![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
>
> Access this story and related links online:
> http://www.kaisernetwork.org/daily_reports/rep_index.cfm?DR_ID=17444
>
> Vasclip Co. today at the annual convention of the
> American Urological
> Association in Chicago is launching Vasclip, a
> device the size of a grain
> of rice that offers a less painful and quicker male
> sterilization
> alternative to a surgical vasectomy, Knight
> Ridder/Kansas City Star
> reports. The clip, which blocks the flow of sperm,
> can be inserted in 10
> minutes or less, compared with the 30-minute
> vasectomy procedure, which
> involves cutting and cauterizing the vas deferens.
> In addition, a
> sterilization procedure involving vasclip may be
> easier to reverse than a
> vasectomy. The procedure, which costs approximately
> $350, currently is not
> covered by any insurance companies. Vasclip
> President and CEO David Elliot
> said that because the vasclip procedure is less
> expensive than a vasectomy,
> companies will likely decide to cover the procedure.
> The company has
> trained approximately 100 urologists and family
> practitioners to perform
> the procedure, and an additional 450 doctors have
> expressed interest in
> being trained, according to Elliott. Although
> Vasclip received FDA
> approval to sell the device in August 2002, the
> company decided to delay
> the product's release until a one-year clinical
> trial of the device was
> completed in order to provide urologists and other
> physicians with more
> authoritative results about the device, according to
> Elliott. The company
> also plans to conduct a follow-up clinical study on
> the reversibility of
> the procedure. Approximately 500,000 men in the
> United States undergo a
> sterilization procedure each year, according to
> Knight Ridder/Star
> (McCartney, Knight Ridder/Kansas City Star, 4/30).
>
no subject
Date: 2003-04-30 09:51 am (UTC)Although does anyone else think that if male steriization becomes a popular and convenient process, the men who get it should be branded, tattood, have a chip implanted or have some other unique identifier so that their claim can be verified by their female friend.
I'm not saying I would lie about it to get out of wearing a prophylactic, but I'd be sorely tempted to. And you know an awful lot of us would.
I know. I know, it wouldn't prevent stds anyway but a lot of us would be set free from our latex cages if the pregnancy issue could be taken off the table.
insanely expensive polyurathane prison, here.
Date: 2003-04-30 10:45 am (UTC)I can just imagine a guy asking for a signed note from the dr on official letterhead stationary proving to a potential lover that he's had this done.
Forget Sir Thomas More, this is Utopia!
Date: 2003-04-30 11:10 am (UTC)"I see, so you vant sie intercourse herr Bullen?" (In my head all border guards are nazi's hence the accent. Although this one looks like the St. Pauli Girl and even Gorring didn't look too imposing while naked and flushed) "Vell, let me see your papers. Mmm." She holds them up to the light, uses a blacklight to detect the invisible watermark. "very good. You may proceed."
I still think chip encoding is the way to go. Implant a little transmitter while they're at it. It'll seem like a sign of doomsday to the christian right but what are they doing practicing birth control anyway? Then the receivers are available cheap to women and probably any decent club will have one you can borrow.
How much fun would it be, as a man, to have some technical, pager looking thing sound bells and whistles maybe even a flashing red light when it's passed by your crotch? Not only will you feel a weird sense of pride, "Those bells? That's my guy, winning an award." But if she checks before you leave the bar, you know you are in like flynn.
Next thing you know it's a status thing and any guy worth his salt wants to have a transmitting package and unwanted pregnancy is all but oblitterated, the anti abortion people can get the therapy they richly deserve and we can all live in a better tomorrow.
no subject
Date: 2003-04-30 10:11 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-04-30 11:55 am (UTC)Re:
Date: 2003-04-30 12:18 pm (UTC)http://www.vasclip.com/Webpage.asp?MID=679130
and here's a link on the efficacy:
http://www.vasclip.com/Webpage.asp?MID=428814
no subject
Date: 2003-04-30 12:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-05-01 02:16 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-05-01 02:31 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-05-01 05:22 am (UTC)