Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Wednesday February 08 2017, @02:23PM   Printer-friendly
from the A-Little-Dab-Will-Do-You? dept.

An experimental new type of male contraceptive that blocks sperm flow with a gel has been successful in monkey trials.

Vasalgel acts as a physical barrier once injected into the tubes that sperm would swim down to the penis.

The company behind it says a two-year trial, published in Basic and Clinical Andrology , shows the gel works and is safe - at least in primates.

It hopes to have enough evidence to begin tests in men within a few years.

If those get funding and go well - two big "ifs" - it will seek regulatory approval to make the gel more widely available to men.

It would be the first new type of male contraceptive to hit the market in many decades.

Vasagel is thought to have the same effect as a vasectomy — but another injection should dissolve the gel plug.

http://www.bbc.com/news/health-38879224

Related: The Perfect Birth Control for Men Is Here. Why Can't We Use It?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Interesting) by iamjacksusername on Wednesday February 08 2017, @05:48PM

    by iamjacksusername (1479) on Wednesday February 08 2017, @05:48PM (#464633)

    I have been following this since it was called RISUG and it was just a news blurb about an Indian scientist. This is something that really drives me crazy. Vasalgel is a game-changer; it gives men an equivalent control over their reproductive choices as women but it nobody seems interested in marketing it. They had to get grants to just find the studies. The Gates Foundation turned them down because "it was not something they were focused on". This is something that will absolutely shake up the status quo.

    52% of pregnancies in the US are unplanned [wikipedia.org]. This is not the same as unwanted but it does go to show at least one of the parties involved was not planning on it. With Vasagel, men would have to make an affirmative decision to produce offspring. I do not think it is out of turn to say that the pregnancy rate will drop as well as abortion rate.

    In the short term, I think it will change the tone and tenor of reproductive rights debate. I think abortion, as a political football, will fall by the wayside as the number of abortions fall. The state could make it like a vaccine: every boy, once he turns 13, can get a free Vasagel injection. That alone would contribute a lot to ending the poverty cycle of teen pregnancies, where poor teenagers have children and then their own children have children as teenagers.

    Vasagel has the power to fundamentally re-shape society, fertility, dating and family planning much in the same way that hormonal birth control changed things for women. I think it is a great development and the fact that they are having such a hard time getting traction to bring it to market drives me nuts. This is something that should have been available 10 years ago.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +4  
       Interesting=3, Underrated=1, Total=4
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 08 2017, @06:33PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 08 2017, @06:33PM (#464655)

    There might not be investors because they might simply not see an adequate market. Condoms are a very cheap substitute (that also prevents STDs) and the market share taken from vasectomies might not be large enough to pay for the clinical trials.

    A costly and invasive procedure, like the one described, might have trouble making money and it seems like it would be an uphill battle on the political side (due to STD concerns, historical forced sterilization, and the perceived endorsement of sexual activity).

    • (Score: 2) by iamjacksusername on Wednesday February 08 2017, @08:41PM

      by iamjacksusername (1479) on Wednesday February 08 2017, @08:41PM (#464749)

      That's absolutely correct; no pharma wants to fund a new drug that is a one-time use per person per lifetime. There is not enough money in it. That's why Parsemus is set up as a social venture corporation. There is not a lot of long-term private profit in this; it is a "social good."

    • (Score: 2) by compro01 on Thursday February 09 2017, @11:15AM

      by compro01 (2515) on Thursday February 09 2017, @11:15AM (#464941)

      Condoms are a very cheap substitute

      Condoms are at present the only option for men. Compared to this, they have a vastly higher failure rate (18% per year vs. sub-1% if it's as effective as a normal vasectomy), you need to actually use them, and there's the age old complaints of reduced sensation.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 09 2017, @01:37PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 09 2017, @01:37PM (#464984)

        I didn't specify, but I meant the business definition of substitute:

        Different goods that, at least partly, satisfy the same needs of the consumers and, therefore, can be used to replace one another. Price of such goods shows positive cross-elasticity of demand

  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by DeathMonkey on Wednesday February 08 2017, @06:39PM

    by DeathMonkey (1380) on Wednesday February 08 2017, @06:39PM (#464660) Journal

    I think abortion, as a political football, will fall by the wayside as the number of abortions fall.
     
    Unfortunately, we've observed this to not be the case.

    U.S. Abortion Rate Falls To Lowest Level Since Roe v. Wade [npr.org]

  • (Score: 2) by krishnoid on Wednesday February 08 2017, @07:14PM

    by krishnoid (1156) on Wednesday February 08 2017, @07:14PM (#464688)

    That alone would contribute a lot to ending the poverty cycle of teen pregnancies, where poor teenagers have children and then their own children have children as teenagers.

