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

The Revolutionary Birth Control Method for Men

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 167 posts

Re: The Revolutionary Birth Control Method for Men

#141

Post by pohl »

thaumaturgy wrote: post #139
pohl wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did the movie really contain genetic claims? I took the sequence at the beginning to be more a criticism of Cleavon's cultural traits. (example: "I thought you was on the pill or some shit!") In fact, most of the movie's humor centered around a downward cultural slide. Kids do pick up their parents memes more readily, after all.

Yes. IIRC, the "opening bit" that camiller was referencing above was about how intelligent people were continually having fewer children while less intelligent people bred as quickly as they could. (ninja edit: here ya go: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSROlfR7WTo )

Ok, but isn't that difference in birthdate orthogonal to whether the "intelligence" is a result of nature or nurture? (Don't forget that when you have children you're not just propagating genes, but memes as well. Kids raised on Jersey Shore will tune in to Ow, My Balls!)

I don't recall the movie taking a stance towards nature. In fact, the moral of the whole story is to try to solve problems, and the great speech at the end envisioned a time where people cared whose ass it was and why it was farting. These are messages about cultural priorities, not genetic limitations.

Re: The Revolutionary Birth Control Method for Men

#142

Post by a-priori »

jrockway wrote: post #105
jonprins wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Until you realize that your bones were 'out of alignment' because you have weak core muscles that you should build up instead. In fact, 'pushing spinal column bones into alignment' without any x-rays or further inspection sounds pretty dangerous to me. What if the chiropractor pushes it too far and strains something, causing me to return for another adjustment? Everyone I know who has tried a chiropractor ends up goi…

I've seen a chiropractor and x-rays are a part of the procedure. You can't do medicine without seeing that there is a problem, correcting the problem, and then verifying that the problem is solved.

You can't do medicine without seeing that there is a problem, correcting the problem, and then verifying that the problem is solved.

No one is debating that. What we're debating is whether chiropractic is medicine.

Re: The Revolutionary Birth Control Method for Men

#143

Post by colanderman »

Sukotto wrote: post #25
ComputerGuru wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes.

Sign me up! I have 3 kids and the existing methods available for ensuring we don't have a 4th are, at best, inconvenient. (Condoms are annoying; the pill messes with my wife's emotions; and either of us getting snipped seems scarily irreversible.) I'll be keeping an eye open for trials here in the US and on any more news about this procedure trickling out from India. hooray for science!

To second yahelc's post... definitely look into IUDs. My SO has been on the non-hormonal (copper) one for 2 years. The only downside was her first cycle post-insertion being rather painful. They are covered by most health insurance plans -- heck, she was on the state's insurance and even they covered it.

Re: The Revolutionary Birth Control Method for Men

#144

Post by colanderman »

hucker wrote: post #121
matwood wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If this takes off, people probably won't wear condoms most of the time, and the number of people being diagnosed with STD's will skyrocket. I don't understand this thinking. To me condoms have always been about STD protection and not pregnancy prevention. I'd like to think for most people this idea will not change. I mean if you barely know a girl and she tells you that she's on the pill so you don't need a condom th…

I'm just curious, where do you live? I live and attend university in Norway, and I must say, I don't think I know anyone that uses condoms on regular basis. Every girl I know uses an IUD or is on the pill, and most people I know get checked regularly. I know Norway is the "world leader" in one night stands [1], and has one of the most well educated populations in the world. Still, condom use is abysmally low. I wonde…

Most people in the States have never heard of IUDs sadly. That leaves condoms as the primary hormone-free contraception option.

Re: The Revolutionary Birth Control Method for Men

#145

Post by towelrod »

pyre wrote: post #135
haberman wrote: post #20

In its report, the WHO team agreed that the concept of RISUG was intriguing. But they found fault with the homegrown production methods: Guha and his staff made the concoction themselves in his lab, and the WHO delegation found his facilities wanting by modern pharmaceutical manufacturing standards. Furthermore, they found that Guha’s studies did not meet “international regulatory requirements” for new drug approval—…

> Do these "modern pharmaceutical manufacturing standards" actually buy us > extra safety? They certainly buy us jobs for bureaucrats. Recently the FDA confiscated all of the birthing pools (related to the surge in popularity of water births). Apparently inflatable pools should be classified as 'medical devices.' To quote the FDA, "pregnacy is an illness and birth is a medical procedure."

