Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
OT: Male birth control tests in U.S. next year
9 views
Skip to first unread message
Lenona
Nov 21, 2011, 8:30:00 PM11/21/11
to
http://www.wired.com/magazine/2011/04/ff_vasectomy/all/1
(article and dozens of comments)
Warning: It includes a graphic video that I haven't even run - I don't
want to.
Excerpts:
...........If the research pans out, RISUG would represent the biggest
advance in male birth control since a clever Polish entrepreneur
dipped a phallic mold into liquid rubber and invented the modern
condom. “It holds tremendous promise,” says Ronald Weiss, a leading
Canadian vasectomy surgeon and a member of a World Health Organization
team that visited India to look into RISUG. “If we can prove that
RISUG is safe and effective and reversible, there is no reason why
anybody would have a vasectomy.”
But here’s the thing: RISUG is not the product of some global
pharmaceutical company or state-of-the-art government-funded research
lab. It’s the brainchild of a maverick Indian scientist named Sujoy
Guha, who has spent more than 30 years refining the idea while
battling bureaucrats in his own country and skeptics worldwide. He has
prevailed because, in study after study, RISUG has been proven to work
100 percent of the time. Among the hundreds of men who have been
successfully injected with the compound so far in clinical trials,
there has not been a single failure or serious adverse reaction. The
procedure is now in late Phase III clinical trials in India, which
means approval in that country could come in as little as two years.
But RISUG is garnering interest beyond India. Every week, Guha’s inbox
fills with entreaties from Western men. They’ve heard about RISUG on
Internet forums or from occasional mentions in newspaper and magazine
articles. Some of them even volunteer to travel to India, offering
themselves as lab rats. Guha puts them off gently but politely; for
now, the trials are open only to Indian men. Everyone else has to
wait. “Our options suck,” fumes one frustrated correspondent, a
Florida real estate manager who emailed Guha a few years ago.........
............A birdlike man with clear, olive-toned skin and an elegant
manner, Guha seems to have been transported from another century. In a
sense, he was: Born in 1940, before independence, he still uses
Britishisms like see here and good man. He doesn’t waste oxygen on
small talk, so when he does speak you know to listen. Nevertheless, he
has a lively sense of humor, and when something amuses him he’ll burst
into a delighted, high-pitched laugh. At age 70, he still does not
need glasses, which he attributes to his daily eye exercises. Every
night, he jogs 2 miles around the IIT campus carrying a rolled-up belt
to ward off stray dogs. “Every part of the body must be exercised,” he
says............
(snip)
Here's one suspicious comment (regarding the idea that teen boys
supposedly would prefer using condoms - thus preventing STDs - to any
type of reversible surgical procedure)
".....sadly, as someone who has done a lot of volunteer work with
teenagers in teaching life skills to them I know a lot of young men
who have had vasectomies and aren't even 21 yet. They did so out of
fear of having kids and the wrong headed thinking that it would make
them irresistible to young ladies fearful of pregnancy.
"One young fellow who was in this group died of AIDS in January of
this year.
"He was 24."
Doesn't sound right at all. I mean, while U.S. doctors are more
willing to sterilize childless patients than they used to be, they
still tend to balk at sterilizing anyone under 30, since the regret
rate is so high - about 1 in 3.
And:
Bojan: ........While reaching out for new birth-control methods for
men can be understood from a macro-social point of view in developing
countries, marketing and endorsing such methods in Western developed
countries could do much harm to these countries' economies and state
budgets, through aging population and less new-coming workers to
replace retired ones. I strongly believe that the currently-dominant
culture in the developed countries, to remain without children until
at least 40 years of age because of pursuing of "higher goals", is
very risky (for the individual) and very damaging for the states'
economies.........
And:
crane_calling: Oh yes, it would be terrible if young people were
allowed to have pregnancy-free sex in committed loving relationships
with a reversible, non-hormonal procedure. Look, with Earth as
horrendously over-populated as it is, it's a little blind to appeal to
'nature' and call other men 'unnatural' for not wanting children. Give
me a hedonistic, self-limiting population over a starving, teeming
mass any day.
Robert Paulson: Nothing unnatural about it. Human beings have this
construct called "culture". It is what has allowed us to accumulate
knowledge and establish stable societies. Within more cultures, a
trait has emerged that makes men responsible for all of their
offspring, such that each successive offspring is a continuous drain
on the man's resources for 18+ years. It is perfectly natural to be
mindful of such resources.
