Scientists at Cornell University may be closing in on the long-sought “holy grail” of male contraception: a safe, reversible, nonhormonal method that completely halts sperm production. In a breakthrough mouse study, researchers used a compound called JQ1 to temporarily shut down meiosis—the critical process that produces sperm—without causing lasting harm. After treatment stopped, sperm production bounced back, fertility returned, and the animals produced healthy offspring.
  • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    172·
    15 days ago

    That’s great but I’ve been seeing articles like this for decades so I’ll believe it when there’s an actual working product you can actually get

      • absGeekNZ@lemmy.nzEnglish
        37·
        15 days ago

        One of the best moves I made.

        After my partner and I had agreed no more kids…it was down to the doc to get the chop. Very easy, keyhole surgery; I feeling 90% by the next day, 100% the following day. 2.5 days of discomfort for years of stress free times…worth it!

        • RecallMadness@lemmy.nzEnglish
          5·
          14 days ago

          You can self heal after a vasectomy. It’s rare but happens. Especially in the first few years following the procedure.

          But easy enough to go to your dr every few years and get tested.

      • BassTurd@lemmy.worldEnglish
        15·
        15 days ago

        Best $50 I’ve ever spent. Quick procedure, quick recovery with an excuse to not do anything for a couple days.

          • quick_snail@feddit.nlEnglish
            13·
            14 days ago

            You can also just be brown and walk in front of ICE. They have a history of forced sterilizing

          • BassTurd@lemmy.worldEnglish
            5·
            15 days ago

            Midwest US, but it’s really down to the insurance policy. This particular procedure was 100% covered other than copay. Copay was usually $50, but for specialties it was $75. If you have insurance, definitely check your policy. A lot of times vasectomy is explicitly called out.

          • Artaca@lemdro.idEnglish
            2·
            14 days ago

            Midwest here. Just had the procedure about two weeks ago (recovery slightly slower than the commenter above, but not by much). They said something like $500 without insurance which honestly wasn’t even that bad. After insurance it was $110. One consultation of “you sure big dawg?” Then the procedure about 4 weeks later, which took maybe 20-30 minutes and I was just chatting away with some Valium in my system. Very easy.

      • MalReynolds@slrpnk.netEnglish
        6·
        14 days ago

        Never regretted it myself, but technically quite a good chance of reversibility (85+%) and 95+% chance of viable artificial insemination if things change.

        Also minimal, short lived discomfort.

        • CrypticCoffee@lemmy.mlEnglish
          15·
          13 days ago

          It’s considered permanent though. Shouldn’t go ahead under view it can be reversed. Saying that, the piece of mind it brings is wonderful.

          Maybe consider freezing sperm first just in case.

          • MalReynolds@slrpnk.netEnglish
            8·
            14 days ago

            Also, compare those to the near certain side effects of female contraception, which is just taken as the natural state of affairs.

          • MalReynolds@slrpnk.netEnglish
            3·
            14 days ago

            Valid, those are pretty good odds though, mind you I looked it up decades ago and the reversal was a pretty involved piece of expensive microsurgery.

    • MDCCCLV@lemmy.caEnglish
      2·
      14 days ago

      They’re progressing slowly, but it’s obvious that they don’t want a bad launch so they’re all waiting until they have something that works and is safe enough and safety only comes from having people take it then see if it works after being reversed or ended years later.

    • BygoneNeutrino@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2·
      14 days ago

      Testosterone is a fairly effective male contraceptive agent, but most people can’t get over the side effect of ball shrinkage.

      • Damaskox@lemmy.worldEnglish
        3·
        14 days ago

        Hmm. And what “debuffs” (for a lack of a better term, lol) can a male experience from this side effect?

        • BygoneNeutrino@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          13 days ago

          Other than the psychological trauma of having smaller balls, there isn’t much in terms of permanent damage. Men on fitness forums claim their testosterone permanently crashes, but this demographic tends towards hypochondria and body dysmorphia. Although this particular side effect can be prevented with HCG injections, this would restore fertility.

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.worldEnglish
    42·
    15 days ago

    We need this just because Republicans would never tell a straight white man what to do with his body…

    And any birth control is better than none, for the periods we can’t have all methods.

