Post: #51

Quote:Guys will say they're on vasalgel and leave the woman with the baby.

In other words they're going to do what a sizable number of women are doing with the fucking pill now. Can you say projection?

Post: #52

Latest post from them:

Quote:A key goal for the first Vasalgel studies, in addition to demonstrating the contraceptive’s safety and effectiveness, was to establish its reversibility. Vasalgel was reversible after a year in rabbits, but as we’ve reported, reversibility has so far been elusive in large-animal studies.

We suspect we simply haven’t found a suitable large-animal model; for example the baboon vas deferens is smaller and more fragile than that of the human. We’re cautiously optimistic that everything will be much easier in human trials, because the human vas is larger and sturdier. And we’re hard at work trying some other things too. But in the meantime, the first clinical trial will be designed to include just men who aren’t counting on reversibility, while we sort out those issues.

Thousands of people would like to be in the first trial, but there are only a few spots. And the researcher will have to pick local men who are the best candidates and want vasectomy anyway. So we’re trying to keep everybody’s focus on the ultimate prize: getting Vasalgel to market, with availability to ALL. If trials go well, then the sky’s the limit: we’ll seek approvals to bring Vasalgel to market, starting in the U.S., E.U., and Canada… and expanding from there.

Post: #53

(03-16-2016 04:12 PM)joost Wrote:  Latest post from them:

Quote:A key goal for the first Vasalgel studies, in addition to demonstrating the contraceptive’s safety and effectiveness, was to establish its reversibility. Vasalgel was reversible after a year in rabbits, but as we’ve reported, reversibility has so far been elusive in large-animal studies.

We suspect we simply haven’t found a suitable large-animal model; for example the baboon vas deferens is smaller and more fragile than that of the human. We’re cautiously optimistic that everything will be much easier in human trials, because the human vas is larger and sturdier. And we’re hard at work trying some other things too. But in the meantime, the first clinical trial will be designed to include just men who aren’t counting on reversibility, while we sort out those issues.

Thousands of people would like to be in the first trial, but there are only a few spots. And the researcher will have to pick local men who are the best candidates and want vasectomy anyway. So we’re trying to keep everybody’s focus on the ultimate prize: getting Vasalgel to market, with availability to ALL. If trials go well, then the sky’s the limit: we’ll seek approvals to bring Vasalgel to market, starting in the U.S., E.U., and Canada… and expanding from there.

It's a bit disconcerting that they haven't locked down the basics of reversibility yet. Now on their Facebook page, they (the guys making this) are asking questions about the importance of reversibility.

"If you're waiting for Vasalgel, how important is reversibility for you? Are you only interested if you're sure reproductive ability could be restored? We'll explore this question in a new survey,"

https://www.facebook.com/Vasalgel

I've got a feeling that they are going to angle this into a non-invasive/less risky alternative to vasectomy very soon if they can't lock down the issues with reversibility. They will try to address reversibility stuff later when they have some cash flow coming in and can afford more staff. Better than nothing I suppose but the main selling point is reversibility for me. Without it, I have no interest in this.

I hope I'm wrong. I want this ASAP so I can hit up Latin America and fuck like its my last fuck with no worry about knocking up those fertile (and often catholic) sluts. This shit is a game changer on so many levels if it happens.

Post: #54

Another update - they did a survey of the people interested in it, and whether reversibility was important.

https://www.parsemusfoundation.org/contr...important/

Quote:4,467 of you responded. The great majority (87%) identified as “a guy who needs (or might need) contraception.” These respondents were presented with additional questions, such as whether they’d consider freezing their sperm (a somewhat expensive option, unfortunately) as a way to “keep the door open” to having kids in the future in case Vasalgel isn’t reliably reversible; 22.3% said they would. Most of the men (78.2%) don’t have kids. 22.5% plan to have kids in the future (or more kids, if they already have any), and 18.3% aren’t sure.

For just over half (53%) of the men, reversibility is not essential to their interest in Vasalgel. 87.3% of male respondents said they’d see Vasalgel as being better than vasectomy even if it turns out not to be reliably reversible.

Who responded? About half (52%) of the respondents were in their twenties; 35% in their thirties; 8% in their forties; only 1.5% were over 50. We knew Vasalgel supporters trended young, and this confirmed it! Most (76.5%) were in the U.S.; 6.5% were in Canada; 3.4% were in the U.K., 2.4% in Australia; 1.6% in Sweden; and 1.5% in Germany.

