Male Birth Control
 

Some key facts:

- Small doses of testosterone and progestin that will decrease sperm levels
- 98% effective
- Must be taken everyday for about 3 months before it becomes effective (or 1 injection/month for 3 months)
- 50% of men say they would take it

Possible side effects:

- Weight gain (4-10lbs), but in lean muscle mass
- Possible lowering of HDL (good cholesterol)

Will possibly be available early next year.

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/hea...ol.for.men.cnn

I'm excited!

As much as I said I'd never take a hormonal birth control, I hate condoms so fucking much at this point that I'll jump on that whenever it makes it to market.

Bye bye 2 hours in hot tub, hello pill!

A while back there was a male birth control shot being investigated...the downside being that it was a large bore needle to each testicle. I would have even done that. I'm all for birth control being the man's responsibility (or shared)...if I were still trying not to create offspring, I'd be all about this. As it is, once we hit our quota, I plan on getting "punched in the nuts with a scalpel" (as one of my friends who's been their refers to getting clipped)

I'd be interested in this since I have zero interest in having kids.

I'd also elect for the vasectomy route like Clavus but Skogafoss doesn't like the idea of it for some reason.

Better you than me!

I also believe birth control is a shared responsibility, but I have my limits. Getting stabbed in the sack is one of them.

I'm sure you don't have to "stabbed in the sack." Women who get the shot don't have to be stabbed in the pussy.

I'm aware. If it's a pill or intermuscular injection, I'm there. I was referring specifically to twistedmosaic's comment about a large bore needle to each testicle - if that's what it takes I'll stick with condoms, thanks.

What's the hot tub got to do with it? Never heard of that..

I think this is a great thing, let's hope it is a huge success and many men take the initiative!

Hot tub is a euphemism. willravel boils his testicles before having sex, every time. He's hardcore like that.

I also eat iron and shit steel, but that's for a digestive thread. :thumbsup:

But yes, keeping your soldiers toasty for over 30 minutes before sex will kill off quite a few sperm, but has no long term effects. Likewise if you're trying to become pregnant, avoid hot tubs and long baths.

** Note: this is the top ten least preventative methods of birth control available on the internet. It falls between saran wrap and a twist tie and beating off 3 times beforehand.**

If the only method of birth control you use is a hot tub, you're an idiot. If you use it along with a condom and the pill? You're just helping the odds. There's no harm in that.

Agreed.

Are we not in a humorous mood today, Mahatma?

Any excuse to soak in a hot tub is a good one :thumbsup:

It wasn't to the testicles, it was to the vas deferens, the tube that carries sperm from the testicle to the seminal vesicles. Geez, was I the only one who wasn't giggling their way through Sex Ed? ;)

That wasn't a chemical or hormonal approach, though--it was literally a ball of sticky goo they were plugging the tubes with. Sounded pretty promising, though, with zero side-effects. Far as I know it hasn't made its way out of clinical trials.

The women in my life have been on hormonal birth control for way too long. If I can step up--especially if the side-effects are as mild as are really described here--I'd totally do it. I'd like to see some more longitudinal study work first, though.

The technical term for using a hot tub for birth control is "parenthood".

I don't want people thinking it's entirely useless. It does actually kill off quite a few sperm, which can aid in birth control when combined with a more effective method (like the pill or a condom).

Besides, if I weren't in a humorous mood, why would I have pulled out the old "Geordi LaFroce shooting a laser out of his visor" pic for Halx's eye surgery thread?

Will is right as usual!

Also if you are trying to become pregnant your man needs to avoid using a laptop computer that generates a lot of heat on his lap. There was a study done somewhere that hypothesized that long term use of a laptop computer right on top of the testicles could cause a man to become sterile permanently.

There is an optimal temperature range for the production of sperm. That is why our testicles hang in a sack outside the body because even body temperature is not conducive to sperm production. Also our soldiers are so smart that they retreat back up into our bodies when it gets too cold for them to produce their smart bombs.

Now there's a real man. :thumbsup:

Hmm, but would you do it even if the side effects were not as mild?

And what's to complain about a bore needle in the balls? As if inserting an IUD up a hole the size of your urethra opening isn't at LEAST as painful? And don't get me started about the fun side effects of birth control.

I applaud twistedmosaic for also being a real man and being willing to go through with something like that, in this case.

