What are you thinking right now?

[DarkSelene]

Can't even read in this house, 12 hours and I'll have my little vacation from all this noise and mess.

 

[DarkSelene]

Ok, this is awesome. I'm super impressed.

 

[soresoul]

Thousand lies been told so many times over the years. I guess that's your only last resort amusement.

 

[AmytheTemperamental]

Happy Birthday

 

[DarkSelene]

^I think their point is that female contraceptive has a possibility of the same side effects.

The male and female contraceptive pill/injection works basically in the same ways. You synthesize hormones so your pituitary gland doesn’t produce them. The tests started with a variety of hormones (progestogen being the most important one) which blocks the sperm production on a man, adding testosterone so the man wouldn’t have a problem with chemical imbalance (Which happens either way, the same with the female pill because it’s not the natural process of your body at work). The difference between the female and male reproductive system is that the female is born with all the eggs she’ll need throughout her life and the rest of the process of being fertil happens only based on hormones. The male reproductive system actually needs hormones to be fertile, because they produce sperm their entire lives (not born with it).
The main side effect that is a concern, imo, is that blocking the production of sperm could lead to infertility that would not be reversed which differs from the female pill where stopping the use and leaving your body to create those hormones naturally would be able to reverse any long term effects in the reproductive system (because we are born with all our eggs).
With that said, the other side effects differs from body to body, and it could lead to death in either cases. The male contraceptive IS more dangerous and the study needs to implement a better combination of hormones because the risks outweighs any potential benefit regarding that the male contraceptive did not have the same efficacy as the female’s one and had more dangerous side effects.

I probably shouldnt have posted about that male birth control thing earlier on since it could just cause fights. The whole coverage of it just came across as pointlessly spiteful and vindictive to me which is probably what irked me.

Sorry for bringing this up again, I just read an article on this and it pissed me off.

 

[AmytheTemperamental]

Toys are the answer.

 

[DarkSelene]

Toys are the answer.

With that I actually agree

 

[user 115627]

The male contraceptive IS more dangerous and the study needs to implement a better combination of hormones because the risks outweighs any potential benefit regarding that the male contraceptive did not have the same efficacy as the female’s one and had more dangerous side effects.

[...]
Sorry for bringing this up again, I just read an article on this and it pissed me off.

Strange, I heard that particular one was relatively successful for the current stage even though there have been side effects of different severity across the board. But the study will go through many more stages and a lot of the participants have agreed to attend follow-up phases. Nevertheless it will probably take many more years of improvement to get approved even after the study is finished.

I know that one of the twenty people who opted out during the study did not regain his original sperm count many months after the treatment. That was commonly referred to as becoming "infertile" in articles, even though that's not correct. There has also been one suicide, but it could not be confirmed to be a direct consequence of the treatment.

...would you share that article you read though? I'd like to check if it was one I've already come across. Plus the subject fascinates me in general.

 

[DarkSelene]

The male contraceptive IS more dangerous and the study needs to implement a better combination of hormones because the risks outweighs any potential benefit regarding that the male contraceptive did not have the same efficacy as the female’s one and had more dangerous side effects.

[...]
Sorry for bringing this up again, I just read an article on this and it pissed me off.

Strange, I heard that particular one was relatively successful for the current stage even though there have been side effects of different severity across the board. But the study will go through many more stages and a lot of the participants have agreed to attend follow-up phases. Nevertheless it will probably take many more years of improvement to get approved even after the study is finished.

I know that one of the twenty people who opted out during the study did not regain his original sperm count many months after the treatment. That was commonly referred to as becoming "infertile" in articles, even though that's not correct. There has also been one suicide, but it could not be confirmed to be a direct consequence of the treatment.

...would you share that article you read though? I'd like to check if it was one I've already come across. Plus the subject fascinates me in general.

It was sucessful, but the risks on the use of progestogen in long term effect could lead to actual infertility itself. Although they were in the phase of the treatment where they were only using the testosterone injections to balance the hormones back. Still, it wasn't as effective as the female pill, I think there was a number of 1.57 pregnancies in 100 females with partners who were being tested while the female pill is less than 1.
They did have a suicide and some cases of depression, a lot of problems with chemical imbalance which is expected but I think it was a bit too out of control to keep testing with that combination/amount of hormones and that's why they stopped.

They're definitely going to keep researching this, but the fact that those feminists were using science as an excuse to blame gender inequality pissed me off. (It was one of the articles about the feminists you and paraiyar posted + a bunch of ignorant people's opinions all over the internet that I waisted my time reading)

 

[user 115627]

It was sucessful, but the risks on the use of progestogen in long term effect could lead to actual infertility itself. Although they were in the phase of the treatment where they were only using the testosterone injections to balance the hormones back. Still, it wasn't as effective as the female pill, I think there was a number of 1.57 pregnancies in 100 females with partners who were being tested while the female pill is less than 1.
They did have a suicide and some cases of depression, a lot of problems with chemical imbalance which is expected but I think it was a bit too out of control to keep testing with that combination/amount of hormones and that's why they stopped.

They're definitely going to keep researching this, but the fact that those feminists were using science as an excuse to blame gender inequality pissed me off. (It was one of the articles about the feminists you and paraiyar posted + a bunch of ignorant people's opinions all over the internet that I waisted my time reading)

Ah, I see what you mean. Yes, the additional hormones can cause infertility by making the body produce significantly less sperm or no sperm at all after prolonged treatment. I doubt they expected it to be as effective at this stage, but it seems promising enough or they wouldn't continue. The female pill also went through less testing stages since the requirements were not nearly as rigid back in the "old days"...and wouldn't even pass current standards in the condition it was approved back then.

