New Male Birth Control Method

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

The Reaper
Posts: 4008
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Contact:

New Male Birth Control Method

Postby The Reaper » Tue May 31, 2011 4:02 pm UTC

NSFW http://www.wired.com/magazine/2011/04/f ... tomy/all/1
The procedure is known by the clunky acronym RISUG (for reversible inhibition of sperm under guidance), but it is in fact quite elegant: The substance that Das injected was a nontoxic polymer that forms a coating on the inside of the vas. As sperm flow past, they are chemically incapacitated, rendering them unable to fertilize an egg.

If the research pans out, RISUG would represent the biggest advance in male birth control since a clever Polish entrepreneur dipped a phallic mold into liquid rubber and invented the modern condom. “It holds tremendous promise,” says Ronald Weiss, a leading Canadian vasectomy surgeon and a member of a World Health Organization team that visited India to look into RISUG. “If we can prove that RISUG is safe and effective and reversible, there is no reason why anybody would have a vasectomy.”

But here’s the thing: RISUG is not the product of some global pharmaceutical company or state-of-the-art government-funded research lab. It’s the brainchild of a maverick Indian scientist named Sujoy Guha, who has spent more than 30 years refining the idea while battling bureaucrats in his own country and skeptics worldwide. He has prevailed because, in study after study, RISUG has been proven to work 100 percent of the time. Among the hundreds of men who have been successfully injected with the compound so far in clinical trials, there has not been a single failure or serious adverse reaction. The procedure is now in late Phase III clinical trials in India, which means approval in that country could come in as little as two years.
And did they mention its reversible? XD Also: the rest of the article may be painful to read/see.

http://www.malecontraceptives.org/methods/risug.php
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reversible ... r_guidance

User avatar
KestrelLowing
Posts: 1124
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 6:57 pm UTC
Location: Michigan

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby KestrelLowing » Tue May 31, 2011 4:13 pm UTC

Note: Didn't click on the links because I'm at work

If this works (and isn't painful for guys), I am ALL for it!! I've always thought it was annoying that males couldn't have a chemical form of birth control. And another layer of protection is never bad especially when the majority of birth control is based on whether I remember to take a pill each night.

I can't see anything but positives for this.

User avatar
Ulc
Posts: 1301
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 8:05 pm UTC
Location: Copenhagen university

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby Ulc » Tue May 31, 2011 4:16 pm UTC

Assuming it works, and isn't excessively painful, this is great news!

Wont stop using condoms just because of this, but it's never a bad idea with an additional layer of protection.
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it - Aristotle

A White Russian, shades and a bathrobe, what more can you want from life?

The Reaper
Posts: 4008
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Contact:

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby The Reaper » Tue May 31, 2011 4:17 pm UTC

From what I understand, they still gotta pull out that little tube and inject stuff into it (its NSFW because there's a video of a ballsack being ....handled....), so its not quite to the point of a pill or simple injection. Still, 10 years without having to worry about accidentally babymaking should have its uses.

User avatar
Angua
Don't call her Delphine.
Posts: 5944
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 12:42 pm UTC
Location: UK/[St. Kitts and] Nevis Occasionally, I migrate to the US for a bit

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby Angua » Tue May 31, 2011 4:22 pm UTC

So long as it's reversible this should be good. I'll have to look into it more - according to the wikipedia article how it works is not completely understood, so I guess we'll need primate studies to make sure that it doesn't adversely affect subsequent foetuses (both if you happen to become pregnant while using it, though it seems to be being marketed as 100% effective so that might not be a problem, and also after you remove it).

Anyway, I hope that it turns out as effective as hoped :)
Crabtree's bludgeon: “no set of mutually inconsistent observations can exist for which some human intellect cannot conceive a coherent explanation, however complicated”
GNU Terry Pratchett

User avatar
broken_escalator
They're called stairs
Posts: 3312
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 1:49 am UTC
Location: _| ̄|○

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby broken_escalator » Tue May 31, 2011 4:28 pm UTC

I'm afraid to click the link since I'm at work, but do they estimate what the potential price would be?

