back to article Boffins develop working MALE PILL

Stateside boffins think that they may have delivered a long-sought boon: a male oral contraceptive without undesirable side effects. There are already drugs which men can take to render sex a mildly athletic recreational activity rather than a potentially life-altering financial and emotional commitment, but these generally …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Anonymous Coward
    Coat

    One half of the equation

    You'll just need to sell it with a companion Credulity Pill, to be given to female partners in order for them to genuinely believe the guys when they say "don't worry love I'm taking this male contraceptive pill"!

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Thumb Up

      Missed the point

      That is such a silly point women always make when they feel threatened and intimidated by the prospect of a male 'pill'.

      It's there to protect MEN and put THEM completely in control of their own progeny, not to empower women. Women already have their own pill for all that, and if you don't like the idea of men empowering themselves, tough. This century is going to be for men what the 20th was for women, so hopefully we'll have a little more balance by the end of it.

      Anything that reduces the number of kids going around calling the wrong man 'Daddy' is a good thing, even if certain women are mortified by the prospect.

      Cue Milifemod...

      1. Sarah Bee (Written by Reg staff)

        Re: Missed the point

        Amazing. Boy, I'm gonna miss this shit.

        1. Fred Flintstone Gold badge

          Re. "Boy, I'm gonna miss this shit."

          As in "when this pill arrives" or are you leaving us?

        2. <shakes head>

          wher is miss bee going

          nooooooo

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Alert

            Miss Bee

            I didn't have these pills in time, and, well .... you know what happened ;-)

        3. Anonymous Coward
          Facepalm

          Re: IT won't miss you

          'Milifemod' was cryptically short for Militant Female Moderator, in anticipation of your predictable response.

        4. wayne 8

          whaddya mean by "miss this shit"?

          Ms Bee, are you heading off for a higher calling than scooping crud out of the comment trough?

      2. Sorry that handle is already taken. Silver badge
        Facepalm

        "This century is going to be for men what the 20th was for women"

        Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

        hahahahahahahaha

        hahahahahahahahahahahahaha

        hahaha.

        1. Sarah Bee (Written by Reg staff)

          Re: "This century is going to be for men what the 20th was for women"

          I know, right?

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      trust works both ways

      Having known two people suckered into becoming fathers unexpectedly when their partners admitted that they'd stopped taking the pill, then trust works both ways. In one case it all worked out, in the other it went horribly wrong.

      So don't think of this as a way of stopping unwanted fatherhood...

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: trust works both ways

        It's as reliable a way as the effectiveness of the pill itself. If a man *really* doesn't want to be a father, he wont be. The same goes for women. If the bloke thought "Oh, I'm sure we'll be safe just this once" then clearly getting his end away for three minutes was more important to him than not becoming the father of an unwanted child for the rest of his life. And perhaps that sums up the regard he'll have for his own offspring throughout its childhood, should he choose to be part of it? The same goes for all those mothers who just use a man to 'acquire' a baby like it's a cute doll or quick fix for a boring life, then get shot of the father and use the child as a weapon against him, harming *it* in the process.

        The male pill's here to allow men to cop off with easy lays like this without causing it to breed:

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auiYBtx-Vxw

        And the female pill is there to allow women to get themselves easily laid without providing an unnecessary route for the propagation of oxygen-starved corners of the gene pool:

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkht4ETbP2o

    3. Chris Collins

      Potting the brown

      You could, of course, take the question out of the act...

    4. oddie
      Thumb Up

      ah, the old 'don't trust the men to take it' conundrum :)

      to be fair, if I was a woman, I wouldn't trust a man to take it either.

      I base this on, that as a man, I certainly don't trust a woman to take the pill... not 100% anyway... there's too many women out there who thinks babies save relationships for that :)

      I guess if a woman takes her pills so that she knows she's safe then the man can do the same.. and if she decides to forget to take her's (or the other way around) then the other party is still able to retain control over their reproductive lives (2 way authentification, it-angle, natch).

