Yesterday, the BBC (2009) reported that Chinese researchers have had a successful test of an injectable contraceptive for men. Gu et al (2009) injected 1,045 healthy men with 500 mg of testosterone undecanoate monthly, with contraceptive results comparable to hormonal methods currently available to women. The same group determined this dose in a previous study, testing placebo, 500mg/month, and 1,000mg/month in groups of 12 men (Zhang et al, 1999). The researchers predict that the method could be available within five years if further testing goes well. As discussed in March (3/26/09), over half of men surveyed would like more personal control over their fertility.
Those of you following the Diffblog Twitter feed will probably be disappointed at this shameless self-promotion. I'm revisiting this topic largely because I participated in the BBC's "World Have Your Say" radio discussion of this story (BBC message board; WHYS radio podcast). I received an email yesterday morning regarding the March blog post, and asking if I wanted to discuss whether men could be trusted with the responsibility of birth control.
What amazed me was the ridiculous blame-game on both sides of the debate. Both men and women accused the opposite sex of intentionally sabotaging birth control, or lying about it, in order to cause pregnancy. How often can this seriously happen? And why does the introduction of another potential method of birth control suddenly move all responsibility from one sex to the other?
For comparison, the so-called "standard" dose of testosterone (for hormone replacement or FTM transition) is 200mg per two weeks (of testosterone cypionate or testosterone enanthate). A pharmaceutical study recommended doses of 750mg per 10 weeks for undecanoate in hypogonadal men (MedNewsToday, 2009). The dosage used in this study seems to be a touch higher, though not nearly as high as doses used for performance-enhancement. I caution against having too much faith in the term "standard" here, since dosing is highly individualized: I take half that much (50mg weekly).
Find out the day's topic before you read: follow diffblog on Twitter! Diffblog also available on LiveJournal.
Difference Blog Reader Poll
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
6 comments:
For me, the problem begins and ends in the asymmetry of it: only women get pregnant. I can't imagine all that many intelligent women looking at this and thinking, "Wow, now I don't have to worry about birth control anymore!" - because in the end, the one who pays for it with their body if someone forgets is always the woman. So whether or not they come up with some male contraceptive pill, I can't see any woman of sense giving up hers - so it's not going to have the same revolutionary effect that The Pill had.
@Cait
See, I feel like a revolution in responsibility is sorely needed among men -- and I think that the chance to take responsibility will inevitably lead to an increased sense of responsibility about a man's role in reproduction.
Is that ingenuous?
Listening to the BBC show now....
Folk keep saying the mother bears the responsibility, and the father can just walk away, but (at least in Massachusetts) that's certainly not true. The legal responsibility is equal.
I really think we need billboards everywhere informing men than if they father a child (willingly or not, knowingly or not), half their income for the next 18-21 years will go to the child's mother. So they might want to be very, very careful with their genes.
So...you think that in the era of the Eternal Man-Child (see anything by Apatow, or with Rogen in it), men are going to magically decide to be suddenly so responsible about birth control that women would trust them generally about it?
Me, I'm a little dubious about that conclusion. :)
As to the legal requirement to pay for one's progeny, it's a fine idea. The implementation leaves much to be desired.
@Cait:
I think that the reason men have become so cavalier about their role is partially because the woman "has control" over whether or not she bears a kid. I seriously consider that a contributing factor.
This justification rings true in my head, even if I find it distasteful: "If she didn't want to get pregnant, she should have been on the pill. She could have gotten an abortion. I didn't get any say in this kid being born, so why should I care?"
I think a hormonal birth control option for men would necessarily increase the appearance of shared responsibility. However, I think the key point here is SHARED responsibility. Right now, the onus for birth control is nearly entirely on the woman. I'm not looking for (and I don't think this would cause) the responsibility to be entirely on the man. However, I can't see how something closer to a 50-50 split is objectionable.
Objectionable? Not at all. Achievable? I'm much more dubious. I agree it's desirable, absolutely. :)
Post a Comment