I thought this might be about the idea of using ultrasound for male birth control, but this is very interesting too.

User avatar
jakovasaur
Posts: 678
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2009 7:43 am UTC

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby jakovasaur » Tue May 31, 2011 4:43 pm UTC

Antonio Cromartie says "too little, too late."

User avatar
Thirty-one
Posts: 342
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 1:13 pm UTC

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby Thirty-one » Tue May 31, 2011 4:49 pm UTC

broken_escalator wrote:I'm afraid to click the link since I'm at work, but do they estimate what the potential price would be?

I thought this might be about the idea of using ultrasound for male birth control, but this is very interesting too.


There was a sentence in the article suggesting the injected material would possibly cost less than the syringe, or something to that effect. You'll still have to pay someone to do it, but it doesn't seem like it should
cost more than a vasectomy does.
He looked around for a corporate partner but found no takers. Unlike birth control pills, which must be used daily, sometimes for years, RISUG is a long-lasting, low-cost treatment (the syringe could end up costing more than the material it injects).


Good news, but the pictures still made me glad I don't need to get this done to me.
Annoyed, getting worked up or bored by the post above? Help is here.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10550
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby CorruptUser » Tue May 31, 2011 10:42 pm UTC

KestrelLowing wrote:Note: Didn't click on the links because I'm at work

If this works (and isn't painful for guys), I am ALL for it!! I've always thought it was annoying that males couldn't have a chemical form of birth control. And another layer of protection is never bad especially when the majority of birth control is based on whether I remember to take a pill each night.

I can't see anything but positives for this.


No disease prevention. Condoms are more than just birth control. This may be good for people in a relationship, but not so good for everyone else. Plus, think about how many pregnancies will occur when a guy doesn't want to wear a condom and just lies about being on this method.

Not saying I disprove of this, or that the cons outweigh the pros, only that there are cons to this.

fr00t
Posts: 113
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 11:06 am UTC

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby fr00t » Tue May 31, 2011 11:17 pm UTC

By the time this thing gets through R&D, then clinical trials, and lead time for production, it will probably be 2020 (hey we may not have a colony on mars but at least we have male birth control) and I'll be past my philandering years. Like with everything else, I was born some 25+ years too soon. Great.

User avatar
jules.LT
Posts: 1539
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 8:20 pm UTC
Location: Paris, France, Europe

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby jules.LT » Tue May 31, 2011 11:40 pm UTC

100% seems too good to be true...
Bertrand Russell wrote:Not to be absolutely certain is, I think, one of the essential things in rationality.
Richard Feynman & many others wrote:Keep an open mind – but not so open that your brain falls out

Tirian
Posts: 1891
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 6:03 pm UTC

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby Tirian » Tue May 31, 2011 11:42 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:No disease prevention. Condoms are more than just birth control. This may be good for people in a relationship, but not so good for everyone else. Plus, think about how many pregnancies will occur when a guy doesn't want to wear a condom and just lies about being on this method.


I completely agree about the first point, but don't think that the second is significant. If I were a hypothetical woman who was considering having unprotected sex with someone I wasn't in a committed relationship with, I'd demand a test that verified that his semen was virtually sperm-free in addition to the clean STD test. I don't care whether he had the procedure, I care about whether the procedure is effective now.

I will also join the chorus saying that this is a great step forward in male reproductive freedom, if true. I've seen more than enough shoddy scientific reporting that was essentially just copying a company's press release and reporting it without verification or balance, and far more than enough companies who realized that there was a financial advantage in overstating their products when trying to raise capital. So I'll be delighted if this process turns out to be safe and effective, but until the clinical trials are over I'm going to be skeptical on both of those points.

User avatar
TheStrongest
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2011 6:33 pm UTC
Location: Philadelphia, USA
Contact:

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby TheStrongest » Tue May 31, 2011 11:51 pm UTC

Makes me a bit squeemish, but as long as it is not permanent and is proven not to cause damage to the urogenital system, go for it!