As for what happens if 18 year olds do it because it's cool?... Not a
whole lot. The industrialized world already has been dealing with
declining birth rates, and doing so rather well. In the case of low
birthrates, a population continues on sustainable, and apparently
takes on an interest in robots for replacement labor (i.e. Japan). In
the case of high birthrates, people starve. It does not seem like
such an issue to err on the side of the former.
(end)
And here's a survey you might want to fill out:
http://www.newmalecontraception.org/risug.htm
(Scroll halfway down to "Want RISUG/Vasalgel?" and click on survey/
petition.)
Lenona.
(article and dozens of comments)
Warning: It includes a graphic video that I haven't even run - I don't
want to.
Excerpts:
...........If the research pans out, RISUG would represent the biggest
advance in male birth control since a clever Polish entrepreneur
dipped a phallic mold into liquid rubber and invented the modern
condom. “It holds tremendous promise,” says Ronald Weiss, a leading
Canadian vasectomy surgeon and a member of a World Health Organization
team that visited India to look into RISUG. “If we can prove that
RISUG is safe and effective and reversible, there is no reason why
anybody would have a vasectomy.”
But here’s the thing: RISUG is not the product of some global
pharmaceutical company or state-of-the-art government-funded research
lab. It’s the brainchild of a maverick Indian scientist named Sujoy
Guha, who has spent more than 30 years refining the idea while
battling bureaucrats in his own country and skeptics worldwide. He has
prevailed because, in study after study, RISUG has been proven to work
100 percent of the time. Among the hundreds of men who have been
successfully injected with the compound so far in clinical trials,
there has not been a single failure or serious adverse reaction. The
procedure is now in late Phase III clinical trials in India, which
means approval in that country could come in as little as two years.
But RISUG is garnering interest beyond India. Every week, Guha’s inbox
fills with entreaties from Western men. They’ve heard about RISUG on
Internet forums or from occasional mentions in newspaper and magazine
articles. Some of them even volunteer to travel to India, offering
themselves as lab rats. Guha puts them off gently but politely; for
now, the trials are open only to Indian men. Everyone else has to
wait. “Our options suck,” fumes one frustrated correspondent, a
Florida real estate manager who emailed Guha a few years ago.........
............A birdlike man with clear, olive-toned skin and an elegant
manner, Guha seems to have been transported from another century. In a
sense, he was: Born in 1940, before independence, he still uses
Britishisms like see here and good man. He doesn’t waste oxygen on
small talk, so when he does speak you know to listen. Nevertheless, he
has a lively sense of humor, and when something amuses him he’ll burst
into a delighted, high-pitched laugh. At age 70, he still does not
need glasses, which he attributes to his daily eye exercises. Every
night, he jogs 2 miles around the IIT campus carrying a rolled-up belt
to ward off stray dogs. “Every part of the body must be exercised,” he
says............
(snip)
Here's one suspicious comment (regarding the idea that teen boys
supposedly would prefer using condoms - thus preventing STDs - to any
type of reversible surgical procedure)
".....sadly, as someone who has done a lot of volunteer work with
teenagers in teaching life skills to them I know a lot of young men
who have had vasectomies and aren't even 21 yet. They did so out of
fear of having kids and the wrong headed thinking that it would make
them irresistible to young ladies fearful of pregnancy.
"One young fellow who was in this group died of AIDS in January of
this year.
"He was 24."
Doesn't sound right at all. I mean, while U.S. doctors are more
willing to sterilize childless patients than they used to be, they
still tend to balk at sterilizing anyone under 30, since the regret
rate is so high - about 1 in 3.
And:
Bojan: ........While reaching out for new birth-control methods for
men can be understood from a macro-social point of view in developing
countries, marketing and endorsing such methods in Western developed
countries could do much harm to these countries' economies and state
budgets, through aging population and less new-coming workers to
replace retired ones. I strongly believe that the currently-dominant
culture in the developed countries, to remain without children until
at least 40 years of age because of pursuing of "higher goals", is
very risky (for the individual) and very damaging for the states'
economies.........
And:
crane_calling: Oh yes, it would be terrible if young people were
allowed to have pregnancy-free sex in committed loving relationships
with a reversible, non-hormonal procedure. Look, with Earth as
horrendously over-populated as it is, it's a little blind to appeal to
'nature' and call other men 'unnatural' for not wanting children. Give
me a hedonistic, self-limiting population over a starving, teeming
mass any day.
