4 ms·

A 100% effective, low maintenance, reversible birth control method could have an incredible effect on the future of the species. I'm guessing the benefits of fe

by thasmin 15y ago

A 100% effective, low maintenance, reversible birth control method could have an incredible effect on the future of the species. I'm guessing the benefits of fewer unwanted children will be incredible. The possible downsides include a dangerously low birth rate and forced temporary sterilization, but I think the long term effects will be very positive.

ComputerGuru 15y ago
I don't get the part about "forced temporary sterilization." If people want to force you to be sterile, wouldn't they use a different method?
- thasmin 15y ago
  Yes, you're right. This discovery won't change anything in that regard. I was thinking about 1984-like scenarios that are very unlikely.
- T-R 15y ago
  For places with runaway population growth that might be interested, a temporary, effective, and low-maintenance method might be more politically palatable than the alternatives.
- forensic 15y ago
  "temporary" e.g. Offer people generous welfare if they elect to undergo this temporary birth control procedure.
delinka 15y ago
You are correct. Except for that part of the population that believes contraception is immoral. Or that rather large part of the population that can't afford the procedure or choose to remain ignorant of even basic contraception. Something like this is certainly more convenient, but ultimately the best method is education.
- w1ntermute 15y ago
  > Except for that part of the population that believes contraception is immoral. And since that belief is evolutionarily beneficial, you can see how it would eventually turn into a bigger and bigger problem...
- billybob 15y ago
  "Except for that part of the population that believes contraception is immoral" If you're thinking of Christians, it isn't necessarily all-or-nothing. Although I believe the Catholic church disapproves of all contraception, Protestants typically approve of anything that prevents fertilization. Once the egg is fertilized, it's considered a human life worthy of protection; prior to that, the egg and sperm are just cells. So this would be considered fine.
  - gjm11 15y ago
    And quite a lot of Protestants are perfectly happy even with methods that may result in the loss of some fertilized eggs. And many, many Catholics use contraception, whatever they're theoretically supposed to think about it.
  - lukeschlather 15y ago
    Most of the Catholic theologians I've run into/read about/heard about are fairly pragmatic about this sort of thing (especially the nuns.) There's the law, and then there's what people do, and then there's what people can do better even if they don't meet God's standards. As for Protestants, you'll find many who agree with the Catholics, many who agree with what you've called typical, and many who consider human life to begin at birth. But most people have a loose affiliation with their denomination, and I don't think there's much that can be called typical about the rank-and-file Protestants or Catholics for that matter.
- JoachimSchipper 15y ago
  Education-only programs have abysmal success rates. I agree that condoms+ignorance isn't a winning plan either, but don't knock cheap, effective and hard-to-misuse contraceptives.
bakbak 15y ago
dangerously low birth rate will be the biggest impact in long-long term - i wont be surprised if every other men uses this technique secretively to NOT to have a child ... as someone mentioned here "A SEXUAL REVOLUTION" is underway ...
- anigbrowl 15y ago
  We already have a 'dangerously low birthrate' in the US (and in many other countries from France to Singapore). By this I mean a working-age population too low to support the retirement costs of the preceding generation. Practically speaking, however, this can be offset by immigration and the demographics should have smoothed themselves out by around 2030 or so.
  - bakbak 15y ago
    i won't be surprised if eventually small demographic countries banning this procedure :-)
clistctrl 15y ago
Now if only they can figure out how to do it without surgery.
- thasmin 15y ago
  If this procedure gets popular enough to change humanity, I'm sure it will. Right now, it's being performed by only one doctor in India and he's not accepting help.
- sorbus 15y ago
  Any method to do it without surgery would be even more invasive than surgery. Off the top of my head, the only thing I can think of[1] is inserting a long flexible tube down the urethra, hoping that it ends up in the right place (it's not very helpful if it ends up in the bladder), and then sending RISUG through it. Likely to be very painful and not work particularly well. [1] There are only so many ways to get to the vans deferens without surgery, so I'm not too worried about missing something obvious. Or nanobots, I suppose, whenever we get those. That doesn't seem likely to be any time soon, sadly.

by thasmin 15y ago

ComputerGuru 15y ago

I don't get the part about "forced temporary sterilization." If people want to force you to be sterile, wouldn't they use a different method?

thasmin 15y ago
Yes, you're right. This discovery won't change anything in that regard. I was thinking about 1984-like scenarios that are very unlikely.
T-R 15y ago
For places with runaway population growth that might be interested, a temporary, effective, and low-maintenance method might be more politically palatable than the alternatives.
forensic 15y ago
"temporary" e.g. Offer people generous welfare if they elect to undergo this temporary birth control procedure.

delinka 15y ago

You are correct. Except for that part of the population that believes contraception is immoral. Or that rather large part of the population that can't afford the procedure or choose to remain ignorant of even basic contraception. Something like this is certainly more convenient, but ultimately the best method is education.

w1ntermute 15y ago
> Except for that part of the population that believes contraception is immoral. And since that belief is evolutionarily beneficial, you can see how it would eventually turn into a bigger and bigger problem...
billybob 15y ago
"Except for that part of the population that believes contraception is immoral" If you're thinking of Christians, it isn't necessarily all-or-nothing. Although I believe the Catholic church disapproves of all contraception, Protestants typically approve of anything that prevents fertilization. Once the egg is fertilized, it's considered a human life worthy of protection; prior to that, the egg and sperm are just cells. So this would be considered fine.
- gjm11 15y ago
  And quite a lot of Protestants are perfectly happy even with methods that may result in the loss of some fertilized eggs. And many, many Catholics use contraception, whatever they're theoretically supposed to think about it.
- lukeschlather 15y ago
  Most of the Catholic theologians I've run into/read about/heard about are fairly pragmatic about this sort of thing (especially the nuns.) There's the law, and then there's what people do, and then there's what people can do better even if they don't meet God's standards. As for Protestants, you'll find many who agree with the Catholics, many who agree with what you've called typical, and many who consider human life to begin at birth. But most people have a loose affiliation with their denomination, and I don't think there's much that can be called typical about the rank-and-file Protestants or Catholics for that matter.
JoachimSchipper 15y ago
Education-only programs have abysmal success rates. I agree that condoms+ignorance isn't a winning plan either, but don't knock cheap, effective and hard-to-misuse contraceptives.

bakbak 15y ago

dangerously low birth rate will be the biggest impact in long-long term - i wont be surprised if every other men uses this technique secretively to NOT to have a child ... as someone mentioned here "A SEXUAL REVOLUTION" is underway ...

anigbrowl 15y ago
We already have a 'dangerously low birthrate' in the US (and in many other countries from France to Singapore). By this I mean a working-age population too low to support the retirement costs of the preceding generation. Practically speaking, however, this can be offset by immigration and the demographics should have smoothed themselves out by around 2030 or so.
- bakbak 15y ago
  i won't be surprised if eventually small demographic countries banning this procedure :-)

clistctrl 15y ago

Now if only they can figure out how to do it without surgery.

thasmin 15y ago
If this procedure gets popular enough to change humanity, I'm sure it will. Right now, it's being performed by only one doctor in India and he's not accepting help.
sorbus 15y ago
Any method to do it without surgery would be even more invasive than surgery. Off the top of my head, the only thing I can think of[1] is inserting a long flexible tube down the urethra, hoping that it ends up in the right place (it's not very helpful if it ends up in the bladder), and then sending RISUG through it. Likely to be very painful and not work particularly well. [1] There are only so many ways to get to the vans deferens without surgery, so I'm not too worried about missing something obvious. Or nanobots, I suppose, whenever we get those. That doesn't seem likely to be any time soon, sadly.