Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Trial For The Male Pill Shows No Side-effects

Hemos posted more than 7 years ago | from the what-about-a-male-morning-after dept.

261

Blahbooboo3 writes "Men concerned about contraception may soon be able to use the male equivalent of the Pill, without the potential side-effects of a drug based on altering the balance of sex hormones. The drug, called Adjudin, works by disrupting the interaction that takes place in the testicles between immature sperm cells and the nurse cells responsible for nurturing sperm to maturity. The germ cells need to adhere to the nurse cells for sperm to properly develop, and the drug prevents this bond from forming. It looks like it will be a gel patch type of applicator."

cancel ×

261 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Totally pointless (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16643569)

This may well be the most irrelevant Slashdot story ever. No one who reads this site is in any position to use this pill. You can't get your hand pregnant.

Re:Totally pointless (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16643607)

Yes, but it is possible to get your sister pregnant.

Re:Totally pointless (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16643805)

If you cohabitate with your hand in California for long enough it can take up to half of your assets.

Re:Totally pointless (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16643839)

Stringing up 1000 LEDs in your bedroom will be safer and far more effective than this pill.

Re:Totally pointless (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16643979)

You are sadly correct. I wrote software for a local doctors office that records a survey from a new patient's initial visit. Of the unmarried men between the ages of 25 and 35, over 90% are not having sex where not having sex is defined as not having had sex with more than two partners in their lifetime and have also not had sex in the previous two years. It's over 90%! That's over 90% that have absolutely no use for this product.

As someone that was that age in a different time, I really feel sorry for you guys. Women just aren't interested in sex like they used to be.

Re:Totally pointless (1)

illegalcortex (1007791) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644107)

Women just aren't interested in sex like they used to be.

Maybe it's just that as opposed to the 60s, 70s and 80s, they aren't baked out of their gourds and unaware of the rampant STDs they'll be exposed to, many of which can later make them sterile or, worse, give them cancer.

Or maybe it's just me.

My surprise is about to turn 3! (1)

RingDev (879105) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644241)

Don't let my pasty white skin and ebbing physic fool you. Chicks dig scrawny pale guys, if you know where to look.

-Rick

Re:My surprise is about to turn 3! (2, Funny)

lewp (95638) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644289)

A mortuary?

Re:My surprise is about to turn 3! (1)

RingDev (879105) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644851)

Close. :P I've worked and partied at a number of Goth clubs in the US and never had a problem.

-Rick

Re:My surprise is about to turn 3! (1)

Zwack (27039) | more than 7 years ago | (#16645035)

You're a physics student? Or you are referring to an old name for a doctor? Or did you mean Physique?

Damn that's hard to understand.

Z.

Re:My surprise is about to turn 3! (1)

RingDev (879105) | more than 7 years ago | (#16645173)

Physique is the word I was looking for. Thanks for the correction. I looked at that sentence, and I knew it was wrong, but I couldn't remember the proper spelling. And a right proper embarrassment is what my lazy editing gets me.

-Rick

Vascetomy is better (1)

revlayle (964221) | more than 7 years ago | (#16643625)

...one time, and it's permanent! YAY!

unless some of these men would want to make kids someday... i have no clue why anyone would want to do that... *shrugs*

Re:Vascetomy is better (4, Funny)

eln (21727) | more than 7 years ago | (#16643709)

Someday you're going to be looking at your overgrown lawn and wishing you didn't have to mow it. This is where kids come in.

Re:Vascetomy is better (1)

Smidge204 (605297) | more than 7 years ago | (#16643867)

A synthetic lawn is cheaper in the long run and doesn't need to be mowed. :)

=Smidge=

Re:Vascetomy is better (1)

buswolley (591500) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644073)

Plasticine Horses and Kaleidoscope eyes.

Re:Vascetomy is better (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16643879)

> Someday you're going to be looking at your overgrown lawn and wishing you didn't have to mow it. This is where kids come in.

No, that's where Mexicans come in.

Re:Vascetomy is better (1)

revlayle (964221) | more than 7 years ago | (#16643965)

Just get a condo... property management will mow it!

Re:Vascetomy is better (1)

Amazing Quantum Man (458715) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644285)

I already have 2 kids (both daughters), and don't want and can't afford more. Had the dirty deed done 7 years ago. The wife is much happier off the Pill, too...

Re:Vascetomy is better (1)

EnderGT (916132) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644365)

Same story... 2 daughters, don't want more.... The chems in the pill can really F**k up a woman's head - life is SOOOOOO much better with her off the pill.

