5 ms·
Sure, but condoms fail too. There is no reason not to use both.
by mjohn 10y ago
Sure, but condoms fail too. There is no reason not to use both.
- OJFord 10y ago> There is no reason not to use both. Fear of it not being as reversible as it was supposed to be would be a pretty good reason not to use this one. If you're married, with children, and looking for an alternative to vasectomy, that risk is lower in the sense that should the reverse procedure not go as expected, it would probably be less crushing than the same experience as a newlywed.
- anothercomment 10y agoHow about combining it with freezing some sperm, just in case. Too expensive perhaps?
- LeftTriangle 10y agoFreezing sperm costs on the order of $200-400 per year depending on how far you pay in advance. Worth paying if you're getting a vasectomy, but probably not worth it for this kind of (hopefully) temporary BC.
- anothercomment 10y agoWhat makes it so expensive?
- LeftTriangle 10y agoYou have to be able to guarantee that your liquid nitrogen powered freezer (expensive) will never fail even once over decades of storage (extra expensive). I'm not sure what kind of profit margins sperm banks are working with, but there's quite a bit of competition, so I suspect the prices are mostly pretty close to cost. It's all very labor intensive as well; they need to employ a bunch of lab techs, all of whom have biotech or medical degrees.
- pluma 10y agoI think what most people usually miss when dismissing the "condoms fail" argument is that while it's indeed unlikely that condoms literally break if properly used (they're stress tested to ensure a ridiculous level of quality so while possible that's still extremely rare) "user error" is not exactly unlikely. It's also extremely likely that user errors will be reported as condom failures instead.