Well...the jolly ol' scientist from the UK have developed a birth control pill for men. It doesn't kill a man's little swimmers, just temporarily paralyzes the muscle that turbo-pumps them out of the body. :D The article says that all a guy has to do it pop a pill "a few hours" before sex, and he's good to go hop in the sack. :love: the article also says, "Within half a day, the sperm is on the move again." Here's the full story (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15937201/wid/11915773?GT1=8717).

It must first pass the clinical trials and pass FDA (not sure what it's called in the UK) requirements...but if all goes well, guys could be popping these pills within 5 years.

The question is, would you (a guy) use it? :hmm:

Personally, I would. My wife is seeing the downsides to hormonal birth control...and wants off as soon as possible. If women can take a pill, so can guys. And if I can get my wife away from the mood swings, a few added pounds, and the health risks, then it's worth it. :thumb:

One funny thing I found at the bottom of the article was this quote:
"The pill would not prevent sexually transmitted diseases, she said."

That's just not true. It prevents *one* type of sexually transmitted disease...yep, that's right: CHILDREN! :evil: :rolling:

Poll Information
This poll contains 1 question(s). 37 user(s) have voted.
You may not view the results of this poll without voting.

Poll Results: Male birth control pill...would you use it? (37 votes.)

Male birth control pill...would you use it? (Choose 1)
* Yes. - 62% (23)
* No. - 30% (11)
* I'm a woman. - 3% (1)
* Just the results for me. - 5% (2)

Yeah, I think I would. My friends always make fun of me because I always use a condom, but I think it's prudent considering how many people I know who have recieved a "unexpected surprise".

My gf is also unwilling to take the pill because she's afraid it will cause permanent damage to her birthing abilities.

Kit, I'm too lazy to read the article :D but what side-effects does it have for guys? I mean, sometimes girls get bigger breasts from their pill right? For guys, does anything "swell up"? :confused: :shake:

this could be just the thing i need.....

Sounds good. With no discharge as proof (and mess), men could finally claim to have been faking orgasms! :shake:
but what side-effects does it have for guys? That's kind of what the clinical trials are for. ;)

With no discharge as proof (and mess), men could finally claim to have been faking orgasms:lol:

I would use it... no bad feeling condoms...


:thumb:

I'll answer this in a few years, once all the bugs are worked out.

Good ole prophylactics till then! :thumb:

Since I'm not sexually active, I wouldn't. If I was married, and my neurological disabilities (Tourette Syndrome, possibly others) were a serious genetic risk to any children I'd father, I'd look into a vasectomy rather than rely on a pill.

A large, firm, solid and emphatic YES! Although it does sound like it cuts out one of the more pleasurable experiences of sex, the discharge, and if there's no discharge there's a chance there'll be no climax.

Still, rubbers reduce the pleasure and birth control pills for women result in some unpredictable women.

im not going to use it, not messing with my body, a few clinical trials are a long shot from problem detection, what if long term use results in damage to the muscle and permanent damage over say, 10 years? short term clinical traisl wont detect that, this pill could be on the market in a few months, and you could pay a 600% mark up on the cost of the pill - and then in 10 years, you find that you cant ejaculate anymore.

The pill, a single dose taken a few hours before having sex now, theres the huge downside - for me, sex is usually a spur of the moment kind of thing, i dont say to my fiance "lets have sex in a few hours, ill take the pill now" and besides ive always used a reliable form of birth control, its called a condom, itll probably prove just as difficult to get kids who go out on the pull to use the pill as it is to get them to use a condom.

Wonder how it'll react with alcohol...

I mean, sometimes girls get bigger breasts from their pill right? For guys, does anything "swell up"? Sold!

I think I'll give this one a miss.

I'm a bit confused, does it stop you cumming or just stop it shooting out at a rate of knots? If it stops you from cumming, then I'm not sure about it to be honest. You'd get no sense of satisfaction out of sex, would you?

I mean, you get in from work, you've had a stressful day and want some sex to chill you out a bit. Your girlfriend/wife finishes up and you're still as wide eyed and stressed as you were before. I mean, we all know that moment just before you cum, that lovely couple of seconds, does that moment just stay? Or do you just never get there?

Not sure about it.

i wouldn't mind trying it, but since sex with my gf aint something we plane hours before and since it sounds like it disable me from cumming, it dosn't sound as a good alternative to other forms of protection.

