1

Of Mice and Men: New Study Touts a Male Contraceptive

Elizabeth Crnkovich also contributed to this article.

Radical feminists have long dreamed of “fixing” men, so that women could be relieved of the burden of birth control. Now comes a new study on mice purporting to show that men can be chemically neutered, supposedly without side effects.

Male birth control has been the object of much research over the past few decades, but to little avail. Most of the drugs used in trials to stop sperm production also produced unfortunate side effects, such as impotence. Since the point of birth control has been to prevent procreation while encouraging sexual intercourse, this obviously would not do.

Now comes a new male contraceptive that, when properly administered, lessens sperm production to the point where a man is effectively infertile. Once a man goes off this drug, however, his sperm production would ramp back up. His fertility would return with no ill effects on any future offspring that he may conceive.

At least, that’s how it worked in mice.

Male mice on the drug were effectively sterile, though not impotent. Once the drug left their reproductive system, they were able to procreate normally. The next generation of mice reportedly showed no gross genetic defects as a consequence of their sires consuming the drug.

Of course, simply because the new contraceptive appeared to work in lower animals, doesn’t mean that it will necessarily work in men. There may be subtle health changes in men that were not apparent in mice. There may be epigenetic consequences for their children that, likewise, were not evident in mice. There may be long-term consequences for the men themselves that would only become apparent over years or even decades, far beyond the duration of this study. Finally, even damaged sperm may lead to the conception of children so genetically compromised that they are not capable of surviving more than a few days or weeks in the womb. That would make the new drug not a contraceptive at all, but an abortifacient.

We certainly see all of these problems and more resulting from the powerful, steroid-based drugs that our government foists on women at home and abroad.

The health risks and side-effects resulting from the Pill include blood clotscancer,weight gainand nausea, to name just a few.

There are physical consequences as well, especially when we are talking about the IUD, the vaginal ring, and implantable rods such as Norplant and Implanon. For one thing, having an IUD can be quite painful. Even once in place, it’s not all fun and games. There are still a number of drawbacks to its long-term use. The implantable rod has a whole host of adverse side-effects including depression, mood swings, bleeding, acne, and lowered sex drive. The vaginal ring, while it may be easier to manage, does not show high user satisfaction either.

It turns out that there are unpleasant side effects from all methods of birth control, differing only in their severity. The only exception is Natural Family Planning, which of course is not contraception at all, but merely a natural way of regulating one’s fertility. This is not surprising, given that NFP does not attempt to alter a woman’s natural reproductive cycle, only to make her aware of it.

Of course, the radical feminists understand that artificial birth control harms women. Many of them have suffered the consequences themselves. That is why they are so determined to developed a male contraceptive that would allow them to transfer the health burden of contraception to men.

Look for the Obama-controlled FDA—which has never seen a contraceptive/abortifacient that it didn’t embrace—to try and push this one through the approval process quickly.

After all, there is an election coming up, and this is one more way to pander to the Sandra Fluke’s of the world.


Steve Mosher is the president of Population Research Institute.
Filed under: »
  • Terri Kimmel

    “There may be long-term consequences for the men themselves that would only become apparent over years or even decades, far beyond the duration of this study.”
    This was my first thought. Mice don’t live an average of 73 years.