becomes a thing you should fully expect to see our population levels crash. There was a survey done by a woman's magazine in England where fully 40% of the women surveyed admitted to having cheated on birth control or sabotaged his condom to get pregnant when their partner didn't want a child. More than 60% thought it was OK to convince a man they knew was not the father that he was the father of they preferred him to the real father.

In short, if men and women both have full agency over their reproductive ability, our population will absolutely crash and we're going to need a lot of robots to sustain our way of life and welfare systems.

Re:Ramp up the robot production

[mentil]

OTOH, a widely-available male pill could help in rebuilding trust between the sexes, which could lead to more long-term relationships and desire to have children. Wouldn't you feel more comfortable raising children with a woman who you don't think wants to entrap you? "Just get pregnant" needs to go the way of "Just get her drunk", and for the same reason.

The robots are coming no matter what, FWIW.

...and next

[Catostylus]

I will be anxiously awaiting the announcement on 1st April next year of the "morning after" male pill.

Re: It's blocked by the VasalGel company.

[FictionPimp]

Exactly, that's why I replied to the post saying it was as easy as leaving the US and getting this done. It's not, it should be, but it is not. The moment it is I will be having this done.