      I think we may be on the road to sexual equality at last (we still haven't got around to male pregnancies I guess).

      for those no-trusty situations there's always still the old condoms :)

      1. frank ly
        Stop

        @oddie

        Never, ever, use an old condom!

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Happy

          nothing wrong with

          and whats wrong with an empty crisp packet?

          1. SirTainleyBarking
            Mushroom

            Nothing wrong

            if you don't mind the rustling, although I'd advise avoiding a packet thats had salt and vinegar flavour in it

        2. oddie
          Joke

          but but but...

          it's so expensive to buy new ones :(

          and the value of them drops even more than cars do the first time you use them :(

          1. Mediocrates
            Joke

            If you're concerned about initial purchase price and depreciation

            Consider heat-shrink tubing.

            As a side benefit, you'll be able to sing the high parts...

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Devil

        As well as counting to 28

        There is always the option of counting to 28 too. It is rather unpopular, but reasonably reliable if you do not push the safety limits too far.

        For those who are going to say something about the lack of point of reference - in a state of relationship both parties have it, while in a state of promiscuity...

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Coat

          "as well as counting to 28"

          well there's one good thing you can say about Catholics... they've got natural rhythm...

      3. oddie
        Thumb Up

        to add to my previous statement...

        as I find myself sandwhiched in between some angrier sounding posts on the matter i feel compelled to clarify my stance, as my tongue-in-cheek reply now looks a bit on the angry side as well.

        I do think that a fair bit of the female populace can be trusted with the reproductive responsibilities of a couple, same as a fair bit of the male can as well.

        I would like to think my long term female partner would trust me to take care of the baby-blockers for a while, just as I trust her at the moment.

        What I wanted to point out is that this offers men the same kind of 'certainty' over the process as women have had up until now (if you look away from condoms/surgical procedures).

        Should you stay in a relationship where the trust has been lost? probably no, that's why people break up, but breaking up is a long process.. and not all 'rough patches' in a relationship leads to breakups. When you still want to try to make things work with your partner, but you don't feel like you can fully trust them, then this would give both parties the same protection/control over their own lives.

  2. Sabine Miehlbradt
    Unhappy

    Stupid headline

    I read that as a pill to make males work. Now that would be some miracle drug.

    Cnuts!

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Would suggesting a pill that made women savvy be any less sexist?

      I'm surprised there's no balanced reply to this particular comment by the mod, as there have been to male posters.

      I know the "they put one of ours in hospital, we put three of theirs in the morgue" attitude would never overcome her more mature view that two wrongs don't make a right...

      1. Steven Roper
        Thumb Up

        Re: no balanced reply by the mod

        That's because the mod is a feminist, or hadn't you noticed?

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Coat

    Seriously

    What woman would be foolish enough to trust a guy that he is "on the pill?"

    If it goes wrong, who is left holding the baby...?

    1. dogged
      Thumb Up

      Backups, dude.

      The female contraceptive pill isn't 100% effective. Very few forms of contraception are, in fact. If you're in one of those relationships where everything should be fine (or where one of you is allergic to latex) and you want a backup, it makes sense.

      And condoms can break. So if you're NOT in one of those relationships you have a backup too. Paternity suits can be ruinous.

    2. Sir Cosmo Bonsor

      Well...

      Why would you trust a woman who says it?

      After all, they seem to be far more interested in children than us blokes do, and as the old ovary clocks tick away they tend to go to increasingly desperate and sometimes devious lengths to get one.

      1. Sarah Bee (Written by Reg staff)

        Re: Well...

        Not all women want children. I would estimate that many women who do want children don't want to achieve them through deception, especially deception liable to result in single parenthood.

        If you can't trust your partner to take responsibility to this end then your relationship ain't worth a damn.

        Let's try and not make this another massive gender shitstorm liberally sprinkled with girl-bashing, shall we?

        1. Sarah Bee (Written by Reg staff)

          Re: Re: Well...