User avatar
Maurog
Posts: 842
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2007 7:58 am UTC

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby Maurog » Wed Jun 01, 2011 5:23 am UTC

What I love most about this is that they still don't know exactly why it works, only that it works.

Make me kinda wonder how it was invented. Did the scientist just go "okay, let's dip sperm in non-toxic chemical polymers and see which one works", and after years of dipping, it turns out a 60 mg copolymer styrene/maleic anhydride (SMA) with 120 µL of the solvent dimethyl sulfoxide is just right?
Slay the living! Raise the dead! Paint the sky in crimson red!

User avatar
Vaniver
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 2:12 am UTC

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby Vaniver » Wed Jun 01, 2011 5:27 am UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Plus, think about how many pregnancies will occur when a guy doesn't want to wear a condom and just lies about being on this method.
Is this a serious concern? The typical response to no condom is unprotected sex (ladies: if you're into sex and maintaining your health, you probably ought to carry around condoms, since that's the most effective way to ensure they get used). I doubt lies about this sort of protection will significantly increase the percentage of condomless encounters that proceed to unprotected sex. Even if that does become an issue, it just gives men an option women already had.
I mostly post over at LessWrong now.

Avatar from My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, owned by Hasbro.

User avatar
KestrelLowing
Posts: 1124
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 6:57 pm UTC
Location: Michigan

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby KestrelLowing » Wed Jun 01, 2011 1:07 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:
KestrelLowing wrote:Note: Didn't click on the links because I'm at work

If this works (and isn't painful for guys), I am ALL for it!! I've always thought it was annoying that males couldn't have a chemical form of birth control. And another layer of protection is never bad especially when the majority of birth control is based on whether I remember to take a pill each night.

I can't see anything but positives for this.


No disease prevention. Condoms are more than just birth control. This may be good for people in a relationship, but not so good for everyone else. Plus, think about how many pregnancies will occur when a guy doesn't want to wear a condom and just lies about being on this method.

Not saying I disprove of this, or that the cons outweigh the pros, only that there are cons to this.


Ah, yes. I forget I always default to the "sex only in a relationship" as that's just what I prefer. That kind of makes the pregnancy deal moot as well. But, people are different! And I need to remember that.

And yes, I must admit the "we don't know why it works" is a little concerning. I guess I'd be worried about long term use if they don't actually know what's going on.

User avatar
iop
Posts: 930
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 11:26 am UTC
Location: The ivory tower

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby iop » Wed Jun 01, 2011 1:14 pm UTC

KestrelLowing wrote: little concerning. I guess I'd be worried about long term use if they don't actually know what's going on.

In much of modern medicine (at least when it involves drug treatments), we don't actually know what is going on, just that it works.

Heisenberg
Posts: 3789
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 8:48 pm UTC
Location: Uncertain

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby Heisenberg » Wed Jun 01, 2011 1:21 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Plus, think about how many pregnancies will occur when a guy girl doesn't want to wear a condom and just lies about being on this method.

How is this any different than the pill? This is an issue with any birth control method, but I've never heard it used to argue against the pill, or IUDs, or any other method.

User avatar
Sizik
Posts: 1261
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 3:48 am UTC

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby Sizik » Wed Jun 01, 2011 6:14 pm UTC

Heisenberg wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:Plus, think about how many pregnancies will occur when a guy girl doesn't want to wear a condom and just lies about being on this method.

How is this any different than the pill? This is an issue with any birth control method, but I've never heard it used to argue against the pill, or IUDs, or any other method.

Last time I checked, guys aren't the ones who get pregnant.
she/they
gmalivuk wrote:
King Author wrote:If space (rather, distance) is an illusion, it'd be possible for one meta-me to experience both body's sensory inputs.
Yes. And if wishes were horses, wishing wells would fill up very quickly with drowned horses.

User avatar
jakovasaur
Posts: 678
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2009 7:43 am UTC

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby jakovasaur » Wed Jun 01, 2011 7:07 pm UTC

Sizik wrote:
Heisenberg wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:Plus, think about how many pregnancies will occur when a guy girl doesn't want to wear a condom and just lies about being on this method.