I'm glad you mentioned they didn't stop because of the participants' complaints or the number of people who opted out but because of their general concerns during the current study stage and the desire to further improve.

And I'm just as annoyed by the nature of these articles, the blatant factual inaccuracy and shoehorning of a political agenda.

 

[DarkSelene]

Ah, I see what you mean. Yes, the additional hormones can cause infertility by making the body produce significantly less sperm or no sperm at all after prolonged treatment. I doubt they expected it to be as effective at this stage, but it seems promising enough or they wouldn't continue. The female pill also went through less testing stages since the requirements were not nearly as rigid back in the "old days"...and wouldn't even pass current standards in the condition it was approved back then.

I'm glad you mentioned they didn't stop because of the participants' complaints or the number of people who opted out but because of their general concerns during the current study stage and the desire to further improve.

And I'm just as annoyed by the nature of these articles, the blatant factual inaccuracy and shoehorning of a political agenda.

The female pill is highly banalized by doctors, it shouldn't be as normal as it is to prescribe/take those, but that's a whole other topic.

The number of people who opted out, for what I've been reading, was really low and a great number of participants did wanted to continue the testing, to me just another proof that this has nothing to do with what those feminists were writing about.

Also, I read this one argument that makes a lot of sense, if since the beginning of studies the pill was about sexism, wouldn't men want the responsability of not impregnanting women for themselves? Wouldn't it be easier to start with a male contraceptive pill since then? And, by the way, the studies began with Margaret Sanger wanting Pincus to work on a pill with money from another woman called Margaret McCormick, both of them were women's rights activists and pro to sexual liberation... I don't see how that could translate into men wanting women to suffer.

 

[user 115627]

The female pill is highly banalized by doctors, it shouldn't be as normal as it is to prescribe/take those, but that's a whole other topic.

That's something I'm also aware of now and it made me wonder why there hasn't been more push for improvement of the female pill. But I agree it is a discussion for a different time.

The number of people who opted out, for what I've been reading, was really low and a great number of participants did wanted to continue the testing, to me just another proof that this has nothing to do with what those feminists were writing about.

Also, I read this one argument that makes a lot of sense, if since the beginning of studies the pill was about sexism, wouldn't men want the responsability of not impregnanting women for themselves? Wouldn't it be easier to start with a male contraceptive pill since then? And, by the way, the studies began with Margaret Sanger wanting Pincus to work on a pill with money from another woman called Margaret McCormick, both of them were women's rights activists and pro to sexual liberation... I don't see how that could translate into men wanting women to suffer.

Yeah, I regard the "men wanting women to suffer" as a non-argument since women's right activists were involved almost from the very beginning. When it comes down to the male pill or any kind of male contraceptive, I heard the argument that men just weren't interested, couldn't be bothered with it or are simply not responsible enough...statements which I cannot understand either and am highly skeptical of by now.

I don't want to sound cynical, but since you mentioned the banalization of the effects of the female pill, I should mention I witnessed a similar(?) push for the approval of Addyi, the so-called "female viagra", throughout the last year. Side effects were also banalized and the efficacy was massively exaggerated.

PS: The somewhat controversial history of Margaret Sanger and her ties to eugenics is yet another topic that is better left untouched here.

 

[Yukongirl]

Guess I haven't hit rock bottom yet. Don't think the bottom even exists....

 

[DarkSelene]

I don't want to sound cynical, but since you mentioned the banalization of the effects of the female pill, I should mention I witnessed a similar(?) push for the approval of Addyi, the so-called "female viagra", throughout the last year. Side effects were also banalized and the efficacy was massively exaggerated.

Oh, it was exaggerated and the company was smart enough to use feminism as a way to get the approval of their failed experiment, "Even the Score" is ridiculous. The "female viagra" acts exactly like modern antidepressants, wich was the reason for it to be developed in the first place, but I guess they thought they would make more money this way...

 

[user 115627]

Oh, it was exaggerated and the company was smart enough to use feminism as a way to get the approval of their failed experiment, "Even the Score" is ridiculous. The "female viagra" acts exactly like modern antidepressants, wich was the reason for it to be developed in the first place, but I guess they thought they would make more money this way...

I couldn't agree more...plus you get the feature of getting unconscious when using it in conjunction with alcohol.

 

[DarkSelene]

I couldn't agree more...plus you get the feature of getting unconscious when using it in conjunction with alcohol.

And isn't that what any woman would want while having sex? Being unconscious! What a bliss that medicine is for HSDD!

 

[user 115627]

I couldn't agree more...plus you get the feature of getting unconscious when using it in conjunction with alcohol.

And isn't that what any woman would want while having sex? Being unconscious! What a bliss that medicine is for HSDD!

#CheersForEquality?

Sorry, couldn't help myself. It's only half as terrible when I can still laugh about the absurdity...

 

[DarkSelene]

#CheersForEquality?

Sorry, couldn't help myself. It's only half as terrible when I can still laugh about the absurdity...

If we can't laugh about it, what can we do?!

 

[lonelyfairy]

I can't believe that I was only 17 years old young teenager when I joined to this forum few years ago... Time flies fast. ;_;

 

[Paraiyar]

I can't believe that I was only 17 years old young teenager when I joined to this forum few years ago... Time flies fast. ;_;

And it only goes faster over time. I cannot believe I'll be 26 in February.