"but wouldn't interfere with performance or orgasm sensation"

"The result is a dry ejaculation."

So all it does is make you shoot blanks. You still get the feeling without any of the mess.

Interesting. I would not mind trying it out but condoms have never been a big problem for me either so it would also be a matter of price and occation. As a backup these would be nice since condoms are not completely infallable either.

I've been waiting for a decent male birth control pill to show up for quite a while already. For the principle of the thing, if for nothing else. I'm still not quite satisfied for the way this specific pill functions, but if it's best in the market and there isn't any big side effects, I'd use it.

Of course right now I don't have to worry much about such things. But when I do get into a relationship, it will be good to know that there's this option to take, since hormonal birth control for women used to mess up my ex.

Personally, I might consider having a vasectomy at some point of my life, probably after I'd had some kids first of course..

Well, if it's safe, what's there to lose? I would use it, had I need for it :)
OTOH, if it would indeed remove the climax, then I think people would choose other forms of protection instead. Also, condom's always a good choice, since no other option can protect from diseases (well, other than having a tested partner, which is of course always the better choice).
So, either that or the good ol' rubber. Or both to be even safer.

but what side-effects does it have for guys? Well...since it's not a hormone treatment...if there are any side effects, they should be minimal.
but wouldn't interfere with performance or orgasm sensation"

"The result is a dry ejaculation."

So all it does is make you shoot blanks. You still get the feeling without any of the mess. Bingo. You get all the benefits of sex, orgasm and all, without the mess. :thumb:
now, theres the huge downside - for me, sex is usually a spur of the moment kind of thing, i dont say to my fiance "lets have sex in a few hours, ill take the pill now" Wait until you get married. Working opposite shifts doesn't help either. :bad: :rolling:

While I would use this in principle, I agree with what many others have said - the fact that it needs to be taken hours before sex makes it good in principle but faulty in practice. Unless you are actually planning on having sex later that day, it would be difficult to know when to take it. As such, anyone using this as a means of contraception will always need to have a backup plan. So for me, if I'm going to have to buy a pack of condoms anyway, then I'm disinclined to buy the pills too.

Nah, I wouldn't take it, since condoms do the same AND prevent contracting diseases (which is an important factor if you are into one-night stands).

Well...since it's not a hormone treatment...if there are any side effects, they should be minimal. what do you base this on?, theyre trying to temporarily stop a muscle from functioning, sounds dangerous to me

Targeted and temporary paralytic drugs don't usually have much in the terms of side-effects, though those that do usually involve serious and permanent nerve damage to the targeted area (meaning you'd NEVER be able to). Personally, I'd rather take something that actually damaged the existing sperm (and stuck around for a little while to damage the new ones) so long as it didn't actually damage the production process.

I would definately consider this after it has been out for a while so there has been a decent amount of troubleshooting.

Would generally abstain from sex than use a condom and it would be nice not to have to give all the responsibility to the woman. At least I wouldnt become a father because she forgot, if I make my own bed I can sleep in it but it wouldnt be fun if someone else made it for me and forced me to sleep.

No. I'm not convinced that it would not interfere with sensation...AFAIK, it is the contraction of the ejaculatory muscles which (atleast partially) cause the pleasurable sensation.

Anyway, I don't plan on ever having children, so a vasectomy would suit me better.

Participating in the control group of these tests could be interesting. :D

For me, it's thanks, but no thanks.

Being allergic to latex forced me to seek alternatives, a thing I found in polyurethane condoms. I hate condoms - this sounds contradictory, but I simply swear by the polyurethane ones, let me explain: First, since polyurethane is considerably stronger than latex, those condoms are *much* thinner and feel natural, something that no latex condom has ever achieved. Second, the cherry on the sundae - polyurethane conducts body heat, which adds to the impression of wearing nothing.

Besides... I hate taking pills, so chalk one more point up in favor of polyurethane condoms.

It prevents *one* type of sexually transmitted disease...yep, that's right: CHILDREN! Hehe. :evil:

Thanks for clearing that one up Arahar. After seeing this:

Although it does sound like it cuts out one of the more pleasurable experiences of sex, the discharge, and if there's no discharge there's a chance there'll be no climax.
and not reading the article, I was like "WTF?? Then why bother doing it at all?" ;) :p

Okay, so my plan is: wait for ya'll to test it, put up a poll and then decide based on what happens to you guys whether I'll take it or not ;)

If for some reason the better half missed her depo, then potentially yes. Seems more likely that if we realised, she'd go to the clinic that evening and we'd make do for a couple of days.

polyurethane condomsDon't they cost alot more, though?