How is this any different than the pill? This is an issue with any birth control method, but I've never heard it used to argue against the pill, or IUDs, or any other method.

Last time I checked, guys aren't the ones who get pregnant.

Yeah but they still have to face some of the consequences of those pregnancies, such as child support.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10550
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby CorruptUser » Thu Jun 02, 2011 1:05 am UTC

jakovasaur wrote:
Sizik wrote:
Heisenberg wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:Plus, think about how many pregnancies will occur when a guy girl doesn't want to wear a condom and just lies about being on this method.

How is this any different than the pill? This is an issue with any birth control method, but I've never heard it used to argue against the pill, or IUDs, or any other method.

Last time I checked, guys aren't the ones who get pregnant.

Yeah but they still have to face some of the consequences of those pregnancies, such as child support.

If they can be found. The horrible example I gave was most likely a one night stand between 2 people who only met a short time prior. Good luck tracking the guy down.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26836
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby gmalivuk » Thu Jun 02, 2011 2:00 am UTC

Meh, I'll care once this is actually on the market. Until then, it's just yet another story about potential male birth control that I still haven't seen pan out.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby Izawwlgood » Thu Jun 02, 2011 2:08 am UTC

Sweet. I'll take two!
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

Sheikh al-Majaneen
Name Checks Out On Time, Tips Chambermaid
Posts: 1075
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:17 am UTC

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby Sheikh al-Majaneen » Thu Jun 02, 2011 11:26 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:
KestrelLowing wrote:Note: Didn't click on the links because I'm at work

If this works (and isn't painful for guys), I am ALL for it!! I've always thought it was annoying that males couldn't have a chemical form of birth control. And another layer of protection is never bad especially when the majority of birth control is based on whether I remember to take a pill each night.

I can't see anything but positives for this.


No disease prevention. Condoms are more than just birth control. This may be good for people in a relationship, but not so good for everyone else. Plus, think about how many pregnancies will occur when a guy doesn't want to wear a condom and just lies about being on this method.

Not saying I disprove of this, or that the cons outweigh the pros, only that there are cons to this.

Excluding abstinence, condoms are the only thing which will prevent pregnancy and STDs the vast vast majority of the time. It should be common sense that methods developed to reduce one's fertility do not make you immune to any disease. These are two different problems requiring two different (permanent) solutions, if you are going to have sex.

User avatar
mmmcannibalism
Posts: 2150
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 6:16 am UTC

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby mmmcannibalism » Fri Jun 03, 2011 12:54 am UTC

Sheikh al-Majaneen wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:
KestrelLowing wrote:Note: Didn't click on the links because I'm at work

If this works (and isn't painful for guys), I am ALL for it!! I've always thought it was annoying that males couldn't have a chemical form of birth control. And another layer of protection is never bad especially when the majority of birth control is based on whether I remember to take a pill each night.

I can't see anything but positives for this.


No disease prevention. Condoms are more than just birth control. This may be good for people in a relationship, but not so good for everyone else. Plus, think about how many pregnancies will occur when a guy doesn't want to wear a condom and just lies about being on this method.

Not saying I disprove of this, or that the cons outweigh the pros, only that there are cons to this.

Excluding abstinence, condoms are the only thing which will prevent pregnancy and STDs the vast vast majority of the time. It should be common sense that methods developed to reduce one's fertility do not make you immune to any disease. These are two different problems requiring two different (permanent) solutions, if you are going to have sex.


Maybe I'm being nitpicky, but I'm not sure if I would count doesn't cover std's as a con in this case. While Its certainly a limitation, this type of birth control* seems comparable to a vasectomy or iud; none of which prevent stds.

*and its arguable whether we should view condoms as in the same category as this method.
Izawwlgood wrote:I for one would happily live on an island as a fuzzy seal-human.

Oregonaut wrote:Damn fetuses and their terroist plots.

