Copper birth control for men
Posted by Cady_Heron04@reddit | CrazyIdeas | View on Reddit | 241 comments
Hear me out- instead of having women go through the countless problems that come with IUD’s, why not go straight to the source? Instead of a vasectomy, just get that copper in the ball tube and kill all them little spermies before they even come out. Anyone happen to know what the effectiveness of that would be? Then when you’re ready to make babies, take it out and boom, spermies back in action. No harm, no fowl, no hormones.
tequilathehun@reddit
Honestly yeah that is literally the exact equivalent of a copper IUD. If its barbaric to do to men, why the hell are girlfriends getting it for dudes who won't respect not cumming in them?
ArcTruth@reddit
There's an answer that has logic, even if it also is stupid. This is also from memory so may not be perfectly accurate.
When medications in development are being evaluated for side effect severity, a major consideration is how severe the condition / non-treated state is compared to the side effect(s). Meaning side effects like vomiting and hair loss are fine for cancer treatments but not for headache pills.
The issue here is scope - it only considers the well-being of the individual taking the drug, which is a problem when looking at birth control. The non-treated state of birth control when you have a uterus is pregnancy, meaning a ton of pretty serious side effects are tolerable as an alternative. But the non-treated state of birth control when you're the one making sperm is.... nothing. Meaning even minor side effects aren't considered tolerable.
So it has logic that makes sense, but is definitely misapplied in this scenario imo.
Dominus_Nova227@reddit
You'd also have to consider the surgical nature of a male IUD, the female IUD can be inserted without undergoing surgery (although anesthesia sounds like it should be mandatory) because it's going into the uterus which only has a single function but the urethra in males both transports sperm and fluid waste so you'd have to place an IUD equivalent somewhere upstream at the ejaculatory duct or seminal vesicle.
Cady_Heron04@reddit (OP)
Love that you mentioned this. Since men are so much more likely to receive pain management than women are, it seems like a great alternative. It wouldn’t go through the urethra though, it would have to go in the vas deferens which I think is the same as a vasectomy.
Dominus_Nova227@reddit
Not really, a vasectomy is a permanent form of contraceptive equivalent to getting a female's tubes tied (tubal ligation). Both can technically be reversed but it's hard and probably not worth it.
A vasectomy requires local anaesthetic because it's a minor surgery, IUD's do not require anaesthetic or analgesic (pain killers) but they are strongly recommended and seem to be able to be administered for most IUD insertions. From what I can see it's not offered as regularly because the level of pain felt is extremely variable, however they should administer it on request. Couldn't find much on the effectiveness of local pain management on IUD's but general pain management such as methoxyflurane is being implemented so that sedation isn't necessary.
My personal recommendation is that any doctor who dismisses your concerns, opinions or requests without proper explanation should be dropped. Medical professionals who aren't in emergency should be concerned about patient well-being first with anything they do.
Sources were primarily health direct, mayo and Cleveland clinics and some misc sexual health practices in Australia. Biological information was gained from images by the NCI and the encyclopaedia Britannica.
Cady_Heron04@reddit (OP)
This is great in theory, but most people can’t just drop a doctor due to insurance, especially with HMO’s. And then the hassle of finding a new one is almost worse than the pain the doctor isn’t managing. In most cases there is zero pain management for IUD insertions. Zero. If local anesthesia is required for vasectomies but pain management isn’t offered regularly for IUD’s, we have a terrible imbalance. If the level of pain for IUD’s is so variable, why wouldn’t they err on the side of caution instead of assuming no pain? Isn’t that a little backwards?
WatcherOfStarryAbyss@reddit
Vasectomies require cutting with a scalpel.
You get local anesthesia any time you're cut with a knife or poked with a needle (like stitches, not a vaccine needle).
Maybe IUD placement should also get local anesthesia, but there's no cutting with a knife or poking with a needle. Placing an IUD "just" requires sticking something through an existing hole. Medically, they're not comparable things.
Cady_Heron04@reddit (OP)
You should look up what a tenaculum is.
WatcherOfStarryAbyss@reddit
It looks like a poky thing, so you should get local for it. No disagreement here.
Also, it seems there's some vacuum thing that is becoming more popular for "stabilizing the cervix"
tequilathehun@reddit
The uterus is an organ, which is felt every single day, and its nestled in the cervix, which moves every single month. It is the same level of invasive and surgical, the only difference is they care to medicate men. It is still placed internally in both sexes' most sensitive parts of the body, except it is placed directly in a woman's without pain medication.
They are literally both surgical. The only difference is men are actually cared for in the procedure.
Legitimate_Agency165@reddit
IUD insertion is not a surgical procedure. No incision is required.
tequilathehun@reddit
Definition of Surgery/Procedure. As used herein, “surgery/procedure” means the removal, incision or curettage of tissue or an organ, insertion of natural or artificial implants, electro-convulsive therapy, endoscopic procedure or other procedure requiring the administration of anesthesia or an anesthetic agent.
Its the insertion of an artificial implant, and if it happened to anyone other than women, would require anesthesia. It also pierces an internal organ, which you can split hairs if that counts as cutting. Its a nontransient alteration of the cervix.
Dominus_Nova227@reddit
Source?
tequilathehun@reddit
Copy the comment I posted and put it into google. Its a fuckin quote, thats how they work.
Dominus_Nova227@reddit
Yes, where'd you get the quote from though?
tequilathehun@reddit
Ctrl c - ctrl v. It was some surgery site or journal. Idk it was days ago now
Xandara2@reddit
I don't think piercing is the correct definition.
tequilathehun@reddit
The forceps they use to hold the woman in place absolutely pierces through the cervix, in two locations. Watch videos of it.
Xandara2@reddit
I think you might be very bad at describing it. You make it sound like women are out in cages for it to be implanted. But I'll watch a video to make sure.
colddiode@reddit
A copper IUD's main function isn't to block the sperm by being a physical barrier because that would mean that period blood wouldn't be able to escape. It works because copper is toxic to sperm and creates an ion barrier that sperm can't move through while also altering the uterus so an egg can't implant.
I'm sure they could create an IUD for men that slows sperm and not urine if they tried.
Dominus_Nova227@reddit
Interesting, maybe a copper sleeve or sieve of some kind?
mwthomas11@reddit
I've never heard that argument before but that actually makes a ton of sense.
(dude who supports increase male birth control options)
James_Vaga_Bond@reddit
It stops making sense when you compare the side effects to the life impact of unplanned parenthood. If you're only looking at physical health and not quality of life, there are whole categories of treatments that would have to be discontinued. Cosmetic surgery, erectile dysfunction, pain management, sleep aids, etc. We're also kidding ourselves if we're pretending that most women are using birth control primarily to avoid the health risks of pregnancy as opposed to the life impact of having to raise a child.
Aquiduck@reddit
It starts making sense when a lot of these "temporary" birth controls had permanent infertility as a high risk side effect.
James_Vaga_Bond@reddit
Do you have a source for this? I was unable to find any articles that mentioned permanent infertility as a possible risk.
WatcherOfStarryAbyss@reddit
Pretty sure for the gel one, it causes an autoimmune thing after prolonged use.
Iirc your immune system starts attacking sperm because you have a large buildup that isn't going anywhere. Once the blockage is removed, your immune system keeps attacking your sperm and that makes you infertile.
It's the same thing that happens after having a vasectomy, which is a large part of why vasectomies are considered medically irreversible.
James_Vaga_Bond@reddit
Do you have a source for this? I ran a search including "vasagel" specifically and still couldn't pull up any articles discussing this claim.