Yeah, but walking around with heating pad strapped to your crotch with an extension cord is neither an attractive look nor a particularly reliable form of birth control on it's own. Since we're talking about birth control, I think it's important to point that out.

I've heard about this as well, and it alarms me a bit... because ktspktsp and I basically sit around with our laptops for a long time, on a regular basis. Granted, usually we're sitting on a bed (with our legs out in front of us), so the laptop is actually on our thighs, not above our genital area... but it does make me wonder. I guess we'll find out once we start trying to have kids.

Anyone know about the effects of wireless devices/cell phones on reproductive potential?

There was a product (might still exist) made for men who had testicles that ran too "hot", thus killing off all sperm production.

Liquid cooled underwear!

The underwear was equipped with a liquid cooling system which would cool down the testicles to the optimal temperature required to produce sperm. Apparently, many infertility cases were resolved this way.

As for male birth control, I'll stick with condoms. I've never been a fan of any product that changes the body's inner workings, even on women.

I'd just wear a kilt!

okay so what vie learned is that to avoid babies with 100% effectiveness without condom use i need the pill and a laptop.
my girl already has her side covered.

Could be a very reliable form of birth control, how often would someone walking around like that have sex? :D

A few potential risks of testosterone therapy:

• Cause skin reactions
• Cause fluid retention
• Cause baldness
• Cause or aggravate sleep apnea (brief, repeated cessation of breathing during sleep)
• Stimulate noncancerous (benign) growth of the prostate and cause or worsen urinary symptoms
• Stimulate growth of prostate cancer that's already present
• Enlarge breasts (gynecomastia)
• Stimulate growth of breast cancer that's already present
• Cause testicle shrinkage (testicular atrophy)
• Limit sperm production (infertility) [Bingo!]
• Stimulate excess blood production (polycythemia)
• Cause acne

MayoClinic.com

I generally don't like the idea of doing this sort of thing if I'm healthy. I wouldn't mess around with hormones unless I was abnormally low or something.

Do they list the rate at which these risks are common?

No, it's just a summary. (I updated the link in my post.) But I'm sure more information could be dug up.

I've seen what testosterone does to female bodybuilders. It's powerful stuff, even in small doses. Now imagine a long-term therapy and what it could do to you if your testosterone is fine or already high enough.

Bullshit. Your preferred method of birth control does not make you a 'real man,' and this isn't a case of competition. Properly, a man and a woman should work together in order to determine the best possible method for them as a couple, and the man giving 100% so the woman doesn't have to do anything isn't conducive to that. If I were with a partner right now I would be willing to consider taking a hormonal birth control pill, so long as I knew it to be safe and effective. I would not allow someone to stick a needle into my testicles (or vas deferns, or anywhere else in the scrotal area) and I don't think I'm any less of a man for it; it's just not something I'm comfortable with.

As for IUD's, well frankly I'm not in favour of those either. They remind me of medieval torture devices. Regardless, I don't think it's quite correct to compare a woman's cervix to a man's urethra, given that a man will never squeeze a baby out of his johnson.

Since getting cut, I don't have to worry about this sort of thing anymore.

That said, I would have been open to some form of birth control for men.

It would depend. I'm not crazy about the side effects of the "current" pill, but I'd probably put up with at least that level of side-effect.

I've been the designated hand-holder for two IUD insertions. Not pleasant.

I will be leary at first, and would like to see a few other quinea pigs try it before I do, but I've seen what testosterone (anabolic) can do to teenage males, and if done right, can have positive effects in the short term.

If I were the FDA, I would worry about every male from 14-25 wanting this even if they didn't have a girlfriend, just for the 4-10 lbs of lean muscle weight gain and some other benfits. I wonder if doctors would go for this, just like they give girls with acne the pill now?

I agree that it's not a competition, and I never said that the man should do 100% of the birth control duty. However, what if there were no birth control pill for men, and the only method was getting the shot in the balls? And what if your partner could not tolerate hormonal birth control, nor did she want an IUD? If current birth control depended on women only doing things that they were comfortable with, we'd have a much more serious population crisis on our hands.

As for the IUD, whether or not they look like torture devices, they are one of the most effective methods available. Have you seen a cervical opening personally? It's the size of a straw hole. It doesn't stretch like the vaginal opening. It dilates when a woman is going into labor, but not when she's having an IUD inserted, especially if she hasn't had any kids yet. So yes, it is like stuffing a small cactus up a fleshy straw filled with nerves, and there is no room for expansion during that time.

