332
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Jan 2024
332 points (95.6% liked)
Technology
58774 readers
3166 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
This kind of thing pops up repeatedly. There's some big, splashy news about a male contraceptive, and then it flames out, or ends up being vaporware.
The problem is that you need to stop a few million sperm with every single ejaculation; reducing that number by 99% means that you're still risking pregnancy. Severing the ductus deferens (a vasectomy) means no sperm get through; trying to clip or block them means that some can potentially get through. Hormonal BC has the same issue; while it significantly reduces sperm count, it may not eliminate it entirely. (And there can be some really significant negative side effects from eliminating endogenous testosterone production, since hormonal levels need to be pretty far out of whack before there's a really big cut in sperm production.)
OTOH, women have to stop two eggs per month, or stop them from being implanted in the uterine wall. A 99% reduction in fertility for women means that it's very, very unlikely that they're going to be able to get pregnant.
(Yes, women suffer from hormonal BC as well, but some women need it just to be able to live normal lives. It's overall less of a problem than it ends up being for men. And women have the option of an IUD as well.)
Personally, I'm in favor of vasectomy; it's allowed me to avoid having any children for 20-odd years now.
Unfortunately no. The issue is. I worked under my supervisor that has been at the forefront of this tech for years.
The issue is men refuse to get the injection or any contraception that has side effects. Time and again the biggest obstacle for both men and women was that the procedure was not 100%.
Therefore the side effects could be permanent. Same as women but for some unknown reason both men and women were not happy to take the risk with a sperm reduction system that could fail in 2 ways.
It doesn't stop sperm or it doesn't stop stop sperm. The risks were too great that it wouldn't be reversible or it wouldn't be as effective as condom or pill. Both bring 99%.
They should be offered the opportunity to freeze their sperm at no cost if they have the vasectomy, as an insurance policy. Then the risk is null.
Do you think vasectomies are free?
In countries with proper national health, yes. Source: live in EU and got mine for the cost of the uber to get home.
I think they could be.