          I meant if one can't trust one's partner, ie either partner. If you're in a relationship where that suspicion would be reasonable then you shouldn't be in it. Amazing how that's the first place everyone goes to with this debate. It makes me sad.

          1. dogged

            "the first place everyone goes"

            Only the eternally single ones, and they're just speculating.

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            When you've seen it...

            When you've seen a baby trap sprung on a close friend, knew the couple well for a few years before she deliberately got herself pregnant and ran away, saw what happenned to him and what the kid got put through that he couldn't help prevent, well it kinda stays with you. And no, that kind of suspicion was not reasonable in their relationship, she would never have been the kind of person to do that, except she did.

            So yes, I would like a male pill please. It would make me feel better, as well as make the world a happier place overall.

          3. NogginTheNog

            Partner maybe the wrong word?

            Actually when I wrote the original post I was thinking more of the one night stand type of 'partner', in which situations trust is very much more a leap of faith!

        2. Cunningly Linguistic
          Paris Hilton

          The only decent girl-bashing...

          ...is when you "bash their back doors in"!

        3. Richard 12 Silver badge
          FAIL

          Sarah, you're probably right.

          I'll freely agree that many women who do want children don't want to achieve them through deception, especially deception liable to result in single parenthood.

          I'll even give you the upgrade to Most.

          However, that's *still* not all.

          Several of my sister's friends* and certainly my cousin-in-law's husband's** 'bit on the side' got a baby through deception. Their motives vary, but are roughly based upon the idea that either the father or the state will be forced into providing financial support for the child and the mother.

          *She's in a bad crowd. It's tough trying to get her out of it before something goes badly wrong.

          ** He's a turd, and she was a muppet. She's finally learnt from the mistake, and it does appear that he hasn't.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Coat

            Panda - Eats, shoots and leaves.

            While there *may* be a select few women who are trying to get pregnant at the hands of any random guy who isnt interested. There may even be ones who think a child will cement a fragile relationship.

            However, I dont think that is the point of the "risk" here.

            If you are about to sleep with someone for the first time and they say "its ok, I am on the pill" there should be alarm bells ringing. The loudest bells should be going off for the women as, at the end of the day, if it goes wrong, she is the one pregnant - the guy will find it easier to do a runner.

            It might be my biased social contacts but I dont know any women who "dislike" the feel of a condom, while at least 90% of the men I know do. Sadly, the majority of my friends (and my younger self) would happily trick their partners into unprotected sex.

            Encouraging a situation where men can, with a straight face, claim to be on the pill to avoid condoms is not going to bode well for sexual health or unwanted pregnancies.

            Yes, people do grow out of the stupidity over this - but for a significant number, it is already too late.

      2. Fred Flintstone Gold badge

        Speak for yourself, mate

        "they seem to be far more interested in children than us blokes"

        Trust me, that changes if you've got one. However, if you don't both want a child you must evaluate your relationship because it *will * crack eventually.

  4. dogged
    IT Angle

    "trouser-department floppening"

    Are we aiming for the OED again?

  5. Jon Massey
    Megaphone

    Is it just me...

    or does anyone else read that in their head as "RAAARGH! antagonist" ?

  6. Anonymous Coward
    FAIL

    I've always thought the old one from assasin to assasinee applied

    "you have to be lucky every day. I just have to be lucky once".

    Given that the average male ejaculate comprises 250,000,000 individual spermazootoa, and it only takes ONE to cause pregnancy, I would never trust a pill designed as male contraceptive.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Jaffa

      You're right- there's only 2,000,000/ml in mine on a good day (that's roughly 3% of the average value), but then I'm a certified Jaffa. Nonetheless, having had a BOGOF deal by IVF and with no intention of creating a third by accident, I'm still taking no chances.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Stop

      One enough

      Actually, contrary to popular belief, one is *not* enough. It takes a few of those buggers to pave the way for the lucky one.

