male birth control: annoyed, intrigued
Dec. 4th, 2007 09:39 am![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
fourwordsapart.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
vaginapaginaSo I somehow clicked a link about male birth control option that are in the pipeline and have been reading about them for a half hour or so. It sounds like they're actually getting pretty close to getting something on the market. I have a few thoughts I want to bounce around with you vag-lovers though! (I suppose this is only particularly relevant to fertile female-bodied folks who have sex with male bodies, sorry to be exclusive.)
Under the cut is an article about a drug that sounds pretty promising. They're taking this drug, binding it to a modified form of Follicle Stimulating Hormone to increase the bioavailability at specific receptor sites, to temporarily eliminate men's virility. It keeps sperm from maturing all the way--and that's about it. Binded to the hormone, they don't need a very high dose, which eliminates side effects. All it does is make the sperm unviable. Sounds good, huh? Especially compared to female hormonal birth control, which, as many of us know, causes a lot of side effects.
But my question is, will men take to it? I read another article that said male contraceptive methods are pointless because (a) it's impossible to expect men to be responsible enough to take a medication regularly, and (b) there's no way men will ever want to take a pill that reduces their virility.
That really irked me. I mean, I don't want to be the feminist who cried sexist, but isn't it pretty short-sighted to say that we can't hold men to do these things when women are expected to do them everyday--with the added burden of terrible side effects? I don't know many women who actually like altering their bodies' natural processes and rendering themselves infertile, but many of us do it.
There are a few things from the article that seem to express a similar underlying bigoted outlook. (I bolded them in the article.) The doctor/researcher interviewed in the article said several things that hint that there's a double standard when it comes to birth control: the medical community and the world at large don't seem to care that hormonal b.c. is inconvenient and unpleasant for women, but they wouldn't dare try to use the same treatments on men if they altered the role of hormones in their body. As if meddling with women's hormonal balance doesn't cause "problematic side effects"!
I thought it was very odd that the article says that injection is unacceptable when many women take Depo Provera injections every three months! (Then again it might be different since this drug has been tested with intravenous injections rather than subdermal or muscular injections.)
So what do you think? Should we hold the same expectations for men that many people do for women--to take an active role in preventing pregnancy and bearing some of the (maybe event unpleasant!) burden of that responsibility? Are men capable of this? Are you excited at the prospect of male contraceptives? Do you think the attitudes I described are sexist or fair? Is the lack of faith in men's ability to deal with birth control realistic?
Personally I am sort of hopeful because maybe if a really good male contraceptive option (that causes few side effects) becomes available, it will eliminate problems for heterosexually active males and females. Which would be great!
Targeting the testicles could help create a male contraceptive without unwanted side effects, a new study suggests.
Chuen-yan Cheng at the Population Council’s Center for Biomedical Research in New York City, US, and colleagues, injected a drug into rats that prevents immature sperm cells from maturing properly.
The drug, called Adjudin, works by disrupting the interaction that takes place in the testicles between immature sperm cells and the nurse cells responsible for nurturing sperm to maturity. The germ cells need to adhere to the nurse cells for sperm to properly develop, and the drug prevents this bond from forming.
But Cheng’s earlier studies showed that when taken orally, Adjudin did not specifically act on cells in the testicle – it caused liver inflammation and muscle atrophy in the rats. "Even though it was very effective, we couldn't make use of it," he explains.
To get around the problem, Cheng’s team has now coupled the Adjudin molecule to a mutant form of follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), which targets receptor molecules found only in the testes.
The new approach allowed them to induce infertility in the adult rats using relatively low doses of the drug, which produced no obvious side effects, the researchers say.
Other types of male contraceptives currently being trialled involve hormone combinations that prevent sperm from being produced altogether. But these can have problematic side effects because hormones play such an important role throughout the body.
At the moment, Adjudin is injected into the rats’ bloodstream. "But injection won't be acceptable for a male contraceptive in humans," admits Cheng. So, the team is now working to develop a gel patch that men could stick on their bodies.