Definitely the best choice you can make if you've had a few already and know you don't want more. Doesn't hurt that bad either.

Re:Vascetomy is better (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16645221)

I also had it done. We had two kids, and enough infertility problems and miscarriages to be sure we NEVER wanted to go through the whole pregnancy process again.

Not messing with birth control or the pill has been very good for our sex life.

Re:Vascetomy is better (1)

soft_guy (534437) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644333)

These [friendlyrobotics.com] are cheaper than children.

Re:Vascetomy is better (1)

KermodeBear (738243) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644385)

Indeed; This is where the kids [google.com] come in!

WAY better than human children for keeping the lawn mowed. As an added bonus:
No diaper changing
No soccer practice
No bed time
No car or driving lessons
No college tuition
You can sell them or give them away at any time
They can give you milk
They're cute
They don't smell NEARLY as bad

Re:Vascetomy is better (1)

jaxom_01 (720138) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644495)

As someone with an overgrown lawn and no kids.... hiring a neighborhood kid to mow your lawn for you is not only a good investment in your time and money but it also helps the neighborhood kid with $$$

Kids (1)

Mark_MF-WN (678030) | more than 7 years ago | (#16645073)

Yeah, but then you'll just buy a lawnba mower robot and it'll be all good. With the new super-realistic love dolls and high-wattage white-noise machines, women are practically irrelevant; now that robots can do chores and computers can waste time and fail consistently, we can dispense with children! All we need now are some quality bots for our multiplayer games that are capable of drinking our beer and spilling chips on our floors, and we'll never need to interact socially ever again!

Re:Vascetomy is better (1)

Nos. (179609) | more than 7 years ago | (#16643717)

Well, as you said, someday. My wife and I have a boy who's about 2-weeks short of his first birthday. We'd like a second, but not yet. Once we have the second, I will most likely get a vasectomy (its easier for a guy to get "fixed" than a woman).

Unless you believe that people should only have sex for the purposes of reproduction, then there are lots of reasons to use birth control, and an extra option like this, for guys, is a good thing. I'm sure we've all heard stories of the girl trapping the guy by getting pregnant by forgetting to take her pill. Well, maybe now those guys will have another option.

Re:Vascetomy is better (1)

disassembled (977342) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644003)

Unless you believe that people should only have sex for the purposes of reproduction, then there are lots of reasons to use birth control, and an extra option like this, for guys, is a good thing. I'm sure we've all heard stories of the girl trapping the guy by getting pregnant by forgetting to take her pill. Well, maybe now those guys will have another option.
I think it's rather unfortunate that that's the first example that comes to mind regarding the benefits of this pill. How about the simple fact that men are now equally able to take responsibility for birth control in a sexual relationship? Also, this pill provides a nice alternative to the nasty side-effects associated with existing female birth control pills.

Re:Vascetomy is better (3, Insightful)

illegalcortex (1007791) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644187)

I think this scenario leaps to mind because it's a real fear. It's actually following your point about men being equally "responsible." Right now men are equally responsible under the law, but they do not have equal options or control of the birth control.

Re:Vascetomy is better (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16644331)

"but they do not have equal options or control of the birth control."

Condom? Unless you are with a psycho with scissors or are the 2% with which it doesn't work or breaks.

Doesn't have to break... (1)

Svartalf (2997) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644557)

All it takes is a good pinhole stretched in it- which can happen if you use the wrong stuff for lubricant, etc...

Re:Vascetomy is better (1)

CheshireCatCO (185193) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644737)

Those guys could easily be using condoms. Looking at the probabilities, you can't help but come to the conclusion that you should always try to have two methods of BC in place unless one party is known to be sterile. Besides, condoms prevent the transmission of diseases as well as production of kids. Any guy who gets "trapped" in the way you mention deserves it for being lazy and/or selfish in the first place. (I'm a bit incredulous that this happens very often anyway, but that's another story.)

All of that rant said, I very much would welcome alternative forms of BC under my own control. I've always trusted my girlfriends, but I also like being able to check for myself *and* I had to see the burden for BC use pushed on just one party. (I also welcome alternatives for women for pretty symmetric reasons: everyone should have options, control, and responsibility.)

Not only that... (1)

Junta (36770) | more than 7 years ago | (#16643725)

A vascetomy is reversable afaik.

Re:Not only that... (1)

Junta (36770) | more than 7 years ago | (#16643795)

Actually, I take it back, the chances are significant that reversal procedures don't succed.

