The Best Birth Control In The World Is For Men

http://techcitement.com/culture/the-best-birth-control-in-the-world-is-for-men/

by d2vid • 14 years ago

629 196 14 years ago

d2vid2• 14 years ago

My girlfriend told me about this because she gets blood clots from hormonal birth control and we wish this was an option today.

You should complete this survey like I did if you are interested: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/TSKSKGM

dfc13• 14 years ago

What happens with the survey? Are you affiliated?

d2vid2• 14 years ago

No affiliation. I think they might contact you to get quotes for media about how cool it would be and to notify you of their progress.

Lazare3• 14 years ago

My fiancée cannot use hormonal birth control for the same reason. Instead, she has a copper based IUD. Your girlfriend has probably considered this already, but if not I strongly recommend looking into it. They're not perfect, but they're very good.

(There are only two real risks/side effects: Heavier bleeding, and it's important not to get Pelvic Inflammatory Disease (which is another way of saying, it's even more important than normal not to get STDs. If she can handle the first, and is in a monogamous relationship - or at least, always uses condoms with people who aren't guaranteed STD free - then neither issue is severe.)

Mind you, vasalgel sounds even better to me. :)

GFischer• 14 years ago

I guess she already did, but have you tried switching pills? (after asking a gynaecologist I guess)

My girlfirend reacted very badly to a well-known and tested brand, however she seems to do much better with a local-brand product with different composition (started that one a few months ago).

schiffern9• 14 years ago

You should talk to you doctor about progestin-only contraception.

Blood clots, heart problems, cancer, bone loss, and sun sensitivity are all associated with estrogen-containing birth controls. From my research, progestin-only methods don't have those drawbacks.

As always, IANAD and this is not medical advice, but you should talk to one.

WA• 14 years ago

There's a highly effectivy method called symptothermal method. It is basically a combination of temperature measuring and cervical mucus observation, as both symptoms change during the menstrual cycle and when ovulation occurs, you can tell from the symptoms. After you successfully determined that the ovulation passed, a woman is infertile until her next cycle starts.

This means that during that time, you don't need any condoms or anything.

Unfortunately, while being extremely well-researched in Germany for more than 30 years, it is quite uncommon in the US and only known as "Fertility Awareness", which is not the "pure" symptothermal method. The method is oftentimes associated (wrongly) with Christian groups.

You can check out Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertility_awareness

Edit: Perfect use application of the "pure" symptothermal method has a Pearl Index of 0.4 (99.6% effectiveness) and typical use is 1-3 (97-99%). This is quite comparable to the pill.

spydum3• 14 years ago

I would be concerned about forgetting to get it redone on year 11.. then surprise!

From the sounds of it though, you'd still have the same side effects of a traditional vasectomy: sperm granuloma. So one is mostly permanent (reconnection can happen, though super rare).. and one is only good for a few years? Yeah.. I think I'd wait for the first 10 years to see the efficacy.

shadowfiend• 14 years ago

I believe we've already waited 10 years. That's why it's “10+”—the oldest trials are about 10 years old at this point, and the effect is still the same (as far as I've been able to read). More, as usual, at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reversible_inhibition_of_sperm_... , including critique.

busted• 14 years ago

I don't see how it sounds like you'd get a granuloma. It sounds like the sperm are destroyed as they pass through the vas deferens but are still washed out as they normally would be.

spydum3• 14 years ago

Ah, I did not read up apparently. I thought this was essentially gluing the vas shut with a polymer that was reversible. According to the wikipedia entry, they don't know the exact reason it works (what?!). Very interesting.. I had overlooked that.

doah78• 14 years ago

Just schedule it along with your passport renewal! If you are in the US~

schiffern9• 14 years ago

It doesn't in langur monkeys: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12826690

dfc13• 14 years ago

The best birth control in the world is one that allows women to have control (and peace of mind) over the process/efficacy.

jff• 14 years ago

They already have that. It's very nice that there's also something men can have, both to supplement female birth control and to provide peace of mind for the man. It's not a "one or the other" proposition.

egiva• 14 years ago

Yeah, why not have two contraceptive methods in play - like a "Plan A" and a "Plan B"? I think you're on the right track here. Many men, including myself, feel pretty equal with their spouse in terms of family planning, but having a Plan B would definitely give me more peace of mind "just in case" haha.

dfc13• 14 years ago

Um, "best" neccesarily implies a "one or the other" proposition.

earbitscom• 14 years ago

Good point, but I'd argue for both people. The best birth control in the world is one that both parties know has actually been administered.

monochromatic• 14 years ago

Why is the best birth control in the world so one-sided?

angersock2• 14 years ago

Because men clearly are not as invested in the possible rearing of a child.