Holy crap. That's it exactly. Except add the part about where it also felt like someone was trying to shove my uterus up through my neck with a pencil. MotherBITCHES that hurt. Ratbastid did a good job holding this chickie's hand. Yikes.

And on topic, as nice as the birth control for men sounds, I'm not a huge fan of it until you show me how well and quickly they can return to normal fertility. Take out my IUD or get me off a pill, and I'm fertile damn near immediately. What kind of time frame would men be looking at?

My 2 cents: sorry to be mean guys, but I would not trust my getting pregnant or not to any guy I'm with. When it comes to the crunch, if I get pregnant he's not the one who's going to carry the baby right? I don't think I'd feel too safe there.

LT, you should see more trustworthy people.

Alright so here is my opinion on this. I think its a very bad idea. I mean, they even say that they don't know the long-term effects it will have on the men. I mean, even most womans birth control gives a lot of women issues so I wouldn't trust the male version. For all you know, you could end up with ball cancer, or with it not working anymore at a more early age than usual, I mean, my fionce has had problems down there many times, so I would never put him through that just to be safe. I would rather be protected. No reason to be messing with your prized gems down there when there is perfectly decent birth control out there for women.

For the one that says they hate condoms, I will have to back you up there. I am a woman and yes I will say they suck. They cut the feeling in half and they make things hurt and tug more. Its no fun. But, if the woman you are with is on a good birth control, then you shouldn't have to worry about the condoms. Me and my man never use them anymore. Once the docs said it was safe to while on B.C. we threw the condoms out.

I am just saying, weigh your risks before you decided to take a birth control guys.

This isn't an either/or situation. Ending up in a situation where "the only method was getting shot in the balls" is so unlikely as to be not worth considering; there are a large variety of available methods out there precisely because everyone's needs or preferences are different.

Once again, I am not in favour of IUDs and would never ask any woman I'm with to get one. If she decided of her own volition that she wanted one, that might be something we'd discuss, but I frankly think they're a bit barbaric and rather unnecessary when there are equally effective and less invasive methods to achieve the same end. I have no intention of arguing about how painful it is; I'm aware that it is very much so. My point was simply that a comparison between a woman's cervix and a man's urethra isn't really accurate and from where I'm sitting seems to be more about shock value than anything else.

I would never expect someone I care about to go through a painful or otherwise unpleasant procedure unless it was necessary. I should similarly hope that she would never expect me to do so either.

Condoms suck. When properly used, however, they are highly effective in preventing unwanted pregnancies as well as being the only available method to prevent disease transmission. This makes them the method of choice for casual encounters. Hormonal birth control for women is effective as long as the woman is responsible about it, and may or may not have unwanted side effects. Some women do react poorly to birth control pills, while others have little or no side effects at all. Thus, hormonal birth control is the preferred method for some other situations, including many long-term monogamous relationships. I can analyse each other method in turn, but you're a smart girl and I don't think you need me to.

Birth control at it's core, like most things, comes down to a cost/benefit decision. Each method has it's own benefits in preventing pregnancy or disease, which balances against it's cost in terms of discomfort, stress or other undesirable effects. What method is best for any given couple, then, will depend largely on that couple's own priorities and how the equation balances out for each one. I sort of thought this was common knowledge, at least around these parts. What I take issue with is the implication that I am somehow inferior to other men based on my own preferences. I doubt you'd let me get away with accusing one of our ladies of not being a 'real woman' because she didn't want to use an IUD or the pill; why should it be appropriate in the other direction? Frankly, the very idea offends me.

Back to the original topic, I would want much more information before I tried something like the pill described. Messing with a dude's testosterone levels can have serious consequences, and I'd want to be at least reasonably certain that by taking this pill I'm not going to end up with testicular cancer or something else. I only have two testicles and I plan on using them some day, so it's in my best interest to make sure I take care of them.

I think this is an interesting idea, it is about time they share the burden. And I mean with hormones, weight gain, mood shifts, etc. all related to birth control. However; I only trust myself when it comes to reproduction and therefore would also take the pill even if they said they were on it.