Re:Not only that... (0, Flamebait)

Iron Condor (964856) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644519)

Actually, I take it back, the chances are significant that reversal procedures don't succed.

Depends -- technology hasn't exactly stood still. There's a variety of options out there these days, including things that are effectively clamps that are put onto the tubes (instead of cutting them) that can be removed fairly easily at some later day. Usually there's some additional (minor, outpatient) surgery needed to re-open your tubing as it tends to grow shut where it was clamped shut, but the success-rate of that stuff apears to be a lot higher than trying to re-attach hoses that were disconnected for many years.

It's been many years since I've read up that kind of thing, but at the time there were new options almost on an annual basis.

(Writing this as a guy whos "between 25 and 35" period started in the 90ies and who's slept with double-digit numbers of folks during that decade. Dunno what people's problem is. Maybe if you didn't try to have sex with ugly women who don't want to have sex with you but instead try to bed the cute and horny ones you'd be more successful? Just a suggestion...)

Re:Not only that... (1)

Some_Llama (763766) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644855)

I was listening to Dr. Dean Edell on the radio the other day and he said that vascetomies reversal rate decreases by 10% a year after the procedure.. so I would say it pretty much isn't reversable as when a man has one i doubt he would want it reversed within that 10 year time frame...right?

Re:Not only that... (1)

Nos. (179609) | more than 7 years ago | (#16643801)

Not 100%. From Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] "there is a procedure to reverse vasectomies using vasovasostomy (a form of microsurgery). It is, however, not effective in all cases".

Given that this is a life altering decision, I'm of the opinion that you shouldn't opt for a vasectomy if you think you might want it reversed later on.

Re:Not only that... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16644859)

Given that this is a life altering decision, I'm of the opinion that you shouldn't opt for a vasectomy if you think you might want it reversed later on.

My thinking, at 37, was that while having a vasectomy reversed is a risky, traumatic, and expensive procedure with no guarantee of success, so is the decision to have a kid. The way I figure it, if I change my mind later and decide to try to raise a child of my own, a vasectomy reversal will be by far the least radical part of the plan.

So far, at 38, the plan seems to be working. :)

Re:Not only that... (1)

Ana10g (966013) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644281)

yea, but stopping a pill hurts a lot less.

Re:Not only that... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16644389)

Technically, it is. They tell you up front to never count on that though because current techniques are not very successful. It's presented as irreversible and they want you to agree that you understand it is most likely permanent. Your testicals do still produce sperm though, no reason a doctor shouldn't be able to extract some and artificially fertilize an egg with them even if they can't re-wire you to include them in your semen.

Re:Vascetomy is better (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16643741)

Maybe some people want to nurture new life...? I know at some point I'd like to have a child... Though first my girlfriend has to agree to that...

Re:Vascetomy is better (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16643863)

I know at some point I'd like to have a child... Though first my girlfriend has to agree to that...

Your imaginary anime girlfriend or the one at the end of your arm?

Re:Vascetomy is better (1)

Bieeanda (961632) | more than 7 years ago | (#16643957)

If he's Vampire Hunter D, it could be both [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Vascetomy is better (1)

doti (966971) | more than 7 years ago | (#16643749)

i have no clue why anyone would want to do that...
I have a steady job, my life is stable, nearing boredom.

I need something to turn it into a complete mess, giving me worries, sleepless nights, and suffocating expenditures.

Re:Vascetomy is better (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16644617)

Vote republican?

Aaaaaaaand I'm outta here.

Re:Vascetomy is better (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16643809)

> unless some of these men would want to make kids someday

That's the big problem with the female pill at the moment, it puts the entire choice in the woman's court and completely leaves the man out of the picture. If the guy doesn't want kids but the woman does? He gets no say in the matter and she can get pregnant on a whim. If it's the other way around and the guy wants kids and the woman doesn't? she just has to keep popping the pills and again the guy gets no say in the matter. A male pill goes a little way to changing one of those choices and not the other, which is not far enough IMHO but it's a step in the right direction.

Leaving the entire choice up to just one sex is patently sexual discrimination.

Re:Vascetomy is better (1)

orasio (188021) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644113)

It's great.
If this works, men can choose not to have kids, and girls could do that already.
It's good, because kids should be opt-in, not opt-out.
If your grl doesn't want to have kids, and is on BC behind your back, you probably don't want to have kids with that kind of person, anyway.

Aside from that, condoms are great for the other issue, everybody can feel protected with them.
The only small problem is breakage, but eh, nothing is perfect!

