Everyone throw away your condoms, there's a new birth control for men with a 100% success rate. (Throw away your condoms after you get the procedure.) A new procedure under clinical trials in India is turning out some very exciting results for the not-into-wearing-condoms-male community. (Kind of a large community.) The method works by injecting a polymer gel called Vasalgel into the penis, which then breaks apart the sperm before it can cause, you know, life. The downside: by injected, I mean injected, as in you have to get a needle straight into your jimmy for this to work. Is a small bit of dick-centric pain worth a decade of worry-free sex? (Assuming you haven't forgotten about the existence of STDs.) That depends on your tolerance for dick pain and your love of barebacking.

Vasalgel, or RISUG (Reversible Inhibition of Sperm Under Guidance) coats the inside walls of the vas deferens and kills sperm as they pass through. Think of it as a gel-based serial killer who helps people save hundreds of thousands of dollars and avoid TV shows like Dora The Explorer.  

Because it's easier to reverse than a vasectomy, this new birth-control option would be especially useful for men who know they don't want children now, but could realistically change their minds within a few years. Hear that fellas? Indecisiveness is making a comeback! We can have our cake, eat it too, and then get Wendy's afterwards! (This is America, after all.)

The procedure lasts about fifteen minutes and is effective for up to ten years. Researchers are planning for the Vasalgel injection to hit the markets by 2015, with clinical trials starting in 2012. 

Come and get it boys, but don't forget: a shot straight into your penis.

Needle. In. Penis. 

Commentarium (68 Comments)

Apr 05 12 - 12:10pm
hmm

Please DO NOT THROW AWAY YOUR CONDOMS. Condoms protect against more than unwanted pregnancy. Condoms protect against ALL STDS, and so are very important.

If you're afraid of a needle in your dick, then you should be afraid of warts all over it to. Put a hat on it.

Apr 05 12 - 3:03pm
Raven't

Condoms protect against many STDs, not all. Condoms will no protect you against Herpes or HPV. They'll somewhat reduce your chances of contracting them, but they won't protect you against them completely.

Apr 05 12 - 8:09pm
Shut up

Yes, because annoying semantics are what's important right now. Use a rubber, that's the point.

Apr 05 12 - 8:28pm
Mistruth

Giving out the wrong facts isn't semantics.

Apr 05 12 - 11:51pm
@Shut up

You clearly don't understand what "semantics" means. "All" means exactly that - all. Not "most". Saying "all" and meaning "most" is not semantics, it's wrong.

Apr 06 12 - 1:24am
Rj

Maybe he meant 'all' you pretentious a..holes. Raven't him/herself admitted that condoms will reduce your chances of contracting those STI's, which is the same as protecting against them. Raven't never said that condoms will absolutely guarantee that you won't get any STI's, just that they PROTECT against them.

Apr 06 12 - 2:06am
@RJ

Except that condoms don't protect against all STIs. They offer very little protection against some.

Pretty hilarious that you throw the word "pretentious" around, and then start acting like an ass.

Apr 06 12 - 5:21am
Paultastic

A highly irresponsible article

Apr 06 12 - 5:41am
PENIS

"very little" protection is still protection

Apr 06 12 - 10:00am
Ali

Do you realize there are a huge number of long-term monogamous people out there using condoms for birth control who have no STD concerns? The entire world of condom users is not comprised of college students hooking up after parties. Yes, lots of people should still use condoms. But there are plenty of us who are married with kids who don't want a permanent solution, and don't want hormones, which pretty much leaves us with condoms or an IUD. In which case the prospect of an option where the guy gets to set up is very exciting indeed.

Apr 06 12 - 10:09am
nope

Ali, that comment was obviously not addressing monogamous couples. But really, monogamous couples should be using an IUD or the pill (which yes, is awful for some women, but a miraculous tool of weight-loss and acne-clearing for others) or a diaphragm (do people still use diaphragms?) + spermicidal lube instead of condoms anyway. Condoms are kind of the worst.

Apr 06 12 - 11:05am
Rj

@Rj "They offer very little protection against some." You're still not saying that they don't protect, at least to some degree, against all. Pretty hilarious that you act like an ass and are wrong. Besides, I was just defending hmm from everyone yelling about semantics which really wasn't the point of the comment.

Apr 06 12 - 11:45am
jake

Can all of you quit being such politically correct alarmists? Has the whole world turned into butt-hurt librarians? Let your hair down. If you need an article to tell you that condoms are important for STD protection, then you probably don't know how to read in the first place.

Apr 06 12 - 4:42pm
@jake

How could I learn anything from the article if I couldn't read?

