Vasectomy? Child-free life?

Simple living, extreme early retirement, being wealthy, ...
User avatar
Riggerjack
Posts: 1585
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: Vasectomy? Child-free life?

Post by Riggerjack » Fri Mar 10, 2017 2:03 pm

Do you realize, that all the ressources that your probably future-minded chlidren would have blocked are going to be available for present minded children, resulting in a greater mid term destruction of our environment?
I understand. The cognitive dissonance caused by both making more humans and despising the effect humans have on the planet is going to result in some tortured logic and self delusion. I can keep quiet about that. You do your thing, I'll do mine.

But when you encourage others to make more humans "to save the earth", I have to call you on that BS.

While it is theoretically possible to have a multi-generational extremely environmentally conscious family, they are unicorns. They appear in books and videos, but are never spotted in the wild.

Usually, extremism spawns equal and opposite extremism. The Bohemian children of wealthy parents. The ambitious children of Bohemians. They are stereotypes for a reason. I have known many hard-core hippies, none of their children followed that path.

Making more mouths is just making more mouths, in a world of 7 BILLION human mouths.

Or maybe I'm wrong. Please, tell me about the particular resources your offspring will protect, and how they will do it in ways you couldn't or wouldn't.

jacob
Site Admin
Posts: 8891
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 73
Contact:

Re: Vasectomy? Child-free life?

Post by jacob » Fri Mar 10, 2017 2:39 pm

Riggerjack wrote: Usually, extremism spawns equal and opposite extremism. The Bohemian children of wealthy parents. The ambitious children of Bohemians. They are stereotypes for a reason. I have known many hard-core hippies, none of their children followed that path.
To validate this (aside from confirming it from my own anecdotal observations):

See the "how it nurtures/is nurtured" rows indicating that this parity-flip tendency is to inflict the opposite pattern relative to the pattern received.

http://www.lifecourse.com/about/method/ ... types.html

In particular, if we're talking about Gen-X, the table predicts that we will overprotect our kids. This "protect the <inser>"-attitude will then backfire in the artist generation (children of Gen-X) who will generally display a careless attitude to protecting this and that. This coming to a planet near you starting 2030 or so once those kids begin to have material economic impacts.

[Nerd observation: If this parity-flip is the driving factor, the four-generation is the second-simplest way to explain the "turnings". It's likely constricted by human lifespan. Most people have little interaction with/influence from their great-grandparents.]

James_0011
Posts: 211
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2016 12:00 am

Re: Vasectomy? Child-free life?

Post by James_0011 » Fri Mar 10, 2017 3:26 pm

BRUTE wrote:what does James_0011 find unhealthy about them?
Roberts, H.J., M.D., Is Vasectomy Worth the Risk? Sunshine Sentinel Press, POB 8697, West Palm Beach, FL 33407.

Roberts, H.J., M.D., “Prostate Cancer and Vasectomy,” Townsend Letter for Doctors, April 1992, p. 277.

Rosenberg, L., et al. “Vasectomy and the Risk of Prostate Cancer,” Am. J. Epidemiol,. Vol. 132, 1051-1055 (1990).

Mettlin, C., et al. “Vasectomy and Prostate Cancer Risk,” Am. J. Epidemiol., Vol 132, 1056-1061 (1990).

"In a hormone survey of males who had emotional problems and impotence following vasectomy, as well as females who had nervous or emotional problems following tubal ligation, both groups had normal hormone levels immediately following surgery except for decreased progesterone. Taking a small dose of progesterone (5-10 mg) daily for only one week cured both males and females. Why? According to Peat, vasectomy sends a signal to the testicles to stop making progesterone. Tubal ligation as well as the IUD, sends the same signal to the ovaries. Peat’s research refers only to the initial weeks following the surgery. It does not apply to the long-term immune system, allergenic and carcinogenic effects described by Roberts."

http://www.litalee.com/shopexd.asp?ccod ... e+Problems

James_0011
Posts: 211
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2016 12:00 am

Re: Vasectomy? Child-free life?

Post by James_0011 » Fri Mar 10, 2017 3:31 pm

Jean wrote:Do you realize, that all the ressources that your probably future-minded chlidren would have blocked are going to be available for present minded children, resulting in a greater mid term destruction of our environment?
Go ahead and breed if you want, but don't claim its helping anyone.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 2499
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Vasectomy? Child-free life?

