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

321–330 of 331 posts

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

#321

Post by roborumble »

darklajid wrote: post #236
jwdunne wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bang on. Me and my partner were planning on me getting a vasectomy in a year, when her implant runs out. We've had to bring that forward a year because one side effect is also a symptom of cancer or polyps. After removal, she experienced a huge lift in energy levels and greater stability of mood. I have 2 children so a vasectomy isn't so bad an idea. Even still, it is an invasive and permanent treatment and I'd prefe…

As a father of two: Said procedure is incredibly harm- and painless. I understand the fear, but I've seen people (even here) spread a lot of FUD about it. If you prefer something else: Sure! If you're merely uneasy about the process: Don't be, it's so common, fast and easy.

My vasectomy a year ago left me in chronic pain on one side, and with a significant reduction in enjoyment of sex. I have spent thousands of dollars on treatment, and will soon go for a reversal, which will cost around $12k. I'm not sure what I'll do if it fails, but orchiectomy is on the table. Vasectomy was the worst decision of my life.

There is a real risk of chronic pain, which can be devastating, and it is much more common than the literature would have you believe.

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

#322

Post by sctb »

and0 wrote: post #197
nvahalik wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lack of intellectual honesty? I'm sorry, was there anything I said that was false? Instead of responding to my list of illustrations all you can do is say that I'm trolling?

It's ironic because I've been thinking of writing a piece on how there are different types of reasoning, from strictly rational to the more empathetic (human?). So I cringed a bit myself writing that, because I feel a lot of HN commenters share a very specific type of "thinking" that only works for a small percent of the population and assume it applies to everyone. I see a lot of failure to empathize here, is what I…

Even if we find ourselves at a fairly fundamental level of disagreement with other community members, it's important not to let that cross into personal incivility, which this comment at least verges on.

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

#323

Post by aianus »

watwut wrote: post #317
aianus wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It's slightly worse than condoms at around 96% per year vs 98% per year.

Hormonal BC is 99.9% in comparison but is not in the man's control :(

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

#324

Post by Markoff »

taejo wrote: post #310
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…

> 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. Efficacy for contraceptives is almost always measured per year . That is, of every 100 couples using this method for a year, two will become pregnant. As the article says, this is about the same level as (perfect use of) condoms.

seem very inaccurate since every couple has very different frequency of sex per year, some couple can have 100 intercourses, other will have 20 and they have same odds according some average couple?

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

#325

Post by grotsnot »

gozur88 wrote: post #295
darklajid wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the GP mentioned that because this subthread discussed a "permanent" solution for men. Storing sperm might be a workaround for future "wouldn't it be nice.." regrets. An insurance. I'm not aware of mainstream (or any, really) permanent solutions for women, at least not to replace contraceptives (medical reasons - like cancer - for an invasive surgery don't count). So, if women usually don't decide to become s…

I'm not sure what you're saying here. Women can have their eggs frozen and undergo tubal ligation. That's pretty analogous to vasectomy and frozen sperm, albeit quite a bit more invasive.

Biology question: does having a tubal ligation affect a subsequent IVF pregnancy at all? Are there records of such a case happening?

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

#326

Post by mistermann »

patrickg_zill wrote: post #159

There is a lot of social commentary on this thread. Unanswered however is, "How will this affect relationships between men and women"? The "MGTOW" crowd laud this development, arguing that once control of fertility is in the hands of men rather than women (a woman can always "forget" to take the pill)... something good, as they define it, will happen. (IANAMGTOW - I am not a MGTOW) In terms of total fertility rate, w…

> something good, as they define it, will happen

It's not a conspiracy theory to point out that there are a lot of men out there who are living lives of poverty due to child support payments due to supporting a child they had absolutely no voice in deciding to carry to term. This at least offers them some protection.

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

#327

Post by mistermann »

Dirlewanger wrote: post #212
SamBam wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Old urban legend, that is notoriously hard to find any evidence of, and just so happens to nicely dovetail with the "Redpill" ideas about crazy, manipulative women. If you didn't know the man in question, which would you find more likely: that a woman emptied a condom in herself in order to secretly make herself pregnant, in order to claim alimony; or that the couple failed to practice safe sex correctly (either thro…

If you step outside your bubble put your ear to the ground so to speak, you'll find the world isn't so black and white. I have a friend who's a family attorney and I wish he was exaggerating about all the fucked up cases he tells me and his colleagues have. Women pulling every trick in the book in order to have a baby with an unwilling partner (of which include lying about being on birth control, and in one case, dig…

I have a friend going through the court system as we speak, it has absolutely destroyed his life.

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

#328

Post by scott_karana »

mercer wrote: post #320
mtanski wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 th…

> 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.

Why should that be that the case? Their intent is already to lower fertility, and with IUDs, sometimes that (unintentionally) happens with identical symptoms to naturally "failed" implantations. ;-)

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

#329

Post by scott_karana »

Markoff wrote: post #324
taejo wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. Efficacy for contraceptives is almost always measured per year . That is, of every 100 couples using this method for a year, two will become pregnant. As the article says, this is about the same level as (perfect use of) condoms.

seem very inaccurate since every couple has very different frequency of sex per year, some couple can have 100 intercourses, other will have 20 and they have same odds according some average couple?

The inaccuracy would depend on the sample size of the test groups. It might be useful to get standard deviation, or maybe the methodology excludes outliers?

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

#330

Post by gozur88 »

grotsnot wrote: post #325
gozur88 wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what you're saying here. Women can have their eggs frozen and undergo tubal ligation. That's pretty analogous to vasectomy and frozen sperm, albeit quite a bit more invasive.

Biology question: does having a tubal ligation affect a subsequent IVF pregnancy at all? Are there records of such a case happening?

Looks like you can do it, but it also looks like they normally try to reverse the tubal ligation first.
Post reply on HN