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby Izawwlgood » Fri Jun 03, 2011 1:50 am UTC

It's not being hailed as disease prevention anymore than the contraceptive pill is. It's a birth control technique, it's as effective as a vasectomy and more easily reversible (as well as less invasive), and provides men with an option.

Pointing to the fact that it doesn't prevent sexually transmitted diseases is like pointing out your Prius doesn't have a microwave.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
SummerGlauFan
Posts: 1746
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:27 pm UTC
Location: KS

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby SummerGlauFan » Fri Jun 03, 2011 4:10 am UTC

Izawwlgood wrote:It's not being hailed as disease prevention anymore than the contraceptive pill is. It's a birth control technique, it's as effective as a vasectomy and more easily reversible (as well as less invasive), and provides men with an option.

Pointing to the fact that it doesn't prevent sexually transmitted diseases is like pointing out your Prius doesn't have a microwave.


It's not any different than any of the slew of birth-control drugs whose commercials always say "does not protect against STD's, HIV, or AIDS." Heck, I heard that disclaimer from a commercial for a male enhancement pill.

Makes you wonder how stupid the average consumer is that you have to make that disclaimer...
glasnt wrote:"As she raised her rifle against the creature, her hair fluttered beneath the red florescent lighting of the locked down building.

I knew from that moment that she was something special"


Outbreak, a tale of love and zombies.

In stores now.

User avatar
DaBigCheez
Posts: 838
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2011 8:03 am UTC

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby DaBigCheez » Fri Jun 03, 2011 4:17 am UTC

It's not the *average* consumer that warning's for, it's for the lower fringes which happen to also have the capability to sue.

At least, I dearly hope so.
existential_elevator wrote:It's like a jigsaw puzzle of Hitler pissing on Mother Theresa. No individual piece is offensive, but together...

If you think hot women have it easy because everyone wants to have sex at them, you're both wrong and also the reason you're wrong.

Sheikh al-Majaneen
Name Checks Out On Time, Tips Chambermaid
Posts: 1075
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:17 am UTC

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby Sheikh al-Majaneen » Fri Jun 03, 2011 4:22 am UTC

DaBigCheez wrote:It's not the *average* consumer that warning's for, it's for the lower fringes which happen to also have the capability to sue.

At least, I dearly hope so.

Ah, yes. The customers who try to stop a swedish chainsaw with their hands and/or genitals. I can't imagine how a lawsuit over birth control not preventing the spread of STDs could win in court though.

User avatar
SummerGlauFan
Posts: 1746
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:27 pm UTC
Location: KS

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby SummerGlauFan » Fri Jun 03, 2011 4:27 am UTC

DaBigCheez wrote:It's not the *average* consumer that warning's for, it's for the lower fringes which happen to also have the capability to sue.

At least, I dearly hope so.


I don't know, I remember a recent study that showed a depressingly large number of people believed all sorts of nonsense about birth control/STD prevention, like "women on top" positions prevented pregnancy or oral sex can't get you an STD. It's hardly a large leap from there to "the pill can protect me!"

Sheikh al-Majaneen wrote:
DaBigCheez wrote:It's not the *average* consumer that warning's for, it's for the lower fringes which happen to also have the capability to sue.

At least, I dearly hope so.

Ah, yes. The customers who try to stop a swedish chainsaw with their hands and/or genitals.

I... I... I hope you're kidding...

Sheikh al-Majaneen wrote:
DaBigCheez wrote:It's not the *average* consumer that warning's for, it's for the lower fringes which happen to also have the capability to sue.

At least, I dearly hope so.

I can't imagine how a lawsuit over birth control not preventing the spread of STDs could win in court though.


If someone can sue for spilling their own piping hot coffee on themselves and win, this would not surprise me.
glasnt wrote:"As she raised her rifle against the creature, her hair fluttered beneath the red florescent lighting of the locked down building.

I knew from that moment that she was something special"


Outbreak, a tale of love and zombies.