Robert Paulson: Nothing unnatural about it. Human beings have this
construct called "culture". It is what has allowed us to accumulate
knowledge and establish stable societies. Within more cultures, a
trait has emerged that makes men responsible for all of their
offspring, such that each successive offspring is a continuous drain
on the man's resources for 18+ years. It is perfectly natural to be
mindful of such resources.
As for what happens if 18 year olds do it because it's cool?... Not a
whole lot. The industrialized world already has been dealing with
declining birth rates, and doing so rather well. In the case of low
birthrates, a population continues on sustainable, and apparently
takes on an interest in robots for replacement labor (i.e. Japan). In
the case of high birthrates, people starve. It does not seem like
such an issue to err on the side of the former.
(end)
And here's a survey you might want to fill out:
http://www.newmalecontraception.org/risug.htm
(Scroll halfway down to "Want RISUG/Vasalgel?" and click on survey/
petition.)
Lenona.
Matthew Kruk
Nov 22, 2011, 1:18:07 AM11/22/11
to
Good, that'll stop Roy from multiplying.
Matthew Kruk
Nov 22, 2011, 1:20:10 AM11/22/11
to
"Lenona" <leno...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:203bbca2-43da-4acc...@u37g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
I looked. I don't feel good.
news:203bbca2-43da-4acc...@u37g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
http://www.wired.com/magazine/2011/04/ff_vasectomy/all/1
(article and dozens of comments)
Warning: It includes a graphic video that I haven't even run - I don't
want to.
--
(article and dozens of comments)
Warning: It includes a graphic video that I haven't even run - I don't
want to.
I looked. I don't feel good.
Message has been deleted
X ` Man
Nov 22, 2011, 8:51:25 AM11/22/11
to
On 11/22/11 8:33 AM, Terry del Fuego wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 17:30:00 -0800 (PST), Lenona<leno...@yahoo.com>
> quoted:
> or put into the water supply? If not, do you know where I can make a
> donation to help that happen?
Aren't you a bit old to be worried about getting pregnant?
> On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 17:30:00 -0800 (PST), Lenona<leno...@yahoo.com>
> quoted:
>
>> RISUG has been proven to work 100 percent of the time.
>
> Has there been any research into whether it will work if aerosolized
>> RISUG has been proven to work 100 percent of the time.
>
> or put into the water supply? If not, do you know where I can make a
> donation to help that happen?
Aren't you a bit old to be worried about getting pregnant?
Rob Cibik
Nov 22, 2011, 3:57:36 PM11/22/11
to
On Tuesday, November 22, 2011 1:18:07 AM UTC-5, Matthew Kruk wrote:
> Good, that'll stop Roy from multiplying.
No worries there, Matthew. I paid for Blow-up Al to be 'fixed'. And with a human female? Fuhgeddaboudit!
> Good, that'll stop Roy from multiplying.
Brigid Nelson
Nov 22, 2011, 4:55:06 PM11/22/11
to
On 11/22/2011 05:33 AM, Terry del Fuego wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 17:30:00 -0800 (PST), Lenona<leno...@yahoo.com>
> quoted:
>
> On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 17:30:00 -0800 (PST), Lenona<leno...@yahoo.com>
> quoted:
>
>> RISUG has been proven to work 100 percent of the time.
>
>
> Has there been any research into whether it will work if aerosolized
> or put into the water supply? If not, do you know where I can make a
> donation to help that happen?
You know that's my favorite fantasy too, but it would probably also
> or put into the water supply? If not, do you know where I can make a
> donation to help that happen?
negatively effect the food chain . Even though I don't much like people,
I do like to eat.
b
Lenona
Nov 22, 2011, 5:51:10 PM11/22/11
to
On Nov 22, 8:33 am, Terry del Fuego <t_del_fu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 17:30:00 -0800 (PST), Lenona <lenona...@yahoo.com>
> quoted:
link halfway down if you want to become an investor, per se.
However, aside from your jokes, I suspect you didn't read the article.
That is, it's a BARRIER method, not a hormonal method. That's good
news for those patients who can't or won't use hormones.
However:
"Though lower doses wear off after as little as three months, the
standard dose lasts at least seven years (Guha 1993; Guha 1997), and
in fact the men from the early studies have been using their RISUG for
20 years now."
So the bad news is that since it can last so long, it will not be
nearly as profitable to Big Pharma as a daily male pill would be, and
Big Pharma ain't gonna be happy about that - and won't respond quickly
to consumer demand unless there's a LOT of consumer demand.
