------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
$9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/jyXolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

Jagged Little Pill
Will male birth control ever become a reality?
By Alex Mar
Posted Friday, Oct. 1, 2004, at 4:50 AM PT

Since its introduction four decades ago, the
birth control pill has not entirely lived up to
its original hype: While it may have offered 
women sexual freedom, the pill has also
introduced a number of hormone-related side
effects and health issues�everything from intense
mood swings to a possible risk of cancer. Though
we're of course much better off than in the 
precarious days of the "rhythm" and "withdrawal"
methods, birth control remains a stressful
business: Should I stay with condoms, even though

they're uncomfortable and fail 10 percent of the
time? Should I risk the side effects and go on
the pill? Should I resort to something as clumsy
and dated as a diaphragm? But even with so many
issues still on the table, one seems to have been
long ago put to bed: Birth control is 
unquestionably a woman's responsibility.

Or is it? A remarkable new product is on its way
that may make it possible to shift the burden of
reproductive responsibility�gasp!� to men. 
Earlier this year, Dutch pharmaceutical giant
Organon, along with Germany's Schering, announced
that they expect their hormone-based
contraceptive for men to hit the European market
in as few as five years. Once that happens, it
may only be another year or so before a U.S.
debut. So, it will soon be possible for a man to
avoid impregnating his partner by drastically 
lowering his sperm count. Unlike a vasectomy, the
effect is temporary, completely reversible. And
of course, the very notion is incredible: For
over 30 years a "male pill" has been in various
stages of development, but this is the first time
serious drug money has backed it up.

As a woman, I can't help but ask: What took so
long?

On the one hand, the wait can be chalked up to
the biological challenges: Fighting off some 800
million raring-to-go sperm is certainly more 
daunting than suppressing a single monthly egg.
The European solution comes not as a pill, but as
a progestin implant, supplemented by a
testosterone injection every three months to keep
the man's hormones in balance. It's similar in 
application to the splinterlike Norplant device
women were putting in their arms in the '90s.
Other forms are also being explored, but research

is slower going, as scientists have yet to
receive adequate funding: The Contraceptive
Development Network (with centers in Edinburgh, 
Shanghai, and Capetown) is working on an implant
that would not require supplementary injections;
and both the Seattle-based University of
Washington's Male Contraception Research Center
and Harbor-UCLA Medical Center are working on 
a longer-lasting injection, a gel, and a patch.
All versions lower the man's sperm count nearly
to zero without significant side effects (or any 
effect on his sex drive); according to clinical
trials, sperm production returns to normal within
three months of discontinuing use.

Conversations with stateside specialists
highlighted the main reason for the decades-long
delay: utter lack of corporate interest, which
has meant seriously limited funds for research.
Thus far, the largest-scale clinical trial in the
United States�conducted by the Seattle center,
but funded in great part by the World Health
Organization�followed 40 men over a six-month 
period at a cost of $100,000. A major clinical
trial of, say, 1,000 men monitored for five years
would cost several million dollars. In addition
to impacting the scale of the trial, the
historical lack of financing has made it
difficult to attract talent to the field: In
total, there are only about 10 specialists in
male contraception in this country, split between

the two centers.

Why the crippling lack of support? There are the
obvious cultural factors. Population pressure is
not exactly the urgent issue in America that 
it is in countries like India or China, creating
the impression that progress in contraception is
not a burning issue. Added to that is our
country's religious conservatism, which has
certainly contributed to our rigid outlook on
birth control. After all, this is a country in
which, over 30 years after Roe v. Wade, the right
to abortion is still considered up for debate; 
and the morning-after pill is legal but difficult
to find. Then there are the financial reasons.
Not surprisingly, the pharmaceutical companies 
have a firmly entrenched
if-it's-not-broke-why-fix-it mind-set: If the
existing product for women is already making a
killing, why cut into that market by targeting
men? Indeed, with the European trials in late
Phase 2 (a drug goes 
through four phases before marketing), the
American giants have yet to get on board.

Still, the tenacious clique of American
researchers�led by endocrinologists William
Bremner in Seattle and Christina Wang at
UCLA�would actually have participated in the
Organon and Schering trials were it not for a
controversial decision by the FDA. According to
one doctor, the FDA panicked over the three
months it takes for the hormonal levels of men
who have used the experimental contraception to
return to normal. Nevermind the fact that the
time period is similar for women who choose to go
off the pill. (An FDA spokesperson could offer no
comment.)

What, then, is safe enough? For men, the major
side effects of the contraception are slight
weight gain and some suppression of good 
cholesterol. But what about the discomforts and
health issues women have been living with for
over 40 years? Almost every woman who has been 
on the pill has experienced the rollercoaster
mood swings, the weight gain, acne, and bizarre
changes in breast size. In some cases, the pill
can affect a woman's libido and ability to
orgasm, or even raise her chance of a 
life-threatening blood clot. And then there's the
mysterious, persistent link of estrogen to
cancer. What kind of double standard is this? 
It's great to have control over your reproductive
destiny, but women�at least the women I know�are
more than ready to share the load.

Here's the real question: If this male
contraception became available by prescription
tomorrow, would American men go for it? The
knee-jerk assumption is a resounding no�but
studies suggest otherwise. 
According to a survey of 2,000 men in Capetown,
Edinburgh, Shanghai, and Hong Kong, 67 percent
were interested in some form of hormonal birth
control. There seems to be a serious disconnect
between our perceptions and what men are 
actually open to. To test my theory, I decided to
conduct an informal "survey," speaking to
approximately 20 male friends and
acquaintances�all in their 20s and 30s, ranging
from techies to fiction writers. Their responses
were not what I'd expected.

Many of the men were initially thrown: "Isn't
that a woman's problem?" But after getting over
their shock, each admitted he could imagine a 
circumstance in which he'd go on birth control,
usually in a serious relationship. (All agreed
that single men would be too concerned about STDs

to go without condoms.) And in a pretty
remarkable testament to shifting attitudes, there
were hardly any worries about a social stigma 
attached to a near-zero sperm count�as long as,
of course, their sexual performance remained the
same (it does). Much more of a red-alert priority
was health: All were eager for more information
on the mysterious side-effects hormones might
have. Few were aware that women�including their
girlfriends�had been dealing with this issue for
years: "I'm amazed women let themselves get
talked into this!" was a response heard several
times.

On the other hand, there was some enthusiasm
about taking the reins, which had a few of my
subjects sounding like First-Wave Feminists: 
"It's my body, and I'd be more in control."
(Control quickly emerged as the way to 
hook men.) But what will really determine whether
the "male pill" catches on is the way in which
younger men are taught to think about birth
control. 
What if it became common practice for 16-year-old
boys to talk to their fathers about getting "that
prescription," just as many girls do with their 
mothers? 
Maybe young men might even start viewing sex in a
more serious, responsible light.

Perhaps men are ready to compromise, to share the
inconveniences and the health risks. But will the
American drug companies be able to put aside
their gendered views?

This week, specialists from Europe and their
American counterparts met for the annual four-day
"Future of Male Contraception" conference in 
Seattle to share theories, discuss recent
breakthroughs, and boost morale. Specialists 
chatted with the handful of U.S. pharmaceutical
reps in attendance, hoping word of their latest
research would be taken back to those holding 
the purse strings and we might finally see some
results. After all, with so many unhappy women
and quite a few willing men, a male "pill" is
looking like a great investment.

Alex Mar is an editor at Rolling Stone.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2107558/fr/ifr/



                
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Y! Messenger - Communicate in real time. Download now. 
http://messenger.yahoo.com

 

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/E-MAIL_TRIVIA/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 




Reply via email to