Post by 7Wannabe5 » Fri Mar 10, 2017 3:54 pm

Eh, pretty basic systems theory analysis will inform that sudden total disruption of production or reproduction is not likely to be the best solution either. I mean I am assuming that it's not the case that the middle-aged members of this forum who chose to not have children themselves held the preference that everybody else not have children too, so that as of this moment in time there would be only humans over the age of 40 left on the planet?

I would go so far as to further presume that given some small desire for continuation of the existence of the human species through some means being retained, there might also be some concept or opinion regarding better or worse situations under which some reproduction of humans would have taken place. For instance, it might not be ideal for human infant to be placed in pile of litter in crack house.

I am okay with my population zero litter of two, and I think I should get some street meme cred for the fact that one of them has a degree in Natural Resources Biology and the other holds expertise in Ancient Languages, and neither of them currently owns a car (lol.) Also, I am currently creating permaculture project which I intend to bequeath to my theoretical two or less grandchildren.

User avatar
bryan
Posts: 568
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2014 2:01 am
Location: mostly Bay Area

Re: Vasectomy? Child-free life?

Post by bryan » Fri Mar 10, 2017 6:04 pm

If I were super sure about not wanting to breed, a vasectomy seems like a good choice. If you are not super sure, it's tough to pick any single method (hence why there are many methods).

Though, is pulling out/withdrawal method really that hard? I guess the urge to send/receive ejaculate is just too strong sometimes? Or perhaps it is more about it being actually risky to do more sex after a previous sex was done. I wonder how THEORETICAL EFFECTIVENESS was determined to be 96% (seems low, intuitively it should be ~99%). Generally I don't trust/consider the PRACTICAL EFFECTIVENESS as is it is not that applicable for individual actors (person A's practice of method achieves a PROBABLE EFFECTIVENESS of ~98% vs person B's at ~90%).

User avatar
BRUTE
Posts: 2096
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: Vasectomy? Child-free life?

Post by BRUTE » Fri Mar 10, 2017 6:53 pm

James_0011 wrote:Go ahead and breed if you want, but don't claim its helping anyone.
haha, breeding. brute enjoys flipping the moral high ground on offspring-spawning. usually the humans with the largest number of spawn claim the moral high ground, as if polluting the planet with more of themselves is somehow a good thing.

few things seem more egoistical to brute than thinking "what the planet needs right now is more of brute's DNA running around, what's the easiest way to clone himself?"

User avatar
bryan
Posts: 568
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2014 2:01 am
Location: mostly Bay Area

Re: Vasectomy? Child-free life?

Post by bryan » Fri Mar 10, 2017 8:11 pm

BRUTE wrote: few things seem more egoistical to brute than thinking "what the planet needs right now is more of brute's DNA running around, what's the easiest way to clone himself?"
or destroy the DNA of your competitors. The thoughts seem, at least, medieval. Ghengis Khan ftw.

Then again it's not that egotistical in the sense that your offspring are not you and may be a disappointment or bring shame to your name? Unless you could figure a socially acceptable way to keep your legacy's honour intact down the generations.. that would be a a bit more egotistical, indeed.
Last edited by bryan on Fri Mar 10, 2017 8:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Riggerjack
Posts: 1585
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: Vasectomy? Child-free life?

Post by Riggerjack » Fri Mar 10, 2017 8:30 pm

I'm not say breeding is bad. I'm not self loathing, I'm good with having people around... at a distance. I would prefer fewer, but it's not up to me.

Maybe it's my liberal upbringing, but I do have an issue with hypocrisy. Telling me to respect the environment/save the planet, for your children is just a bit hypocritical. Coupling that to how "other people" need to have less children is downright wrong. Yet the list of prominent and less prominent progressives who have preached no breeding, then had a litter is almost as long as the list of progressives who lived to 30. I have no respect for anyone preaching that others should sacrifice beyond the sacrifice the preacher is willing to bear.

I didn't want children. Not having them was not a sacrifice.