Re:Vascetomy is better (1)

Bieeanda (961632) | more than 7 years ago | (#16643851)

Permanent, aside from those cases where it spontaneously reverses. Those cases are notably rare, perhaps 1 in 2000 at worst, but it can happen.

Plus, there's the difficulty of finding a doctor to perform the surgery if you're under thirty and/or haven't already had children.

Re:Vascetomy is better (1)

PsychoSlashDot (207849) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644275)

I'd love to attribute a reference, but I've failed. Within the last two years I read a medical release that showed results along the following general lines: 5 years after vasectomy something like 20% of men were firing live rounds and after 10 years, it was something like 70%. The study stated that the actual ammunition count wasn't as high as prior to the operation, but basically the operation evidently frequently heals, at least to some degree.

Like I say, I wish to heck I could point at the source. It was... frightening.

That all being dropped, I can offer an entertaining anecdote that I know is true.

My uncle and his wife pumped out a kid and decided they were done. She got fixed. No more puppies, right? Wrong. Bad hackjob, and she ended up pregnant within two years, and kid # 2 arrived. Okay, well, lesson learned. So he got fixed. No more puppies, right? Wrong. With both parents spayed or neutered where appropriate, they popped out a third litter of one, something like two years later. Now, I was kind of young at the time and for all I know they had the operations done by some guy in his basement, but let's just say that I've acquired a healthy respectful paranoia about birth-control.

When and if my wife and I decide it's time, that's fine. But for now... she's on the pill and I'd very likely break my personal "no medication is good for you" ethic if this product makes it to market. And I don't even really trust asprin.

Re:Vascetomy is better (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16644211)

I just got one a few weeks ago. It wasn't nearly as bad as I expected. The first needle to inject the lidocaine hurt a bit, after that it was all pretty minor pain. The actual cut was tiny and healed quickly. I spent the next two days laying around and relaxing then went back to work, pain wasn't too bad for the most part as long as I didn't jostle my nuts or try do move faster than a normal walking speed. After about a week I was almost completely back to normal, just some minor pain in certain circumstances (carrying something heavy, climbing a lot of stairs), another week after that and everything is completely normal except a little bit of bruising left but it doesn't hurt and is fading fast. I've performed several times and everything works great.

Re:Vascetomy is better (1)

Alcimedes (398213) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644391)

Might want to double check with your doctor about how long you wait after getting one before you have sex with your partner. There's a reason they tell you to wait at least for weeks. My friend's fifth child is evidence of that.

He waited four weeks instead of six and had another kid for his trouble.

Re:Vascetomy is better (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16644649)

They tell you to ejaculate at least 15 times and then bring them in a sperm sample for testing. Apparently there is a sperm cache so you have to cycle through a certain volume of semen to clear it all out. My wife still has an IUD in for a few more months so everything is under control.

To address the other post in this thread re: spontaneous reversal - from what I was told that is even more unlikely using current techniques. They actually remove a section and then cauterize both ends. In the past they would just snip it and let it be. I got mine performed at a planned parenthood facility that does something like 400 of them a year - they had never had any fail or spontaneously reverse.

Something I've always wondered... (1)

oldosadmin (759103) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644283)

does a vasectomy ... eh ... unload the gun, or do you just start shooting blanks.

i.e., does the trouser snake still throw up, or does it turn into dry heaves

(serious question)

Re:Something I've always wondered... (1)

MorderVonAllem (931645) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644397)

"Because the sperm itself makes up a very small proportion of the ejaculate, vasectomy does not affect the volume, appearance, texture or flavor of the ejaculate."

Re:Something I've always wondered... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16644641)

I think "Shooting blanks" would be the correct analogy. Actual sperm make up only a tiny amount of the total, and since the procedure just stops sperm from being added to the 'mix', there's really no noticable change at all, short of using a microscope.

Re:Something I've always wondered... (1)

Iron Condor (964856) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644693)

does a vasectomy ... eh ... unload the gun, or do you just start shooting blanks.

Last time I checked (early nineties, but I don't see why that should've changed since then) there was the idea that you're still ...uh... "primed for seven shot". After that you can carry a teaspoon of goo to the clinic to have them verify your infertility.

For mice only (4, Informative)

KingArthur10 (679328) | more than 7 years ago | (#16643627)

So far, this study has been done on mice only and the dosage was applied only once. The BBC [bbc.co.uk] has a decent write-up about it. Hopefully this will be applicable to humans, but many believe the exact drug will not work on human males.

