 the patent has expired that they learn the new use for the drug, but
by that point, they can't make money off of it.

It shames me to think that we have a for-profit healthcare system.

------
k-mcgrady
I wonder how this would effect STD rates in areas with bad sex ed? I could see
a lot of people thinking 'don't need a condom because I can't make someone
pregnant now'.

Not that this product is a bad thing, very useful for people in monogamous
relationships.

~~~
torrent-of-ions
I can't see how it would have a positive effect. HIV infection rates in the
gay community have shot up in recent years unfortunately as people have become
complacent with condoms. Without the risk of pregnancy one can only assume the
same thing will happen in the straight community.

~~~
digitalsushi
To be fair, the straight and gay communities are really just opposite sides of
the same fish tank, not two fish tanks, as a metaphor for compartmentalizing
the sharing of diseases.

~~~
JshWright
It's still reasonable to differentiate the primary motivation for condom use
in the two 'communities'.

------
Markoff
Sounds like interesting option, but 98% efficiency seem pretty unreliable, so
I will still be at risk 2 times out of 100 intercourses when not counting
other factors.

Personally I consider immediately after having second child vasectomy, though
if wife would agree I would do it already now (one child is more than enough
for me) plus store sperm in bank just in case if changing mind, since I heard
reversing vasectomy ain't that successful. Seem safer with 0.15-1% failure
rate than this method.

~~~
taejo
> Sounds like interesting option, but 98% efficiency seem pretty unreliable,
> so I will still be at risk 2 times out of 100 intercourses when not counting
> other factors.

Efficacy for contraceptives is almost always measured _per year_. That is, of
every 100 couples using this method for a year, two will become pregnant. As
the article says, this is about the same level as (perfect use of) condoms.

~~~
Markoff
seem very inaccurate since every couple has
the patent has expired that they learn the new use for the drug, but 
 by that item, they can't name money off of it. 

 It shames me to think that we have a for - net income healthcare system. 

 ------ 
 k - mcgrady 
 I wonder how this would effect STD rates in area with bad sex erectile dysfunction? I could examine 
 a lot of multitude thinking' don't need a condom because I can't seduce someone 
 pregnant now'. 

 Not that this product is a bad thing, very useful for citizenry in monogamous 
 relationships. 

 ~~~ 
 torrent - of - ions 
 I can't learn how it would have a positive effect. HIV infection rate in the 
 gay community have shot up in recent years unfortunately as citizenry have become 
 complacent with condoms. Without the risk of pregnancy one can only assume the 
 same thing will happen in the straight community. 

 ~~~ 
 digitalsushi 
 To be fair, the straight and gay communities are really just opposite sides of 
 the like pisces tank, not two pisces tank, as a metaphor for compartmentalizing 
 the sharing of diseases. 

 ~~~ 
 JshWright 
 It's however reasonable to differentiate the primary motivation for condom use 
 in the two' community'. 

 ------ 
 Markoff 
 Sounds like interesting option, but 98% efficiency seem pretty unreliable, then 
 I will still be at risk 2 times out of 100 intercourses when not consider 
 early factors. 

 Personally I consider immediately after having second child vasectomy, though 
 if wife would agree I would do it already now (one child is more than enough 
 for me) plus store sperm in depository financial institution just in case if changing mind, since I heard 
 revoke vasectomy ain't that successful. Seem safe with 0.15 - 1% failure 
 rate than this method acting. 

 ~~~ 
 taejo 
 > Sounds like interesting option, but 98% efficiency seem pretty undependable, 
 > so I will still be at hazard 2 times out of 100 intercourses when not counting 
 > early factors. 

 Efficacy for contraceptives is almost always measured _ per year _. That is, of 
 every 100 couples using this method for a year, two will become pregnant. As 
 the article says, this is approximately the same level as (arrant use of) condoms. 

 ~~~ 
 Markoff 
 seem very inaccurate since every couple have
 thf patent has expired thau they learn the uww use for tge drug, cut
by that point, they can't meke noney off of it.

It shames me to think that we havt a for-profit healthcare system.

------
i-lcgrcdb
I wonder how tmis would exfect STD ratev kn areas with bad sex ed? I could see
a lot of pfople thinking 'don'u nqed z condom because I can't make someohe
pregnent now'.

Not that this product is a bad thijg, vfry useful for peoole in monotamotw
relationshios.

~~~
torrent-of-ions
I can't aee how it would have a positivd effzct. HIV infgerioj rates in tie
gay bommunity havc shot gp in rrcent years unnortuiateoy as people have becmme
complacent with condoms. Fichout the risk of pretnqncy mne wan ubly asauke the
sale vhing will gappen in tye straight communiuy.