WatcherOfStarryAbyss@reddit
Iirc, the autoimmune response is a well-known phenomenon for vasectomies. Something like 50% of men will develop an autoimmune response within a year or getting a vasectomy, and that response will render them sterile.
The result (a blockage of the vast deferens) is the same, unless vasalgel includes an immunosuppressant, so the outcome will be the same.
Last I heard, vasalgel was not intended for continuous usage and had to be stopped after 12 months. I don't know how long you have to wait before you get it again, but it is my understanding that if you get it too often then you risk permanently reducing your fertility.
James_Vaga_Bond@reddit
I know vasectomies have the potential to be irreversible, and thus are only supposed to be given to men seeking a permanent form of birth control. That's not what we're talking about here, though.
The official website for Vasagel.didn't mention anything like what you're talking about, neither did any other articles I was able to find on the subject. That's why I'm asking for a source for the claim.
WatcherOfStarryAbyss@reddit
Vasectomies are considered irreversible for two reasons:
1) the reversal surgery is difficult and invasive And 2) men who have undergone a vasectomy are usually sterile due to an immune response.
I'm saying that the mechanism of vasalgel, as I understand it, is identical to a blockage of the vas deferens. I would then expect a similar autoimmune outcome as you'd get with any other blockage of the vas deferens. This corroborates what I've heard about vasalgel being unsuited for continuous use.
If you want to talk about studies, I have yet to see any studies for Vasalgel that demonstrate reversal efficacy after about a year. Everything I've seen has been in rabbits and monkeys, and talks about how vasalgel was still effective at blocking sperm after 12 months. The one with monkeys mentioned how one of the subjects had a sperm granuloma following injection of vasalgel, and had to have a traditional vasectomy.
I don't care about vasalgel's promotional materials. I want to see studies after a year, two years, five years, and ten years that demonstrate no autoimmune response. Because based on everything else we know about vas deferens occlusion, an autoimmune response is what most often occurs.
Xandara2@reddit
If that last sentence was true then abortion would see in the same severity as taking the pill is. Which it isn't.
James_Vaga_Bond@reddit
I'm not sure I follow what you're saying. You don't think birth control is primarily used to avoid becoming a parent because abortion is controversial?
Xandara2@reddit
Abortion is seen as more extreme than other types of birth control. If it only was about preventing parenthood then it wouldn't be. But it is. So your argument doesn't hold up entirely. Preventing pregnancy is at least as important as preventing parenthood.
James_Vaga_Bond@reddit
I mean, abortion is a more invasive procedure. It doesn't make sense to rely on it as anything other than a last resort. That said, the main reason it is used is so that someone doesn't have to become a parent.
Xandara2@reddit
That's incorrect as well. The only reason it's used is to not become a parent. The amount of cases where it's used to prevent becoming pregnant is 0. After all you can't prevent something that's already the case. But we were talking about birth control which is the combination of preventing pregnancy and preventing parenthood. And in those options abortion is more extreme to many people not only because it's more invasive. It maybe to you but your opinion on that isn't universal. There's plenty of women who don't mind other types of birth control but do mind abortion. Which is why I pointed out that your reasoning was not entirely correct. Even if it is correct for you personally.
James_Vaga_Bond@reddit
Incorrect. Abortion is sometimes used by women who wanted to have a child because the fetus isn't viable or the pregnancy is threatening their health. That's the exception I was referring to. I'm fully aware that abortion doesn't prevent pregnancy.
Xandara2@reddit
But in that case abortion isn't about birth control. Which makes those exceptions irrelevant to the argument in the first place.
James_Vaga_Bond@reddit
That's why I wasn't really trying to go into those cases. I just used the term "primarily" instead of "only" so that the conversation wouldn't get derailed on a technicality like this.
Also, you seem to have missed the original point about "the health risks of pregnancy." Yes, birth control is used to prevent pregnancy. The primary reason people want to prevent pregnancy isn't because of the health risks, it's because they don't want to have a child to take care of.
Xandara2@reddit
That's just not the case. Another example is putting your kids up for adoption. It prevents being a parent but is also judged more harshly than taking the pill. You say primarily but both seem pretty much equal reasons to me if we look at societies opinion about them.
James_Vaga_Bond@reddit
If you're arguing that people use birth control to avoid the societal judgement of putting a child up for adoption, it still makes the point that it is being used to improve their quality of life as opposed to their physical health, which was my original point.
I.said "primarily" because one reason is way more common than others. It had nothing to do with either being more valid. You're being pedantic. First you try to correct me for saying that abortion is primarily used to prevent parenthood, by saying that's the only thing it's used for. When I clarify the exception I was referring to, you say it's irrelevant to the original discussion and ask why I even went into it, then proceeded to dive into it yourself. Now you're arguing that both of those reasons are equal (after originally arguing that one of them didn't exist.) I'm going to refer you back to your previous comment where you said that this exception isn't really relevant to the original discussion.
SkeeveTheGreat@reddit
Unfortunately, given the wests issues with ethics in testing and medicine, I don’t think it is wrong. The medical system is an ethical mess already, I’m not sure relaxing ethical considerations is going to do us any good.
Ultimately, I think the answer to this issue is vasectomies, because a successful vasectomy doesn’t mean you can’t get someone pregnant later with interventions. Vasectomies do not cause sperm to no longer be produced, so we can gather sperm through alternative processes, which should in turn be covered by insurance or public money imo. However, I admit that that thinking may not be popular, but I got a vasectomy with the thought process that if I can’t afford to get the necessary medical intervention to have kids after my vasectomy, then I can’t afford to have children.
WatcherOfStarryAbyss@reddit
Vasectomies, within a few months, cause an autoimmune response to sperm in more than 50% of men. That response renders them sterile, since their immune system destroyed whatever sperm they produce.
Medically, vasectomies are considered irreversible due to low likelihood of regaining fertility after an expensive (not covered by insurance) reversal surgery. If you've had your vasectomy more than a year ago, you're probably sterile.
SkeeveTheGreat@reddit
Every study Ive seen has PESA and TESE, all of the studies Ive seen since I got mine done end with close to a 100% success rate on sperm retrieval.
If you have other evidence to show what you’re saying is true, i’d love to see it.
couldntyoujust1@reddit
I think the other thing the commenter is missing is that women have a big hollow organ inside their bodies that the copper IUD can reside that will prevent pregnancy, but men do not have an equivalent space to house a device that would make them infertile because our reproductive system - including our testicles - are literally a bunch of tubes. Maybe you could insert such a copper ball into the epididimus of each testicle, but that likely has its own risks since testicles - and therefore these epididimi - hang outside the body.
So putting a copper anything inside his reproductive tract isn't nearly as straightforward as putting a copper IUD through a woman's cervix and into her uterus.
MinimumImpression330@reddit
on top of this,the copper iud was approved by the FDA in 1984, when standards were much MUCH lower
Pure-Election-9137@reddit
No the true answer is the actual top comment.
It's just easier to stop one egg vs millions of seed
Dish-Live@reddit
It’s not about being barbaric it just probably wouldn’t work very well. I’m sure a lot of men would be interested if it did.
tequilathehun@reddit
Its the exact same mechanism. Copper kills sperm on contact.
WatcherOfStarryAbyss@reddit
There's not a good way to implant it in a guy.
IUDs have to be replaced periodically (5yr?) and woman have a cavity in which to place an IUD without surgery.
Men don't have the same kind of cavity, so you're basically left putting a little copper tube in one of their flesh tubes. But that would require surgery to implant and remove, and male genitals are more exposed so they get bumped much more often than a woman's uterus.
Sit on a chair wrong? Oops, your little copper BC tube just poked through your vas deferens and you now you need emergency surgery.