Only 2 small side effects (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16643637)

Hair loss and erectile dysfunction.

So it works! (1)

BillX (307153) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644921)

Can't get pregnant if you can't get laid...

Re:Ah, oblig Simpsons ref (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16645055)

Homer: It's Viagra-Gain. It gives you lots of hair and what you need down there. What are you waiting for, loser?

Announcer: Possible side effects include loss of scalp and penis.

Homer: What did it say about my scalp?

I heard about this once! (1)

rehtonAesoohC (954490) | more than 7 years ago | (#16643663)

He told her he was on the male pill. She slapped him... That was the end of that.

No side-effects? (1)

NekoXP (67564) | more than 7 years ago | (#16643669)

Didn't they say that when they did the first trials for the female contraceptive pill?

Totally safe! No apparent bad things can happen!

Except blood clots and cancer, 20 years later..

Re:No side-effects? (2, Funny)

Dion (10186) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644125)

Well it's better than the alternative...

Idiots (1)

Cybert4 (994278) | more than 7 years ago | (#16643711)

Just get castrated like me. Try that for birth control! I have as much chance of having kids as Bush does of thinking logically.

Re:Idiots (1)

illegalcortex (1007791) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644237)

I have as much chance of having kids as Bush does of thinking logically.

That's not a very nice opinion of women. ;)

That's okay (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16644253)

I prefer using Unixs to being a unich.

Call me hypocritical but... (2, Funny)

SkunkPussy (85271) | more than 7 years ago | (#16643713)

...there is no chance of me (as a man) ever using this!

They say no side effects, but look at "safe" female contraception which may lead to increased chance of certain cancers (although decreased chance of others).

Not that I'm going to stop my gf taking the pill though...

Re:Call me hypocritical but... (1)

ElleyKitten (715519) | more than 7 years ago | (#16643909)

So it's ok for her to risk her health, but not you? What if she couldn't take the pill, would you try this option?

Re:Call me hypocritical but... (1)

SkunkPussy (85271) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644071)

I agree its a moral dilemma. If I was a woman I would be as reluctant to take the female contraceptive pill as I am the male contraceptive pill. I think I'm just selfish.

Re:Call me hypocritical but... (1)

jfengel (409917) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644363)

Some women take contraceptive pills to make their periods more predictable, and sometimes easier, even in the absence of the chance of getting pregnant. (I've even known lesbians who take the pill for exactly those reasons.) Presumably they find it worth the risk of issues later in life.

The male pill probably doesn't offer the same kind of additional benefits, so I can see some couples deciding that if it's going to be one or the other it should be her.

But then, I'm paranoid, and I can see having both of us on contraceptive pills. And even at that I'm not sure I'd be comfortable without the barrier method (i.e. condoms) as well.

Required? (1)

jasonla (211640) | more than 7 years ago | (#16643733)

Great, we have a pill for men. The only problem is it's on a voluntary basis. Prescriptions based on intelligence and ability to support a child should determine candidacy for this pill.

Re:Required? (1)

VorpalEdge (967279) | more than 7 years ago | (#16643873)

Have fun enforcing that. Or even determining intelligence (hint: IQ tests suck).

Re:Required? (1)

oliverthered (187439) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644177)

IQ tests suck

Only if your bad at them.

Re:Required? (1)

VorpalEdge (967279) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644717)

Nah, I simply base my determination of intellect on a different-enough basis than the IQ test. I'd go further, but it'd be off-topic.

Re:Required? (1)

TychoCelchuuu (835690) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644079)

So much more humane than simply killing them! Truly, you are a saint.

Re:Required? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16644901)

Congratulations Slashdot user 211640 (jasonla), you have been selected for initial trials of a great new product. Through a selective screening process, only the most fitting candidates have been chosen for this rare opportunity. We at EugenAmerica Inc. take great pride in our work toward advancing the human race, and now you too will have a part in the achievement of this lofty goal. Be sure not to miss this opportunity to respond now, and enjoy the benefits of a lifetime home treatment plan. Take pride, you are now part of the path to the future that will guide mankind to glorious new heights.

Treatments are every 15 days, at $199.95 per treatment, plus a annual administrative cost of $699.96 (that's only $58.33 a month). Adminstered treatments have an additional labor cost of $149.95 per session. All costs and applicable taxes are due at time of treatment. Failure to pay in full will constitute a missed treatment. Failure to respond to this notice, begin treatment within thirty (30) days, on or before November 20, 2006, or a missed treatment, is a criminal offence, subject to fines and/or jail time, and a forfeiture of the home self treatment option.

