Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Monday April 06 2015, @06:23AM   Printer-friendly
from the tadpole-blocker dept.

In present day 2015, the available options for contraception aren’t great, and the burden still rests largely on women to mitigate the damages of our wanton impulses. Aside from the copper IUD, all the birth control devices and pharmaceuticals available to women alter our hormones with various weird side effects. When it comes to birth control for men, aside from condoms and pulling out (neither of which are very​ reliable in practice), a vasectomy has been the only other option for preventing unwanted pregnancies. Though there’s about a coin-flip chance of it being reversible, those odds aren’t enough to make it something guys under 40 typically consider. A few other male contraceptives are being explored, but there are no approved male contraceptive drugs in the United States.

But what if there was a simple way a man to fire blanks until he and his partner were ready to have a kid—without the snip s​nap?

The pro​cess takes about 15 minutes. A doctor injects a tiny dot of a synthetic gel into the sperm-carrying tube just outside of each testicle. Once injected, the gel sets in the tube and acts like a filter, allowing fluid to pass through but not sperm. “Like water might percolate through Jello,” said Elaine Lissner, director of the Parsemus Foundation.

This isn’t like a Depo-Provera shot you have to get once every few months either—once injected, the sperm-filtering gel would remain in place for 10 years. If the recipient decides he wants to take a shot at having kids at any point in between, all it takes is another injection of sodium bicarbonate (aka baking soda) to dissolve the liquid, and the sperm factory becomes operational again.

It may sound too good to be true, but clinical and animal trials in India have shown that the method works with near-pe​rfect results and no serious s​ide effects. And unlike the birth control pill and condoms, which have a real-life efficacy rate far lower than the ‘perfect use’ scenarios advertised on the packages, the birth control injection, like an IUD, comes with virtually no room for human error.

So why isn't this in widespread use? Well, one reason might be that commercially, there is more money to be made selling contraceptive pills than a 10-yearly injection, and secondly, I guess "needles in close proximity to testicles" is not something that many men like the sound of...

 
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: 2) by ikanreed on Monday April 06 2015, @02:14PM

    by ikanreed (3164) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 06 2015, @02:14PM (#166977) Journal

    No one said that, hence calling you an idiot.

    Congratulations on graduating to goddamn idiot.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by ikanreed on Monday April 06 2015, @02:36PM

    by ikanreed (3164) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 06 2015, @02:36PM (#166985) Journal

    And you know what? Sorry if I'm being overly hostile. I just detest people pushing the whole "Medicine has side effects therefor should never be used" line. I was sick to death of it 5 years ago.

    • (Score: 2) by Fnord666 on Monday April 06 2015, @03:30PM

      by Fnord666 (652) on Monday April 06 2015, @03:30PM (#167006) Homepage

      I was sick to death of it 5 years ago.

      Figuratively speaking of course.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 06 2015, @03:36PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 06 2015, @03:36PM (#167010)

      And you know what? Sorry if I'm being overly hostile. I just detest people pushing the whole "Medicine works statistically therefor should always be used" line. I was sick to death of that 25 years ago.

      Fixed that.

      Statistics become meaningless when something doesn't work for the specific case in which I am concerned - medicine or otherwise.

      • (Score: 1, Troll) by ikanreed on Monday April 06 2015, @03:42PM

        by ikanreed (3164) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 06 2015, @03:42PM (#167012) Journal

        You're the problem.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 06 2015, @04:12PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 06 2015, @04:12PM (#167022)

          Statistically you have one testicle and one ovary, therefore that is precisely the reality of the situation and no rationalization can change it. Clearly makes sense.

          • (Score: 2) by ikanreed on Monday April 06 2015, @04:19PM

            by ikanreed (3164) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 06 2015, @04:19PM (#167024) Journal

            It's not like medical science actually takes things like gender and age and conditions into account, so you've stumbled on an amazing insight.

            No wait. You're dumb, and should completely rethink your worldview. You won't because we're having an internet argument, but you should