Dish-Live@reddit
Copper IUDs mostly prevent implantation
NDthrowaway99@reddit
How about we practice sexual responsibility and own the consequences of our actions collectively, instead of shifting the blame to one gender or the other?
Cady_Heron04@reddit (OP)
Pro-lifer has entered the birth control chat everyone! How about blame is currently 100% on the female right now and we finally have a chance to even the playing field? How about not everyone shares your values and beliefs and just because they're yours doesn't mean anyone else has to agree. How about not everyone wants to have children- especially men and they should be able to have control of that decision?
TheCocoBean@reddit
It's relatively easy to stop one egg implanting. It's really hard to kill millions of sperms. You could get 99% of them and still have more than enough to get pregnant.
That being said, more male birth control is a definite good thing. But I'll admit that like...as the person who would end up pregnant if it was forgot/misused/lied about, I'm not sure I could trust someone's word as enough that they have used it, you know?
jdej1988@reddit
You’re on point about male birth control. Companies who actually developed male bc found that women don’t trust men to actually take theirs. There’s no real market for it, so it will probably never be as available as womens’ bc
Stresso_Espresso@reddit
How about the market of men that don’t want to be fathers and want to be responsible for their own sex lives? I’ve read a lot of these trials and the men in them are usually very satisfied and interested in continuing
jdej1988@reddit
Allas, not enough money to be made.
Stresso_Espresso@reddit
That’s not the reason it hasn’t been approved- there’s lots of money to be made
andy11123@reddit
IIRC There was a drug trial done for a male contraceptive pill but it failed because the participants reported weight gain, libido issues, mood swings.
Pretty sure I've seen those side effects waved off as insignificant for the lady version
Jimisdegimis89@reddit
The circumstances of this study are always misconstrued and taken out of context. The basic gist of it is that while yes one of the safety committees called off the study due to reported side effects when one of the participants committed suicide (later determined to not be linked to the study) it was because the rate of adverse reactions was extreme, basically a rate 5-10x higher than other hormonal birth controls used by women.
AKRiverine@reddit
Was the suicidal patient taking a placebo? Otherwise, how in the world could they rule out a drug affect when the drug is known to cause mood swings?
---Cloudberry---@reddit
Also we have refined women's contraception over the years and come up with a bunch of different and very reliable options. So the hormonal doses are lower, and better studied for side effects/long term issues.
andy11123@reddit
Ah fair enough then. Every days a school day
SkeeveTheGreat@reddit
I used to work in medical research, and I’ll tell you that even if the side effects didn’t occur more frequently, those side effects would see it never be approved. The ethics around it are ultimately what’s at issue.
See, pregnancy for women is a potentially deadly condition, with a ton of side effects on its own that are fucking ghastly. Birth control for women therefore is weighed against the standard of what it prevents for the patient. Male birth control prevents a condition for someone else, who is not the patient, and must be weighed against the positive effects to men taking it. The ethics involved are iron clad for a reason, and until you can have male birth control that meets that ethical line, it won’t be approved.
---Cloudberry---@reddit
For a woman the risk/benefit is different. Pregnancy is riskier and has many more side effects. Anything a hormonal contraception can do to a woman, pregnancy probably does too and might be more extreme along with everything else pregnancy does. It's weight gain vs bigger weight gain. Mood swings vs bigger mood swings.
For men, that's not the case, since they can't become pregnant.
GodSpider@reddit
Even if all the stuff people had corrected you on didn't exist, the problem is the pill has to beat condoms. Condoms don't cause weight gain, libido issues or mood swings. It has to be small enough side effects that it's worth it to have sex without a condom
scotty-utb@reddit
Let's see if "mild skin irritation" will prevent approval of "andro-switch" male BC
John12345678991@reddit
It failed because it got those side effects far more and worse than the ones that happen to women.
Svardskampe@reddit
They already get vasectomies.
John12345678991@reddit
I have a friend who didn’t want kids so he got a vasectomy. He now has 2 kids
Torvahnys@reddit
Is he sure they're his?
NarrMaster@reddit
Yeah, a side effect of vasectomies is your kids come out a different color.
Rawniew54@reddit
Well most just don’t want to be fathers before like 30. If there was a male birth control option that was easily reversed I would have done it. Vasectomy reversal is not usually covered by insurance and it’s much more invasive than the vasectomy
wrecktus_abdominus@reddit
People on reddit seem to have a grave misunderstanding about vasectomy reversal. Anytime I see male birth control come up, there will be someone who says "just get a vasectomy! You can always have it reversed later." This is terrible advice. Vasectomies are meant to be permanent birth control. They are technically reversible, but that should never be the plan. No reputable urologist should be performing them on men who think they will want it undone later. As you mentioned, they are far more invasive than the original procedure, much more expensive to the patient, and are frequently unsuccessful at restoring fertility. When I had my vasectomy done, the doc grilled me before he would do it. "What if you get divorced, or your wife dies? What if she or a new wife wants more children later?" Stuff like that. He even wanted to make sure my wife was on board with me having it done. The point is, do it when you are sure you don't want any more children.
Numerophobic_Turtle@reddit
I see a lot of people refuting this claim that vasectomies are reversible, but I've never actually seen the people who are supposedly saying its true.
bonaynay@reddit
people constantly talk out of their asses about vasectomies
couldntyoujust1@reddit
Not to mention there's a huge chance it won't be effective at making him fertile again.
TheCocoBean@reddit
Condoms.
Stresso_Espresso@reddit
Condoms can fail, be messed with, etc- there’s peace of mind in having a backup
Xandara2@reddit
Do people really use backups? I would love to see the numbers on that.
---Cloudberry---@reddit
They should do for long term, condoms have a high failure rate. That doesn't mean condoms aren't massively useful and very important of course. But it's too easy to make a mistake, have it fail, or be forgotten. I exist because my parents relied on condoms..
BumblebeeOfCarnage@reddit
I’ve always used more than one method at a time. Usually I try to use three methods
Stresso_Espresso@reddit
You mean like how people are on birth control and use condoms?
Yes that’s very common
TheCocoBean@reddit
True true.
Low-Palpitation-9916@reddit
Just try aiming for the face.
Torvahnys@reddit
A product known as Vasalgel is currently in trials and testing for approval by the FDA. It is a polymer gel injected into the Vas Deferens (same tube cut for a vasectomy), blocking the sperm from being released. It is completely reversible by flushing it out with a solvent injection.
MsCardeno@reddit
I see so many men post on the internet about how they were “tricked” into getting a woman pregnant. There should definitely be a market for men. This should be a concern for men. No man should believe “trust me I’m birth control” from a casual partner.
crazycatlady331@reddit
Why is he not using a condom?
couldntyoujust1@reddit
Because they are often "one size fits all" when penises come in many shapes and sizes. Female condoms haven't taken off despite their availability and several other reasons.
Condoms sometimes are too snug, or too loose, they fit the shaft but not the head, if they don't fit just right, they can desensitize the penis, most men don't masturbate with condoms, sex with condoms still feels different with vs without condoms, there's an emotional aspect of penis skin against vaginal mucosa that makes it feel way more connected and better for both partners to go without, etc.
There are a lot of reasons to dislike using condoms. And in the US there's evidence it's worse because most men here are not uncircumcised and so their own sexual sensitivity is reduced and then adding a condom on top of that is a hard sell.
Men need more non-condom options and so far the options and research into it have been lacking. One option which could replace vasectomies still requires an injection of a gel into the vas differens by a doctor that lasts several years and reversal is still not guaranteed though is preliminarily greater than for vasectomies.