Clearly.

(seriously: making a kid should be && not || )

mc32• 14 years ago

I think in this case they are using "best" to mean "effective" as in "will work as advertised". Rather than the more subjective "best" overall.

tomjen33• 14 years ago

How does this change anything for the female? If she doesn't trust the partner, but still wants to have sex with him, she can be on the pill, use a condom or use something else.

This simply gives men additional choices and allows couples where the female isn't able to use birth control to have sex without producing a baby.

The only 'choice' this takes away is the females choice (properly rare, but still feared) to claim she is on the pill and really that has never been reliable.

ImprovedSilence• 14 years ago

I can't explain the downvotes, but you brought up a very good point, any guy can just say he's good to go, and be lying just to get a piece. A girls best to bet is to look out for herself.

carbocation9• 14 years ago

Let's not trivialize birth control with a title like this.

Good birth control comes from empowering both partners, and protecting those who are unwilling partners.

For women, an IUD is a great option. For men, barrier methods have been the only reliable, reversible methods until now. This is exciting, but let's not forget about the whole scope and meaning of self-control over reproduction.

Resident_Geek5• 14 years ago

I don't see how this title trivializes birth control. Good birth control comes from controlling birth. I don't believe any other method can claim 10+ years of effectiveness, with practically no side effects and high reversibility.

carbocation9• 14 years ago

Intrauterine devices (IUDs) fit exactly that bill. But one of my points is that one form of birth control, only for men or only for women, shouldn't wear the title "best."

jdoliner• 14 years ago

In what way does this trivialize birth control? The ideal of birth control as a technology would allow anyone to cheaply turn their ability to reproduce on or off with no side effects. It's no more concerned with unwilling partners than willing, the technologies work the same for both. Judging from this article the method in question is getting pretty darn close to that ideal.

dfc13• 14 years ago

Its not ideal if it is only verifiable by one sex.

hoprocker• 14 years ago

Reportedly, when the pill was introduced, it empowered women by giving them much more control over their reproductive options. Afaik, this is the first non-barrier method of contraception that reliably provides the same freedom for men.

carbocation9• 14 years ago

Yes, this is great. It's the title that I find wrongheaded.

Nesterov2• 14 years ago

Oooo interesting. Now if they can slap an anti-virus on it, I'll be sold.

jurjenh• 14 years ago

I believe from the article that it already neutralises HIV...

Nesterov2• 14 years ago

That's only male to female. Although upon further research, female to male infection has a very small chance of occurrence. Nonetheless, still risky!

Lost_BiomedE• 14 years ago

I am always surprised that every discussion of vasectomy, and even this solution, hand-waves away the experience one undergoes in the process. Before doing this yourself, at least know what your getting into:

http://thebrowser.com/articles/final-cut

For example, compare "one little injection" to "I don't scream, but I clamp my jaw so tightly it clicks. I arch my back so much I end up looking behind me at the door."

maaku2• 14 years ago

This is not a vasectomy. It's not even related to vasectomy. Please RTFA.

dangrossman2• 14 years ago

Isn't that a little much? The procedure sounds identical to a vasectomy except the very last step -- instead of cutting the vas deferens you inject this substance into them.

jaggederest• 14 years ago

That doctor was incredibly negligent about pain management.

There's a level called 'unconscionable pain' that is essentially always malpractice, and if you're clamping your jaw and arching your back reflexively, you've hit it and then some.

There's no reason not to mildly sedate a patient, and no reason why anyone should suffer undue pain. Sure, it'll hurt during recovery, but that's why they should issue with vicodin.

silentscope3• 14 years ago

I do see a market with this, but it's got a lot of problems you'd need to navigate. Nothing a smart team couldn't figure out.