I don't know if I'm old-fashioned or scared of sexually transmitted diseases, but eww... hell no.

Don't they cost alot more, though? As means of comparaison, a 6-pack of polyurethane condoms costs about $8.59, which means about $1.43 per condom. In bulk, that slips down to $1.25. Regular latex chings at 0.82, bulk 0.69$.

So yes, polyurethane is much more expensive than latex... but apart from natural membrane (read: lamb skin) which doesen't even protect against STDs (and gads knows I'm not comfortable slipping on lamb skin on my shaft), polyurethane is my only other option - the swelling part I can live with, but the redness and itchiness caused by latex drives me crazy. I don't care stashing out a bit more because for me polyurethane is far superior to latex.

Crap, that's expensive. You can get a hooker for a week in Amsterdam with that.

Well, I guess it wouldn't be too expensive if you don't have sex all that often. If you are a wild stallion, on the other hand, polyurethane would not be very nice on the wallet.

I think I'd wait for all the bugs to be ironed out and for a fully patched version to be rolled out before I'd take a drug like that. But if guys have been using it for a few years without problems, then sure - I'd use it, if I was in that situation.

Well, I guess it wouldn't be too expensive if you don't have sex all that often. If you are a wild stallion, on the other hand, polyurethane would not be very nice on the wallet. If you're having sex once a day it would be about $15 a month but 2 times a day would push the $30 figure so it'd be better she go on the pill at a set cost of about $20 a month.

The economics of sexual frequency... facinating.

Crap, that's expensive. You can get a hooker for a week in Amsterdam with that. Damn Barmy! At those rates, she'd probably come with the disease free of charge as well ;)

Well, all-in-all, it's an interesting possibility.

Firstly, all those nay-sayers who quail at the unknown possibility of side-effects (no trials yet), I say you're all a bunch of selfish sexists considering you probably have no qualms about your g/f or wife (or mistress ;) ) take hormonal treatments that have KNOWN side-effects! :lol:

Condoms break, vasectomies can reverse themselves (wonderful thing our bodies' ability to heal) and, really, the only 100% safe method is ABSTINANCE, but this sounds like a good idea.

If I didn't practically abstain already, I'd be up for it.


Um....and well, as for 'how it works' - this is a little unsettling (as well as somewhat embarrassing to admit) but the effect described is something I'm already doing. :bad:

Well, I can...man! How to keep this 'clean'?!?

:idea: ...I know - dry, clinical language!

When engaged in coitial activity with my wife, I will invariably reach the usual conclusion, however - even though I experience all the expected sensations of orgasm; the muscle tremors, the electric tingling throught the body, the...damn, how to *describe it*? - the feeling of my brain simultaneously exploding and shrinking into nothingness - all that.

But, as for *ejaculation*, it just doesn't happen.

Well, after concentrating on 'thinking through' the feelings, I've been able to figure out what's happening - there's a 'control valve' in the eurethra that switches access from the bladder to the testes/prostate, and I *think* I'm ending up 'spilling my seed' into my bladder.

I have noticed urination for some time after 'activity' can be...not quite uncomfortable...but more 'weird-feeling'. :heh:

I'd read years ago in a sex-advice column of an order of monks that trained themselves to do just this - expel their semen into their bladders - I guess to cover any evidence of impious behaviour as much as birth control. Maybe I'd managed to unconsciously figure out how to do it myself, or maybe I just have a congenital defect down there (not that I'd be comfortable discussing this with a doctor - y'all are the first besides my wife to learn of this), who knows?

And I can't be sure that this is the cause (embarrassment precluding medical examination/advice, remember? :) ) but this sort of thing may cause...um...'irregularity'. :rolleyes: So side-effects may include a broader base of things than one would expect. :)

ANYWAYS, as such, you can understand why I feel a sense of deja vu about this whole thing! :D

But overall, I approve of this and would probably take it (once clear of medical trials and approval) if applicable.

Shoshino DID have a valid point about it running counter with 'spontenaity', though - but you could say the same about finding/using a condom...and users of Viagra (and it's knock-offs) DO deal with this issue already.