    3. Lee Dowling Silver badge

      Wow

      Amazing then, that in couples that try for pregnancy deliberately without any form of aid whatosever, you're expected to give it at least a year before you even think about seeing your doctor about it, and a couple or more before they think you might have a fertility problem, and a few more before they will actually do anything about it (if you still want kids that badly by then).

      It's a statistical game, always, but sperm can slip through solid rubber (yep, you don't need to have any kind of tear), avoid the women's monthly shedding of the uterine lining, work its way up the tube and STILL fertilise an egg just the same. The chances are low but even with all the precautions in the world, you'll be lucky to achieve 99.5% avoidance.

      Having just watching Inside The Human Body, I can also tell you that probably only half-a-dozen or so sperm would get to the egg even *with* perfect conditions and no contraception. That's *why* there's 250,000,000 of the buggers in the first place.

      And anyone who relies on JUST a male pill is as silly as someone who relies on JUST a condom, or JUST a female pill, or JUST a diaphragm, or JUST a coil, etc. Without putting all the burden on the woman's body (have you seen the changes that happen when a women goes on/off the pill?), it would be a cinch to just get the man that you want a serious relationship with (serious enough to discuss contraception) to take a pill too to increase the chances at virtually zero cost.

      P.S. I'm a man. I have a (planned well in advance) daughter. And would seriously consider taking these if they were free on the NHS.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        @Lee Dowling

        (I'm the Jaffa AC from above)

        I got lucky- if you can call it that- because I got a proper test only 5 months after we started trying. This was largely due to a home test kit I bought on the internet on a whim. Don't laugh- I expected the doctor to, but to her credit she took me at least half seriously. The home test was unambiguously "negative", and that was concerning to say the least. She arranged a proper count, mainly it seemed at the time to reassure me, and it turned out the first test was right.

        We had a total of 11 months from starting trying to conceive to embryo implantation from IVF, and we had twins 8¾ months after that . As you suggest, that's quicker than a lot of "normal" couples. So, the moral of this story is- I'd thoroughly recommend a home test if you're trying to conceive. It's only about 20 quid, and it could prevent a lot of wasted time and worry. IVF isn't fun, but it's a lot better if you find out early.

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Happy

      be careful

      don't forget you only get a bucket and a half!

  7. Anonymous Coward
    WTF?

    Did anyone else think soma?

    Or was that just me?

  8. SpecialGray
    Thumb Up

    Sounds useful to me!

    That some women cannot take the pill due to medical issues etc, and that some couples might find this method useful as part of their (non) family planning.

    Also, it hasn't been unknown for the odd and thankfully rare bunny boiler to 'forget' to take her pill in order to get pregnant to secure a relationship. So maybe there are some paranoid guys out there that would take it just for that!

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    An interesting development.

    While I know women who don't want kids, just sex and have proved it by marrying and then still not having a family, I've never really believed the assertion by some women that the kids were somehow an inconvenience to them. In my experience, it's more a case of "Hooray! I've got kids, but if I pretend I was desperate for them, my man/the government/the local council will take it was contributory negligence and I'll get less handouts."

    That said, I also understand why women pretend why they don't want kids. Who wants a woman who wants three of your sperm, your future earnings and your house? They have to pretend, and can't be blamed for it.

    However, having seen it go seriously badly wrong (for men,) I couldn't criticise a man for taking this pill, as I suspect "forgot to take the pill" is an excuse used by women who haven't forgotten at all. I base this among others on this case (http://wikileaksnews.net/woman-had-two-children-after-secretly-taking-ex-husbands-frozen-sperm-from-clinic.html)

    I'd imagine though that women will still want to retain control. My own doctor wouldn't put me forward for a vasectomy without first speaking to my wife to ensure she knew (it was all very subtly done, but happened nonetheless,) but I'll wager I wouldn't be consulted if my wife wanted to go on the pill.

    My guess is the women's lobby will campaign against this when they realise control has been taken from women's hands.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Not in the UK..