Most of the time, men trust women when they say they're on birth control. Women get pregnant--a big deal. It's less likely (but not unheard of) that a woman wants to get pregnant and then lies about birth control.

Men, on the other hand, would love to not use a condom. And men don't get pregnant. So saying "yeah baby, I've had my shots" would probably be a lot more common.

You'd need to market this to couples. Relationships with trust--not teenagers. Or, as an "and-1", extra step prevention. Not as a first line of defense. Then, the low cost would be more of an extra procedure that would get them thinking more about being safer. You wouldn't hang your business model on it but could actually do more business by offering it.

Lastly, being a man, the idea of someone putting forceps in my scrotum gives me the willies. Just sayin'.

ianferrel2• 14 years ago

Isn't most non-condom birth control primarily intended for couples?

All the other types prevent pregnancy only. Condoms prevent disease as well.

dfc13• 14 years ago

Hormone based birth control for women has ancillary health benefits outside of family planning.

streptomycin2• 14 years ago

In theory, maybe. In practice, no. Condoms are way out of fashion these days among the young sexually active crowd.

sudhirj• 14 years ago

If I remember right the doctor who came up with this was trying to prevent the immediate problem of unplanned pregnancies in rural India - they're among the primary causes of our population explosion.

Most of the men and women in his (initial) target audience are illiterate and do not understand / care for methods of contraception that require any kind of anticipatory action - like taking regular pills, putting drunken desire on hold to find a condom, or even paying for either of these. (On $2 a day, all existing contraceptives are luxuries).

That said, I think is a perfect fit for his target demographic. Looks like the characteristics of that demographic are a lot more universal than he thought :D

dminor• 14 years ago

For couples who are done having children, this is a fantastic alternative to a vasectomy.

callmeed• 14 years ago

How so? If I'm "done" I'd rather have a vasectomy than risk forgetting about this and getting my wife pregnant at 42.

oodalolly2• 14 years ago

You hit the nail on the head, here. Even if you're in a committed relationship, there's still a need, as a woman, to protect yourselves at all costs from pregnancy if you aren't looking to have a child. That's why many women in relationships will use secondary birth control. (Condoms + the pill, IUD + spermacide, etc.)

Female birth control puts the power of reproduction back in the hands of the woman, which is a comfort for most women. Relying on your partner to be the one safeguarding your body is a tough choice, but is a wonderful choice for, as you said, couples.

vacri3• 14 years ago

If your sexual activity is not with a long-term exclusive partner, you should be using barrier protection anyway.

tesseractive• 14 years ago

You could also go a different route and seek endorsements from pro athletes known to have a large and expensive number of baby mamas around the country. Market it as the "Player's Club Membership Card." It could become really trendy.

dkersten2• 14 years ago

The way I see it, contraceptive is for the person using it.

So if the guy doesn't want the girl to get pregnant, or wants to avoid STIs - he should use the appropriate protection.

If the girl doesn't want to get pregnant, or wants to avoid STIs - she should use the appropriate protection.

(Both people want to avoid pregnancy/disease? Then both should use protection!)

That way you don't need to worry about what the other person is doing - you manage your own expectations.

If you're in a stable long-term relationship and have talked about it, then sure, you can rely on one person, but otherwise each person should, imho, manage their own contraceptives.

dkrich• 14 years ago

I disagree completely. Sure there are guys who might lie, but a lot of guys would love to be able to not ever have to worry about the female using birth control. Males (and females) hate condoms, but the idea of having a child before you are ready is a very scary proposition. I think this would sell very well if the surgery were painless and not too invasive.

X-Istence• 14 years ago

While putting forceps into my scrotum also gives me the willies I am more than willing to get the procedure done.

I think this is more a secondary defense. For me personally it wouldn't replace condoms (1, I have never had issues with them, and 2, STD's can still be transmitted) unless in a committed relationship, but also to make sure that if something goes wrong with the female birth control, that there is a second stop-gap measure.

I as a 23 year old love the idea. If it is affordable and easy to get done I wouldn't have an issue going to get it done. And from the sound of it, it will not cause pressure to build up much like getting them cut would...