---

EDIT: Oh, and gentlemen? *DON'T* keep condoms in your wallet! (Unless you keep your wallet in a jacket or similar, not tight against your body like in a pants pocket) :lol:

If you're having sex once a day it would be about $15 a month but 2 times a day would push the $30 figure so it'd be better she go on the pill at a set cost of about $20 a month. :confused: OK, maybe it's me, but I don't know anyone who has sex twice a day for a month straight. I can certainly see once a day, especially in the early parts of the romance, but twice a day? Do you have jobs? Simply going to work every morning and not getting home until the evening would likely limit you to once a day in most cases.

Jaded, I don't think what you're describing is the same as what the pill does. Supposedly, the pill will paralyze the 'expell' muscles all together, so the semen doesn't go anywhere, it just sits there. And don't worry, the body has natural processes for the handling of any buildup, which can include a gradual release into the bladder.

I don't like all this talk of "paralysing" muscles down there. It makes me a bit queasy to think about it.

I just had to put a female opinion in here - don't forget that a fair number of women can't use birth control because of allergies, medication conflicts, etc. And condoms have a higher-than-comfortable failure rate, not to mention possibly allergies to those too. So personally, I was really happy when I heard about this stuff.

That's quite wicked actually. Do you come here often? That's not a sleezy pulling technique, I just notice you've been here for not too far off 5 years now and have made 27 posts! Post more, we need more female views around here. There's enough testosterone on BoM to sink a battleship!

I'd read years ago in a sex-advice column of an order of monks that trained themselves to do just this - expel their semen into their bladders - I guess to cover any evidence of impious behaviour as much as birth control. Maybe I'd managed to unconsciously figure out how to do it myself, or maybe I just have a congenital defect down there (not that I'd be comfortable discussing this with a doctor - y'all are the first besides my wife to learn of this), who knows? Yeah, I know that technique - a specific pressure point which deflects ejaculation into the bladder - it works fine, you just need to know the exact location of the said pressure point. Works like a charm.

OK, maybe it's me, but I don't know anyone who has sex twice a day for a month straight. I did. Lost 30 pounds in two months. Did you people know that 20 minutes of... err, y'know burns 90 calories? That's 270 per hour, think about it.

OK, maybe it's me, but I don't know anyone who has sex twice a day for a month straight. /me raises his hand.

Hi, how ya' doing. Ok, so it wasn't a *full* month, but the week leading up to our wedding, the week in Hawaii, and the week after we got back was just crazy. We were still going at it *at least* once a day for the next month stright...and then things started to slow down once we ran out of all the lube, body paint, and other tasty things we got as gifts. :rolleyes: The stress of school + work also made things slow down. :bad:

And I agree that condoms suck. I'm lucky enough to have a wife that is allergic to latex, is opposed to anything that has to do with lamb skin condoms, and thinks the polyurethane ones will have the same effect as the latex.

Sex in general is good for your body. Since we've kind of gone off topic, here's some things to consider about that awesome 3 letter word:
(Not sure if everything is true, but it's still a good read.)
1. Sex is a beauty treatment. Scientific tests find that when women make love they produce amounts of the hormone estrogen, which makes hair shine and skin smooth.

2. Gentle, relaxed lovemaking reduces your chances of suffering dermatitis, skin rashes and blemishes. The sweat produced cleanses the pores and makes your skin glow.

3. Lovemaking can burn up those calories you piled on during that romantic dinner.

4. Sex is one of the safest sports you can take up. It stretches and tones up just about every muscle in the body. It's more enjoyable than swimming 20 laps, and you don't need special sneakers!

5. Sex is an instant cure for mild depression. It releases endorphins into the bloodstream, producing a sense of euphoria and leaving you with a feeling of well-being.

6. The more sex you have, the more you will be offered. The sexually active body gives off greater quantities of chemicals called pheromones. These subtle sex perfumes drive the opposite sex crazy!

7. Sex is the safest tranquilizer in the world.

8. Kissing each day will keep the dentist away. Kissing encourages saliva to wash food from the teeth and lowers the level of the acid that causes decay, preventing plaque build-up.

9. Sex actually relieves headaches. A lovemaking session can release the tension that restricts blood vessels in the brain.