---Cloudberry---@reddit
These issues about condoms fitting seem like they can be addressed with a bit of effort and planning. To have completely unprotected sex because you didn't bother to find condoms that fit is just insane.
But I'm with you on just not liking them. However, unless you trust your female partner completely, then it's probably better to abstain.
couldntyoujust1@reddit
You're missing it. "A bit of effort and planning" is severely understating the problem. Penises have unique dimensions and unique shapes. They're all generally along the lines of what is portrayed in half-decent drawings, but they vary widely on a variety of dimensions.
Condoms on the other hand are either straight or have exotic shapes and there's not one condom I know of in the store that has sizing guidelines that will clue you in that this condom is likely to fit you well and feel good. In my experience, the best condoms I've used - albeit only on my own rather than with a partner - are the Trojan Bareskin Raw condoms. They fit me just right and are thin enough that I barely feel them and they work great... and I bought my first box ever to try them out a few weeks ago. Until then I didn't regularly use condoms for my own solo time. I was sexually active with a woman for 14 years and we divorced between 2-3 years ago. I'm a couple weeks away from 37 years old, and only just now found the condom I would say really fit.
If a young man or a teenage boy even wants to be responsible by using a condom with his girlfriend, he's going to have to buy several varieties after he's looked up a sizing guide on the internet that took various brands and measured them. Even then, if those condoms don't accommodate his unique shape, he's not going to want to use them. So after buying 25-45 dollars worth of 3-packs of condoms, he now has to try them on and honestly I'd recommend jerking off with them to see how they feel. At 5 dollars a pack on average, that's 5-9 packs with 3 each, so 15-27 jerk off sessions. That's a couple weeks to a month depending on his stamina, all before he figures out which one is the best IF he finds one he likes.
Do you see the problem?
gilmoregurlies@reddit
25-45 dollars? Like the $30 a month women spend on BC? Or the $20 a month they spend on pads and tampons?
I’m all for male birth control, but complaining about cost isn’t gonna persuade women who are already used to spending way more than that on their own birth control methods
couldntyoujust1@reddit
You're paying way too much for BC at least by my count, and have many many options. Also, most girls if they ask their mom for pads or tampons, she'll get them for her. If she asks her boyfriend - in all seriousness - he almost certainly will buy them for her.
If a boy asks his dad (and that's difficult since there's a fatherlessness crisis and no shortage of single mothers) for condoms, do you really think he's going to more often than not get them? Or do you think the parents are going to explain that he's too young for sex? Also his penis is growing through adolescence so what fit a year ago might be too small now. When he's an adult that's less of an issue but when he's 18 and trying to find the condoms that fit over the ones that don't, do you think he's going to expend all that money at that age?
Also, there's a huge difference between "mom/dad, can you buy these toiletries that keep me sanitary for an involuntary experience I have every month since I was 9" and "mom/dad, can you buy me a whole bunch of different varieties of condoms to try out while I masturbate as well as some lube so I know which varieties fit best and then buy me a bulk pack of that kind when I figure it out?"
By 18, he's old enough to do that by himself. Maybe even by 16. But a large enough proportion of the teenage population lose their virginities before 18. It's less than it was, but it's still sizeable enough.
This all wouldn't be necessary if condoms came in shapes and sizes rather than one size fits all for one variety. Then the expense would be unnecessary and he would only need to measure and would get the right size and shape every time and it would just be a matter of the varieties themselves - thinness, extra headroom, ribbing, nubbing, etc.
The point is, condoms should have advertised sizing and dimensions. Maybe there should even be a standardized sizing for them. You seem to think that men should take responsibility for using condoms, and then you rudely poo poo me when I point out where the friction is with getting men to use them. It seems you don't want to solve the problem, you just want to make men suck it up and shame them if they express any discomfort or unhappiness with that.
This isn't good faith. And worse, what exactly do you think I need to convince women of? That men should have birth control options? Do you think they are the ones who are keeping men from having it? Maybe some radfem women who want to continue to maintain their privilege of having all reproductive rights and continue denying any to men want to stop men from having their own non-barrier contraceptive, but those won't be the majority or the ones in charge.
MarkM3200@reddit
One solution that I'm surprised doesn't pop up more is Vaginal Contraceptive Film. It's a sheet of plastic coated in spermicide that you push up to the cervix and let dissolve for 15 mins. Neither person can feel it, and it costs only a little more than condoms. There's also a gel version that is instantly effective, and is pushed through an applicator like a tampon is.
I hate condoms with a passion, there's no standardization, and they all reduce sensitivity. VCF are rated as slightly less effective than condoms by Planned Parenthood, but they are still enormously effective if used right.
---Cloudberry---@reddit
For a casual partner they should almost certainly be using condoms because of STD risk.
But anyway, even if you are with someone you trust sometimes there is a problem with the female pill and its effectiveness is compromised. Sickeness/medication/forgetting to take it. Most women who are serious about their contraception will try to be aware but people make mistakes, or at least, as a couple you'd be glad to have another method on-going.
Hayaidesu@reddit
They are tricked if she won't do a abortion a woman knows her body better than a man ever can so like wtf
fakeaccount572@reddit
In some "alpha pill" sections of the internet, I see...
Tre_Walker@reddit
I don't think men trust women to take theirs either. So it comes down to personal responsibility for either party. Do it for yourself and not for her.
MilesSand@reddit
What companies actually brought a working mbc product to market? It's basically impossible to even get clinical trials past any ethics board because of a technicality in the rules they all use worldwide, so whatever it is surely hasn't been tested and more than likely failed because it didn't work, not because men weren't interested.
Patient-Couple7509@reddit
I’m not even trusted to do the laundry right, no way she’s trusting me to do that right!
GeeTheMongoose@reddit
It was never going to hit the market. The side effects that are acceptable in women are unacceptable for men to experience.
scotty-utb@reddit
Regarding the user community of "andro-switch", there are some 20k users aside of the ongoing studies.
So, 20k men (like me) using a not yet approved male birth control device because they want to be contracepted.
80% of hormonal trial participants answered they would like to proceed. And:
In France, you can still get the hormonal shot prescribed (i do not know numbers of users)
There are men eating papaya seeds (could result in Pearl-Index well below 5)
There are men (ab)using stero, some of them happy to be contracepted too.
The Bimek does have enough interessents, but no funds to start (but i doubt he is wearing it for real)
jdej1988@reddit
I mean, sure there are some options! Thing is that the company wants to earn their investment back and then some. Compare those numbers to the market for women’s birth control and imagine what the price would be to earn it back
Tricky-Proof3573@reddit
But that’s how copper iuds work already, by killing the millions of sperm
Cady_Heron04@reddit (OP)
100% agree. I would not trust a man to take a pill every day without skipping or lying. That’s why I think something more permanent would be better. But they’d probably lie about that too honestly.
Chevey0@reddit
Who hurt you? What made you so sexist?
Cady_Heron04@reddit (OP)
Wow the men are really triggered by that comment. Y’all wouldn’t survive half a day as a woman 😂🤣
couldntyoujust1@reddit
Try surviving half a day being a man sometime.
FenixVale@reddit
Didn't a woman do that and end up killing herself afterward
couldntyoujust1@reddit
I've heard the same. I heard of another woman who pretended to be a man on dating apps and was appalled how she almost got no matches and the ones she did get she could tell were not appealing personality-wise.
The truth is that there are experiences men have that women will never relate to because the social dynamic is totally different and the dynamic is not one you can really change because a lot of it comes from aspects that are biologically baked in.
I just yesterday wrote a review for a book on Amazon for preteens-teens. The main character is 14 and in 8th grade and after writing the review I went through and read the other reviews.
I had pointed out in mine that the book featured a scene where the main character sees a girl he likes which drives most of the story and the text says in the main character's inner monologue that his body was doing things they learned about in health class that signal he's becoming an adult and then adds that he had never been so glad he was carrying a math book. I also mentioned another scene where the MC explains to the audience that he had read a book called Lady Chatterley's Lover thinking it was dirty but couldn't find any of the parts with sex.
I wanted to review it because I wanted parents to be aware that those scenes were in there but that they were passing references, the fact the MC had gotten an erection was handled very tactfully and the mention of reading a book thinking it would feature sex scenes and being disappointed not to find them was a passing reference and common for boys that age or even a bit younger (10-13), and to voice my feelings of some missed opportunities for redemption and better story quality.
Then I went to read the reviews others had written and I found a one-star review that was a mother objecting that the main character used the word "hot" to describe girls and described a boy to the audience as "throwing like a girl". She stopped reading and felt the book was inappropriate for her 10 year old... because of course boys aren't attracted to girls by their visual appeal and boys and girls throw entirely with equal force and accuracy.
No mention of the arousal reference and God only knows if she read far enough to find the MC mentioning the book he read in hopes of satisfying his curiosity. She definitely missed the MC referring to a girl as "a troll" who will likely "grow up to be a load bearing wall" or referring to the nerdy girl as "not a real girl" because she wasn't at all attractive to him.
No, instead, God forbid a 14-year-old boy use the word "hot" to describe attraction or appealing to the fact that generally boys are biologically stronger and more spacially aware than girls by biology in pointing out a male classmate "throws like a girl." Can't have such blatent sexism as... acknowledging reality.
skiyakater@reddit
It's interesting you're getting downvoted for saying you wouldn't trust men because they lie but then you have replies getting upvoted about how men can't trust women because they lie
Why does one get downvoted but the other get upvoted when they're basically saying the exact same thing but about different genders?
GoSpeedRacistGo@reddit
Probably specifically because OP said men can’t be trusted and placed it too generally on men as a whole, while the replies are more pointing out women do lie about it too (likely in greater numbers rn just because there’s more of an expectation for them to use BC) and another saying first that they wouldn’t trust themselves to take it.
It’s the amount of sexism the comments seem to exude, regardless of intent, that are causing the downvote/upvote difference.
“I would not trust a man to” and “they’d probably lie about that too” are much more of an indictment of one gender as a whole than “there are women who lie” and “I would not trust me in taking a daily pill. Neither do I trust woman.” are.
One seems very sexist, and the others do not.
Chevey0@reddit
I love that your assuming every one who disagrees with you must be a man 😂😂😂🤦♂️
No_Key_5854@reddit
Ok bro
eggokuno@reddit
Why are u having sex with someone u cant trust?
No-Stretch-9230@reddit
You dont know you cant trust someone until you do.
Millworkson2008@reddit
A vasectomy is the more permanent option
scotty-utb@reddit
I would not trust me in taking a daily pill. Neither i do trust woman.
There are too many drawbacks (vomit, direah, other medication, ... and simply forgetting it)
Using "thermal male contraception": andro-switch / slip-chauffant, since 2 years now, i can not easily forget. And i can prove my contracepted state by sperm-analysis.
PlanA/ADAM (=Vasalgel/RISUG) , VasDeBlock would also be great. I would opt for it.
Wish_Dragon@reddit
Tell me more about your contraceptive methods if you please. What’s your experience using them, main pros/cons?
scotty-utb@reddit
"thermal male birth control", using testicle ascent:
A silicone ring (andro-switch) or special brief/jockstrap (slip-chauffant) is used to hold the testicles in inguinal channels, 15h/day, everyday. This does increase the testicle temperature by some 2 degree, which does suppress sperm production below contraceptive threshold of 1mio/ml.
(1mio/ml was set at hormonal trials which correspond to Pearl-Index 1 there)
Also sperm motility is greatly reduced (i have 0% motil, 0% vital at 0.4-0.6mio/ml)
Pearl-Index 0.5 was seen because of user-fault. There was no pregnancy caused yet at perfect use, There are some 20k Ring users already.
Reversibility is proven up to 4 years of usage (so, at the moment the recommendation is to pause after 4 years, watch sperm getting normal, then start over again)
As long you reach the 15h overall, you can remove it for short durations (like, sex)
Experience:
in the beginning it is strange, but i got used to it real quick. I do not notice during the day.
(some say, "like women wearing Bra")
Getting dressed in the morning, undress when go to bed, routine.
If it would be uncomfortable, i would not use since 2 years now.
Side effects:
Testicles does shrink some 10% in size. (Reversible) This does also occur at hormonal trials and is seen at stero (ab)use in sports. There is less sperm, so they shrink slightly.
"mild skin irritation", for me i need to keep the hair between 5-10mm (sorry for metrics) in order to prevent irritation. (We all hope this will not stand against approval then)
There was no increased cases of testicular cancer or torsion seen so far.
If the Ring would be to rigid, urethra stenosis could happen. So you should choose your size correctly.
Pro:
i have control over my contraception state. We use it as sole birth control.
(Others may prevent baby trap etc)
It works
It is 100% day to day suitable
Con:
i need to wear it. No problem for me
you will be called a feminist green left subject. No problem for me.
so, nothing i am aware of.
Wish_Dragon@reddit
Thank you! That was incredibly informative. Had never heard of it before. I don’t know if I could deal with it though as I have some sensory issues and my underpants can be irritating to me at times.
scotty-utb@reddit
Another option could be "spermapause" then, a boxer with electrical heating pads and battery.
But there are no studies so far, and only a lot less users.
But they claim it does work
Thebabaman@reddit
I know women who lied about being on birth control and about not being able to get pregnant. Men will just bitch and moan about condoms.
Person_37@reddit
Huh. That's definitely a stupid statement even ignoring the sexism, as in the original post you propose the copper treatment method because it is reversible
James_Vaga_Bond@reddit
There are women who lie about using birth control. The availability of a temporary male birth control method would make that a non issue. Its purpose isn't to alleviate the burden of using birth control from women. Its purpose is to share the ability to prevent pregnancy among both sexes. If you don't trust your male partner to use birth control, you're free to use birth control yourself. The responsibility isn't on the producers of birth control to make a product which can't be discontinued without a partner's knowledge.
scotty-utb@reddit
killing 99% may be enough.
from hormonal studies, 1mio/ml sperm concentration is seen to correspond to Pearl-Index 1.
You could trust if he has a sperm analysis protocol.
If he does not hand to you, handle as non existent.
If you do not trust him, do not trust him in regards of STI either. Wear condoms.
FenixVale@reddit
So essentially nothing has changed
CourtesyFlush667@reddit
Like when a woman claims she's on the pill and then all of a sudden she's miraculously pregnant as if thru immaculate conception and ropes some man into a life he didn't ask for ?
breadstick_bitch@reddit
He still chose to come in her. Why would you come in a woman whose word you don't trust?
GodSpider@reddit
Do you think any woman who trusts a man to wear a condom is in the wrong if he takes it off?
Cady_Heron04@reddit (OP)
That’s technically assault in some states now.
GodSpider@reddit
Good, they didn't consent to the sex you're having. Same as lying about being on the pill
Xandara2@reddit
You missed the point that they actually did trust her. They were just wrong to do so.
CourtesyFlush667@reddit
Why let a man blow his load in you if you think having his baby is going to bring a positive outcome based on a lie that you were on the pill?
EmperorMorgan@reddit
You could trust him if you kept a metal detector handy
Z3ppelinDude93@reddit
That last paragraph is also how I feel about women who say they’re on birth control 🤷♂️
PutridAssignment1559@reddit
Anabolic steroids are a great birth control method for men, they make men infertile as long as they are on it. Higher the dose, the better it works.
Tricky-Proof3573@reddit
No they don’t, bodybuilders have gotten people pregnant on steroids
PutridAssignment1559@reddit
They usually have to take another hormone that increases fsh production, or it happens when they are off their cycle.
jfklingon@reddit
Aren't the rates of domestic abuse higher with anabolic steroid use?
PutridAssignment1559@reddit
Yeah probably with very large doses. Typical therapeutic dose of testosterone is like 100mg, bodybuilders will use the equivalent of like 2000-3000. And they also pile all all sorts of compounds that have various psychological effects.
I was basically joking about men taking steroids. Although, I suspect a relatively low dose of testosterone, just enough to reduce fertility, would be effective without the side effects bodybuilder have.
jfklingon@reddit
I don't know jack shit about the topic, just know a few piece of shit meat heads. Seems like a cool avenue to look at though
ProXJay@reddit
Don't steroids have some rather bad side effects
Xandara2@reddit
Yes.
PutridAssignment1559@reddit
Like getting jacked?
ProXJay@reddit
Or prostate cancer
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/anabolic-steroid-misuse/
scotty-utb@reddit
Not every men likes to add hormones (stero/testo)
And from studies, the side effects was not tolerable.
Also, some 13% did not reach the contraceptive threshold.
If it works for you, great
AdFun5641@reddit
There is a simpler more effective and cheaper solution that's similar that has been stuck in testing for 20 years.
RISGUL, Vasagel, now I think they are trying to get funding under "Plan A"
Having medical treatments isn't as simple as "just inject some copper". There needs to be testing on efficy and saftey. There just isn't money for testing birth control for men
MilesSand@reddit
The money is there, but the trials are being blocked by ethics boards because reduced fertility is considered a negative outcome even though that's the point
WatcherOfStarryAbyss@reddit
No, the issue is permanently reduced fertility.
Women aren't sterilized by taking BC, but most male BCs will render the guy sterile after a long period of usage.
Vasectomies are medically considered irreversible, because reattachment surgery often fails. Reversal is also very expensive, and won't be covered by insurance.
Afaik, the injected gel leads to sterility also. Something about the immune system cleaning up sperm that couldn't be discharged and developing an autoimmune response to sperm.
I don't really recall the male BC pill issues, but I want to say that they led to a substantial uptick in suicidal depression among users. Didn't quote me on that though.
AdFun5641@reddit
Do you have a source for this claim?
Cady_Heron04@reddit (OP)
You’re right it’s not simple. It’s a crazy idea. Usually testing comes after the idea stage. But there must be money for it if RISGUL, Vasagel, and Plan A are being tested. Just sayin!
AdFun5641@reddit
You missed my point. The idea isnt crazy. Pharma is already developing the product. They just won't invest the money needed to get it through testing.
scotty-utb@reddit
A lot of funding for non-hormonal male BC comes from the MCI:
https://www.malecontraceptive.org/
I did pledge to entrelac directly, supporting "andro-switch" (and later on (hopefully) some other thermal male birth control options like "spermapause", "slip-chauffant")
scotty-utb@reddit
There is also ADAM and another (endoscopic rather than injected) Vas Blocking device "VasDeBlock"
Yes, all male BC projects are lacking funds...
Dual270x@reddit
There is already a valve that can be installed on a man's testicles to switch birth control on/off. It might have been more of an experimental thing.
scotty-utb@reddit
The Bimek? only the inventor himself does claim to have it implanted. And i doubt he has.
Because... i i would have implemented as the inventor, i would have MRT/XRAY/SONO/... pictures all over my homepage. Has he?
The nearest to come may be "thermal male contraception": andro-switch / slip-chauffant
No hormones, reversible, Pearl-Index 0.5.
License/Approval will be given after ongoing study, in 2028. But it's already available to buy/diy.
There are some 20k users already, I am using since two years now.
Cady_Heron04@reddit (OP)
That sounds cool, but I’d imagine it would come with some user error.
jindrix@reddit
Encase the balls in copper
Star_BurstPS4@reddit
Could just stop having sex for pleasure and use sex for what the universe intended it to be??? There are also other forms of sex that don't include the risk of getting pregnant. Just saying.....
a_shadow_of_a_doubt@reddit
Hey, why don't we just give up on enjoying life while we're at it?
Star_BurstPS4@reddit
If sex is your only enjoyment in life bud then you are living wrong
a_shadow_of_a_doubt@reddit
It sounds like you're having sex wrong...
Difficult-Sea4642@reddit
I'm sorry to hear that men don't please you vaginally. But it's nice to hear that oral and anal are still on the menu.
James_Vaga_Bond@reddit
The way the universe intended
Cady_Heron04@reddit (OP)
Honey, grown ups are talking.
Useful-Upstairs3791@reddit
I’ve got a better idea: only anal and bjs
That’s god’s birth control right there
newaroundhereig@reddit
The universe has intent?
deleted_by_reddit@reddit
[removed]
AutoModerator@reddit
Your post was automatically removed because it contains political content, which is off-topic for /r/CrazyIdeas. Please review the subreddit rules and guidelines.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
MichelPalaref@reddit
There's a better solution : thermal method by testicle ascent. Already practiced with great succes by 10.000+ folks.
OtherwiseAct8126@reddit
So having my notebook on my lap for 10 hours a day should do the trick
MichelPalaref@reddit
Doesn't seem like it, as reported by a 2024 systematic review :
MagnanimosDesolation@reddit
Is that what it sounds like?
moronmcmoron1@reddit
Yeah it's like a cock ring that squeezes your nuts up into your body, something like that
MagnanimosDesolation@reddit
Yeah I can see why it's not that popular...
MichelPalaref@reddit
Of all the experimental birth control it's the most popular by far
deleted_by_reddit@reddit
[removed]
AutoModerator@reddit
Your post was automatically removed because it contains political content, which is off-topic for /r/CrazyIdeas. Please review the subreddit rules and guidelines.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
scotty-utb@reddit
It's simply one that is already available to use (aside from other thermal methods like wet-heat or heated boxers)
scotty-utb@reddit
not actually squeezing, it's more like holding them there.
If it would be uncomfortable, i would not use it since 2 years (and Michael since 5 years)
Xandara2@reddit
Any kind of cockring is a no for me. Especially if you have to wear them the entire day. The discomfort of having permanently sweaty balls alone sounds awful.
scotty-utb@reddit
it's way more flexible than a traditional cockring
The Balls don't get sweaty, the sack may... but i do not notice a difference
MichelPalaref@reddit
It's a silicon ring or a textile jockstrap with a textile ring at the center of it.
You have to put the penis + the scrotum (testicles' skin) inside of it, gently. Then, the testicles won't have enough room to stay down there and will go up, at the root of the penis, upward of it.
There, they will be heated by bodily heat and gain 1-2°C, which is enough to drastically lower or even stop spermiogenesis.
You have to wear it 15/24h, everyday.
It takes 3 months to work on average and 3-6 months to go back to normal after using it.
The goal is not to be azoospermic (0 sperm cells), but at least to be greatly oligozoospermic (very few sperm cells) : 2007 WHO consensus puts the acceptable threshold at 1M sperm cells/ml, which they equate to 99% theoretical efficacy.
Efficacy is theorized to be higher, since WHO consensus was based on hormonal male contraception methods, which only impact quantity of sperm cells, where thermal method heavily impacts both quantity and quality of sperm cells.
However, like pills, efficacy is user dependant over their ability to follow medical protocol : In the review I linked, there was 7 unplanned pregnancies over 1645 participants, all 7 of them due to error in protocol by the participants.
lozzyboy1@reddit
It's worth noting that users failing to follow protocol is usually the biggest problem for most contraceptive methods, and from the review it looks like we should expect high rates user error for this particular method. Between the practical difficulties in properly following the protocol and the high rates of side effects it seems likely that they underestimate the rates of non-compliance, while the small sample sizes and observation windows make it difficult to really assess absolute efficacy. Given the effects seen on sperm quality, breakthrough cases could have worse outcomes with higher rates of pregnancy loss or developmental disorders (though this is not observed in the studies in this review). It's probably important to develop the technique further to ensure high compliance (either by reducing the burden or discontinuing the practice for individuals who aren't compliant), along with better studies on larger sample sizes to get a better idea of the frequency of serious negative outcomes.
MichelPalaref@reddit
7/1645 seems like an acceptable rate of non-compliance to me, especially considering that this method being still experimental, means that a lot of men are not medically followed. Some men still go to associative network, collectives, do their research online, so even though they don't have access to medical follow up, it can still work (even though it's dangerous considering only a spermiogram can confirm the efficacy of the method). Some men are just ordering the ring and putting it right away without doing anything else, which could explain a good amount errors or problems with the method
It's the same thing with lots of side effects : a common side effect is pain/discomfort, especially in the first days. It is very much possible to greatly reduce the rate of this side effect if proper follow up is done : informing the participant to gradually wear the ring instead of 15/24h right away, don't hesitale to get a bigger and/or looser ring, trim pubic hair ... are all very effective solutions to this problem, but if the person doesn't have access to these informations then of course it's gonna be noted as pain.
It's also worth mentioning that the severity of side effects is not assessed. For some people the pain will be unbearable and they will stop using the device, for others it is extremely mild. I had slight discomfort that was very tolerable the first 2 days of wearing the ring, then nothing for 4+ years.
Regarding efficacy, one only needs to do a spermiogram ; if the threshold is reached, then WHO guidelines can be applied. If there's one parameter that is pretty solid, it's efficacy.
Larger sample sizes studies are indeed warranted, as well as regularizing methodologies to be able to have truer replicates. Reducing the burden could be a lead indeed, since some people can technically achieve the 1M sperm cells/ml threshold with less than 15h a day for example, so a more personalized protocol could be imagined. But to ensure caution, it'd seem that keep the 15h/24 would be best to ensure efficacy of the method.
lozzyboy1@reddit
The review cites a far higher rate of (self-reported, and therefore likely underestimated) non-compliance than that: "Indeed, the required wearing time of 15 hours a day was not respected in 9-13.5% of cases [...] 14.5% of individuals renounced to perform semen analysis" Given that the reduction in sperm count is variable and the only way to know that it is working as a contraceptive is through sperm analysis (and that partial application could reasonably be expected to lead to a higher rate of pregnancy complications), it seems quite ethically problematic that those individuals were allowed to continue in these trials. Obviously we don't know the level of non-compliance because the trials didn't gather that information (or if they did the review didn't note it, I haven't gone through the original papers), so it's hard to know how much risk these individuals faced.
Regarding the side effects, you're quite right, and of course the current standards in female birth control come with a host of side effects. It doesn't look like a huge number of people dropped out from the studies, suggesting that the side effects weren't that bad, although the largest studies basically didn't report drop outs which is not a great sign. Still, there were clearly plenty of people who were happy enough to continue with the program. Again, my concern isn't necessarily that the side effects are particularly severe, rather that they could be the cause of the non-compliance. The fact that about 93% of respondents described some form of negative side effects does leave me worried that the non-compliance rates may be significantly higher than reported. Again, I haven't gone through any of the original papers so I'm not sure if any of them reported on this, but I would be particularly concerned about this if there hasn't been research into short-term recovery rates in sperm count, things that could be missed if, for example, the subjects were highly compliant leading up to sperm testing and laxer afterwards (I know that probably sounds silly, but people like to do well in tests!).
Definitely looks like it works impressively well, with low rates of serious issues, where the protocols are followed properly though.
deleted_by_reddit@reddit
[removed]
AutoModerator@reddit
Your post was automatically removed because it contains political content, which is off-topic for /r/CrazyIdeas. Please review the subreddit rules and guidelines.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
mwthomas11@reddit
I'd never heard of that before. Interesting! Makes sense on first glance though.
MichelPalaref@reddit
If you want to look more into it, check out r/thermal_contraception ! I put lots of links, sources and there are other users there with whom you can discuss
Not-Meee@reddit
In the conclusion of the paper:
Some of the concerns revolve around compression of the structures, concerns about reversibility, and risk of testicular cancer. Among other things.
MichelPalaref@reddit
> All four criteria—efficacy, reversibility, safety and acceptability — would benefit from additional studies with larger sample sizes or with similar protocol, so that the data can be pooler and meta-analysd to meet 2007 consensus' recommendations.
For efficacy :
Reversibility :
Side-effects :
Acceptability :
Full conclusion :
So this method is strongly suggested as effective, reversible and acceptable. Of course it's not black and white and some concerns, especially for the minority of bad side effects with penile compression are valid and should be investigated more. All in all, more research needs to be done to confirm or infirm with full certainty any of these claims. It seems that right now the overall picture is more encouraging than discouraging, and that reflects the overwhelming majority of feedback by users (even though these accounts are anecdotal and should be regarded as such for now).such for now).
MichelPalaref@reddit
> Regarding compression of the penile structures,
While it seems to be a reality for some men, it is not only a minority but also seems linked to a bad usage of the devices : some men do the method without proper following and deviate from safety practices, for example by using silicon rings that are too small, or by using the rings at night mainly. These actions bear a greater impact on blood flow, erection and as such compression of penile structures. It seems likely that with a proper medical following, these symptoms would greatly reduce. They are a still concerning however and should be treated seriously, and even perfect medical follow up probably couldn't erase all the bad side effects cases as number of users grow.
> Regarding reversibility, she says :
Meaning that while reversibility in itself should be studied more, it's not more really reversibility as a whole that is questioned, but how fast reversibility of all spermatic parameters happen. In that regard, she also states multiple times during the review that basically every man is different and that intra-individual physiological differences might by themselves explain the delay in inhibition and reinstallation of spermiogenesis, which is why she puts the emphasis on doing multiple spermiograms, as per medical protocol.
> Regarding testicular cancer risks, she writes :
She is here refering to natural cryptorchidism, a pathology indeed linked to testicular cancer ... in infants with undescended testicles since birth, with a risk factor with birth defects caused by idiopathic causes, more likely lifestyle (consumption of alcohol, tobacco, pesticides, etc, during pregnancy) and/or medical priors in the family.
She also adds :
So it seems that there is evidence for heat as damageable when it comes down either to congenital conditions or high-intensity and uncontrolled exposure over periods of time. Artificial cryptorchidism is based on milder heat usage since it only uses bodily heat and is used by already grown up men, not infants with preexisting conditions. Of course, more studies need to assess the risk but I don't think it's all black and white.
scotty-utb@reddit
reversiblity was already proven up o 4 years usage.
cancer risk (minimum age 20) was not seen to be increased
torsion risk is not seen to be increased, too
Blinkin_Xavier@reddit
Tubes can be untied, and both male and female condoms exist, no one needs to be putting copper inside their bodies
Cady_Heron04@reddit (OP)
Women put copper in their bodies all the time.
Blinkin_Xavier@reddit
So just because those women make bad decisions you think men should have to as well?