In my ideal world, we would have a strain of super mumps come thru. Fever chills, 2 weeks of bedrest, and 90% sterility. In that world, population would collapse, and children would be cherished. Child abusers wouldn't make it to jail. When there's only 1 kid per block, everyone is watching. No kids in sweat shops, no kids mining trash heaps.

Jean
Posts: 220
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2013 8:49 am

Re: Vasectomy? Child-free life?

Post by Jean » Sat Mar 11, 2017 5:47 am

The problem with the libertarian point of view is that the criterium for private property in not clear cut. For some people, looking at a landscape gives it value, for other, only mining does.
Which sets us back do violence to set property rights.
So I strongly encourage people I like to breed, and people I don't like to drink themselves to death. This is purely subjective, as everyone is.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 2499
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Vasectomy? Child-free life?

Post by 7Wannabe5 » Sat Mar 11, 2017 7:01 am

few things seem more egoistical to brute than thinking "what the planet needs right now is more of brute's DNA running around, what's the easiest way to clone himself?"
Few things seem more ridiculous to me than thinking raising children is equivalent to a choice in the moment to ejaculate ;) I chose to have children because I enjoy the work of caring for young children. I started babysitting when I was 10, and I am still teaching kindergarten part-time in my 50s. When I was raising my own children full-time, I almost always had another child in my care. I like spending a day making play-dough, reading picture books, pulling a wagon to the park, wiping off faces with towel monster and taking afternoon nap. I also find early childhood development fascinating. How is this individual two year old like every other two year old? How is she uniquely herself? I do pat myself on the back a bit that my kids, after no shortage of trials and tribulations, have landed on the other side as well-mannered adult citizens of the planet who are also interesting conversationalists, but mostly it makes me happy that my kids remember having a mostly fun childhood, because I enjoyed sharing that time with them too.

Felipe
Posts: 162
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 10:06 pm

Re: Vasectomy? Child-free life?

Post by Felipe » Wed Mar 15, 2017 1:19 am

I've been seriously thinking about getting one too. My current stance on kids is that I want to wait until 30 then reconsider but right now I don't see myself enjoying having kids, except for being able to teach them how things work and learning with them.

Vasalgel looks like a good options whenever it becomes available. I've signed up to possibly be in trials when that begins. <crossing my fingers>

DutchGirl
Posts: 1018
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Vasectomy? Child-free life?

Post by DutchGirl » Thu Mar 16, 2017 7:28 am

@bryan: the pullout method gives "only" a 50% pregnancy rate if you use it consistently for a year. That's a bit better than not pulling out at all, which gives roughly a 90% pregnancy rate for a heterosexual fertile couple. So I would strongly advise anyone to not rely on "pulling out" if you're not ready to have a child (or an abortion or a pregnancy followed by an adoption).

User avatar
bryan
Posts: 568
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2014 2:01 am
Location: mostly Bay Area

Re: Vasectomy? Child-free life?

Post by bryan » Thu Mar 16, 2017 12:35 pm

@DutchGirl, how so? i.e. citation needed. Again, not asking for at-large statistics (that are helpful for a government, say) but for something closer to experimental results. Something that enumerates the failure modes of the method (i.e. you can't knock the method if the male starts ejaculating and then pulls out..)

Planned Parenthood gives a thumbs up to the Withdrawal Method (admittedly they strongly suggest combining it w/ condom to prevent STIs).

If I were female I would certainly not be a huge fan of the pull-out method (since the male is the one in control).

edit: see https://www.guttmacher.org/sites/defaul ... 07-410.pdf, however all the theoretical % of various methods (I mentioned 96% seems low) all seem to come from "Contraceptive Technology" HTNCSL, which I haven't found a link to..

User avatar
jennypenny
Posts: 5152
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:20 pm
Location: Stepford USA

Re: Vasectomy? Child-free life?

Post by jennypenny » Thu Mar 16, 2017 3:58 pm

@bryan -- It's hard to find reliable statistics on the withdrawal-only method because it tends to be combined with fertility-awareness methods (known as Natural Family Planning in the Catholic Church). The failure rate is said to be 2-5% when the two methods are combined. Off the record, I've heard that the rate varies with age and that 20-somethings tend to have higher failure rates (10-12%). The rate drops to almost zero by maternal age 40. The variability could be due to the increased fertility of 20-somethings or to method failure. Since it's primarily used/studied by Catholics who, in theory, wouldn't have strong objections to pregnancy, the incentive to follow the method rigorously is absent. I'd guess it's a combination of both. I haven't seen any studies of teen failure rates but I doubt the Church would study such things. I wouldn't recommend that kind of labor-intensive method to a teenager anyway.