87% of guys interested are under 40. So it may arrive in time for the majority of men hitting their peak.

"I'd hate myself if I had that kind of attitude, if I were that weak." - Arnold

Post: #55

Yeah, but they keep asking about reversibility (they have also had posts on their FB page specifically asking about it, too). That tells me they are less than confident about their hopes of reversibility in humans, which sucks. I would love good birth control that isnt a shitty condom or vasectomy, but eventually I do want kids.

Post: #56

Were they having problems reversing it? I'd love to have a peak at their trial data.

Post: #57

The Rational Male has been talking about this lately - my bad if it's a repost.

I'm still not convinced it will be as much of a game changer since so many younger guys of all social strata wait until it's too late to think about an option like this. And forget about the baby daddies in waiting over in the housing projects - they have no interest in this product anyway - why worry about child support payments when everybody's on welfare?

It would have to be completely reversible, inexpensive and non-invasive to gain any significant inroads to the men most interested in this option. Would still love to see it hit the market!

Post: #58

(07-30-2014 11:10 AM)TheWastelander Wrote:  That's what they say now, but I don't believe taking away women's ability to trap a man is going to be something they actually support when the rubber meets the road.

Most of the guys who a naive enough to believe they could never get trapped these days would probably never consider using something like vasalgel in the first place.

It has a lot of value though for guys with at least average SMV in their mid 20's and up who have a lot to lose financially with an unexpected pregnancy. I don't think it will see much use below the post college age.

Post: #59

What happens when I cum? Nothing comes out? Or I can still spray across the room but the liquid contains no sperm?

Post: #60

(09-23-2016 07:30 AM)NomadofEU Wrote:  What happens when I cum? Nothing comes out? Or I can still spray across the room but the liquid contains no sperm?

The testicles, at most, only contribute 2% of your cum.

The prostate does most of the work of cum production, and it wouldn't be affected by this technique.

So you'll still squirt, although it may be slightly less, and the colour and consistency may be a bit different. The cum should be spermless though.

Post: #61

The kind of stuff I like seeing!

I hope the costs end up small. I only see this working will to change female behavior if a significant amount of guys go thru with it.

Post: #62

Reportedly, the treatment will cost about $1000, but it lasts something like 20 years. To get it reversed before it wears off, you go back in and they inject some kind of antidote that turns it off.

Yes, it's a game changer for guys with status. You get it done and it doesn't matter what the girl does, she's not getting pregnant by you. If she claims she's pregnant, you show your medical records and tell her to sod off.

Post: #63

Parsemus Foundation selects new Executive Director

Quote:Linda Brent
Vasalgel
Parsemus Foundation Founder and Trustee Elaine Lissner recently selected Linda Brent as the Executive Director of the organization. Linda consulted with the organization for several years prior to accepting this new role. Linda has over 30 years experience in animal welfare and nonprofit management. She has a PhD in primatology and specializes in chimpanzee behavior and welfare. After founding and directing a nonprofit chimpanzee sanctuary, Chimp Haven, she returned to school to earn her MBA and began a consulting business. Linda comments, “I am thrilled to have the opportunity to continue the amazing work that Elaine initiated at Parsemus Foundation to bring neglected medical advancements to the forefront. I look forward to expanding our impact over time, and working closely with stakeholders to make a difference for human and non-human health and welfare”.

Post: #64

Glad to see something coming into the world to aid men. No more being forced into fatherhood... We made it gentleman!

Post: #65

Looks like they're making progress on live monkeys. The method was proven 100% effective on rhesus monkeys. Now they're working on the reversibility portion.
Link to the Guardian

Quote:Successful male contraceptive gel trial brings new form of birth control closer
Designed to be a reversible and less invasive form of vasectomy, Vasalgel has been found to work reliably in primates

A male contraceptive gel has been found to work reliably in a trial in primates, bringing the prospect of an alternative form of birth control for humans closer.

The product, called Vasalgel, is designed to be a reversible and less invasive form of vasectomy and in the latest study was 100% effective at preventing conception. A blob of the gel is injected into the sperm-carrying tube, known as the vas deferens, and acts as a long-lasting barrier.


