• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Fate of male birth control injection now in government’s hands

You can bet that the U.S. will never have an injection such as this available to anyone in the U.S., even if it did work which is still in question. It would take years of study in the U.S. to be approved by the FDA and even then, big pharma would put an end to it quickly because they would stand to lose a lot of money on products for women's birth control. These are lifetime drugs for a lot of women. Why would any woman continue taking prescription birth control every day if her husband could simply get one injection? That would result in a great loss of revenue for pharmaceutical manufacturers.

In fact, Big Pharma would even fight it as far as trying to prevent its use in any kind of public health applications, even the kind that would make bigots squeal with delight.
You can bet your bottom dollar there are more than a few far-Right supremacist types who would love the idea of sterilizing vast swaths of ethnic minority males, or at the very least, controlling their right to father children to some extent.

And still I bet Big Pharma would call in as many lobbyist foot soldiers as money could buy to bring that to a halt anyway.
 
Less invasive than what? If you are comparing to the procedure I linked to in the OP, then no it isn't. Compared to using the linked procedure on a woman, maybe. Less invasive than a tubal ligation, yes.

Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk

I think he was referring to my earlier statement that a vasectomy is less invasive than a tubal ligation.
 
You believe that men, with their own best interests in mind...like avoiding child support...would allow that? :doh

It's even more unlikely since the majority of lawmakers, etc are men as well.

OTOH, I do believe that most men would be afraid of it...so many are paranoid about vasectomies "affecting their manhood." :roll:

I know this is slightly off-topic but I had to laugh because you're right.
Many men are convinced that such procedures might affect their virility and prowess.
I have heard more than a few mutter that very thing.

But on the other hand you also wouldn't believe the number of women who think that Viagra has an influence on a man's mood or desire. You can even tell them that if the mood isn't there, nothing is going to happen, and some go on believing that anything fueled by the little blue pill is phony chemically induced desire.

Even in the twenty-first century, medical myths still abound.
 
In my lifetime I have sustained broken bones, lacerations that have required many stitches, 3rd degree burns, and other injuries but the only time I almost fainted was when a doctor was trying to inject me with novocaine to give me stitches. I don't know what it is about needles, but they give me the creeps!

You wussy. :lamo

I have to give the wifey a shot twice a day.
She doesn't even wince.

Karenhelmet2.webp
 
I think he was referring to my earlier statement that a vasectomy is less invasive than a tubal ligation.
Wasn't positive since he quoted my post which refered to the new procedure.

Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk
 
You wussy. :lamo

I have to give the wifey a shot twice a day.
She doesn't even wince.

View attachment 67269034

In defense of the irrational needle fear; I have a tattoo that covers my entire back, over 33 years in the medical field, and multiple combat tours.....but when it comes time for the flu shot, my wife holds my hand. :shrug:
 
In defense of the irrational needle fear; I have a tattoo that covers my entire back, over 33 years in the medical field, and multiple combat tours.....but when it comes time for the flu shot, my wife holds my hand. :shrug:

If it makes both of you feel any better, I do not fear injections but BLOOD DRAWS have ALWAYS made me faint.
I do not know why.
I've prevented it happening once or twice when I looked away and didn't see the blood coming out.
But on a couple of occasions I blacked out anyway, even though I had my eyes closed.

First time it happened I just went down like a ton of bricks and next thing I know a pleasant but somewhat matronly nurse brought me back, and I was mortified.
Very embarrassing.

"Oh hon, we get great big guys in here, Marines, cops, firefighters, six foot four, all muscle, and they're worse than you are."
 
If it makes both of you feel any better, I do not fear injections but BLOOD DRAWS have ALWAYS made me faint.
I do not know why.
I've prevented it happening once or twice when I looked away and didn't see the blood coming out.
But on a couple of occasions I blacked out anyway, even though I had my eyes closed.

First time it happened I just went down like a ton of bricks and next thing I know a pleasant but somewhat matronly nurse brought me back, and I was mortified.
Very embarrassing.

"Oh hon, we get great big guys in here, Marines, cops, firefighters, six foot four, all muscle, and they're worse than you are."

I hated trips to dentist but they were made easier when I found one that did gas. I mean he offered nitrous oxide to patients.
 
Less invasive than what? If you are comparing to the procedure I linked to in the OP, then no it isn't. Compared to using the linked procedure on a woman, maybe. Less invasive than a tubal ligation, yes.

Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk

Less invasive that a tubal ligation.
 
You wussy. :lamo

I have to give the wifey a shot twice a day.
She doesn't even wince.

View attachment 67269034

I remember when I was getting my head sewn up after a skiing accident the doctor recounting how many "macho" construction workers he'd seen hit the deck just from the sight of a needle. It's a common fear, I guess.
 
Less invasive that a tubal ligation.
True enough, but what I was saying was that it might be possible to use this same new method to block up the fallopian tubes as it does the vas deferens. Definitely more invasive than the male procedure, but just a longer needle with ultrasound guidance.

Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk
 
Back
Top Bottom