Male pill (3, Funny)

Robber Baron (112304) | more than 7 years ago | (#16643737)

Male pill...the man puts it in his shoe and it makes him limp.

Long-term (1)

phorm (591458) | more than 7 years ago | (#16643751)

I always wonder about the long-term effects of these pills. How do they know that, in 10-15 years, the pills won't cause permanent infertility in a certain percentage of males? How about in 20-50 years, that they won't have long-term defects in offspring. It's not that the research isn't a useful thing, but I think I'll let a generation or two act as the guinea pigs for this before me.

Early Adopters (2, Funny)

everphilski (877346) | more than 7 years ago | (#16643885)

Its the price of being an early adopter, just like purchasing a 1st gen Nintendo DS or a 1st gen MacBook... except with your body.

Re:Long-term (1)

zen-theorist (930637) | more than 7 years ago | (#16643921)

It's not that the research isn't a useful thing, but I think I'll let a generation or two act as the guinea pigs for this before me.
unless you just discovered the elixir of youth, you won't outlive the two "generations of guinea pigs" for it to be of any use to you.

Re:Long-term (1)

TCQuad (537187) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644011)

How about in 20-50 years, that they won't have long-term defects in offspring

Given the small volume and short lifespan of the sperm along with the dilution factor, it's doubtful that the male pill would affect any offspring created the natural way. It's actually more likely that the female pill would have harmful side-effects since the length of incubation time would augment any small effects lingering around after the contraception had stopped.

Re:Long-term (1)

nEoN nOoDlE (27594) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644093)

I think I'll let a generation or two act as the guinea pigs for this before me.

Well, by that time, I assure you you won't need it.

I overheard a girl saying the pill didn't work... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16643787)

...it kept falling out. I really hope she figured it out and stayed out of the gene pool.

What if you take it with Viagra (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16643845)

What if you mix it with Viagra?

Reminds me of a friend who once took weed with scotch. ...Just once..

Where?? (1)

lbmouse (473316) | more than 7 years ago | (#16643975)

The article doesn't explain exactly where you have to stick the gel patch ;).

Re:Where?? (1)

Iron Condor (964856) | more than 7 years ago | (#16645109)

The article doesn't explain exactly where you have to stick the gel patch ;).

Yeah, that's the dirty little secret: The patch is three feet long by two feet wide and 11 inches thick. It has to be applied topically directly on the penis. Studies show that it prevents fertility with almost complete efficiency...

WoW themed patches (1)

SoyChemist (1015349) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644121)

Can I get custom patches printed with my WoW character on them? I wonder if they can make transparent background patches so it would look like I have a really cool tattoo, perhaps of an elf or a dwarf or a battle axe. Perhaps posessive girlfriends will want custom patches that have Property of hernamehere on them. Color coded patches would be great too.
  • Blue if you are single.
  • Green if you are in a relationship.
  • Neon green if you are in a relationship with a lusty nerdess.
  • Rainbow if you are gay.
  • Yellow if you are a swinger.
On a more serious note, This development should seriously empower women. I know too many girls that have got pregnant during college and had to drop out. A friend of mine from highschool has three kids with three different guys. Perhaps some women will prefer to date guys that wear the patch regularly. Of course, then fake patches will show up.

Re:WoW themed patches (1)

EvilCabbage (589836) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644287)

"I know too many girls that have got pregnant during college and had to drop out. A friend of mine from highschool has three kids with three different guys."

That says to me that your friends have issues throwing their ass around town without thinking about the consequences.

I'm no prude, but if they're not going to use their head, they shouldn't be fucking.

Re:WoW themed patches (1)

illegalcortex (1007791) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644409)

I'm no prude, but if they're not going to use their head, they shouldn't be fucking.

Good luck arguing your way out of millions of years of evolution.

Re:WoW themed patches (1)

Iamthefallen (523816) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644745)

I'm no prude, but if they're not going to use their head, they shouldn't be fucking.

Fortunately, very few women become pregnant when they just use their head.

Re:WoW themed patches (2)

illegalcortex (1007791) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644309)

Rainbow if you are gay.

Errrr....

Re:WoW themed patches (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16644355)

"A friend of mine from highschool has three kids with three different guys."

Maybe she should have told them to wear a condom?

Rainbow if you are Gay (1)

SoyChemist (1015349) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644497)

Gay or straight is not a binary thing. Gay men have been known to get women pregnant.