      "My own doctor wouldn't put me forward for a vasectomy without first speaking to my wife to ensure she knew (it was all very subtly done, but happened nonetheless,) "

      In the UK that is a clear violation of doctor-patient privilege. A snip is your problem, not your wife's, and any discussion about this with 3rd parties (including your wife) MUST be authorised by you or it's plain illegal. If your doctor does not put you forward without your wife knowing it is classified as coercion and is ALSO illegal - given the topic this could lead to fines as well as problems with the UK GMC.

      Don't know how it is abroad, but the whole idea of confidentiality is to keep things confidential. Your wife has no say over what you do with your body (although I would indeed have questions about your relationship if you kept such an important "mod" from your wife)..

    2. dogged
      Trollface

      Re: An interesting development

      ^

      Bitter divorced guy detected.

    3. oddie
      Happy

      ....when they realise control has been taken from women's hands.

      maybe, I guess some of the more misguided ones might...

      However, I don't see this as taking control away from anyone, merely giving it to both women and men equally.

  10. Ken 16 Silver badge
    Coat

    You just put one in your shoe

    and it makes you limp...

    I'll get my coat

  11. Frank Bitterlich
    Thumb Up

    Coming up next...:

    ... the male "morning-after" pill. *That* is the one I would buy...

    1. Filippo Silver badge

      there's one already

      But it's solid lead, and very illegal to use.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      @ Frank Bitterlich

      There is one, although its use does carry consequences. It's commonly known as the Falcon Punch!

  12. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Great :)

    Once it comes out I can take the male pill as a fall back, but will still use condoms for stI reasons.

  13. Graham Bartlett

    @AC 14:42

    That wasn't my experience. For sure, one of the questions is "have you discussed this with your partner?", but if you lie and say "yes" then there's no way they'd be checking up. And it's not required either - it's there as part of the whole counselling thing to catch the occasional nutcases who might ask for inappropriate treatment under the influence of mental illness, drugs or whatever.

    And that's *VERY* recent experience I'm talking with.

    For the benefit of blokes, no it doesn't hurt at the time. If you've ever given blood, it's the same needle-stick pain and feeling, just in a different place. ;) But it's going to ache all next week like you caught yourself in the nuts a half-hour ago.

  14. Anonymous Coward
    Thumb Up

    Good real world needed thingy

    My wife can't take contraceptive pill's because she's got liver problems, and condoms are a pain and occasionally split etc in the heat of the moment as the less furry toothed amongst us may already know.

    In the end I went and had a vasectomy to eliminate the problem as we had the set of two kids, but I'd have quite happily popped pills than go through that surgery and post op recovery again, which was riddled with complications.

    Its not about trust or integrity of the relationship, its a bit more as another string to the bow against unwanted pregnancies as far as Im concerned.

  15. The Vociferous Time Waster
    Mushroom

    FFS

    Let's not forget that there are more risks in a casual relationship than just the prospect of pregnancy. Wearing a condom is still the defacto best way to protect yourself and your partner and any girl who does not insist on this is as foolish as the man who chooses to ride bareback.

    A pill for either a man or a woman should be reserved as a backup in case of failure (in which case trust is moot because it's a backup for both parties) or in the confines of a stable relationship where both parties choose to take responsibility for contraception.

  16. Arbuthnot Darjeeling
    Paris Hilton

    what a discussion!

    and yet no one has given a big thanks to science for an end to the misery of unwanted pregnancies in mice.

  17. b166er

    Tit le

    Reading through this thread for me, is confirmation of the fact that the law needs to change to protect father/child relationships to the same degree as mother/child.

    Tax Credit Agent: Do you have any children?

    Me: Yes

    Tax Credit Agent: Is your house their permanent residence?

    Me: Sometimes

    Tax Credit Agent: Are you regarded as the full-time carer?

    Me: No

    Tax Credit Agent: We can't count your child toward this assesment.