In the meantime, there's the pesky problem of those men's rights
activists who demand that fathers be treated with the same social
reverence that mothers are, but who also support those men who demand
the right to abandon their unwanted children, while refusing to lift a
finger to help the campaign for better male birth control. (Some of
the more famous MRAs won't even TALK about it, such as Fox News' Marc
Rudov and Youtube gadfly/psychologist/author Bernard Chapin......)
This is compounded with the handful of hysterical misogynists who
argue that if we don't have such birth control already, it's due to a
feminist conspiracy.
Aside from gold-digging Hollywood groupies and such, why does anyone
believe women wouldn't welcome it? I mean, when was the last time you
heard ANY woman complain about the fact that an unmarried man over 30,
especially, can get a vasectomy any time, no questions asked? Didn't
think so. In the same vein, when women get asked by reporters on the
street what they think of the male PILL in particular, their knee-jerk
reaction is always "I wouldn't trust him." In other words, women are
likely more worried about having too MANY babies than too few. It
WOULD be interesting to hear what they'd say if asked "what do you
think of this foolproof reversible male method?" Again, I'm sure
they'd welcome it.
BTW, in the current issue of Ms. Magazine, there's an article on male
BC that points out that while market researchers have found little
consumer interest in the recent past, the same thing happened with
NuvaRing before it was actually available. However, once on the
market, it became very popular. So the author thinks the same thing
could happen with RISUG.
Lenona.
> On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 17:30:00 -0800 (PST), Lenona <lenona...@yahoo.com>
> quoted:
>
> >RISUG has been proven to work 100 percent of the time.
>
> >RISUG has been proven to work 100 percent of the time.
>
> Has there been any research into whether it will work if aerosolized
> or put into the water supply? If not, do you know where I can make a
> donation to help that happen?
Well, you can click on the last link I provided and search for another
> or put into the water supply? If not, do you know where I can make a
> donation to help that happen?
link halfway down if you want to become an investor, per se.
However, aside from your jokes, I suspect you didn't read the article.
That is, it's a BARRIER method, not a hormonal method. That's good
news for those patients who can't or won't use hormones.
However:
"Though lower doses wear off after as little as three months, the
standard dose lasts at least seven years (Guha 1993; Guha 1997), and
in fact the men from the early studies have been using their RISUG for
20 years now."
So the bad news is that since it can last so long, it will not be
nearly as profitable to Big Pharma as a daily male pill would be, and
Big Pharma ain't gonna be happy about that - and won't respond quickly
to consumer demand unless there's a LOT of consumer demand.
In the meantime, there's the pesky problem of those men's rights
activists who demand that fathers be treated with the same social
reverence that mothers are, but who also support those men who demand
the right to abandon their unwanted children, while refusing to lift a
finger to help the campaign for better male birth control. (Some of
the more famous MRAs won't even TALK about it, such as Fox News' Marc
Rudov and Youtube gadfly/psychologist/author Bernard Chapin......)
This is compounded with the handful of hysterical misogynists who
argue that if we don't have such birth control already, it's due to a
feminist conspiracy.
Aside from gold-digging Hollywood groupies and such, why does anyone
believe women wouldn't welcome it? I mean, when was the last time you
heard ANY woman complain about the fact that an unmarried man over 30,
especially, can get a vasectomy any time, no questions asked? Didn't
think so. In the same vein, when women get asked by reporters on the
street what they think of the male PILL in particular, their knee-jerk
reaction is always "I wouldn't trust him." In other words, women are
likely more worried about having too MANY babies than too few. It
WOULD be interesting to hear what they'd say if asked "what do you
think of this foolproof reversible male method?" Again, I'm sure
they'd welcome it.
BTW, in the current issue of Ms. Magazine, there's an article on male
BC that points out that while market researchers have found little
consumer interest in the recent past, the same thing happened with
NuvaRing before it was actually available. However, once on the
market, it became very popular. So the author thinks the same thing
could happen with RISUG.
Lenona.
Lenona
Nov 22, 2011, 5:54:40 PM11/22/11
to
Forgot to throw in this site:
http://malecontraceptives.org/methods/risug.php
Other methods get mentioned too.
http://malecontraceptives.org/methods/risug.php
Other methods get mentioned too.
Roy, Roy, the Asperger Boy
Nov 22, 2011, 10:50:09 PM11/22/11
to
On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 23:18:07 -0700, "Matthew Kruk" <nob...@home.com>
wrote:
>Good, that'll stop Roy from multiplying.
>
I think his personality and mood disorders had pretty much prevented
that already.
wrote:
>Good, that'll stop Roy from multiplying.
>
that already.
Message has been deleted
0 new messages