No side effects? (1)

AdamKG (1004604) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644151)

What about infertility?

Re:No side effects? (1)

Atheose (932144) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644805)

That's not a side effect... that's an intended effect. Temporary infertility, at least.

Paternity Insurance (4, Insightful)

onkelonkel (560274) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644575)

Think of taking this pill as Paternity Insurance. When some random girl you hooked up with one night (who swore she was on the pill) shows up 9 months later with a baby, a DNA test and a lawyer who will nail you for 18 years worth of child support you might be wishing you did.

And enough with the whining about side effects. Anabolic steroids can make your hair fall out, your epiphysia (growth plates) fuse prematurely, cover you in zits and make your nads shrivel to the size of raisins.....but some of you will take em anyway.

Re:Paternity Insurance (2, Funny)

crossmr (957846) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644875)

I always make them sign a paper if they tell me they're on the pill, it requires 2 witnesses and a video taped statement. I also have it notarized.

Re:Paternity Insurance (1)

Nimey (114278) | more than 7 years ago | (#16645097)

How often do you get laid?

Re:Paternity Insurance (1)

Rude Turnip (49495) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644995)

The DNA test should be enough to prove your innocence, assuming you are.

Beware the evils of contraception (0, Offtopic)

bluevector (732221) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644765)

We must escape from the Culture of Death; to learn about alternatives to medical contraceptives and the contraceptive mentality, please visit the following sites where you can learn about the techniques and benefits of modern Natural Family Planning (NFP):

Couple to Couple League International [ccli.org]

Billings Ovulation Method [woomb.org]

One More Soul [onemoresoul.com]

Pope Paul VI Institute [popepaulvi.com]

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church [scborromeo.org] :

2351 Lust is disordered desire for or inordinate enjoyment of sexual pleasure. Sexual pleasure is morally disordered when sought for itself, isolated from its procreative and unitive purposes

2353 Fornication is carnal union between an unmarried man and an unmarried woman. It is gravely contrary to the dignity of persons and of human sexuality which is naturally ordered to the good of spouses and the generation and education of children. Moreover, it is a grave scandal when there is corruption of the young.

2360 Sexuality is ordered to the conjugal love of man and woman. In marriage the physical intimacy of the spouses becomes a sign and pledge of spiritual communion. Marriage bonds between baptized persons are sanctified by the sacrament.

2361 "Sexuality, by means of which man and woman give themselves to one another through the acts which are proper and exclusive to spouses, is not something simply biological, but concerns the innermost being of the human person as such. It is realized in a truly human way only if it is an integral part of the love by which a man and woman commit themselves totally to one another until death."

        Tobias got out of bed and said to Sarah, "Sister, get up, and let us pray and implore our Lord that he grant us mercy and safety." So she got up, and they began to pray and implore that they might be kept safe. Tobias began by saying, "Blessed are you, O God of our fathers. . . . You made Adam, and for him you made his wife Eve as a helper and support. From the two of them the race of mankind has sprung. You said, 'It is not good that the man should be alone; let us make a helper for him like himself.' I now am taking this kinswoman of mine, not because of lust, but with sincerity. Grant that she and I may find mercy and that we may grow old together." And they both said, "Amen, Amen." Then they went to sleep for the night. (Tob 8:4-9)

2362 "The acts in marriage by which the intimate and chaste union of the spouses takes place are noble and honorable; the truly human performance of these acts fosters the self-giving they signify and enriches the spouses in joy and gratitude." Sexuality is a source of joy and pleasure:

        The Creator himself . . . established that in the [generative] function, spouses should experience pleasure and enjoyment of body and spirit. Therefore, the spouses do nothing evil in seeking this pleasure and enjoyment. They accept what the Creator has intended for them. At the same time, spouses should know how to keep themselves within the limits of just moderation.

2363 The spouses' union achieves the twofold end of marriage: the good of the spouses themselves and the transmission of life. These two meanings or values of marriage cannot be separated without altering the couple's spiritual life and compromising the goods of marriage and the future of the family.

The conjugal love of man and woman thus stands under the twofold obligation of fidelity and fecundity.

2366 Fecundity is a gift, an end of marriage, for conjugal love naturally tends to be fruitful. A child does not come from outside as something added on to the mutual love of the spouses, but springs from the very heart of that mutual giving, as its fruit and fulfillment. So the Church, which is "on the side of life," teaches that "it is necessary that each and every marriage act remain ordered per se to the procreation of human life." "This particular doctrine, expounded on numerous occasions by the Magisterium, is based on the inseparable connection, established by God, which man on his own initiative may not break, between the unitive significance and the procreative significance which are both inherent to the marriage act."

