SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
This Male Birth Control Pill has Just Been Shown Safe in Humans for the First Time:
For years, scientists have been trying to develop a safe and effective version of the pill for men, and a new drug candidate could be the contraceptive we've been looking for.
This week, scientists in the US announced that an experimental oral drug called 11-beta-MNTDC looks to be safe and tolerable, based on results from a phase 1 clinical trial involving 40 men.
"Our results suggest that this pill, which combines two hormonal activities in one, will decrease sperm production while preserving libido," says male reproduction biologist Christina Wang from the Los Angeles Biomedical Research Institute (LA BioMed).
[...] 11-beta-MNTDC is a modified form of testosterone with both progestational (in effect, sperm-blocking) and androgenic (hormone-balancing) characteristics.
Before you get your hopes up too much, this was strictly a test for toleration; further studies are required to test efficacy.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by darkfeline on Wednesday March 27 2019, @03:25AM (11 children)
> girl has to trust the guy way too much for casual sex anyway.
Isn't it the other way around? The girl can revoke consent at any time, including after the fact. The girl can choose whether or not to use birth control or have an abortion, irrespective of the guy's wishes. The girl can garnish the guy's wages, irrespective of any deceit used or ulterior motives harbored. The girl can even send the kid for adoption later without any input from the guy.
At least in most places in the US, maybe other countries have saner laws/implementations of said laws.
It's a bad time to be a guy (male suicide rates rising, male graduation rates, college acceptance rates falling, lots of programs and opportunities for girls and few for guys). That's why the MGTOW movement exists.
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 2) by gringer on Wednesday March 27 2019, @04:31AM (3 children)
It sure is a scary time for boys.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cFIIj6A1Y4 [youtube.com]
Ask me about Sequencing DNA in front of Linus Torvalds [youtube.com]
(Score: 4, Interesting) by darkfeline on Wednesday March 27 2019, @06:21AM (2 children)
I can't tell what the point of that song is. I suppose it's was intended to be mocking guys for being afraid of being accused of rape while there are guys who rape girls, but ironically I can't tell if that it in itself supposed to be satire.
Because a guy raping a girl is clearly a crime and I know of no court which would rule otherwise, but at the same time there are men being found guilty of rape despite the supposed victim, her friends, and eyewitnesses all vehemently denying the allegations. One of these is justice for a crime and one of these is blatant sexism and an affront to justice.
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 1, Troll) by gringer on Wednesday March 27 2019, @09:40AM (1 child)
How about the supreme court of the United States?
In case you missed the start of the video, the song was written in the context of a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, in which Professor Christine Blasey Ford reported that she was sexually assaulted by the applicant, and members of congress pointed out that her statements were in part supported by evidence that the applicant freely gave out. The applicant was appointed to the supreme court anyway.
Ask me about Sequencing DNA in front of Linus Torvalds [youtube.com]
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Wednesday March 27 2019, @08:42PM
They weren't ruling on whether he committed a crime. They were deciding whether to allow him onto the court.
Still a stupid decision, but there's a difference.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 27 2019, @07:02AM
Colleges are increasingly becoming degree mills anyway. There are plenty of jobs (software development) where degrees are not needed but are increasingly required by employers because they are too short-sighted to actually interview people. So, colleges increasingly become more about job training than actual education, in an effort to push out as many paper holders as possible and collect their money.
The entire school system, from the K-12 system to the college system, is utterly abysmal and needs to be completely reformed.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 27 2019, @07:08AM
Yes for example in France. It's joked about that DNA paternity tests are illegal but that doesn't mean you get stuck with unwanted offspring.
The offspring of your wife is legally supposed your biologic offspring but it's not your civil offspring unless you claim the child as such without 5 days of birth or later
adopt it.
There is absolutely no risk besides STDs to casual unprotected sex for the man.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 27 2019, @01:17PM (4 children)
I'll add another danger of leaving birth control up to the woman: she may tell you she's on the pill, and she may be telling you the truth, but she omits telling you that some days she forgets to take it. Oh well! SURPRISE, MOTHAFUCKA!
As a man, unless you are in a marriage with a woman you trust 100%, you simply have to wear a rubber if you stick it in her cooter.
Rubbers are cheap, simple, and work -- IF YOU USE THEM EVERY TIME.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Wednesday March 27 2019, @04:06PM (3 children)
Actually, if used every time, and always perfectly, condoms are about 98% effective - pretty good, but they still have a failure rate hundreds of times higher than most female birth control options.
Meanwhile, out here in the real world people aren't perfect, and in practice they're only about 80-85% effective.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 28 2019, @05:06AM (2 children)
As I said in my post (which you responded to): there are some women who can't remember to consistently swallow a pill.
(Don't ask me how I learned.) Men, take responsibility for your reproduction and disease exposure. Wear the rubber every time. Exceptions only during marriage, etc.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Thursday March 28 2019, @07:39AM (1 child)
Sure, but the pill is the only form of female birth control that suffers from that problem. (Well, there's cycle monitoring, but that's so ineffective that it's hardly fair to call it birth control. Better than nothing, but not by much)
It's also one of the least effective forms of (non-mechanical) female birth control, with IUDs, hormone implants, etc. being 10x to 1,000x or more more effective. And even then, the pill (taken properly) is still around 100x more effective than condoms (though some things, like St. John's Wort can neutralize its effectiveness).
Condoms' 2% chance of pregnancy per year is a lot better than the baseline 80%, but a 1-in-50 chance of a completely life-changing outcome is still pretty high for a lot of people's tastes. Especially when you look at how the the risk compounds over time. Use a condom perfectly every time, and there's an 18% chance that you'll father at least one child within 10 years. Use it very-slightly-less-perfectly, for a 95% effectiveness, and that chance jumps to 40%.
They're undeniably the best option currently available for men, but there's lots of room for improvement.
Also, why the exception during marriage? Just because you're married doesn't mean you want to have (more) kids. Birth control within marriage is one of its most important uses - without it you should plan to have a new baby every 12-18 months.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 28 2019, @07:31PM
All your points are taken.
As for why the "in marriage" clause in my email?
You left out the ", etc." part that came immediately after.
I didn't feel like typing out the rest that I trust our Soylent readers could infer.