There are liars the world over. I don't think that is necessarily a trait that is just for men. I've know quite a few guys in high school that had unprotected sex because their girlfriend was on the pill end up with a baby because that is the way she thought she could keep him forever.

antihero• 14 years ago

I am 23 years old, I'd consider myself rational about most things, but this scares me absolutely shitless. I know that's dumb, but if someone like me is made extremely nervous about screwing with my method of reproducing, then that can indicate what other people are feeling.

Secondly, I see orgasm as a highly pressurised, highly tuned, intense thing. It feels like I'm straining every part of my balls to the limit when I'm doing this - if I had medical procedures down there, anything that could psychologically make me feel they were frail, that would utterly ruin it.

agateform• 14 years ago

>There are liars the world over. I don't think that is necessarily a trait that is just for men. I've know quite a few guys in high school that had unprotected sex because their girlfriend was on the pill end up with a baby because that is the way she thought she could keep him forever.

A friend's x-girlfriend got pregnant because she poked a hole in the condom without him knowing. If you are male and don't want to have kids, make sure you use your own condoms. Woman has many more options to avoid pregnancy, man has one shot with the condom (AFAIK vasectomy can be permanent).

I think this type of birth control has the potential of lowering paternity fraud since man will know the child is not his. It also reduces unwanted pregnancy when woman poke hole in condom or other condom issues.

This birth control for man is great news and I hope to see more male birth control options in the future.

tomjen33• 14 years ago

It is not the business problem if some guy lies to get sex (welcome to the human world). And there is a market among men with many sexual partners to get this procedure -- every man fears that she lies about the pill.

Doesn't mean you can't market it to couples too, of course.

raju• 14 years ago

Relevant HN discussion from 10 months ago - http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2602785

natasham25• 14 years ago

I've asked my guy friends whether they would get this procedure, and none of them will. Guys expect women to mess with their bodies, but are not willing to make the sacrifice themselves when it comes down to it, even though this is more safe and harmless than pumping your body with hormones every day.

kisielk4• 14 years ago

Not sure why some guys have so many reservations about this, it sounds like a simple and reversible procedure with a quick recovery. I'd get it if it were available in Canada.

salsakran• 14 years ago

Uhm, it involves cutting open your scrotum.

The idea that people will casually do this is ... hilarious.

pinchyfingers2• 14 years ago

Your friends must not get laid a lot, or are very monogamous.

esrauch3• 14 years ago

I would rather pump my body full of hormones than have invasive surgery. You wouldn't?

xibernetik2• 14 years ago

As far as invasive surgeries (and birth control) goes, it's really not that invasive if it can be performed in 15 minutes without general anesthetic by a regular doctor. Even IUDs require more time than that.

Would you still be okay with the hormones if they caused you to gain 15 lbs of fat, lose your libido and render your SO unattractive to you? It's not as simple as swallowing a pill every morning and getting on with your life -- hormonal treatments have very real and sometimes significant side effects.

chc• 14 years ago

This is only barely more invasive than giving blood. You clearly haven't tried the latter if you would prefer it over the former.

njharman2• 14 years ago

Fuck no. Hormones (and most other injections) has way more impact / risk / effect than a tiny cut.

I cut myself several times a month, badly a few times year. (too lazy to wear gloves when doing yard work, accidents etc). I know what a cut is / does. No idea what putting crap in my body will do.

randfish• 14 years ago

I'll publicly go on record as saying I'd do this (if it's as safe and well-tested as the article suggests). I think, like many other things, it simply takes some public examples, preferably high profile, to help instill trust in people.

Eliezer• 14 years ago

I got a vasectomy, even though I was sad about that, when my primary was reacting poorly to birth control. I wish that this had existed six years ago or that I had known about it. You have the wrong guy friends.

StavrosK• 14 years ago

This is unrelated, but I started Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality today and I can't put it down, so thanks!

neutronicus• 14 years ago

Psh. If I can afford this it is 100% on.

spydum3• 14 years ago

In the US, a vasectomy runs about $400-600 (often covered by health insurance if you have it), and is largely just for the doctors time. Sounds like this should be the same if not cheaper by a very insignificant margin.

vacri3• 14 years ago

I'd happily have this done, if it were available. Screw what 'guys expect', I don't want a woman to end up 'expecting'.

artsrc• 14 years ago

From:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/11/health/11patient.html

> about 527,000 vasectomies were performed in this country each year.