When the time comes to stop producing mini-Xephs, I will go under the knife and get cut. *shrug* Once your system is through with that, it's 100% effective, only needs to be done once and doesn't have a tendency towards side effects.

If there's an option to do a pill for a bit to check for side effects then switch to the shot, I'll do it once it's on the market for a year or so. I'm not planning to have kids any time soon and this combined with a woman being on the pill (or this plus a condom if it's not a long-term thing) sounds like a pretty good insurance policy.
They emit non-ionizing radiation at very low power and cannot produce any effects in the human body beyond a rise in temperature barely measurable with lab instruments.
I don't give a shit about what it does to my sperm production, I want a pair for summer wear as long as they aren't too bulky to fit under snug jeans.
They emit non-ionizing radiation at very low power and cannot produce any effects in the human body beyond a rise in temperature barely measurable with lab instruments.
I don't give a shit about what it does to my sperm production, I want a pair for summer wear as long as they aren't too bulky to fit under snug jeans.

Look man, we're pretty much in agreement here. Where is all the hostility coming from? Once again, my intention was not to make this into some competition, but to praise the guys who would be willing to do any form of male birth control that was safe and available to them, period. Yes, I consider that to be a praiseworthy stance. Did I say personally to anyone that they were not a "real man?" No, and certainly did not say it to you (you seem to have taken it rather personally). I did not accuse anyone of anything, so I perceive that you read a bit more hostility in my tone than I intended (and believe me, if I'm intending hostility, I'll be a lot more clear and direct about it--you know that!).

And you know what? If the roles were switched--(truly switched, which can only be a hypothetical situation)--where the man was the only one with access to (often experimental) hormonal BC for the last 40 years, and there was no form available for women--and if the man had been going through all kinds of hell to try all different kinds of BC, and then suddenly a brand new, safe, effective method (albeit painful) became available for the woman--and if the woman was opposed to the idea of getting the BC simply on the basis of being uncomfortable (after everything the guy had already gone through on his side of things)--you better believe I would praise another woman who said, "Sure thing, I'd be willing to give any form of birth control a try, after all the shit that my man has gone through for both of us." Would I attack a woman for saying it was uncomfortable and she didn't want to do it? No. But I would certainly praise someone for stepping up to her responsibility as a female, if she suddenly had access to BC and could take some of that burden off of her man, regardless of the cost to her comfort level.

So no, there is no double standard in my mind--IF the same situation were to actually exist, in every aspect, with opposite genders. Hope that's clear to you now. As for the comparison between an undilated cervix and a male urethra? It was not for intention of "shock value"--the male urethra was the closest thing I could think of, in the genital vicinity, that is shaped like a thin straw, with sensitive nerve endings, that sometimes gets things shoved up it in uncomfortable ways. I don't really think it's that far off to see the parallel, but each to their own.

If this post hasn't settled the issue, I don't see how this debate will really go anywhere.

Male birth control would be awesome. Seeing as I get every woman I am with (I do it as well) tested before we really start anything the diseases are not a problem. And condoms are just brutal.

And I read somewhere that the reason testicles are outside the body is because they only produce sperm below body temperature. So that coincides with wills hot tub thing, just jack off then go in the tub for an hour.

Yes, and if you use that as your only method of birth control, start investing in Pampers now.

Not that I'm saying you're saying that--I'm clarifying for any lurkers on this thread who think they've just been informed of a simple and failsafe way to stay non-parents.

The only 100% fool proof way of not having kids is not having sex. Simple as that.

It's like the third or fourth warning. If they've not gotten it by now, they're probably parents.

Yeah, I just feel a certain duty to debunk it anytime it gets hinted at as reliable.

Your position seems to be based on the premise that birth control has historically and traditionally been a woman's responsibility. This is, at it's core, what I'm taking issue with, as I don't think it's accurate. Women having been using hormonal birth control for longer, but hormonal birth control is not the only (nor even the most effective) form of birth control available. It is and should be a shared responsibility, and your statement that real men take a shot to the scrote for their women carries with it the implication that any one who does not do so is not a real man. I don't like being judged to be less of a person based on my choice in matters so personal as this, and I see no benefit to risking my health or happiness on some new and untested method when the tried and true ones are readily available.

I do agree, however, that further discussion of this is not likely to be productive. We may just have to agree to leave it at a difference of opinion.