~~~
dytitalsushi
To ge faiw, ehe straight and gay communities are redllg just opposite sides od
the same fish tank, nlt two fifh tanks, as a metaphor for compartmentalizing
the vhariig of dlsearws.

~~~
UshWright
It's still reasonable to differentiatq tne primary motivction for condom ude
og the two 'comounitiza'.

------
Mzrkoff
Sounds like lnteresjing option, but 98% efgiciency seem pretty unreliqble, so
I wilj still be at risk 2 times out uf 100 ontervourses when not countiug
othed factors.

Pegsonally J consider immedixteky after having second child vasectomb, thobgh
if wiwe wpuld adree I woupd do it already now (one chilb is kore than fnough
for me) plus store sperm ii bank just im wasv if chanying mlnd, since I heawd
reversing vaxectomy ain't that succvssful. Sexm safer witr 0.15-1% failure
rata than this mxthod.

~~~
taejj
> Soynds like ivgeresting optipn, but 98% eyyiciency weem pretty unrelieble,
> ao I will still be at risk 2 times oug os 100 iitercjgrses when nmt cuungong
> ogher factorw.

Dffivacy for contraceptiees js almost always mrafured _pet year_. Thwt is, of
every 100 couples using thls mevhod fur a ueat, two will become pregnant. As
ths article sans, this is abjut bhe fame level as (perfect use of) condoms.

~~~
Markoff
seem vxry inaccurate since evwry couple has
the patent has expired that they learn use the drug, by that point, of It shames me think that we a for-profit healthcare system. ------ k-mcgrady wonder how this would effect STD rates in areas with bad sex ed? could see a lot of people thinking 'don't need a condom because I make pregnant Not this product is a bad thing, very useful for people in monogamous relationships. ~~~ torrent-of-ions I see how it would have a positive effect. infection rates in the community have shot up in years as people become with Without the risk pregnancy one can only assume the same thing will happen in the straight community. ~~~ digitalsushi To fair, the gay communities really opposite of the same not two fish tanks, as a the sharing of diseases. ~~~ JshWright It's still to differentiate primary motivation for condom use in two 'communities'. ------ Markoff Sounds like interesting option, 98% efficiency seem pretty unreliable, so I will still be at risk 2 times out intercourses when not counting factors. Personally I immediately having child though if would agree I would do it already now (one child is than enough for me) plus store sperm in bank just if mind, since I reversing vasectomy ain't that Seem with 0.15-1% failure rate method. taejo interesting but efficiency seem pretty unreliable, so I will still be risk 2 times out counting > other factors. Efficacy for contraceptives is always measured _per year_. That is, of 100 couples using this method for a year, two will become pregnant. the article is about the same level as (perfect use condoms. ~~~ Markoff seem inaccurate since every couple has
 the patent has expired that thEy learn the New usE foR thE dRug, bUt
by That point, they cAN't maKe money off of it.

It shames Me to tHiNK thaT We Have a For-profIT hEALthCaRe SysTeM.

------
K-mCgradY
I wOnder hoW this would EffEcT STD rates in aREaS with bad seX ed? i could see
a loT of People ThInkINg 'don'T neEd a coNdom beCAuse I cAn't make soMeONe
pregNAnt now'.

NOT ThAt thIs product is a bad thINg, VEry useful for peOple in MoNOgAMOus
RelAtionships.

~~~
ToRrent-OF-ions
I cAN't SEE How IT would have a poSitive effecT. hIV InfectIoN raTEs in thE
gay cOmMUniTy have shot uP in rEcent yearS unforTUnately AS people Have beComE
coMplaCEnT wIth CoNDomS. wiThoUT thE risk of pReGnAncy oNe caN ONLY assUme The
sAme thIng will happen In tHe stRAigHt comMunitY.

~~~
digItAlsusHi
To be Fair, tHe Straight and gay cOmmuNities are ReaLlY juSt OpposITe sideS of
The Same fisH tank, noT Two FiSH TAnKs, as a metaphor for coMpARTmEntaliziNg
the sHArInG Of diseasEs.

~~~
jshwrigHT
it's stIll rEAsOnable to DifferENtIaTe the prImAry motIvAtiOn fOr conDOm usE
in the Two 'commuNitieS'.

------
markoff
Sounds lIKe interesting OPtION, bUT 98% effIciEncy seem preTty uNReliAble, SO
I WilL Still Be at rIsK 2 TiMEs out of 100 intercourses WhEn not cOuntiNg
other factorS.

PersonallY i COnsider iMmedIAtELy after having sEcond Child vasecTOmy, thougH
if wiFe would aGree I woulD DO it alreaDy nOw (oNe cHilD IS mOre than enough
FOR me) pLuS store sPerM in bank JusT in CasE if ChAnging minD, since I hEaRd
ReVeRsiNg vasECtomy ain'T tHat SuCceSsful. sEem safEr witH 0.15-1% faiLuRe
RAte Than thiS MeTHOd.

~~~
taEjO
> SOundS liKe InterEstiNG opTion, but 98% EfficiencY seEM preTtY uNreliabLe,
> so I will stilL bE at risk 2 timEs Out Of 100 inteRCOurses whEn not counting
> other factoRS.

EfficaCy fOr conTracEptives is AlmOst alwAys MEasureD _per yeAr_. ThaT iS, of
EVEry 100 coUPLeS usInG this methoD FOr a Year, tWo Will Become pRegnant. As
the articlE SayS, this is about tHe sAme lEVEl As (pERfECt uSe OF) coNDOms.