Contraceptive jabs for men may work - but what about the male pill?
Read more
Previous tests in smaller animals showed the procedure could be easily reversed by breaking up the gel using ultrasound.

Catherine VandeVoort, of the California National Primate Research Centre and the study’s lead author, said: “Men’s options for contraception have not changed much in decades. There’s vasectomy, which is poorly reversible, and condoms. If they knew they could get a reliable contraceptive that could also be reversed I think it would be appealing to them.”

The Parsemus Foundation, a non-profit organisation that funded the work, said it plans to start a human trial as soon as funding is secured, based on the promising monkey results.


After decades of minimal progress on male contraceptives, a range of different approaches now appear to be showing promise. A World Health Organisation investigation, published last year, found that a male hormonal contraceptive jab was as effective as the female pill. However, scientists are still working to overcome unwanted side-effects including depression, acne and soaring libido that are linked to hormone-altering gels, pills and injections.

By contrast, the Vasalgel procedure does not interfere with sperm production and hormone levels in the body remain unchanged, meaning such side-effects are not an issue. As with a vasectomy, sperm continues to be produced in the testes, but rather than being ejaculated, it dissolves and is naturally absorbed by the body.


The Guardian's Science Weekly The male contraceptive pill: how close are we? – Science Weekly podcast
Over 100 million women around the world use the female contraceptive pill. But why isn’t there a male alternative? And are the barriers to its creation scientific or social?
Listen
Unlike vasectomy though, in which the tube is snipped and the two ends cauterised, the Vasalgel procedure should be reversible, potentially making it an attractive option for a wider range of men.

“They wouldn’t have to worry about it on a day-to-day basis,” said VandeVoort. “This would be more akin to an IUD [the coil] in women.”

In the study, published in the journal Basic and Clinical Andrology, 16 male rhesus monkeys were given injections of the gel and then returned to their group, which included between three and nine breeding females.

The monkeys were monitored for at least one breeding season and about half the monkeys lived alongside females for two years, during which time there were no conceptions and side-effects, such as inflammation, were minimal.

Angela Colagross-Schouten, lead veterinarian on the project, said: “We were impressed that this alternative worked in every single monkey, even though this was our first time trying it.”

The same team are now hoping to confirm that the procedure is fully reversible in monkeys.

Post: #66

Condoms already exist which are used to control the risk of impregnating a woman and contracting an STD, Vasalgel doesnt really empower us, it empowers women and may even expose us to the potential of sterility
We don't need a sperm gel, we need legal protection over a womens agency once they become pregnant where men have no say or legal recourse

Post: #67

(02-07-2017 07:54 AM)lex the impaler Wrote:  16 male rhesus monkeys were given injections of the gel and then returned to their group, which included between three and nine breeding females.

Where do I sign up for the human trials?

Post: #68

(02-13-2017 07:56 AM)Bazzwaldo Wrote:  Condoms already exist which are used to control the risk of impregnating a woman and contracting an STD, Vasalgel doesnt really empower us, it empowers women and may even expose us to the potential of sterility
We don't need a sperm gel, we need legal protection over a womens agency once they become pregnant where men have no say or legal recourse

Condoms as the ultimate solution?

Do you even raw dog bro?

Post: #69

(02-13-2017 07:56 AM)Bazzwaldo Wrote:  Condoms already exist which are used to control the risk of impregnating a woman and contracting an STD, Vasalgel doesnt really empower us, it empowers women and may even expose us to the potential of sterility
We don't need a sperm gel, we need legal protection over a womens agency once they become pregnant where men have no say or legal recourse

Prevention (birth control) is better than cure (relying on legal "justice" to remedy the situation). Always has been, always will be. So I'd say it does empower men, in the best way possible.

What's with the sterility fear mongering by the way? Where does it suggest in the trials to date that this is even a likelihood?

Sex with a condom for most, if not all guys is a trade-off. Sure, you get to fuck a girl, but at the sacrifice of sensitivity and enjoyment - like trying to get drunk off mid strength beer. You'll get a bit of a buzz, but it's lacklustre at best. Some will say, nah, there are condoms out there that feel just like going in raw. Bullshit. There is nothing like going in raw.