    • notwhoyouthink@lemmy.zipEnglish
      2·
      15 days ago

      Maybe they won’t do that but will certainly restrict access by any means necessary for everyone except the rich.

  • jqubed@lemmy.worldEnglish
    34·
    15 days ago

    Summary:

    Scientists at Cornell University may be closing in on the long-sought “holy grail” of male contraception: a safe, reversible, nonhormonal method that completely halts sperm production. In a breakthrough mouse study, researchers used a compound called JQ1 to temporarily shut down meiosis—the critical process that produces sperm—without causing lasting harm. After treatment stopped, sperm production bounced back, fertility returned, and the animals produced healthy offspring.

      • jqubed@lemmy.worldEnglish
        7·
        14 days ago

        And I question how viable it is given this:

        To achieve this, scientists used JQ1, a small molecule inhibitor originally developed to study cancer and inflammatory diseases. While JQ1 is not suitable as a treatment due to neurological side effects, it is known to interfere with a stage of meiosis called prophase 1. This allowed researchers to demonstrate, for the first time, that targeting meiosis can safely and reversibly shut down sperm production.

        It sounds like calling the treatment “safe” might be a bit of a stretch.

        • stray@pawb.socialEnglish
          2·
          14 days ago

          I think they meant “safe” with regard to reproductive ability. It sounds like they’re happy with targeting meiosis, not with using JQ1 specifically.

        • Redjard@reddthat.comEnglish
          4·
          14 days ago

          It’s an early step. Good chance it doesn’t work well in humans, and many side effects can’t be discovered until human trials either.

      • stray@pawb.socialEnglish
        3·
        14 days ago

        The “in mice” part is actually really exciting to me because male pet mice have to be kept solitary to prevent pregnancies and aggression with other males, but they still have social needs. It would be amazing if they could be kept with females full-time with no pregnancy risk.

        Would also be nice to keep mixed-mischiefs of rats since their personalities and behaviors are somewhat sexually divergent. You could have a couple busy girls and a couple cuddly boys without having to take turns free roaming.

    • minorkeys@lemmy.worldBannedEnglish
      1·
      14 days ago

      They have no real idea what harm it may cause. Sterilizing people with an unknown method and promising it’s ‘reversible’ is capitalist propaganda.

  • MyTurtleSwimsUpsideDown@fedia.io
    29·
    15 days ago

    While JQ1 is not suitable as a treatment due to neurological side effects, it is known to interfere with a stage of meiosis called prophase 1. This allowed researchers to demonstrate, for the first time, that targeting meiosis can safely and reversibly shut down sperm production.

    If developed for human use, this type of male contraceptive could be delivered as an injection given every three months or possibly as a patch to maintain effectiveness, Cohen said.

  • bitjunkie@lemmy.worldEnglish
    28·
    14 days ago

    …in mice, after massive, cancer-causing doses, probably.

    I’m tired of hearing about this shit. Put it to market or stop talking about it.

    • Smoogs@lemmy.worldEnglish
      15·
      14 days ago

      Yeah just push it out to public. Just like they did with women’s contraceptives.

  • YellowParenti@lemmy.wtfEnglish
    25·
    15 days ago

    There was this gel that got injected into the tube connecting the balls to the urethra(vas deferens?). It would destroy the sperms as it went through and you where basically sterile. To reverse they injected you again with something and it would become a liquid and you ended up busting it out in a few ejaculations. It’s been stuck in early human trials for a decade.

    • unalivejoy@lemmy.zipEnglish
      19·
      15 days ago

      Makes me wonder how many side-effects women birth-control had when it was approved for the public.

      🙂😐🫣☠️

            • Salamanderwizard@lemmy.worldEnglish
              9·
              15 days ago

              Oh dude I know it. In the beginning of my partner and mine’s relationship, she was constantly throwing up in the middle of the night. This went on for like 3-4 yrs. The doctors gave us a bunch of bullshit about it. Told her basically it was her fault. Ended up being her birth control.

              She had an iud at one time that gave her cysts in her ovaries. I have seen this woman be in so much pain and stuff it down to keep going through the day.

              I’ll fucking fight you (not you) if you say women are weak to my face.