Do you have a source for that quote?

Re: The Revolutionary Birth Control Method for Men

#146

Post by meric »

btilly wrote: post #133
bemmu wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree they are in the same class with acupuncturists, in the "stuff that doesn't work"-class.

Actually the best current evidence is that acupuncture does bring real pain relief: http://www.umm.edu/news/releases/back_pain.htm That said, most of its relieving effect is due to the placebo effect, and there is no evidence saying that it can do anything for you other than possibly reduce pain.

"The sham acupuncture studies were double-blinded, meaning neither the researchers nor the participants knew who was receiving the real or the sham treatment. When looking at those studies, the reviewers found the differences in pain ratings showed a significant difference between the real acupuncture and the sham acupuncture groups, indicating that the benefit was not just due to the placebo effect."

How did you get "most of its relieving effect is due to the placebo effect" from the article?

Re: The Revolutionary Birth Control Method for Men

#147

Post by jacoblyles »

haberman wrote: post #20

In its report, the WHO team agreed that the concept of RISUG was intriguing. But they found fault with the homegrown production methods: Guha and his staff made the concoction themselves in his lab, and the WHO delegation found his facilities wanting by modern pharmaceutical manufacturing standards. Furthermore, they found that Guha’s studies did not meet “international regulatory requirements” for new drug approval—…

Regulation costs account for 90% of bringing a drug to market, on average $1 billion and 10 years of clinical trials for each new drug [1]. Of course, a mere 10 years of clinical trial cannot catch all long-term side effects, and we would be safer if the FDA was more stringent. The flip side is that we would have fewer and more expensive health care options. For better or worse, our regulatory structure is heavily biased towards fewer deaths from approved treatments, very long clinical trials, and expensive health care.

In general, the word "agile" and the health industry have nothing to do with each other.

[1] yeah, yeah, citation needed. I pick facts up by listening to The Economist podcast on the way home, you go find a hyperlink.

Re: The Revolutionary Birth Control Method for Men

#148

Post by btilly »

meric wrote: post #146
btilly wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually the best current evidence is that acupuncture does bring real pain relief: http://www.umm.edu/news/releases/back_pain.htm That said, most of its relieving effect is due to the placebo effect, and there is no evidence saying that it can do anything for you other than possibly reduce pain.

"The sham acupuncture studies were double-blinded, meaning neither the researchers nor the participants knew who was receiving the real or the sham treatment. When looking at those studies, the reviewers found the differences in pain ratings showed a significant difference between the real acupuncture and the sham acupuncture groups, indicating that the benefit was not just due to the placebo effect." How did you get…

I concluded that from several articles that I read on the way to picking that was as best representing current thought on the effectiveness of acupuncture.

There is still debate on whether real or fake acupuncture is better. (Studies have come down on both sides of this issue.) However pretty much everyone who has tried to study the subject has found that both real and fake acupuncture have a definite impact on pain. Frequently both will outperform conventional medicine. For a random example see http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com/features_julieshealt....

From that I know that there is a readily measurable benefit to acupuncture, another readily measurable benefit to the placebo, and the difference between the two benefits is difficult to measure. Which leads me to conclude that most of the benefit from acupuncture is due to the placebo effect, and only (possibly) a little is because acupuncture itself is effective.

Re: The Revolutionary Birth Control Method for Men

#149

Post by cullenking »

yahelc wrote: post #50
Sukotto wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sign me up! I have 3 kids and the existing methods available for ensuring we don't have a 4th are, at best, inconvenient. (Condoms are annoying; the pill messes with my wife's emotions; and either of us getting snipped seems scarily irreversible.) I'll be keeping an eye open for trials here in the US and on any more news about this procedure trickling out from India. hooray for science!

Bizarre to be giving contraceptive advice on HN, but you should really look into IUDs. They're far less hormonal than the pill, and only require maintenance every 5 years.

Some people do not do well on IUD's (huge increase in cramping, excessive bleeding etc).
Post reply on HN