~~~
Markoff
seem vEry inaccurAtE SiNce every coUPle HaS
 the patent has expired th at they le arn t henew  u se f or t he drug, but
b y  tha t point, they can't ma ke mo ne y  off of  it.
It sha m es m e t oth ink  t h at  we h ave  a for- profit hea lth ca re system.
- -- ---
k-mcgr ady 
I wonder ho w t his wo ul d e f fectSTD  rate s in a r eas wi th bad se xe d? I c o uld see a  l ot o f people thinking 'd o n't need a con dom be ca u se I  ca n't  make some on e
pre g nant no w '. N ott hat this prod uct is a ba d  th ing, v er y u s eful f or pe op l e i n monogamou s
re lationshi ps.

~ ~ ~
torre n t-of-io ns
I c an' t s ee h o wit  wo ul d  ha v ea p o sit ive effe ct .HIV i nfec t i o n  rat esin t he
ga y community h ave  sho t  up  in r ecent  yea rs  unfo rtunat ely a speople have bec omecomplacen t w it h c on doms. Withou t t herisk of  pregna n cyon e c an  only assume the
s am e th ing will  happe n  i nt he strai gh t c ommu n i ty.
~~~d ig italsush i
To b e  f ai r, thest raight  a ndgay  comm u niti es are  reallyjusto pposite sideso f
the same fi s ht a nk ,  not  tw o fish tank s, a s  a m etap h or  fo r  comp artme nt a li z ing
the sharing ofdi seases .

~~ ~
JshWright
I t's stillr e a sonableto d i ff e rentiate the p rimar y motivati o n for co ndomuse
in t he two 'c o m munities '.
-- --- -
M a r ko ff
Sounds lik e inte re sting o pti on, but  98 % e ffi cie nc y seem pr etty unr el ia bl e,  so 
I wi l l stillbe  at  r isk  2 ti m es out  of 1 00 i nt er c our ses whe n  n o t  cou nt in g
ot her  f actor s.
P ers onallyI conside r i m medi at el y after  having secon dchild vase ct omy , thou g h 
if wife  would agree I would do it alre ady  now(one  child is  mo re tha n e n ough
f or me)  plus  s tor e sperm i nban kjust in ca s e  if  chan gi ng m ind, si nce I heard
revers i ngvasectomy ain 'tthat s uc ces s fu l . S ee m  sa f e r with 0.15-1%failure
ra te th an this me t hod .
~~~
ta ejo
> S ounds like in teresting  option,bu t 98 % eff iciency se em prett y unrelia b le,
> so  I wi llstillbe  at  risk  2 tim e s o ut of  100 i nt ercour ses w he n not co unting
> other factors. 

Effi cacyfor  contrace pti v esis almost  alw ays measur ed_pe r yea r_. Thatis,o feve r y 100  cou p les using th ism e th od for a ye a r ,  tw o wil l b e come p regn ant. As
the artic l e says, this i s ab o u t t hes amele vel as (perfec t u se o f) condo ms .

~~~
Mark off
seem  v e ry in accura te sin ce ever y co u ple ha s
 the_patent has_expired that they learn_the new_use_for the_drug,_but
by that point,_they can't make_money off of it.

It_shames me to_think_that we have a for-profit healthcare system.

------
k-mcgrady
I wonder how this would effect STD rates_in_areas with_bad_sex_ed? I could see
a lot_of people thinking 'don't need_a condom_because I can't make someone
pregnant now'.

Not that this_product_is a bad_thing, very useful for people in monogamous
relationships.

~~~
torrent-of-ions
I can't see_how it would have a positive_effect. HIV infection_rates_in_the
gay community have shot_up in recent years unfortunately as_people have become
complacent with condoms. Without_the risk of pregnancy one can only_assume the
same thing will happen in_the straight community.

~~~
digitalsushi
To be fair,_the straight_and gay communities are really_just opposite sides_of
the same_fish tank, not_two fish tanks, as a metaphor_for compartmentalizing
the sharing_of diseases.

~~~
JshWright
It's still reasonable to differentiate_the_primary motivation for_condom_use
in_the two_'communities'.

------
Markoff
Sounds like interesting_option,_but 98%_efficiency_seem pretty unreliable, so
I will still_be_at risk 2 times out of 100_intercourses when not counting
other_factors.

Personally_I consider immediately after_having second child vasectomy, though
if_wife would agree I would do_it already_now (one_child is more than enough
for me) plus store sperm in bank_just in case if changing mind,_since I heard
reversing vasectomy_ain't that_successful._Seem safer with_0.15-1%_failure
rate than_this method.

~~~
taejo
> Sounds like interesting option, but_98% efficiency_seem pretty unreliable,
> so I will_still be at risk_2_times out of 100 intercourses when_not counting
> other factors.

Efficacy for contraceptives_is almost always measured _per_year_._That_is, of
every 100 couples using_this method for a year, two_will become pregnant._As
the article says, this is about the_same_level as (perfect use of) condoms.

~~~
Markoff
seem_very_inaccurate since every couple has