10. A lot of lovemaking can unblock a stuffy nose. Sex is a natural antihistamine. It can help combat asthma and hay fever. I am a living testament to #9 and #10. Headaches just melt away every time, and it's not uncommon at all for the phlegm in my chest to loosen up enough for me to clear it out. I've also noticed that for a short time, my nose (when it is stuffed up) actually does clear up to the point where I can breathe through it freely...doesn't last too long though. :bad:

Anyway...back on topic now... :p :rolling:

Ok, so it wasn't a *full* month, but the week leading up to our wedding, the week in Hawaii, and the week after we got back was just crazy. OK, but that's a special circumstance. Almost everyone goes at it like rabbits during the honeymoon.

I think people like DotW are in the minority here. I doubt that most people average having sex 60 times per month with their partner.

And I wasn't talking particularly about how much people have sex - what got me on the topic was the cost of condoms versus birth control. I don't even remember who brought it up originally, but basically they were saying that the cost of condoms could exceed the cost of birth control, and I just thought that was unlikely.

Evidently, I am in the minority in only having sex a few times per week with my wife. Still, I find it hard to believe that most people have sex 60 times per month. I can believe it can happen over a short period of time - it's certainly biologically possible - but I doubt if you took an average over a long period of time you'd be able to get anywhere near 60.

Aldeth, I'd say you ARE in the minority...you randy devil, you! ;) I can count on one hand the number of times in a MONTH my wife and I...um, 'conjugate'. :D

But back when we were first together (and some time before the wedding even - pre-marital heathens that we are) we probably averaged maybe seventy or eighty times in a month. And that probably persisted halfway through our first year of wedded bliss.

:idea:
Saaay, maybe that's why I just don't have much sex drive now? I overloaded my Id and burned it out?

And as for the 'cost-accounting' bit, I thought it was a comparison between this 'male birth control pill' and the more usual female 'Pill'?

5. Sex is an instant cure for mild depression. It releases endorphins into the bloodstream, producing a sense of euphoria and leaving you with a feeling of well-being. Well, I don't know about euphoria... but the well-being part is damn right.

9. Sex actually relieves headaches. A lovemaking session can release the tension that restricts blood vessels in the brain. Again, absolutly true, though the effect is temporary.

I think people like DotW are in the minority here. I doubt that most people average having sex 60 times per month with their partner. I know, I know. This likely wouldn't have been possible during the rest of the year, but during this summer, both of us worked part time... so the rest came naturally.

I don't even remember who brought it up originally, but basically they were saying that the cost of condoms could exceed the cost of birth control, and I just thought that was unlikely.
That was me. I was talking about latex allergies and the higher cost of polyurethane condoms.

And thinks the polyurethane ones will have the same effect as the latex. It's absolutly not the same thing. Polyurethane has a natural feel, transmits body heat... and if your wife thinks it will the same effect than latex because of her allergy... trust me, it will not . I have been using polyurethane alternatives for nearly two years, and I never had the shadow of a problem.

Wow...I've always wondered when they would put out something like this...

I'm definitely all for it...and I know my girlfriend would love me for not making her have the morning-after pill on the odd occasion when we run out of condoms...

LMAO Barmy :shake:

Firstly, all those nay-sayers who quail at the unknown possibility of side-effects (no trials yet), I say you're all a bunch of selfish sexists considering you probably have no qualms about your g/f or wife (or mistress ) take hormonal treatments that have KNOWN side-effects! I say, I say! I'll have you know SAH that I do NOT have her take those things! I just wrap my tool. (She wont take them :rolleyes: )

average having sex 60 times per month with their partner. heh, i wish :rolleyes:

I'd read years ago in a sex-advice column of an order of monks that trained themselves to do just this - expel their semen into their bladders - I guess to cover any evidence of impious behaviour as much as birth control. Maybe I'd managed to unconsciously figure out how to do it myself, or maybe I just have a congenital defect down there (not that I'd be comfortable discussing this with a doctor - y'all are the first besides my wife to learn of this), who knows?
Such an ability, wasted on the married man ;) hehe just kidding. Wish I knew how to do that.. you don't suppose they have a website about it or teach a course? :shake:

Wish I knew how to do that.. you don't suppose they have a website about it or teach a course? I've done a bit of research in an old book my ex forgot among my stuff, and the ejaculation-deflecting technique is called the "Jen-Mo" or some such, and the pressure point is about halfway between the balls and the anus. I can't be much more precise, since this is described in a text, but you just have to try it the trial and error way - use it only if you must, because orgasms are just not as good using this technique.

@ Kitrax: love the "top 10" list ;)

Aside from that, if it were tested and proven harmless, I don't have a problem. I'm a bit uneasy about possible side effects, though.