This is true, but using it as a basis to argue against birth control is a bit like arguing 'I could be killed walking down the street, and therefore there's no reason why I shouldn't drive 150 mph on public roads.' That there's always a risk does not negate the concept of risk management.

Read the post above that! I am all for male birth control! I think this is awesome.

ratbastid, protector of the idiots and savior of the morons.

MSD, keeper of the protector of the idiots.

I'll just finish by saying that I think we have had a miscommunication somewhere, because essentially we do agree. No, I do not think that women have been 100% in charge of BC and men 0%. However, I do think women *usually* bear *most* of the responsibility for birth control, and ALL of the responsibility for hormonal BC, at least as of the options right now. Am I wrong in that? We've got condoms, vasectomies, and pulling out as options for male birth control. None of those are hormonal, and thus none of them have systemic, body-wide effects on the person using them. Vasectomies are not reversible, as far as I know. Withdrawal is not particularly effective. So condoms are pretty much it for the average male, and even those have a noticeable failure rate. Am I missing something about male birth control options that I didn't know about before?

Also, I still did not say that "real men take a shot to the scrote." I said that a man who is *willing* to do that, is a "real man" in my book, just because they are willing to do anything to shoulder MORE of the burden than most men have had to do in terms of BC. I don't know if we're just quibbling over semantics at this point, but honestly, I just think it's admirable that a guy would be willing to do whatever he could to help out, beyond getting snipped (which is permanent, and therefore not good for most young couples who eventually want kids), without letting the idea of discomfort get in the way. I am talking about hypothetical, FUTURE forms of tested, safe, proven male birth control, btw... not the sketchy ones that are currently out, which I would never advocate any man doing, if it was not safe/proven/etc. But if getting a shot in the balls is the only form of male birth control available, in the future, and it goes ALONG with the woman keeping up her current form of BC... well heck, two thumbs up to both of them.

Anyway, I'm tired now and don't feel like discussing it further. I still think this was a miscommunication, and that essentially we agree.

Usually I say that idiocy should be a matter of natural selection, but not when idiocy might result in idiots with kids.

willravel, patron saint of the keeper of the protector of the idiots.

For some reason, I picture your Latin saintly name as being Testis. Which is somehow related to this thread.

Baraka_Guru, pointer-outer of the patron saint of the keeper of the protector of the idiots.

hooray for off-topic fun!

I see where you're coming from.

So many women take hormonal birth control, and we have a lot of side affects too. So for a man to say "Too many side affects" bothers me in a way.

I'm pretty interested in male birth control.

I would actually prefer something more along the lines of the shot in the vas differens, no side effects and just a few moments of pain and your good for a long time. Why meddle with hormones if theres other options available.

now since that option doesnt appear to be coming available in the near future I'd be willing to take the hormonal ones in the meantime.

I guess. Heh. *shrug*

You may be right, patron saint of the keeper of the protector of the idiots.

:p

Not comfortable with Male BC/Shedding light on IUD's
 

From the side effects that were listed above, I don't think I'd really like my man taking the male BC pill. Yeah, female BC does have a lot of bad side effects, but I'd rather try other methods on my own to protect the both of us instead of just saying that I have "carried the burden" this whole time and that it's time for my guy to "man up" in other words and take something harmful to his health. I had the non-hormonal copper IUD inserted and love it. 10yrs and I don't have to worry about babies if I don't want to and neither does my guy. I recommend it, but of course it comes down to everyone's comfort ability with different methods. I wouldn't judge someone because they chose to go a different route. Male or Female. Just do what makes YOU comfortable. :)

I have to back up the IUD for a minute. (aka "torture device") Just want to get this out there for any females just surfing the web and such.

I had an IUD inserted after I found out that I couldn't really take anything else other than POP's (progesterone only pills) considering I have high blood pressure and having any BC with Estrogen in it could kill me. POP's need to be taken 100% on time every single day... I don't have a good memory, and even with taking them the recommended way, they are only about 97% effective. I have one child already and don't plan on having anymore anytime soon... so the IUD was a good choice. Every woman is different so yeah, there are going to be horror stories. There are with every method. (even with sterilization) I get light spotting sometimes and cramping, but it's not something I can't handle.

