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

COSO, an ultrasound-based and reversible approach to male contraception

jamesdysonaward.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 71 posts

Re: COSO, an ultrasound-based and reversible approach to male contraception

#21

Post by elif »

dingdongbing wrote: post #20
clarkevans wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even so, providing direct control of fertility by a male partner is an important problem. Currently, the only control option that permits unprotected sex is a vasectomy -- this is expensive, requires many months, and is not always reversible. On the female side there is the UID and hormonal interventions -- both of which have downsides for the female partner.

Why is it an important problem? We have hormonal and non-hormonal UIDs, many different types of pills, rings, and not to mention _condoms_ which actually prevents STDs. I don't have a problem with other guys heating their balls up, but where is the important problem?

Women with health complications and healthy partners, women concerned about future fertility, etc.

Re: COSO, an ultrasound-based and reversible approach to male contraception

#22

Post by clarkevans »

dingdongbing wrote: post #20
clarkevans wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even so, providing direct control of fertility by a male partner is an important problem. Currently, the only control option that permits unprotected sex is a vasectomy -- this is expensive, requires many months, and is not always reversible. On the female side there is the UID and hormonal interventions -- both of which have downsides for the female partner.

Why is it an important problem? We have hormonal and non-hormonal UIDs, many different types of pills, rings, and not to mention _condoms_ which actually prevents STDs. I don't have a problem with other guys heating their balls up, but where is the important problem?

Why must women must be the ones that compromise by having a medical intervention? Don't they also have the right to be "squeamish" about having an IUD or their hormones altered?

Re: COSO, an ultrasound-based and reversible approach to male contraception

#23

Post by lazide »

dingdongbing wrote: post #20
clarkevans wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even so, providing direct control of fertility by a male partner is an important problem. Currently, the only control option that permits unprotected sex is a vasectomy -- this is expensive, requires many months, and is not always reversible. On the female side there is the UID and hormonal interventions -- both of which have downsides for the female partner.

Why is it an important problem? We have hormonal and non-hormonal UIDs, many different types of pills, rings, and not to mention _condoms_ which actually prevents STDs. I don't have a problem with other guys heating their balls up, but where is the important problem?

Condoms are not very reliable (historically about 90% pregnancy prevention effectiveness over a year) due to issues with using them.

The other methods can fail due to misuse (missing a pill or get the timing wrong) or be removed without the partners knowledge - which does happen surprisingly often.

Re: COSO, an ultrasound-based and reversible approach to male contraception

#24

Post by dingdongbing »

lazide wrote: post #23
dingdongbing wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it an important problem? We have hormonal and non-hormonal UIDs, many different types of pills, rings, and not to mention _condoms_ which actually prevents STDs. I don't have a problem with other guys heating their balls up, but where is the important problem?

Condoms are not very reliable (historically about 90% pregnancy prevention effectiveness over a year) due to issues with using them. The other methods can fail due to misuse (missing a pill or get the timing wrong) or be removed without the partners knowledge - which does happen surprisingly often.

It's 98% for one year according to the NHS.

IUDs dont fail, and certainly a guy can miss his ball heating session or stop without the partners knowledge.

Re: COSO, an ultrasound-based and reversible approach to male contraception

#25

Post by vidarh »

iSnow wrote: post #3

I see a couple of acceptance problems with the device. First, men a notoriously squeamish when it comes to their testicles. "Heating" without telling the temperature won't fly with many. I guess it doesn't have to be hot as it probably only needs to be warm enough to relax the cremaster muscles. If it has to be uncomfortably hot, I see little chance in the market. Second, I'd expect the ultrasound to hurt. The epidid…

The pill can feel like gambling too. Yet lots of people rely on it, either in isolation or combined with another method. It may well be that people feel like it's gambling on its own but still end up finding value in it combined with the pill or with condoms or both long before people feel confident about relying on it on its own.

Re: COSO, an ultrasound-based and reversible approach to male contraception

#26

Post by strathmeyer »

AndrewDucker wrote: post #2

I'd love to have effective male contraception. But the previous work on this doesn't make it look like it's the answer: https://www.parsemus.org/humanhealth/ultrasound-male-contrac... See the section "Effective contraception in humans remains elusive"

Turns out "take a hot bath" doesn't make anyone any money. It's very common in poor countries such as India. (https://www.dontcookyourballs.com/)

Re: COSO, an ultrasound-based and reversible approach to male contraception

#27

Post by dingdongbing »

clarkevans wrote: post #22
dingdongbing wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it an important problem? We have hormonal and non-hormonal UIDs, many different types of pills, rings, and not to mention _condoms_ which actually prevents STDs. I don't have a problem with other guys heating their balls up, but where is the important problem?

Why must women must be the ones that compromise by having a medical intervention? Don't they also have the right to be "squeamish" about having an IUD or their hormones altered?

Use condoms.

>don't they get the right to be squeamish about having an IUD or their hormones altered?

IUD exist without any hormones, and taking hormones generally are safe and extemely well tested. Saying "hormones altered" shows your bias, and you don't think blasting your balls with heat "alters" your hormones? Certainly men who get vasectomies produce less testosterone.

Re: COSO, an ultrasound-based and reversible approach to male contraception

#28

Post by gambiting »

dingdongbing wrote: post #24
lazide wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Condoms are not very reliable (historically about 90% pregnancy prevention effectiveness over a year) due to issues with using them. The other methods can fail due to misuse (missing a pill or get the timing wrong) or be removed without the partners knowledge - which does happen surprisingly often.

It's 98% for one year according to the NHS. IUDs dont fail, and certainly a guy can miss his ball heating session or stop without the partners knowledge.

>>IUDs dont fail

They absolutely do, and it's often life threatening when it happens. It's very unlikely, but it's not absolute protection.

https://www.webmd.com/sex/birth-control/get-pregnant-iud

Re: COSO, an ultrasound-based and reversible approach to male contraception

#29

Post by gambiting »

dingdongbing wrote: post #27
clarkevans wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why must women must be the ones that compromise by having a medical intervention? Don't they also have the right to be "squeamish" about having an IUD or their hormones altered?

Use condoms. >don't they get the right to be squeamish about having an IUD or their hormones altered? IUD exist without any hormones, and taking hormones generally are safe and extemely well tested. Saying "hormones altered" shows your bias, and you don't think blasting your balls with heat "alters" your hormones? Certainly men who get vasectomies produce less testosterone.

>>Certainly men who get vasectomies produce less testosterone.

It literally doesn't, it's a weird repeated myth about vasectomies.

https://www.vasectomy.org.au/faqs/sex-life-myths/#:~:text=A%....

>> and taking hormones generally are safe and extemely well tested.

Well, if you are willing to accept an increased risk of cancer, sure, "extremely safe". Like, don't get me wrong, it's still one of the best options for pregnancy prevention, but let's not pretend like the pills are candy - they aren't.

https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/h...

Re: COSO, an ultrasound-based and reversible approach to male contraception

#30

Post by causi »

Feels like snake oil. There's no data on how the device uses ultrasound to destroy sperm. There's no data on how often it must be used to keep live sperm from getting to the prostate where they cannot be destroyed. The biggest section is boasting about how they had a bunch of guys off the street draw up idea for the appearance of the device. Red flag, red flag, red flag.
Post reply on HN