    (for the record, my son lives with me from Wednesday afternoon until Thurday morning and from Friday afternoon until Sunday night/Monday morning.)

    Rinse and repeat for just about any other official paperwork.

    Father/child relationship = not as important

    A lot has been done, but it's nowhere near there yet.

    You can probably guess, I'm all for male empowerment.

    Perhaps it's more common than you think Sarah?

    As AC's first post says, hopefully we'll have more balance soon.

    On this occasion, we should definitely think of the children :)

  18. Anonymous Coward
    Boffin

    "our mice have been mating quite happily"

    I'm curious how this was determined. Did they give them a survey after the act?

  19. honkhonk34
    Mushroom

    I can't understand why women would have any problem with this

    And I say that in a neutral way; the concept of a male pill does not invalidate the use of the female pill. As things stand if you're a woman and you don't want to get pregnant you take/use the pill or other contraceptive method. if you're a man you use a condom (which let's be honest diminishes sensation) or a vasectomy (which ain't exactly fun).

    I have a happy and stable relationship and my partner uses the pill; if a male pill was available I would take it too - not because I don't trust her but because it decreases the odds of an unexpected guest* due to her forgetting a pill, it being a dud, etc etc etc

    The only people who would have a problem with this are people who would loose an amount of control due to it, and that group is probably women who may intend to use pregnancy as some form of leverage. I have no pity for such people.

    There is no "do you trust a man if he said he took it" - your primary responsibility is to yourself; do you want to be pregnant? If the answer is no then you should be taking contraceptives even if your partner claims to be.

    this merely offers men the same choice as women have enjoyed for many years now, and I can't really see it as a bad thing.

    (*My family's term for unplanned children)

  20. Anonymous Coward
    Unhappy

    Bugger me!

    My voting finger has never been busier than on this article. Why, WHY!, does it take just a tiny chink of opportunity for sexist, really vile comments to come out? My, the internet is wonderful as long as you can put up with the murky stuff created by the veil of anonymity.

    Yes I'm a woman, no I would never EVER consider conning someone into donating sperm to try and get pregnant, no I don't spend my waking hours dreams about piles of nappies and gurgling, I can afford my own house and don't rely on the state, I have a fully functioning brain and can hold civilised conversations in real life and in cyber space - unlike many of you lot it seems.

    But no, in a new relationship which may or may not last, I would not trust a man to be the sole source of contraception. I literally would be left holding the baby so do have a much larger vested interest. Don't take offence, just be grateful someone is being proactive about it. In a serious relationship, yes I would trust my partner since he is likely to be equally affected by any mistakes. Either way, let's not turn this into an opportunity for women bashing eh? I'm sure Sarah and I could provide screeds of evidence on really unpleasant men, but we don't feel the need to everytime we fire up our PCs.

    Sarah, Please don't leave me! You are the sane female voice that keeps me reading this site!

    B

    1. Anonymous Coward
      IT Angle

      Well...

      A lot of the sexist posters are doing exactly the same thing as you from a merely logical standpoint, which is confusing your own personal beliefs and experiences with the greater whole which makes up the situation. ( I refer primarily to your second paragraph)

      I hate to put it like this but your moral high ground (or at least your barbed comment) is invalid in the sense that a balanced discussion on this isn't really about individuals, it's about at least slightly abstracted gender equality, so despite the fact you would never do such a thing, it's pretty much irrelevant (at least to me)

      As for the volume of sexism that's offended you, I quite understand. I'd welcome some of those screeds of info about unpleasant men, because at least in my book this isn't a Male-Female battle, it's a Good People-Idiots battle. There's plenty of good people and idiots on both side of the (rather arbitrary) gender line.

      A semi anonymous forum based on a news site dealing primarily in technology having a higher proportion of men moaning about women doesn't hugely surprise me, though. I can't even think of a good old stereotype for the kind of forums you'd find a higher percentage of women to moan about men on, though I'm sure it'll exist.

This topic is closed for new posts.