I followed and sponsored that project for several years. They promised human trials in 2012, it is 2017 and still no human trials… If they could deliver I didn’t had the vasectomy and probably wouldn’t have the shit I have to live with now.
I could be mistaken but for RISUG/Vasagel I think they still have to yank your vas deferens out of a hole in your scrotum. I don’t think they do it through the skin. I am totally against Essure, the female birth control that consists of titanium coils with a fibrous covering that are inserted in a womans fallopian tubes, scarring them closed. However, you can insert those in a “non-invasive” way. That’s because a woman’s vagina and uterus can accommodate a baby’s head. You can’t get to the vas deferens through the penile opening.
If they can ever perfect an access to the vas deferens through the skin they would have a winner. I would imagine it will never be done in your average hack/joe blow Urologists office because it would require precision to guide the needle to the right place. That’s the other big problem with this technology, it won’t be something any monkey with a few crude tools can perform so guys will probably keep getting butchered.
… I was wrong …
Certainly there will be problems. Not only the inside of the vas is really thin, the nerves around it are also very thin and their location is unpredictable. Some people are prone to really bad scarring, such as keloids or hypertrophic scars, and breaching the vas wall may obviously lead to sperm flowing out and forming a granuloma.
One word: condoms.
I don’t see how your average Joe Blow urologist could find it and get a needle into the precise center of it through the skin.
Here’s this on RISUG btw:
"Mechanism of action
RISUG works by an injection into the vas deferens, the vessel through which the sperm moves before ejaculation. RISUG is similar to vasectomy in that a local anesthetic is administered, an incision is made in the scrotum, and the vasa deferentia are injected with a polymer gel (rather than being cut and cauterized). "
Sorry, wrong ref to the CW Urology update
Effectively the low pain numbers from this have got everywhere, because it’s a core primary urology reference text, and loads of people will quote the problematic numbers in good faith as it’s seen as authoritive.
In turn a lot more men are being left in significant levels of genital pain by vasectomy than previously acknowledged.
There are also a lot of people who have built whole careers on providing vasectomy who will really not want to hear that there is a much higher rate of complications than previously thought.
Up to 1 in 50 odds, vs. 1 in 1000 previously, for a contraceptive method , which already requires a genital surgery to use, leaving you in life impacting and possibly uncorrectable pain is a pretty major un-sell after all
It’s not good faith. All the sons of bitches that quoted those numbers came with several horror stories, when I started to question deeper.
Maybe so, if it’s not in good faith, at least they could say their legal liability was covered by the texts numbers.
Ignorance is no defense here. It took one guy, not a trained health professional or medical researcher, almost no time to find the circular reference. It’s there for anyone who wants to know the truth to see.
This will keep happening until the providers with bad outcomes are confronted. I am going to be delivering some AUA guidelines to my old urology practice. I have tried a couple of times to get a hold of their informed consent documentation but they don’t give it out unless you are getting a vasectomy. They won’t just hand it out if you ask.
Make an appointment to get a ‘vasectomy’ and get them to email you all of the paperwork etc.
Then cancel the appointment with enough notice so you don’t get hit with a cancellation fee.
If they say anything like, ‘wait, didn’t you already have one?’ Say you got a reversal for fertility and want another vasectomy lol.
It’s not totally untrue
I completely agree with you Mike the vasectomy risk stats error should never ever have happened but this kind of thing seems horribly common.
This article is really interesting on the occurances of stats errors in scientific papers : https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/feb/01/high-tech-war-on-science
Confidence in science gets undermined by very serious human life impacting errors like understating the occurances of life impacting chronic pain from vasectomy by up to 20x (!!!).
Victor successfully chased some of those low occurrences from use, how hard would it be to have a slow running project on the board to flag and track where risk is still understated or uses the erroneous 1 in 1000 levels, and to use the AUA guidelines to make sure as many men as possible get given the AUA between 1 in 100 to 1 in 50 rate for pain impacting quality of life?
I don’t think it would change the world, but as a letter and email campaign it might help chip away at the bad numbers slowly to help some people avoid a bad outcome.
“Project : Ow my balls”?
I too wonder why it does not seem to hurt most men. Logically it seems like it would. Why are we different. I am still not sure how it does not conflict with the “first do no harm” part of the Hypocratic Oath.
I’m fine on the right side so I’m a way I’m one of those men it does not hurt, at least on one side.
My pain is the exact same pain on both sides. Strong ache right behind the top of both testicles. Sucks cause whatever i do next i have to cut up both sides again that is if i get to the point where i do another surgery. Trying to wait as long as possible of course before that happens.
I have one good side myself (right side). It’s not 100% perfect, but compared to my screwed up left side that had the pre-existing condition, it’s a night, and day difference.
My first reversal was a failure, and it still resolved about 95-99%~ of the problems on my right side.
I don’t know if this paper was shared here before. Maybe it was.
Chronic scrotal pain ranging from 1-14%.
However, doctors advertise only the 1% margin.
As before any deal, read the fine print before signing it.
An interesting read, sounds pretty accurate to me, remember vasectomy provides an income to greedy Drs, I would agree reading this that we who get them are bloody idiots