"We are at a very early stage, but we are optimistic because in human males these FSH receptors are also only found in the testes," he says.
Journal reference: Nature Medicine (DOI: 10.1038/nm1420)
Under the cut is an article about a drug that sounds pretty promising. They're taking this drug, binding it to a modified form of Follicle Stimulating Hormone to increase the bioavailability at specific receptor sites, to temporarily eliminate men's virility. It keeps sperm from maturing all the way--and that's about it. Binded to the hormone, they don't need a very high dose, which eliminates side effects. All it does is make the sperm unviable. Sounds good, huh? Especially compared to female hormonal birth control, which, as many of us know, causes a lot of side effects.
But my question is, will men take to it? I read another article that said male contraceptive methods are pointless because (a) it's impossible to expect men to be responsible enough to take a medication regularly, and (b) there's no way men will ever want to take a pill that reduces their virility.
That really irked me. I mean, I don't want to be the feminist who cried sexist, but isn't it pretty short-sighted to say that we can't hold men to do these things when women are expected to do them everyday--with the added burden of terrible side effects? I don't know many women who actually like altering their bodies' natural processes and rendering themselves infertile, but many of us do it.
There are a few things from the article that seem to express a similar underlying bigoted outlook. (I bolded them in the article.) The doctor/researcher interviewed in the article said several things that hint that there's a double standard when it comes to birth control: the medical community and the world at large don't seem to care that hormonal b.c. is inconvenient and unpleasant for women, but they wouldn't dare try to use the same treatments on men if they altered the role of hormones in their body. As if meddling with women's hormonal balance doesn't cause "problematic side effects"!
I thought it was very odd that the article says that injection is unacceptable when many women take Depo Provera injections every three months! (Then again it might be different since this drug has been tested with intravenous injections rather than subdermal or muscular injections.)
So what do you think? Should we hold the same expectations for men that many people do for women--to take an active role in preventing pregnancy and bearing some of the (maybe event unpleasant!) burden of that responsibility? Are men capable of this? Are you excited at the prospect of male contraceptives? Do you think the attitudes I described are sexist or fair? Is the lack of faith in men's ability to deal with birth control realistic?
Personally I am sort of hopeful because maybe if a really good male contraceptive option (that causes few side effects) becomes available, it will eliminate problems for heterosexually active males and females. Which would be great!
Targeting the testicles could help create a male contraceptive without unwanted side effects, a new study suggests.
Chuen-yan Cheng at the Population Council’s Center for Biomedical Research in New York City, US, and colleagues, injected a drug into rats that prevents immature sperm cells from maturing properly.
The drug, called Adjudin, works by disrupting the interaction that takes place in the testicles between immature sperm cells and the nurse cells responsible for nurturing sperm to maturity. The germ cells need to adhere to the nurse cells for sperm to properly develop, and the drug prevents this bond from forming.
But Cheng’s earlier studies showed that when taken orally, Adjudin did not specifically act on cells in the testicle – it caused liver inflammation and muscle atrophy in the rats. "Even though it was very effective, we couldn't make use of it," he explains.
To get around the problem, Cheng’s team has now coupled the Adjudin molecule to a mutant form of follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), which targets receptor molecules found only in the testes.
The new approach allowed them to induce infertility in the adult rats using relatively low doses of the drug, which produced no obvious side effects, the researchers say.
Other types of male contraceptives currently being trialled involve hormone combinations that prevent sperm from being produced altogether. But these can have problematic side effects because hormones play such an important role throughout the body.
At the moment, Adjudin is injected into the rats’ bloodstream. "But injection won't be acceptable for a male contraceptive in humans," admits Cheng. So, the team is now working to develop a gel patch that men could stick on their bodies.
"We are at a very early stage, but we are optimistic because in human males these FSH receptors are also only found in the testes," he says.
Journal reference: Nature Medicine (DOI: 10.1038/nm1420)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-12-04 05:10 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-12-04 08:25 pm (UTC)