this post was submitted on 30 Jul 2025
441 points (99.8% liked)

science

20828 readers
362 users here now

A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.

rule #1: be kind

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 55 points 1 week ago (1 children)

more options are always good for edge cases.

  1. some women can't take birth control pills, and the other birth control options have downsides as well.

  2. nothing is 100% effective, so if you want to be even more sure that you won't make babies, both pertners being sterlized is extra security.

  3. some men would like to be sterile but are hesitant to have a vasectomy done. They are generally simple but they don't always go well.

  4. for younger single men in casual encounters, you can never be sure of the other's birth control status. I'm sure there are men who would like the option to be in control of their sperm.

[–] I_Fart_Glitter@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I’m not saying there shouldn’t be male hormonal birth control, it’s just that after 40 years of the same story over and over, it seems the effort should be redirected. Vasalgel has been “in development” since the 70s. It’s not getting any closer.

Meanwhile, the US still only has one size of non hormonal IUD available, and two sizes of hormonal. They don’t fit most nulliparous women comfortably. This is a very fixable problem. 50 years of R&D could have solved this.