In stores now.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10550
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby CorruptUser » Fri Jun 03, 2011 4:28 am UTC

DaBigCheez wrote:It's not the *average* consumer that warning's for, it's for the lower fringes which happen to also have the capability to sue.

At least, I dearly hope so.


Well, there are some other, ahem, not so obvious things about birth control/condoms that aren't taught in sex ed. For example, you can't continue using a condom. No, I don't mean rinse and reuse, I mean if the guy ejaculates, the sex is over, regardless of whether or not he still has an erection.

User avatar
Box Boy
WINNING
Posts: 1356
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 9:33 pm UTC

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby Box Boy » Fri Jun 03, 2011 7:29 pm UTC

SummerGlauFan wrote:If someone can sue for spilling their own piping hot coffee on themselves and win, this would not surprise me.
Minor Nitpick: the coffee was several times hotter than it should legally be and caused severe third degree burns as a result, instead of merely hurting like a bitch, so it was partially their fault.
Although I still don't know how she got more than a million.
Signatures are for chumps.

PeterCai
Posts: 865
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 1:09 pm UTC

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby PeterCai » Fri Jun 03, 2011 8:39 pm UTC

Box Boy wrote:
SummerGlauFan wrote:If someone can sue for spilling their own piping hot coffee on themselves and win, this would not surprise me.
Minor Nitpick: the coffee was several times hotter than it should legally be and caused severe third degree burns as a result, instead of merely hurting like a bitch, so it was partially their fault.
Although I still don't know how she got more than a million.

because mcdonald have internal documents stating that the coffee was too hot but made a decision to not do anything, because paying off the lawsuits would be cheaper than replacing the coffee makers. the court found out about this and made a decision to punish mcdonald. the fine is an incentive for mcdonald to replace it's coffee makers and a warning to the rest of the industry.
Sheikh al-Majaneen wrote:Ah, yes. The customers who try to stop a swedish chainsaw with their hands and/or genitals.

yeah, well, the chainsaw was marketed to have a failsafe system so good that you can do this. it's hardly the customers' fault for believing that.

Duban
Posts: 352
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 1:22 pm UTC

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby Duban » Fri Jun 03, 2011 8:57 pm UTC

SummerGlauFan wrote:
Sheikh al-Majaneen wrote:
DaBigCheez wrote:It's not the *average* consumer that warning's for, it's for the lower fringes which happen to also have the capability to sue.

At least, I dearly hope so.

I can't imagine how a lawsuit over birth control not preventing the spread of STDs could win in court though.


If someone can sue for spilling their own piping hot coffee on themselves and win, this would not surprise me.

You, like most people, are grossly misinformed of that lawsuit. The coffee wasn't just normal hot. McDonalds kept its coffee close to boiling hot. The woman had an extended hospital stay and severe burns on her lap that required skin grafts. The defense also brought evidence that showed the management of the restaurant had recieved hundreds internal e-mails telling them that the coffee was dangerous and chose to ignore them. It's actually pretty clear that the company was in the wrong.
It is not the gods I fear. No, It is those who claim to speak for them that concern me.

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3999
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby Dauric » Fri Jun 03, 2011 9:10 pm UTC

PeterCai wrote:
Sheikh al-Majaneen wrote:Ah, yes. The customers who try to stop a swedish chainsaw with their hands and/or genitals.

yeah, well, the chainsaw was marketed to have a failsafe system so good that you can do this. it's hardly the customers' fault for believing that.


Great, now I have images of a late night infomercial where the host whips out his whang to demonstrate a chainsaw failsafe...

... Ultimately demonstrating an Old Male Birth Control Method

(Yes, I know the actual claim was with a person's hands, not genitals)
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

The Reaper
Posts: 4008
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Contact:

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby The Reaper » Fri Jun 03, 2011 9:12 pm UTC

Duban wrote:The coffee wasn't just normal hot. McDonalds kept its coffee close to boiling hot.
Damn good coffee.