    This reminds me of the opening scene of Idiocracy. *Both* families. Neither of those scenarios sounded particularly appealing.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 08 2017, @07:42PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 08 2017, @07:42PM (#464708)

    Men are driven to spread their seed. Maybe the number of guys who want to block their little swimmers with injected gel is smaller than you think. Rationalize all you want, but things like life, death, and procreation have another dimension.

    • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday February 08 2017, @08:16PM

      by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday February 08 2017, @08:16PM (#464731) Journal

      Yes, men are driven to spread their seed. But humans invest heavily in raising offspring. Men also have an incentive to not have to pay for all of the potential children they create. Thus they may pair up with one partner and invest in the fruits of that, yet also have affairs as opportunities to spread their seed without having to deal with any consequences of that. (Not that it doesn't sometimes catch up with them.)

      Off topic, but women have an affair because they want both the best genes for their offspring, as well as the best resources for their offspring. So a younger woman may be a mistress for an older man in exchange for resources. Or an older wealthier woman may have an affair with a younger man to get better genes.

      Despite the drive to spread their seed, (some, few?) men have an intellect. They may want to do the spreading frequently without any possibility of conception, and retain careful control of when the spreading of seed can result in conception. This is not rocket surgery.

      --
      People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 09 2017, @02:50AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 09 2017, @02:50AM (#464855)

      Men are driven to have sex, not spread their seed. They will have sex just fine with infertile women, young women, and other men. This contraceptive gel takes power away from women. Holes in condoms or swiped semen are not going to work with this method. This circumvents the vast bias of the state towards giving women child custody and alimony. It is also reversible. If you oppose this method of birth control beyond questioning its effectiveness, cost, or health impact, then your motives are suspect.

      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday February 09 2017, @07:00PM

        by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Thursday February 09 2017, @07:00PM (#465170) Journal

        LOL. This lesbian feminist is all for it. It sounds odd, but I want to see this idiot war between the sexes end already. Ironically, not having to play the hetero mating game lets me get some outside, cooler-headed perspective, and ends with more sympathy for Y-chromosome-bearers than you might expect. IMO the real man-haters are straight girls since they have to deal with being naturally attracted to guys.

        --
        I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
      • (Score: 2) by q.kontinuum on Thursday February 09 2017, @11:18PM

        by q.kontinuum (532) on Thursday February 09 2017, @11:18PM (#465308) Journal

        then your motives are suspect

        Is "religious" a subsection of suspect, or did you just miss religious?

        --
        Registered IRC nick on chat.soylentnews.org: qkontinuum
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 08 2017, @08:13PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 08 2017, @08:13PM (#464729)

    It will be interesting to see how US culture reacts to birth control once it's something that's available to men. But IUDs [wikipedia.org] (extremely effective, long lasting, zero-effort after initial install birth control) already exist for women and offering them for free to teens [nytimes.com] has been tried to great success (40% lower teen birthrate, 42% lower teen abortion rate in a trial in Colorado), but there's been a lot of conservative push-back over expanding the program. Once it involves men and women, that might change, but I wouldn't be so sure. But the problem being overcome isn't the technical one of developing effective birth control, it's the cultural one of misogyny.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 09 2017, @01:50AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 09 2017, @01:50AM (#464843)

    You do realize blocking the expression of sperm eventually causes the immune system to see all sperm as threats and causes the male to become sterile? Letting every 13 year old get the injection would be an excellent way to obliterate the population in a couple generations.

    Plus the blockage does nothing against STDs. Well see those skyrocket with better male-based birth control.

    I agree that it's worth developing, but it's not as great as it looks on the surface. And I don't see any studies of them adding then removing, then adding, then removing, then adding, then removing the plug. How effective is it with constant switches? Will that matter? You can be sure some people will be constantly transitioning.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 09 2017, @01:30PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 09 2017, @01:30PM (#464981)

      You do realize blocking the expression of sperm eventually causes the immune system to see all sperm as threats and causes the male to become sterile?

      AIUI, this particular procedure doesn't block the expression of sperm, only their inclusion in ejaculate. Sperm will still be created in the testes, they'll just only be able to swim around in circles before getting reabsorbed, or whatever it is sperms do after retirement.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 09 2017, @09:02PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 09 2017, @09:02PM (#465252)

        By expression I was referring to ejaculation, sorry if I wasn't clear on that. Sperm always getting reabsorbed eventually turns the immune system against them. That's why vasectomies aren't always reversible. Though to be fair I don't know how long it takes nor with what percentage of people it occurs in, I only know that it happens.