I have a vasectomy and would have preferred this.

rdl4• 14 years ago

I would definitely get this; already considering vasectomy.

swah• 14 years ago

I thought it was abstinence..

pinchyfingers2• 14 years ago

omg omg omg omg omg omg omg omg omg omg omg omg

Please let this be real.

Male birth control is one of the top things that I wish for everyday.

The really great thing is that this isn't just a first-world problem. Birth control is obviously a huge issue in developing nations. So, while I can chase the dream of male birth control for purely selfish reasons, to address my privilege problems, I'm at the same time involved in a solution for a very real problem in the world.

jason_tko• 14 years ago

Did you read about what's involved in the actual procedure...?

If you read the steps necessary for the procedure and manage to maintain your enthusiasm, you have my awed and confusion admiration.

LesZedCB• 14 years ago

compared to other means of male birth control, it is quite tame as I see it.

Cushman• 14 years ago

...an outpatient procedure under local anesthesia that takes 10 minutes and lasts 10 years? It's hard to imagine how it could be better unless they literally just waved a tricorder over your junk.

schiffern9• 14 years ago

You know that's exactly the same thing that's involved in a vasectomy, right?

Except with a vasectomy you have the risk of chronic testicular pain.

sanderjd• 14 years ago

While this is generally fantastic, it seems like it would be a real bummer in an apocalyptic modern-medicine-eliminated need-to-repopulate type of situation (only mostly kidding).

radu_floricica• 14 years ago

If it really happens, you don't want to have children for the first few years anyway. And since slowly wears off, it's pretty much the ideal scenario.

schiffern9• 14 years ago

RISUG is indeed a great contraceptive, but when talking about its benefits for HIV we should be incredibly careful.

RISUG isn't a cure-all. Transmission is still possible through microtears and directly through the skin of the glans penis and the meatus. And RISUG does nothing to prevent female->male transmission.

It's far too easy for "RISUG inactivates HIV in some components of semen" to transmute into "It's ok baby, I got a shot that protects me from HIV!"

electromagnetic3• 14 years ago

Agreed, but spread knowledge of this in Africa where HIV is a big problem, and isn't well understood or cared about (to western standards) and not only could it be a cheap and affordable birth control, but if it reduces the risk in transmission of HIV then its still coming up double.

henryprecheur• 14 years ago

That policy is a bit risky. That might diminish the use of other things that reduce significantly the spread of HIV, like condoms. It's still unknown how effective the gel is: maybe 90%, maybe 5%, condoms are 90% effective AFAIK[1].

[1] http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/416

dr_• 14 years ago

female to male transmission rates are really low in general.

baddox• 14 years ago

All sexual transmission rates are pretty "low," if Wikipedia's sources are accurate. Even anal intercourse is under 2%.

tomp• 14 years ago

It can't be that low...

How do men (heterosexuals) get infected then?

celerity2• 14 years ago

First of all, it's still in trials. Second of all, what should set off an immediate alarm is the claim of "100% effectiveness" (and safety for that matter, what if the doctor screws up and cuts your tubes?).

No, thanks.

celerity2• 14 years ago

In fact, if you check the Wikipedia article for this thing you will see a large amount of controversy and problems that the article just ignores. That alone is enough for me to not consider this seriously. It would indeed be nice if this form of birth control were real, but as things stand it's just vaporware for medicine.

It's really amazing to me how many people believe anything they want to hear...

JohnnyFlash• 14 years ago

It sounds great. My partner's family has a history of cancer so she doesn't want to go on any kind chemical birth control. Nor is she keen on something like the coil.

I have always wondered why there are so few contraceptive options for men. I know a lot of guys who have had the kids they want and contraception is a hassle. Something like this for couples which is inject once and forget for a decade sounds ideal.

spurgu• 14 years ago

This would be so awesome. The world is overpopulated, largely because of recklessness. Most people don't plan on having 4 children, it just happens. I would instantly have this procedure.

The Best Birth Control In The World Is For Men

Related Stories