Tirian
Posts: 1891
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 6:03 pm UTC

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby Tirian » Fri Jun 03, 2011 10:19 pm UTC

Duban wrote:You, like most people, are grossly misinformed of that lawsuit. The coffee wasn't just normal hot. McDonalds kept its coffee close to boiling hot. The woman had an extended hospital stay and severe burns on her lap that required skin grafts. The defense also brought evidence that showed the management of the restaurant had recieved hundreds internal e-mails telling them that the coffee was dangerous and chose to ignore them. It's actually pretty clear that the company was in the wrong.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v. ... estaurants

The coffee was normal hot. You can see the references for that page that the widespread personal and commercial standards for proper coffee is that the coffee be brewed at 195-205 degrees and, if not drunk immediately, should be maintained at 180-185 degrees, which is in line with McDonald's practices. To suggest that coffee be cooled to non-scalding temperatures before serving is like suggesting that ice cream should always be served melted to prevent brain freeze.

My layman's belief is that any business that serves coffee to people in drive-through windows should either add the cream and sugar themselves or serve it in a cup where a normal person seated in a car can remove the lid without significant risk of groinal spillage, but at the same time a reasonable customer should appreciate the risk and step outside the car to open the coffee cup or fail to do so at her own peril.

Sheikh al-Majaneen
Name Checks Out On Time, Tips Chambermaid
Posts: 1075
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:17 am UTC

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby Sheikh al-Majaneen » Fri Jun 03, 2011 11:43 pm UTC

PeterCai wrote:yeah, well, the chainsaw was marketed to have a failsafe system so good that you can do this. it's hardly the customers' fault for believing that.

Um...I thought that story was apocryphal. Or something. A google search after I posted that did not alert me otherwise.

But still, you'd have to be stupid to deliberately put it to the test...it is for accidents...

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10550
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby CorruptUser » Sat Jun 04, 2011 3:49 am UTC

Sheikh al-Majaneen wrote:
PeterCai wrote:yeah, well, the chainsaw was marketed to have a failsafe system so good that you can do this. it's hardly the customers' fault for believing that.

Um...I thought that story was apocryphal. Or something. A google search after I posted that did not alert me otherwise.

But still, you'd have to be stupid to deliberately put it to the test...it is for accidents...


Like the attorney who demonstrated his office's safety windows by running in to them multiple times until he got defenestrated.

User avatar
SummerGlauFan
Posts: 1746
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:27 pm UTC
Location: KS

Re: New Male Birth Control Method

Postby SummerGlauFan » Sat Jun 04, 2011 6:38 am UTC

I like the direction this thread has gone; burns from coffee, and someone getting neutered by a chainsaw.

Tirian wrote:
Duban wrote:You, like most people, are grossly misinformed of that lawsuit. The coffee wasn't just normal hot. McDonalds kept its coffee close to boiling hot. The woman had an extended hospital stay and severe burns on her lap that required skin grafts. The defense also brought evidence that showed the management of the restaurant had recieved hundreds internal e-mails telling them that the coffee was dangerous and chose to ignore them. It's actually pretty clear that the company was in the wrong.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v. ... estaurants

The coffee was normal hot. You can see the references for that page that the widespread personal and commercial standards for proper coffee is that the coffee be brewed at 195-205 degrees and, if not drunk immediately, should be maintained at 180-185 degrees, which is in line with McDonald's practices. To suggest that coffee be cooled to non-scalding temperatures before serving is like suggesting that ice cream should always be served melted to prevent brain freeze.

My layman's belief is that any business that serves coffee to people in drive-through windows should either add the cream and sugar themselves or serve it in a cup where a normal person seated in a car can remove the lid without significant risk of groinal spillage, but at the same time a reasonable customer should appreciate the risk and step outside the car to open the coffee cup or fail to do so at her own peril.


Interesting link. Reminds me of my highschool days, and looking up baseless/stupid lawsuits (McDonalds came up a lot).
glasnt wrote:"As she raised her rifle against the creature, her hair fluttered beneath the red florescent lighting of the locked down building.

I knew from that moment that she was something special"


Outbreak, a tale of love and zombies.

In stores now.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests