New male contraceptive Pill with no side effects (in the works)

[deadparrot]

Men could soon be able to use a 'male Pill' that has no side effects, scientists have revealed.

The chemical implant acts as a contraceptive but does not change the balance of a man's sex hormones.

Scientists have discovered a substance that can temporarily block the development of sperm without altering testosterone levels and without causing unwanted side effects.

They hope human trials of a new contraceptive for men based on their discovery could begin within a few years.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=413524&in_page_id=1770

[dmallind]

1. Cool!

Too late for me as I went the surgical route, but would have welcomed this before that. I'm certainly no lothario bed jumper either now or then, but more contraceptive options is never a bad thing and would have increased my peace of mind tremendously.

[gully]

2. Marvelous news for men!

And, many women - of course.

[OKthatsIT]

73. Legally, men can protect themselves. But women won't trust it.

Great news for men. Indeed. Having control is a good thing.

But, I'm afraid women can't take the risk and will continue to protect themselves, too.

[Marnieworld]

3. Fantastic!

Too many times men have been "trapped" by women with pregnancy. I know women who have done this and men who have had this done to them. I know I will be flamed for this, I always am. I know that you shouldn't "play" if you can't handle the consequences mentality. Yet, I think with people and with sex there aren't absolutes. If you are a committed partner, buying birth control pills for your girlfriend, saying that you never want children, but the woman is secretly not taking the pills trying to trap a man because she senses the relationship ending isn't that just tragic for the guy? All of the power has been in women's hands since Roe v Wade and birth control. It's nice that guys can have some control over their lives besides abstinence or surgery. Speaking as a woman who had a hard time on the pill, totally altered from hormones, I think this is long past due.

[mom cat]

6. No flame here. Assholes come in all genders. I have also known men to

get a woman pregnant to trap her. It is lousy when anyone does this. I am glad that men will now have a way to control their reproductivity. I reccomend that bowls of the stuff be available for free everywhere,

[greccogirl]

21. How does a man "trap" a woman

into getting pregnant? Are you joking? Any woman that doesn't take care of herself..............

[mom cat]

30. The ols "hole in condom"trick, daterape, drugging, you name it!

[greccogirl]

60. Drugging someone is NOT A TRICK,

it is assault. Hole in the condom? Use the pill and a diaphram as I did. It is very hard to "trick" anyone.

[noonwitch]

11. If those men has used condoms, they wouldn't have been trapped.

So, now men will have yet another excuse not to use condoms, which not only prevent pregnancy but also prevent disease.

And a lot of women will have so little self-respect that they will continue to have sex with those men anyways.

[girl gone mad]

14. Right on both counts.

A man concerned about impregnating his partner(s) already has at least 4 options at his disposal. I have no sympathy for these "trapped" men.

[Marnieworld]

16. none?

even if they bought their partners pills and were lied to? What are the options? Abstinence? Surgery? Condoms? All of them unneccessary if you think you are already using a 99% effective method. Can't you even conceive of this being unfair?

[Pithlet]

29. He's still giving up his own responsibility and putting it on her.

I'm not saying that deliberately lying to a partner to trick them into pregnancy is right. But, whatever the partner tells you, whether you're a man or a woman, you are ultimately responsible for your own birth control. If you give that responsibility over to the other partner, then you're risking a pregnancy. If you're "trapped" into an unwanted pregnancy, again male or female, you were at the very least an accessory to your own trapping. I think that at least half of the time, the woman being accused of "trapping" are no more happy about the unwanted pregnancy then the man is. I think that trapped pregnancies, for both men and women, are way overblown.

I'm not saying it doesn't happen. I think that the fear that it will happen and that it happens routinely is routed in sexism, though. Bottom line is, male or female, if you don't want to become a parent, use birth control. You are responsible for your own parental status. If you trust your partner enough to forgo that responsibility for yourself, and a pregnancy occurs anyway, then chances are good your partner wasn't intentionally trying to trap you. If he or she did, then that relationship was trouble, and you have big issues to face either way, and the pregnancy/sex aspect was just one facet.

[noamnety]

32. The pill is not 99% effective; it's 95% effective

You're quoting a hypothetical number. 95% is the REAL WORLD number.

A 5% chance of conceiving a child is a significant risk. Heck, if we all had a 5% chance of winning the lotto, I'd be buying a bunch of tickets. I sure the heck wouldn't enter into a "reverse lotto", where I get a sweet reward for accepting such a ticket, but then I have a 5% chance of having to pay tens of thousands of dollars over the next 18 years if my number is drawn.

[Marnieworld]

34. All statistics equal

When/if the equivalent pill is available for men I'd bet the pregnancy rate goes down considerably. At least in the age range up to 30 or so. And that would be great.

[Tesha]

35. That's 95% effective across a year.

The pill is >95% effective at preventing pregnancy across
any given year (so a less than 5% chance of becoming
pregnant across the year).

Any single incident of sexual intercourse has a far lower
probability (than 5%) of producing a pregnancy.

Tesha

[noamnety]

38. Yes, across a year

Sorry, sometimes I forget people don't all know that. I should have clarified.

[greccogirl]

61. It is more than 95% and even if you didn't believe that,

5% odds are not statistically significant. Try condoms, a diaphram and the pill. Trust me you won't get pregnant.

[noamnety]

64. 5% failure rate is significant

to the ones who get pregnant. I try to figure if I were a college professor and saw 100 female students a day, and they were all on the pill, if 5 of them got pregnant in a year, that would be a huge deal.

The stats are from here: http://www.fda.gov/fdac/features/1997/conceptbl.html

Guys DO need to understand they are accepting some risk, and if they aren't comfortable with that, they ought to use additional measures.

[Tesha]

71. That table suggests that it's dosing failures that lead to pill failures.

> Implant (Norplant) 0.09% 0.09%
> Hormone Shot (Depo-Provera) 0.3% 0.3%
> Combined Pill (Estrogen/Progestin) 5% 0.1%
> Minipill (Progestin only) 5% 0.5%

The first number is the "Typical Use" rate, meaning that the method
either was not always used correctly or was not used with every act
of sexual intercourse (e.g., sometimes forgot to take a birth control
pill as directed and became pregnant), or was used correctly but
failed anyway.

The second number is the "Lowest Expected" rate, meaning that the
method was always used correctly with every act of sexual intercourse
but failed anyway (e.g., always took a birth control pill as directed
but still became pregnant).

The pill, when actually taken according to directions, is far more
effective than 95%; the minipill is 99.5% effective and the combined
hormone pill is 99.9% effective, so if they can follow directions,
only *ONE* of your hypothetical students need get pregnant *EVERY
TWO TO TEN YEARS*.

Tesha

[noamnety]

75. Exactly - typical use

meaning that's how it is typically used.

People aren't hypotheticals. They exist in the real world, where people DO forget to take pills, people take antibiotics without realizing it reduces the effectiveness of the pill, etc. As a woman, you would know absolutely if you were faithful about taking the pill when you were supposed to, and you could assume the smaller rate.

But this thread is written about the GUY'S birth control options and responsibilities. And realistically, he has to assume the person he's with is typical. Even though he wants to believe she's the exception. We all want to believe that about our partners.

If an actual guy is actually dating an actual woman, he should assume a 5% failure rate, and take appropriate precautions. Real world numbers.

If a hypothetical man is hypothetically dating a hypothetical woman, he can safely assume a 0.1% failure rate.

[Marnieworld]

15. Why would you use a condom when your girlfriend is on the pill?

The deliberate deception of pretending to be on the pill was the problem. In a monogamous relationship with uninfected people who are practicing other methods (allegedly) of birth control you honestly think people would also use a condom?

[greccogirl]

22. As a backup and disease prevention.

Before I was married, I was on the pill, we used condoms and I had a diaphragm. Needless to say, I didn't get pregnant.

[HockeyMom]

54. Have to use a back up method after Vasectomy

until no more sperm are present. Can take anywhere from 3 to 6 months.

[BoneDaddy]

27. After 2 kids

I went for the vasectomy, so I am in the clear. But good news all around.

But as with any chemical I would like to see some long term studies, as women can testify re: any complications or problems with the early "pill".

[Heidi]

4. Excellent news for everyone!

Recommended and

:kick:

[jus_the_facts]

5. Oh really...NO side effects...sure wish they'd tried to make *the pill* w/o any for women....

....YEARS AGO...taking the pill for over 20 years causes EXTREMELY HORRIBLE side effects for us women as I know personally to be a FACT!!! :grr:

and on edit...I can't think of any DRUG that doesn't have side effects. :eyes:

[Megahurtz]

8. I think that

anything that alters hormones will unfortunately have side affects.

[customerserviceguy]

25. I actually tested hormone based male contraceptives

back in the late 1970's. I was recruited through an ad in a student newspaper at the University of Washington. Funding got cut during the Carter years, and eliminated during the Reagan years, so research was stopped cold dead, unfortunately. My only side effect was a bit of acne near my hairline. I went on two separate studies, one with just testosterone, the other with testosterone and Depo-Provera in a small amount. No ill effects, its the reason I only made child support payments on three kids instead of six! Glad to see this is coming back.

[Megahurtz]

45. I am glad to see it's coming back,

especially with the No-Choice ReThugs trying to limit our choices
and cause another population explosion.:crazy:
I guess there probably wouldn't be any more side effects than the Birth Control Pill has for women,
and as everything, it will effect different people differently.

I am glad to see there are now more options.:)

[customerserviceguy]

53. Especially this option

At the time I volunteered, I was working as a volunteer for Planned Parenthood in Seattle, preparing Pill prescriptions for women who came to our clinic. About one out of ten of them had their boyfriend with them, and on the rare occasion that one of them stepped up to my counter, all I could offer him was either a pack of condoms or a pamphlet on vasectomy, what I called at the time, the "all or nothing solution". I had hoped with all my heart that this would have been commercially available for men by 1985, too bad it took another twenty plus years for that to possibly become a reality.

[Megahurtz]

56. This does seem like something that should have been

offered to the men long ago. I wonder who was holding it back?

[customerserviceguy]

68. There were a number of things

most notably a decreased amount of funding at the government level, and a lessened interest from the pharma industry, as that was the time of the Dalkon Shield lawsuits, and health warnings were starting to come out for the Pill. All the sources of money dried up for something that it was doubtful that, in those days, men might not readily embrace. That's what I was told by the researchers. I became pretty good friends with them, I even did a piece for this for Good Morning America back in 1979, with the chief researcher, C. Alvin Paulsen.

[Missy Vixen]

18. I can't use hormone-based birth control, either

I'm now donning my flameproof undies as well -- soooo, you don't want kids, your partner does, and he's taking the male pill. What would you do?

I'm also just a bit disgusted at the "no side effects".

Julie

[greccogirl]

23. Easy. No glove, no

love...............

[kestrel91316]

20. Well, you might want to speak for yourself there.............

I took the pill, happily and uneventfully, for over 27 years, pretty much continuously. The only "side effects" I suffered from, lol, were a drastic improvement in an acne problem, and a drastic lessening of my debilitating menstrual cramps. And it was 100% effective at preventing pregnancy.

My gyn said I could stay on it without concern until I hit menopause, but I quit a few years ago since the DBF shoots blanks and my hormonal unpleasantries were easily controlled with natural progesterone cream.

[Dulcinea]

24. Not necessarily.

I took the pill for 17 years, & my side effects included regular periods (which I didn't have before) & NO unwanted pregnancies. I only went off to have kids when I was ready.

That said, more birth control options for everyone is always a good thing!

[Tesha]

36. For millions of women, it doesn't cause "extremely horrible side effects"

For millions and millions of women, the pill doesn't cause
"extremely horrible side effects". For most of us, it doesn't
cause any particular side effects at all.

And with the coming of period-suppressing regimes like Seasonale,
it may actually benefit our health in the long run; fewer cycles
across our lives probably leads to fewer problems in the long run.

Tesha

[jus_the_facts]

41. It was AFTER I got off of them when the problems began...

...suppressing my body's natural chemistry with extra hormones have caused ME problems after taking them for over 20 years...guess I'm just one of the unlucky ones...I'm only speaking from MY perspective and experience....to each their own...I don't reccommend using them PERIOD *pun intended* :nopity:

[Tesha]

42. Perhaps you're just perimenopausal and the pills had nothing to do with it?

20 years, ehh? That must be putting you up into the age where you
might be entering menopause.

So perhaps you're just perimenopausal and the pills had nothing
to do with it?

Tesha

[jus_the_facts]

46. I don't think so...suppressing ones body's natural balance with drugs.....

....and then it trying to correct itself is the cause of my problems...good luck to anyone else who decides to use them for any length of time as it is risky to *screw* with mother nature.

[Pithlet]

52. Must be Big Pharma.

Doctors are a bunch of no-nothings. The fact that our life-spans are longer and we don't die in childbrith by the millions anymore, if we don't live long enough to have 16 kids, is sheer luck. Remember, modern medicine bad. Fear-mongering good. Bonus points if you can use meaningless anecdotal evidence derived from self-diagnosis. We must save women from the horrors of modern medicine and go back to the good ol' days one message at a time. :sarcasm:

[jus_the_facts]

55. Yeah their mistakes still kill almost 100K people a year....

....there is no such thing as *the good ol' days* and the present isn't all that peachy either in regard to the medical establishment...even by their own standards...


http://www.iatrogenic.org/library/mederrorlib3.html

Medical Error

Historic report from Institute of Medicine.

"Reducing one of the nation's leading causes of death and injury - medical errors - will require rigorous changes throughout the health care system, including mandatory reporting requirements, says a new report from the Institute of Medicine (IOM) of the National Academies. The report lays out a comprehensive strategy for government, industry, consumers, and health providers to reduce medical errors, and it calls on Congress to create a national patient safety center to develop new tools and systems needed to address persistent problems.

"The human cost of medical errors is high. Based on the findings of one major study, medical errors kill some 44,000 people in U.S. hospitals each year. Another study puts the number much higher, at 98,000.

Even using the lower estimate, more people die from medical mistakes each year than from highway accidents, breast cancer, or AIDS."

[Pithlet]

58. The problem is human error.

Humans make mistakes. Even if your stats are true (they look inflated to me, from a biased source), that doesn't mean that modern medicine hasn't saved far more lives than medical error has taken. Sorry. I'll take being able to control when I have children, and surviving childbirth any day. Both brought to me by modern medicine. While I think it's important to educate oneself, and make informed choices, I also think it's terribly misguided to fear it and avoid it completely. As far as the BC pill goes, not everyone can or should take it. But millions of women do take it, safely and effectively. It's been crucial to women's independence, and I don't want to see its continued availability threatened, whether it's from fundies or some anti-medicine woo woo movement.

I also think that a safe and effective pill for men is a great idea. Men don't have enough options when it comes to their own responsibility for birth control. I'm always shocked when this issue comes up and they aren't clamoring for it. It's too soon to judge how safe and effective it will be at this point since it isn't even on the market yet, but it's also silly to just automatically reject it before it's even out of the gate because it's something new. But, I think it's silly to reject all modern medicine, and to pretend we aren't any better off than we used to be.

[Tesha]

65. It's also okay if you ask questions about your own care.

It's also okay if you ask questions about your own care.

For example, I always wonder about some of the prescribing errors
that lead to complications. Okay, I'll buy that if CVS fills your
one-time prescription for a pain killer with coumadin (a "blood
thinner") instead, you might not notice it. But if your routine
20 mg tiny white Lipitor tablet suddenly turns into a big pink
tablet that smells like an antibiotic, isn't it partly *YOUR*
responsibility to ask "Hey, wassup with *THAT*?"

Similarly, doctors don't have the final say-so in selecting
your treatment. Usuaally, they just offer alternatives and
options; the choice is up to you. If *YOU* decide to have
the vertebra in your back fused to try to overcome lower
back pain, but then discover that you haven't got the range
of motion you used to have, should you really be "surprised"?

There's probably no one who cares about your own health care
than you do!

Tesha

(None of this reply should be taken as diminishing hospitals'
roles in the transmission of iatrogenic infections, outright
surgical errors, and the like.)

[jus_the_facts]

72. Yes...I already know this......

....as I went to my life-long OB/GYN and specifically asked for an antibiotic as I already knew why I was there...instead of listening to ME...his *nurse practioner* decided I didn't know what I was talking about...and refused me...then she and the doctor decided I had some new mysterious *syndrome* of the glands of my vagina...gave me a detailed photocopied list of 5 treatments for this...gave me the first of the 5 a topical creme...when I went back after using it..it didn't solve my problem...he then tells me he will operate to remove the glands around my vagina instead of any of the options in between the first and 5th option of surgery...I finally got a few of the pills I'd asked for in the first place after my Dad got cancer and had to take this particular antibotic and it SOLVED my problem without carving around and mutilating me instead....so thanks again for your concern but I don't need any advice on this subject.

And on edit...this problem also started after quitting the birth control pills and always would affect me before my periods started.

[Marnieworld]

43. I too had horrible side effects from the pill

Immediately too not after many years of use. depression, crying, rages, I was like a completely different person. Appetite increase. It was horrible. After a year I was much much, heavier and suicidal. I accidentally went off of it and was suddenly "normal" again. It was a nightmare and is more common than people think. And I had to figure it out for myself, no warning about this, no screening beforehand and no monitoring. My hubby is all snipped now but if I had to deal with fertility again it would tube tying for me. That was almost 9 years ago and I'm fine now in case anyone is wondering. :hi:

[jus_the_facts]

44. It is a roller-coaster of hormone HELL...it's like my body is trying to make up....

...from me suppressing my periods for so long...it's just not natural and I don't recommend their use because of what I've been through. :hi:

[Marnieworld]

48. Amen to that sister!

More women should know of the possibilities and what to watch out for.

[jus_the_facts]

51. Thank You...

....so many women have suffered at the hands of big pharma and doctors who are complicit in causing more problems than they solve these days...I'm glad I never had an unwanted pregnancy as I've never wanted to have children...but in hindsight I wish I'd never taken birth control pills just because I thought they were the easiest way to prevent pregnancy...as I now know the harm they've caused me and I regret making that choice instead of being more careful in other ways that aren't as damaging to my body. :hi:

[Tesha]

67. See, that's the problem.

> as I now know the harm they've caused me and I regret
> making that choice instead of being more careful in other
> ways that aren't as damaging to my body.

See, that's the problem. There's essentially no way you can tell
whether the symptoms you're now experiencing are the result of
20 years of the pill or not. The only way you'd ever know for
sure would be to run your life exactly over again, sans pills,
and see what happens. And that experiment is, of course,
impossible.

As I mentioned (and you mostly ignored, saying just "I don't
think so"), you may just be in the early stages of menopause.

Tesha

[jus_the_facts]

69. Are YOU a doctor?

....I know my own body and my experience...thanks for trying to diagnose me yourself from a couple of snippets in a thread online. :eyes:

[Tesha]

70. You may know your body...

You may know your body, but your knowledge of the scientific
method seems to be somewhat lacking.

Individual anecdotes simply don't prove anything.

Tesha

[jus_the_facts]

74. Thanks again but please don't assume I don't know what I'm talking about....

...my post above to your other remarks might give you an inkling of one of my experience with the *experts*.

[greccogirl]

62. For a vast majority of women,

the effects of the pill are positive. Acne goes away, shorter and less painful periods and always on time.

[superconnected]

7. Having learned from womens bc there are rarely

"no side-effects." and then it's highly circumstantial depending on who's using it.

Unfortunately men haven't learned this yet. Most havent figured out female bc often has terrible and sometimes deadly side effects.

Hopefully it wont hurt the men but, I wouldn't trust it.

Remember the on size fits all pills they started women with, 300 pound woman got the same estrogen pill as a 90 pound one. Some women got cancer from the overdoes on estrogen. Others just had their utereses removed.

I was lucky. My skin would tear with me barely brazing it with my finger nail because it became so tender with the estrogen o.d. My doctor freaked over that and insisted I not take it again. I was only a few days into it. A friend of mine used it for years though and then got the hysterectomy.

[tblue]

9. Too bad we can't give it to Poppy retroactively

[Megahurtz]

47. Or HIS Dad,

and before that his DAD'S Dad. Lol!

[jberryhill]

10. Suuuure...

"no side effects"

and

"hope human trials... begin within a few years"

While I agree that a drug nobody has yet taken has no side effects, but I am willing to bet they'll find some.

[Recursion]

12. But this is the brave new world of big pharma...

...drugs are assumed not to have side effects until a jury forces the company to admit there are.

[jberryhill]

26. Good Point

You're right.

We need "tort reform" so that we can continue to have drugs with no side effects.

[crossroads]

13. Yeah Baby! Good news!!!

Put it in the water...lol! Make it mandatory! About time!!

[Ohio Joe]

17. Sweet

It's about time!

[mongo]

19. woo Hoo! Sign me up!

If I could afford it I'd get snipped tomorrow.

[THUNDER HANDS]

28. how many women would trust men to take their pills daily?

I mean, the woman is the one who gets pregnant. If I was a woman, I wouldn't want the job of safeguarding a pregnancy left to anyone but me.

[Arugula Latte]

37. Exactly.

I can just picture it: "Hey, baby, it's okay, I'm on the pill." ... Yeah, sure.

[Egnever]

39. I dont think the point is to have the women trust them

Although i can see it being used the way you describe. I think the point is for men to have the same ability as women to not have to "trust" the other when it comes to avoiding a pregnancy.

By all means please keep taking your pill or whatever form of birth control you choose. If avoiding a pregnancy is what we are after doubling up on that protection can only be a good thing.

This is long over due IMHO.

[Book Lover]

49. Myself, for one

But if you don't trust the guy you're having sex with, then use your own BC. That's for your protection. His BC is for his own. What's wrong with that?

on edit: Oh, I see you're a guy. Reword the above to switch the genders, please :-)

[greccogirl]

63. No woman who is

smart would.

[Nikia]

66. I would trust my husband

He wants children right now less than me.

[Jed Dilligan]

31. I'm not messing with that stuff

How many pills introduced as "without side effects" are now the subject of class action suits?

There are many other ways to avoid conception, even for people who hate condoms.

[funkzilla]

33. hmmm

I still reckon a lot of guys won't want to use it. I think men worry more about messing with their bits than women - and most people will want other folks to use it for a bit before they do. And it's not going to be a protection against STDs

[Infinite Hope]

40. That's all we need is more foreign substances...

there are already options and chances are this is no more fool-proof than anything else. Our society is obsessed with turning to foreign substances to substitute for judgment and other alternatives that don't involve unnatural substances in our body that clearly have some effect whether we notice it short term or long term. Chemicals and substances don't pass through our body without some effect on the cells, tissues, and orgams. This is one person who won't substitute foreign substances for common sense.

[Deja Q]

50. Great! This means men will spread only diseases, not babies!

That'll help "negative population growth"...

[Tight_rope]

57. The Government should be giving these pills out for free.

[Ilsa]

59. Wow, this ought the get the Fundies' boxers in a bunch!

More "free love" waiting for us all!

[bamacrat]

76. Should have been developed a long time ago