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

31–40 of 71 posts

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

#31

Post by glenda »

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.

A vasectomy does not inhibit testosterone production and the hormones in existing birth control have been shown to cause blood clots, migraines and other serious issues for women taking them.

Condoms require proper use every time and are not as effective as other methods.

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

#32

Post by collegeburner »

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…

Yeah I physically cringed when I heard this, idk if I'd ever be able to make myself do it. Just stick to condoms.

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

#33

Post by dingdongbing »

gambiting wrote: post #28
dingdongbing wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

It does say that the baby's and the mother's health could be in danger, but where does it say it's often life threatening?

Never heard about an IUD failing at all so thanks for the link anyhow

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

#34

Post by matheusmoreira »

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?

Power and control.

Females have a wide range of birth control options, all highly effective. However, they are all entirely under the woman's control. They can stop birth control without the man even knowing about it.

This isn't some conspiracy theory, either. Women do show up to gynecologists to ask them to remove their IUDs with the explicit intent to have a child regardless of their partner's wishes. This is not considered rape.

Male contraception eliminates this problem. Men are now in direct control of whether their sperm is able to fertilize. Just like women are currently in control of whether they ovulate.

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

#35

Post by dymk »

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.

98% if used correctly, which they aren’t. Now I guess one could say “well then that’s a personal problem - people should just use them correctly”.

But the problem we want to solve is poor control over family planning, not blaming people for making human mistakes. We do that by developing better contraception options, for both men and women.

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

#36

Post by lazide »

dingdongbing wrote: post #33
gambiting wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>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

It does say that the baby's and the mother's health could be in danger, but where does it say it's often life threatening? Never heard about an IUD failing at all so thanks for the link anyhow

Had it happen once with a partner (copper IUD, and it has been installed correctly), it was pretty terrible emotionally and physically.

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

#37

Post by collegeburner »

elif wrote: post #21
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?

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

Uhh Id be concerned about this for the same reason, do we know the effects of repeatedly microwaving my balls on cancer and future fertility (both ability to get a woman pregnant and rate of birth defects)?

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

#38

Post by dingdongbing »

glenda wrote: post #31
dingdongbing wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

A vasectomy does not inhibit testosterone production and the hormones in existing birth control have been shown to cause blood clots, migraines and other serious issues for women taking them. Condoms require proper use every time and are not as effective as other methods.

The increased risk is very slight, and there are contraceptive pills without estrogen which do not have any increased risk at all.

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

#39

Post by gambiting »

dingdongbing wrote: post #33
gambiting wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>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

It does say that the baby's and the mother's health could be in danger, but where does it say it's often life threatening? Never heard about an IUD failing at all so thanks for the link anyhow

It says that with an IUD if you get pregnant it's more likely that it will be an ectopic pregnancy, and those are by very definition extremely dangerous to the mother and treated as medical emergencies most of the time.

"It is the most common cause of death among women during the first trimester at approximately 6-13% of the total"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ectopic_pregnancy

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

#40

Post by lazide »

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.

The little asterisk you see on those 98% numbers is important, as it ignores the real life variables that come up. At least according to this planned parenthood link [https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/birth-control/condom...] found when tracking down some data (they do a lot of birth control), it’s actually even worse - 15 out of 100 couples using them consistently get pregnant every year, so 85% real world effectiveness.

Not saying either side is the only one who ever does weird things - noting that ideally, each side would be able to make a choice and have it stick, and it would require both sides consent for a child.

Post reply on HN