I think the combined fertility awareness/withdrawal method can be very reliable, especially in committed relationships where the burden of following the method is shared between both partners. That said, I have a hard time imagining using only that method in any situation except for a long-term committed relationship. The disease risks are too great to forgo a barrier method of contraception. I also wouldn't rely solely on NFP if there were grave risks associated with pregnancy, either because of maternal health issues or known genetic problems related to fetal development.

Jean
Posts: 220
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2013 8:49 am

Re: Vasectomy? Child-free life?

Post by Jean » Thu Mar 16, 2017 4:43 pm

One begnin STD costs as much to heal in antibiotics as 1000 condoms do.
So outside of commited relationships, I would advocate for condom or abstinence, unless impregating anyone is very high in your priorities.

DutchGirl
Posts: 1018
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Vasectomy? Child-free life?

Post by DutchGirl » Sat Mar 18, 2017 12:18 pm

Oh, it's 27%, so one in four women who get pregnant using this method (only) for one year, not one in two. Still, that's a TERRIBLE birth control method. If you use it for five years, you would have a 80% chance of a pregnancy during those five years. I guess only to be used for people who are only trying to have a few years between each pregnancy (and child), and not as a way to actually prevent a pregnancy. Source: https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn ... ulling-out .

User avatar
bryan
Posts: 568
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2014 2:01 am
Location: mostly Bay Area

Re: Vasectomy? Child-free life?

Post by bryan » Sun Mar 19, 2017 7:06 pm

Thanks, that's the page I read where it sounds like PP gives it a thumbs up. Though, PP is quoting the 96% effectiveness which I have already questioned as being too low.

enigmaT120
Posts: 849
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2015 2:14 pm
Location: Falls City, OR

Re: Vasectomy? Child-free life?

Post by enigmaT120 » Mon Mar 20, 2017 1:07 pm

Jean wrote:One begnin STD costs as much to heal in antibiotics as 1000 condoms do.
So outside of commited relationships, I would advocate for condom or abstinence, unless impregating anyone is very high in your priorities.
That's if you only get ones that can be cured. So I agree, and that's why I am only interested in committed relationships since if I had to use a condom I wouldn't bother having sex with another person. I hate VD and I've never even had one.

Felipe
Posts: 162
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 10:06 pm

Re: Vasectomy? Child-free life?

Post by Felipe » Tue Mar 21, 2017 3:05 am

Interesting idea that it costs 1000 condoms equivalent to cure one std. It's actually infinite since condoms are free at local colleges and std testing clinics. 10-17 if you're not on this forum and pay a whole dollar for each one.

Chlamydia is $17, gonorrhea is $10 to cure, syphilis takes a penicillin shot, HPV tends to cure itself, well over 50% of people already have dormant HSV-1 and most don't know it and it'll likely never effect them. Chlamydia and gonorrhea have high transmission rates so these are the most common.

HIV can kill you. This one is worth being safe from and getting actually educated about as it will effect the rest of your life if you get it.
HIV has a ridiculously low transmission rate unless 1) the infected person has a high viral load and 2) large amount of bodily fluids containing the virus (blood, sperm, precum, vaginal fluid, or breast milk) from infected person gets in direct contact with blood on potential victim.

Condoms are a joke for protection from disease. I know someone who got HIV when his condom broke because of the 2 previous conditions. He thought the rubber protected him. Get tested instead and only play with someone you trust.

I know multiple people who had unprotected sex with someone with HIV when their viral load was low-nothing happened but better not to play with fire.

+1 to JennyPenny on fertility awareness. High success rate but depends on not playing when desire is highest. IUD, BC pills, vasectomy, and hopefully vasalgel soon all have high success rates (>99% without pulling out) and don't depend on this willpower.

If anybody knows of anything available now as effective as vasectomy without the irreversible risk, please let me know.

Post Reply