Having the IUD inserted was about 30 seconds worth of an intense labor pain and a total of 10min of feeling real uncomfortable. The 2-3 days following that were heavy cramping pains... after that, everything is great. I'd definitely go through a small amount of horrid pain by getting the torture device inserted than having a baby that I don't want because I forgot to take my pills on time. Medically, if having the IUD put in is your best option, then I say it's worth the try ladies. Just remember we are all different so results are not always the same.

Hope I helped... in some way. I'm new to the forum discussions!

Thanks for this. My girlfriend is considering the IUD, and I would like her to know what she's in for if she gets it. She's on the pill right now, and doesn't seem to be having side-effects, but she is looking at the costs of the pills, about $95 a month, or the IUD insert, $200, for however long that lasts. I just don't want her to choose something that is going to hurt her too much, as she's been through enough, what with chemotherapy for over a year, that's just ended, and all. The main reason she's on birth control is that the doctors said she shouldn't even try to have a baby, as it is way to risky for her....

I would gladly look into this treatment for men. How bad could it be?

i agree condoms fucking suck

I think it's fantastic. I have a 16 year old son. Now if he was a girl, I could go to the doctor and put her on the pill. All I can do with my son is repeat the mantra, always wear a condom, always wear a condom . . .

STD's aside, the ability to protect our son's would be nice too.

I have had an IUD for 3 years and I love it. It didn't hurt that much when I got it, not as bad as Hallucinajenn's experience. The pain felt like a quick sharp poke in the uterus, no more than 3 seconds. My periods are pretty much normal, sometimes they are slightly heavier, but not much.

I wouldn't trade it for anything. I have never had such reliable worry free birth control. I have tried everything from Depo to the pill and the IUD is by far the best.

If the BC is too costly, which I agree that $95 a month is a lot, then the best option in that case would be the IUD for a one time fee and depending on which one out of the 2 that she got it would protect her for 5 or 10yrs. I have the copper IUD that wont need to be removed until 2019 if I chose to keep it that long.

Now with her particular situation I'd say that it would be best if she and her Dr. talked about it to see if it is a good decision. It definitely has made things a lot easier for me and from what I've read, a lot of other women out there as well. Everyone experiences it differently, but once that pain is over, your set for quite some time. Her Dr. might not recommend the IUD though because she hasn't had children. That's another issue that I've seen... some Dr's wont approve it, some do.

Good luck with everything though, keep us posted!

To get more info on IUD stories you can also just type in "IUD" in the search bar up there to get more posts on other experiences. Hope that helps!!

Thanks for the info. She's already been approved by her doctor. She's had some complications that make it a better option than no BC at all.

Even with the risk of STDs and the fact that you want the best for your son, if he gets an STD, it's his problem. If he knocks up some girl who's opposed to abortion, it will be your problem for years to come.

apart from killing sperms, I heard it will hurt sperm production too

Science Invented A Birth Control Shot For Men, So Why Does Nobody Seem To Care? - Healthy Living on Shine

(NSFW video of procedure)
The Revolutionary New Birth Control Method for Men | Magazine

This is an update to this topic, it looks like it might hold some promise.

Too bad he sold the International rights to it. What would cost $10 in India will probably cost $1000 in the US now...

The only thing is they said it is reversible, but has it been tested yet? Do you need to get that section of Vas Deferens tubing removed and stitched back together again? And I guess there isn't much chance of the gel being expelled, but I would be concerned about it.

Go live under a tetras mast. Scientific studies on dogs bollox point to it being best to stay away. So if you dont want kids, live under one and your sperm will die - dont know about cancer - think thats an added gift.

When a man has a temporary vasectomy and decides he wants it reversed they inject a solvent into the vas to dissolve the gel. It then gets naturally excreted. Presumably next time he ejaculates.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No f'n way would I consider this until it has gone through at least a decade of use by other people. Let them get the cancer and long term side effects first, not me. It might be ready by the time my son is ready for birth control methods.

Granted, I do have three kids but pulling out was pretty damn effective for us. It has worked for more than 10 years. None of our kids were conceived by failures to pull out, they all happened when a conscious choice not to pull out was made.

I agree that medical testing will have to be done, including reversal and monitoring for side effects, but it seems very similar to the VasClip method. I would have to assume that it is safer than birth control pills and other chemical/hormone BC methods.

Including this other new one that wipes out Vitamin A in men...
Now "He" Can Take the Pill | Betty Dodson with Carlin Ross

You're brave. I just wouldn't trust coitus interuptus.