Also, just in case you're unaware (and for those that actually are), condoms are not an effective measure against all STD's HSV II, i.e. Herpes Simplex Virus can be contracted even if wearing a condom. Guys that shave are at the highest risk, so don't shave - only trim.

Post: #70

(02-13-2017 10:17 AM)Windom Earle Wrote:  

(02-13-2017 07:56 AM)Bazzwaldo Wrote:  Condoms already exist which are used to control the risk of impregnating a woman and contracting an STD, Vasalgel doesnt really empower us, it empowers women and may even expose us to the potential of sterility
We don't need a sperm gel, we need legal protection over a womens agency once they become pregnant where men have no say or legal recourse

Prevention (birth control) is better than cure (relying on legal "justice" to remedy the situation). Always has been, always will be. So I'd say it does empower men, in the best way possible.

What's with the sterility fear mongering by the way? Where does it suggest in the trials to date that this is even a likelihood?

Sex with a condom for most, if not all guys is a trade-off. Sure, you get to fuck a girl, but at the sacrifice of sensitivity and enjoyment - like trying to get drunk off mid strength beer. You'll get a bit of a buzz, but it's lacklustre at best. Some will say, nah, there are condoms out there that feel just like going in raw. Bullshit. There is nothing like going in raw.

Also, just in case you're unaware (and for those that actually are), condoms are not an effective measure against all STD's HSV II, i.e. Herpes Simplex Virus can be contracted even if wearing a condom. Guys that shave are at the highest risk, so don't shave - only trim.

Condoms are NOT the ultimate solution Dr. Howard, I didn't say they were, I did say they are a form of contraception where Men have control over unwanted pregnancies and I agree totally Windom Earle that condoms are not an effective measure against all STD's, however there is sufficient evidence to state the use of them reduces STD transmission a hell of a lot more with them than without!
Raw dogging is the ultimate, no contest, my point is if you want to control your fertility and not get harnessed financially with a bastard for 18 years this trade-off is an option

Of course "Prevention (birth control) is better than cure (relying on legal "justice" to remedy the situation)"
My point is there is no current legal remedy because if there was, women would think twice about skipping the pill or riding the cock carousel for fear they may be left with the bill for raising a bastard themselves!

Given “reversibility has so far been elusive in large-animal studies”, this revelation by researchers qualifies my reference to the use of the word 'sterility' in relation to ones inability to conceive a child

None of this would matter if men had legal protection for unwanted pregnancies rather than the rubber and gel varieties on offer today

Post: #71

(02-13-2017 07:56 AM)Bazzwaldo Wrote:  Condoms already exist which are used to control the risk of impregnating a woman and contracting an STD, Vasalgel doesnt really empower us, it empowers women and may even expose us to the potential of sterility
We don't need a sperm gel, we need legal protection over a womens agency once they become pregnant where men have no say or legal recourse

Your followup to others calling you out does not really address the fact that you state that Vasalgel wouldn't empower men.

It absolutely would empower men by having a 100% effective method of birth control. Condoms are not 100% effective even if used diligently as they can break/slip off, etc...

Further, RISUG (Vasalgel is not the same technique but is similar) has had 100% reversibility in their clinical trials, so it's not a foregone conclusion that Vasalgel wouldn't be able to achieve the same.

Saying we don't need a sperm gel is assuming that your needs are the needs of all men. I don't think we'll ever get a legal recourse/say over pregnancy because it's far to complicated and touchy of a subject, but beyond that, there are plenty of men that don't believe in abortion who would still want the ability to choose when they have kids who don't want to use condoms (or are allergic to latex, etc...).

You don't speak for men with your fantasy legal protection idea, instead of backpedaling you should consider just admitting you made a poorly worded or just outright poorly thought out statement.