2367 Called to give life, spouses share in the creative power and fatherhood of God. "Married couples should regard it as their proper mission to transmit human life and to educate their children; they should realize that they are thereby cooperating with the love of God the Creator and are, in a certain sense, its interpreters. They will fulfill this duty with a sense of human and Christian responsibility."

2368 A particular aspect of this responsibility concerns the regulation of procreation. For just reasons, spouses may wish to space the births of their children. It is their duty to make certain that their desire is not motivated by selfishness but is in conformity with the generosity appropriate to responsible parenthood. Moreover, they should conform their behavior to the objective criteria of morality:

        When it is a question of harmonizing married love with the responsible transmission of life, the morality of the behavior does not depend on sincere intention and evaluation of motives alone; but it must be determined by objective criteria, criteria drawn from the nature of the person and his acts criteria that respect the total meaning of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love; this is possible only if the virtue of married chastity is practiced with sincerity of heart.

2369 "By safeguarding both these essential aspects, the unitive and the procreative, the conjugal act preserves in its fullness the sense of true mutual love and its orientation toward man's exalted vocation to parenthood."

2370 Periodic continence, that is, the methods of birth regulation based on self-observation and the use of infertile periods, is in conformity with the objective criteria of morality. These methods respect the bodies of the spouses, encourage tenderness between them, and favor the education of an authentic freedom. In contrast, "every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible" is intrinsically evil:

        Thus the innate language that expresses the total reciprocal self-giving of husband and wife is overlaid, through contraception, by an objectively contradictory language, namely, that of not giving oneself totally to the other. This leads not only to a positive refusal to be open to life but also to a falsification of the inner truth of conjugal love, which is called upon to give itself in personal totality. . . . The difference, both anthropological and moral, between contraception and recourse to the rhythm of the cycle . . . involves in the final analysis two irreconcilable concepts of the human person and of human sexuality.

2371 "Let all be convinced that human life and the duty of transmitting it are not limited by the horizons of this life only: their true evaluation and full significance can be understood only in reference to man's eternal destiny."


From John Paul II's encyclical letter Evangelium Vitae [vatican.va] :

It is frequently asserted that contraception, if made safe and available to all, is the most effective remedy against abortion. The Catholic Church is then accused of actually promoting abortion, because she obstinately continues to teach the moral unlawfulness of contraception. When looked at carefully, this objection is clearly unfounded. It may be that many people use contraception with a view to excluding the subsequent temptation of abortion. But the negative values inherent in the "contraceptive mentality"-which is very different from responsible parenthood, lived in respect for the full truth of the conjugal act-are such that they in fact strengthen this temptation when an unwanted life is conceived. Indeed, the pro- abortion culture is especially strong precisely where the Church's teaching on contraception is rejected. Certainly, from the moral point of view contraception and abortion arespecifically different evils: the former contradicts the full truth of the sexual act as the proper expression of conjugal love, while the latter destroys the life of a human being; the former is opposed to the virtue of chastity in marriage, the latter is opposed to the virtue of justice and directly violates the divine commandment "You shall not kill".

But despite their differences of nature and moral gravity, contraception and abortion are often closely connected, as fruits of the same tree. It is true that in many cases contraception and even abortion are practised under the pressure of real- life difficulties, which nonetheless can never exonerate from striving to observe God's law fully. Still, in very many other instances such practices are rooted in a hedonistic mentality unwilling to accept responsibility in matters of sexuality, and they imply a self-centered concept of freedom, which regards procreation as an obstacle to personal fulfilment. The life which could result from a sexual encounter thus becomes an enemy to be avoided at all costs, and abortion becomes the only possible decisive response to failed contraception.

The close connection which exists, in mentality, between the practice of contraception and that of abortion is becoming increasingly obvious. It is being demonstrated in an alarming way by the development of chemical products, intrauterine devices and vaccines which, distributed with the same ease as contraceptives, really act as abortifacients in the very early stages of the development of the life of the new human being.


Re:Beware the evils of contraception (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16644943)

Yesh, Reverend, step away from the pulpit...

Worst. Story Suggestion. Ever. (1)

CheshireCatCO (185193) | more than 7 years ago | (#16644801)

OK, the article was just fine, but I think that the story suggestions off to the side need reconsideration. "The Humble Banger: the secret life of the British sausage" just seems like it's pushing it on this particular story, doesn't it?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>