            • Salamanderwizard@lemmy.worldEnglish
              2·
              14 days ago

              What? Are we going with how evolution has made us? Sure. There’s a difference between us, but that doesn’t make em weak. I believe in evolution and nature. With that, I can acknowledge the difference. But weak? Bullshit. The average woman might have different strengths than the average man, but that doesn’t mean shit. We defy nature. Every day, we defy nature. Plus, with that, you could say there’s things they are better at than men.

              My partner is way better at managing things for us. So, should I never lead anything or anyone? I mean, the best managers I’ve had were women. My dad was shit at keeping bills paid, but my ma did it all while cleaning a house. So, should all men be treated like babies who can’t handle money or be responsible for themselves?

              I don’t know about you, bud, but I prefer to be my own human and handle my own shit. My partner is my equal, just like all women are my equal. Cause I don’t know their strengths and weaknesses. They’re a human. They defy nature in whatever way they want, just like me.

              • minorkeys@lemmy.worldBannedEnglish
                1·
                13 days ago

                Clearly this topic makes you a little defensive and that’s a whole lot of extrapolation and assumption I’m not interesting in wading through.

              • minorkeys@lemmy.worldBannedEnglish
                1·
                13 days ago

                Being strong one way doesn’t make women strong in all ways, either. So in some way, that are very visible, women are weak. That’s the answer to the question asked, you don’t need to like it.

        • Grimy@lemmy.worldEnglish
          5·
          15 days ago

          iirc, the first daily pills had the dosage of our current morning after pill. From what I understand, the morning after pill makes you feel like complete shit and they were taking it everyday.

          Edit: This reply was meant for unalivejoys comment.

  • HubertManne@piefed.socialEnglish
    17·
    14 days ago

    To achieve this, scientists used JQ1, a small molecule inhibitor originally developed to study cancer and inflammatory diseases. While JQ1 is not suitable as a treatment due to neurological side effects, it is known to interfere with a stage of meiosis called prophase 1.

    • kungen@feddit.nuEnglish
      22·
      14 days ago

      So the substance isn’t a possible treatment for cancer because of neurological side effects… and their next step is “let’s sell it to guys who aren’t able to use condoms”?

      • monotremata@lemmy.caEnglish
        11·
        14 days ago

        I think the idea is that this particular drug isn’t suitable as birth control, but having identified that this mechanism/biological pathway can work for birth control, they can look for a less toxic compound to achieve the same effect.

      • HubertManne@piefed.socialEnglish
        7·
        14 days ago

        sounds that way to me. I think the thing like always is the title. its something they noticed and now a track to find something that does a similar type of mechanism without the bad side effects.

    • JcbAzPx@lemmy.worldEnglish
      4·
      14 days ago

      While JQ1 is not suitable as a treatment due to neurological side effects

      That doesn’t sound very safe.

      • LaLuzDelSol@lemmy.worldEnglish
        2·
        13 days ago

        Should have just used bleach if they don’t care about it actually being a viable treatment. Or, for that matter, we’ve already invented spermicidal foam…

  • AmidFuror@fedia.io
    8·
    15 days ago

    Now I’m curious if irreversible methods are considered “birth control.” It seems redundant to write “reversible birth control,” but maybe I’ve been using too narrow a definition. I consider IUDs to be birth control, but not vasectomies. The distinction is the level of effort required to reverse.

    If completely irreversible, is that not considered sterilization?

      • atro_city@fedia.io
        2·
        13 days ago

        I was about a decade or two ago, but then the news stopped. No idea what’s been going on with it since.

    • LaLuzDelSol@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      13 days ago

      I was a donor to that project, and right now I think there are still concerns about the long-term reversibility. The project isn’t dead but I doubt we will see it as a readily available option for the public within the next decade, if ever.

  • harambe69@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    7·
    14 days ago

    Kinda hard to make male contraceptives. Women are naturally infertile for most of the time not spent actively ovulating. They are permanently infertile during pregnancy, real or synthetic. But men? We’re always churning out swimmers. When that process stops, something has gone very wrong.

    So, artificially induce a naturally occurring phenomenon vs artificially terminate a constant mechanism.