Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New male contraceptive may be submitted for Indian approval this year

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 331 posts

Re: New male contraceptive may be submitted for Indian approval this year

#311

Post by sarah2079 »

Markoff wrote: post #303

Sounds like interesting option, but 98% efficiency seem pretty unreliable, so I will still be at risk 2 times out of 100 intercourses when not counting other factors. Personally I consider immediately after having second child vasectomy, though if wife would agree I would do it already now (one child is more than enough for me) plus store sperm in bank just in case if changing mind, since I heard reversing vasectomy…

The % efficiency figures for contraceptives are for one year of typical use, not per go.

Re: New male contraceptive may be submitted for Indian approval this year

#314

Post by nommm-nommm »

cr0sh wrote: post #235
aianus wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They will not give you a vasectomy in the US as a young childless man. Something about 'changing your mind later'. It's very patronizing.

Definitely patronizing! Not only that, but even when a woman is in obvious pain and having issues which only a hysterectomy will solve (ovarian cysts) - if she is under 30 or so, they won't give it to her. My wife and I made the decision not to have children a long time ago. In the meantime, she's had times where she went into the hospital ER for pain caused by ovarian cysts. She attempted to inquire about a hysterec…

Stupid question but why would a hysterectomy (removal of the uterus) prevent cysts from forming on the ovaries? The ovaries are the hormone producing organs.

Re: New male contraceptive may be submitted for Indian approval this year

#315

Post by glibgil »

imloquacious wrote: post #313

This article fails to realize the true reason men would never use this product: You have to inject it into your testicles.

> You have to inject it into your testicles

You need an anatomy lesson or you need to read the article before commenting

Re: New male contraceptive may be submitted for Indian approval this year

#316

Post by cheez »

ams6110 wrote: post #312

The reason male contraceptives don't get a lot of traction is that men don't get pregnant.

Nope, that is not the reason.

The reason is that they don't know it exists. Condoms are OK, but for that drunken one night stand, not necessarily good enough. Female birth control has the problem that you have to trust your partner (spoiler: not everyone is trustworthy.)

When my son has his first girlfriend and if it is getting serious, I would get this done for him if it was available.

Re: New male contraceptive may be submitted for Indian approval this year

#317

Post by watwut »

aianus wrote: post #229
watwut wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Condoms exist and men who don't want children already use them. So, I don't think it is going to change all that much.

You've never heard of people relying on withdrawal? It was still pretty popular when I was in college three years ago, usually when the woman got nasty side effects from hormonal BC.

That tends to end up in big families. It is the least dependable protection.

Re: New male contraceptive may be submitted for Indian approval this year

#318

Post by watwut »

patrickg_zill wrote: post #242
watwut wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Condoms exist and men who don't want children already use them. So, I don't think it is going to change all that much.

If they are used, and if they don't break, etc. Sadly, among wealthy and famous men, there are even cases where the woman uses the contents of the used condom to impregnate herself - and then successfully sues for child support. Like female BC, this is something that is completely invisible and does not rely on an external or mechanical method of prevention.

That sound more like urban legend, I would be surprised if pregnancy like that would even be possible. Anyway, you should use condom during random sex encounters due to risk std anyway. Nothing wrong with combining them with something else, absolutely do it. But this new contraceptive wont prevent std whether hiv or syphilis.

Re: New male contraceptive may be submitted for Indian approval this year

#319

Post by NoGravitas »

mrkgnao wrote: post #284
zdcvbnmnbvcx wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi. I'm against vasectomies and all contraception because my religion (Catholic) teaches they are gravely sinful, but aside from this, I've read that some very small percentage of men have recurring pain for years following vasectomies- something to Google/ think about if you're considering this. Like the top commenter said, another option is Natural Family Planning - the Symptothermal method taught by the Couple to…

Huh, you weren't kidding: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/periodic-abstinen... although we do have this: > "You really can't extrapolate from this paper," says David Grimes, an obstetrician-gynecologist and vice president of biomedical affairs at the nonprofit public health organization Family Health International. "Naive readers see these results, and they think [STM] is the greatest thing since laptop co…

When my wife and I decided to have our first child, we did basically the reverse of this method (ie, had sex exactly when this method would tell you not to). And we were expecting after the first month. So, the predictability is there; it's just the usability that makes this method not a reliable form of birth control.

Re: New male contraceptive may be submitted for Indian approval this year

#320

Post by mercer »

mtanski wrote: post #308
WA wrote: post #222

This is big. This is the future of contraception, because it works, it's incredibly cheap, it has (almost?) no side effects. All current solutions are a joke. Hormone-based contraception feels like something from the middle ages. It has serious side effects, it has "harmless" side effects that aren't even related to the pill anymore after years of intake, but still an annoyance (migraine, headaches, yeast infections,…

> Copper IUDs [...] are ethically troublesome (eggs can be fertilized after ovulation, but the copper IUD prevents nidation) That's only if you have some outdated religious beliefs (to put it kindly). If you look at nature ~50% (various research points to 40% to 60%) of fertilized eggs are lost before a woman's menstruation cycle. So half are lost without attaching to the uterine wall and anybody noticing it. There i…

> If you look at nature ~50% (various research points to 40% to 60%) of fertilized eggs are lost before a woman's menstruation cycle. So half are lost without attaching to the uterine wall and anybody noticing it.

That strikes me as a bit of an unfair argument. I can't speak for all religious people, but for many there's a huge difference between losing fertilized eggs 'naturally' and inducing this outcome. Within their world-view, this distinction makes sense.

> So the whole ethical concern about copper IUDs and preventing nidation is a misguided at best. And more realistically, it is a harmful and outdated belief clocked in arbitrary religious rules ... meant to exert control over women and families.

While I agree on the arbitrariness, and while I'm not religious anymore, I once again don't think it's fair to argue that 'realistically' these beliefs exist to exert control. I'm sure many people have used religion to exert control, but most of the deeply religious people I know can do a decent job arguing why they believe what they do, I just disagree with their axioms.

Post reply on HN