Post: #72

^^^^^
Aneriodocean, Let me relieve you of the idea that my posts are properly thought out, no fuckin way, it’s a forum where ideas are thrown around, some, including mine are poorly worded and poorly thought out
I’m trying to look at this from a logical point of view
No-one wants to wear a condom if there was a choice
In a casual fuck situation Men wear them to 1) protect themselves against an unwanted pregnancy and 2) reduce the risk of catching an STD
In a casual fuck situation a woman prefers us to wear one and couldn’t give a fuck if our pleasure is reduced
She prefers this for two reasons 1) protect themselves against an unwanted pregnancy and 2) reduce the risk of catching an STD
Lets say RISUG is a 100% effective form of contraception, 2% more effective than wearing a condom and lets assume its completely reversible.
This new method of male contraception for men 1) protects themselves against an unwanted pregnancy but 2) increases the risk of catching an STD in lieu of wearing a condom
With women in a casual fuck situation its different again, historically they’re responsible for the prevention of pregnancy by taking a contraceptive but now with a 100% fool-proof male version, supposedly allowing us to rawdog them could 1) expose them to the risk of getting pregnant if he was bullshitting and 2) increase the risk of STD in lieu of wearing a condom

This does not empower men, it enslaves us because
1) The responsibility for the prevention of unwanted pregnancy now fall on us
2) The responsibility for the prevention of STD’s fall on both men and women and the most effective method of reducing exposure is wearing a fucking condom!
3) Most importantly, in a legal sense women have agency, they have the protection of the state should they fall pregnant in the following ways
1) they can choose to keep the child against the wishes of the father
2) they can choose to abort the child against the wishes of the father
3) they can refuse to be subjected to a paternity test and name a father
4) they can go full term and adopt the baby out against the wishes of the father

Options 1 and 3 enslave a male financially and option 2 and 4 emotionally scars the father, the woman has impunity in all 4 options

When you said “ there are plenty of men that don't believe in abortion who would still want the ability to choose when they have kids who don't want to use condoms”
It sounds like you’re describing a committed relationship, I am and most other contributors to this thread are talking about a casual sexual encounters where unwanted pregnancy can occur

I understand why you think having agency over who and when you impregnate empowers men using a new male contraceptive i.e because its 100% effective but you miss a few important considerations like STD’s, State legal protection on women’s reproductive rights and taking the only responsibility left to women, one she would gladly give up, her responsibility for contraception
Legal protection of men is as you say fantasy and its because of this fact, the handing to men yet another responsibility in my opinion enslaves us all the more
[i]

Post: #73

(02-14-2017 08:25 AM)Bazzwaldo Wrote:  1) The responsibility for the prevention of unwanted pregnancy now fall on us

I don't see how Vasalgel changes that.

It's in the nature of men to behave recklessly, however Vasalgel makes it much less likely that you'll have to suffer for the occasional failure to think with your big head.

"I'd hate myself if I had that kind of attitude, if I were that weak." - Arnold

Post: #74

Sorry for the source, but here's an interesting article about RISUG approaching approval in India, and some of the history of obstruction and interference with the trials.

https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/artic...lly-coming

Quote:Testing has been completed on 282 subjects across ten hospitals, and the results are nothing short of miraculous—Risug has shown complete effectiveness with zero side effects. A 2011 report by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare mentioned finding no side effects for the drug in the long-term (a period of nine to ten years), as well as full efficacy. When the 300th volunteer is tested, the Indian Council of Medical Research will formally submit the application for approval to the Central Drugs Standard Control Organization, which is similar to the American FDA.

Quote:Many of the questions raised about Risug and the resultant delays have been instigated by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in the US, he contends. For several years, the agency wanted to promote a drug for men that involved regular ingestion like the female pill, Guha said. The first medical practitioner to administer Risug for clinical trials, Dr Gulshanjit Singh, told me a similar thing some years ago. The NIH, he said, was batting for a hormone-based, repeat-use drug developed by a US-based firm. He remembered meetings where a section of the ICMR argued strongly in favour of this American drug, and pointed out problems with Risug. Singh served as the head of the department of surgery in Safdarjung Hospital and Deen Dayal Upadhyay hospital, two prestigious publicly-funded hospitals in New Delhi.


Recent developments seem to support this claim. The drug whose trials were stopped in October 2016 was a hormone-based solution, relying on regular ingestion to control the production of hormones. Regular use implies long-term sales, a steady guarantee of profit. Risug, on the other hand, requires a maximum of two doses--one injection to put the polymer film in place, and another to flush it out of the vas deferens.


"In fact, even in the World Health Organization (WHO), there are people who don't want the drug [Risug] to come through," A.R. Nanda, the Union health secretary from 1999-2002, told me.

"I'd hate myself if I had that kind of attitude, if I were that weak." - Arnold