Aptos283@reddit
They are actually working on a gel in the tubes to block the sperm from entering the ejaculate. That way you don’t have to try and kill them and end up leaving some alive.
Cady_Heron04@reddit (OP)
Wouldn’t they just die eventually anyway if they can’t come out?
Aptos283@reddit
In the same way they would die if you don’t ejaculate, yes. It’s not so much to avoid killing them as to not rely on killing them in order to function.
trauma_666@reddit
I got a vasectomy
dirtmother@reddit
Apparently, there is a fabric of underwear that reliably drops sperm count so much, it was at one time considered a potentially viable form of male birth control.
I wanna say alpaca, maybe? Or like. Rayon? I wish I could remember.
TheMainEffort@reddit
Nah bro you have to stand in front of a radio transmitter. Source: some guy who was in charge of teaching me how radios work.
scotty-utb@reddit
Anything producing heat will bring your sperm count down on prolonged and regular exposion:
Seat heating
Oven as Baker/Chef
Radio/Microwave Antenna
scotty-utb@reddit
You can use whool, cotton, isoprene, yes, even polyester. As long the testicles are hold at body temperature 15h/day.
Have a look to the TWO studies on polyester sling. The second one did not reproduce Azospermia or even contraceptded state 1mio/ml!
Both did conclude "increased scrotal Temperature"
The same Author (Shafic) did proceed with a paper on thermal only.
Some years and studies went by, leading to "slip-chauffant", which i am wearing (no polyester included)
And some year later now, a silicone ring "andro-switch" (also, no polyester) is heading for approval.
KenderKinn@reddit
No harm no 'fowl' lmao.
otkabdl@reddit
Just get neutered. Stop those little spermies at the source. After that the only children you will want will probably have paws and fur.
Dominus_Nova227@reddit
You do understand that op is talking about reversible forms of contraceptive right?
Human-Shirt-5964@reddit
This is a sub for stupid ideas and opinions.
Dominus_Nova227@reddit
Ah, forgot that.
wrapbubbles@reddit
anything is reversible until you rule out the invention of time travel in future.
New-Number-7810@reddit
Condoms are also an option.
Hayaidesu@reddit
It's stupid, I mean ehh my god
Jack-of-Hearts-7@reddit
Just use a condom for god's sake.
VA3FOJ@reddit
And this wouldnt cause additional issues? Also pregnancy requiers both sperm and egg, so which source are we talking about?
Aromatic-Track-4500@reddit
I loved how they said "go right to the source" like men are the only ones contributing to pregnancies. Fuck my life people, get educated.
Bob_bobbicus@reddit
They recently developed an injection that goes into the balls that acts as a birth control for men and it lasts for 2 years. That's probably the closest we'll get to copper birth control for men
scotty-utb@reddit
ADAM, but still "5 years in future, period"
The closest to be approved is "thermal male birth control" (andro-switch / slip-chauffant)
Difficult-Sea4642@reddit
When you say to forget IUDs and go straight for the source... the source you're talking about is the ovaries.
But, since you seem to be talking about an IUD for men, I don't think it's possible. The female IUD uses hormones to trick the body into thinking it's pregnant so the egg won't attach to the uterine wall. You can't really do anything similar with a man.
I think what you're proposing would have to disable the testes or kill the sperm. That's insane and not at all equivalent to an IUD. The IUD doesn't disable the ovaries or kill the eggs. What you're proposing is barbaric compared to the IUD.
Cady_Heron04@reddit (OP)
You should google copper IUD’s and then delete this comment.
Difficult-Sea4642@reddit
I know about copper IUDs. That's why I wrote my comment how I did.
ChicaFoxy@reddit
You don't know enough or you wrote it wrong, copper IUDs don't use hormones, it doesn't tyick the body at all, it just creates an uninhabitable environment for fertilized egg.
Cady_Heron04@reddit (OP)
Also the source I’m talking about isn’t the ovaries, it’s the sperm. Women’s bodies haven’t been studied enough to justify the amount of birth control options there are. The actual size and shape of the clitoris wasn’t even discovered until the late 90’s. We’re still making new discoveries about women’s reproductive systems today. Men’s reproductive organs however, have been figured out for a while now. It’s safer both physically and morally to research birth control for men instead of women. Just because women carry the pregnancy doesn’t mean men shouldn’t be held accountable.
And killing sperm isn’t barbaric at all. How many sperm end up in socks or down the shower drain or thrown away in a condom? It isn’t any more barbaric than releasing an unfertilized egg. Or think about all the sperm that die when someone DOES get pregnant. Only one makes it to the egg. The rest are goners.
Cady_Heron04@reddit (OP)
The copper IUD has no hormones in it. It does not trick the body into thinking it’s pregnant so the egg ring attach to yer uterine wall.
The copper affects sperm function and movement. This helps keep sperm from reaching the uterus and joining with an egg.
PlantainRegular7557@reddit
Good idea! Might I add a crazy idea of my own? It is much easier to freeze sperm and after insert them into the uterus (no hormones needed) than to freeze eggs and implant them. Why not offer sterilization to all men for free if they want and freeze their sperm for if they want kids
Fantastic_panda_801@reddit
Good idea! Might I add a crazy idea of my own? It is much easier to freeze sperm and after insert them into the uterus (no hormones needed) than to freeze eggs and implant them. Why not offer sterilization to all men and freeze their sperm for if they want kids
Electronic-Cable-772@reddit
I don’t want to ever know what “copper in the ball tube” is referring to😂
scotty-utb@reddit
The Idea of adding copper to male genitals is not new:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/001078248490057X
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2605.2009.01028.x
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12282271/
From efficiency point of view, you need to kill some 99% of sperm.
From reversibility, how do you remove it then?
There are some male contraception projects in human trial already, the most promising may be
"thermal male contraception": andro-switch / slip-chauffant
No hormones, reversible, Pearl-Index 0.5.
License/Approval will be given after ongoing study, in 2028. But it's already available to buy/diy.
There are some 20k users already, I am using since two years now.
Erivandi@reddit
Kind of sounds like a vasectomy with extra steps.
Sir_Drenix@reddit
Definitely agree there should be male birth control available and readily available.
Though, there would still be other issues to overcome; how many women would feel comfortable with their partners being the ones who is managing the birth control?
Women are the ones most affected by pregnancy (physically, career wise, etc); I think there needs to more research into birth control for women to reduce/remove the negative side effects of what is currently available.
Suitable options on both sides!
Angel_OfSolitude@reddit
Have yall considered just not sticking your dick in girls you don't want kids from?
Cady_Heron04@reddit (OP)
I wouldn’t announce being an incel so publicly, but you do you.
Living-Fly-7673@reddit
its in the name angel of solitude AND he has 400,000 comment karma
Angel_OfSolitude@reddit
Look if you're going to try and insult me at least do it accurately.
cromulent-potato@reddit
Counterpoint: fun
Unverdrossen@reddit
What an insightful recommendation
ZookeepergameIcy9707@reddit
IUDs prevent implantation.
Cady_Heron04@reddit (OP)
Copper IUD’s kill sperm.
ZookeepergameIcy9707@reddit
"Copper IUDs prevent pregnancy by releasing copper ions that create an environment that is unfavorable for sperm.These ions make it difficult for sperm to move, reach, and fertilize an egg. Additionally, copper IUDs can alter the uterine lining, making it less hospitable for a fertilized egg to implant, according to Clue app."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BERWPMoU8dc
pan-re@reddit
https://twin-cities.umn.edu/news-events/first-hormone-free-male-birth-control-pill-clears-another-milestone
They’re trying types of male birth control. This isn’t the only one.
Star_BurstPS4@reddit
When abortion becomes legal again we should try this