Apr 06 12 - 4:44pm
@Rj

And a piece of paper protects, at least to some degree, against radiation poisoning. Doesn't mean I'm going to claim that paper protects against radiation.

Yet again, learn what semantics means.

Apr 09 12 - 3:22pm
wow

the internet is stupid.

Apr 10 12 - 4:24am
miller

you are stupid, to think internet is stupid... what is it that people want? STIs, or WHAT? THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS 100%

Jul 24 12 - 4:09pm
not you

so much anger

Aug 09 12 - 2:43am
thatsmartgirl

for people who say condoms offer little protection against thinks like hpv (warts), studies show it's around 70%. "Condom Use and the Risk of Genital Human Papillomavirus Infection in Young Women." New England Journal of Medicine 354:2645-265422 Jun 2006. also there's a vaccine for that.

condoms, the pill, and other barriers are not 100% effective against pregnancy either. so how about the benefit of not getting some girl knocked up when you are 20 and in college. or married couples who have already had a couple kids and don't want more using it as an alternative to surgery.

Aug 18 12 - 2:31am
Newuitategr

As a man that will only be sleeping with one woman for the foreseeable future, yay.

Apr 05 12 - 12:12pm
Show

Oh happy day!

Apr 05 12 - 12:25pm
COCKSALOT

As a relatively promiscuous straight male, I resent the accusation that I would like to be boning random ladies. with condoms. STDs are terrifying.

Apr 05 12 - 2:57pm
babyjane

STDs are no more terrifying than any other communicable disease. As a man having oral sex or vaginal intercourse with women, your risk of actually contracting HIV is very low, especially if you're discerning enough not to fuck intravenous drug users. More common STDs, such as chlamydia and gonorrhea are easily treatable, and even herpes which people freak the fuck out over is actually pretty manageable with modern drugs treatment. None of this is to say everyone should be taking unnecessary risks. Rather, I think the fear and stigma that people attach to STDs actually deters people from getting tested, treated, and being honest with their partners about STD status.

Apr 05 12 - 3:13pm
Dude

Good points all around except for the easily treatable part. There are now certain strains of Gonorrhea that are spreading around that are resistant to all known treatments.

Apr 05 12 - 10:30pm
nope

Awful, awful points. HIV transmission is very very low through oral sex yes, but not vaginal sex. Yes, it's "low" compared to other STDs, but is it low enough to risk fucking HIV? And you have absolutely no idea whether some rando you've picked up IVs drugs, or has/had a boyfriend that IVs drugs. And that's not counting Dude's well-placed point about the resistant gonorrhea. Seriously DON'T FUCK RANDOS WITHOUT A RUBBER.

But yes this invention sounds marvelous and any man that whines about it is obviously completely ignorant as to what women have been asked to do for the past sixty years to hold off on the babies. This sounds like a walk in the park.

Apr 06 12 - 12:35am
babyjane

HIV transmission is low for MEN who are having vaginal intercourse, but much higher for women. There must be a tear in the urinary tract or some other wound that allows the HIV virus to enter the bloodstream. Vaginal or anal sex can easily create these tears in the mucus membranes of the person who is being penetrated, but vaginal intercourse generally does not create these tears in the urinary tract of the male. The probability of a man contracting HIV from an infected woman during vaginal intercourse is 1 out of 1000, although this is higher if she is on her period. Here is a reference for this http://www.hiv.va.gov/patient/faqs/risk-of-unprotected-sex-with-woman.asp
While is is very risky for many reason besides HIV to have unprotected sex with multiple partners, it is important to have accurate information about how HIV is transmitted and the relative risks of different activities. Ultimately, if you are very concerned about STIs, you should lower your risk by engaging in monogamous relationships with a partner whose STI status has been verified.

Apr 06 12 - 12:52am
babyjane

I just want to add that my goal is not to encourage anyone to have unprotected penetrative sex. I myself always use condoms and try to engage in lower risk activities such as oral, mutual masturbation, or strap-on sex with people I trust.

Apr 11 12 - 2:37am
Kimberlee McKane

says: ~boning random ladies~ LMFAO!

Apr 05 12 - 12:46pm
Medically Inaccurate

Actually this procedure would NOT include a needle in the penis. The vans deferens is located in the scrotum, so it is a shot in the balls, not the penis.

Apr 05 12 - 8:47pm
Also:

Local anesthesia is a wonderful thing.

Apr 05 12 - 10:14pm
kateldg

I'm glad I'm not the only one who knows some basic human anatomy.

Apr 06 12 - 3:04am
ThatOneGuy

Actually, the vas deferens are located in the scrotum, around the penis, and finally loop around to connect to the seminal vesicle and prostate. So, you don't have to get it to the balls to hit the vas deferens. They could easily go through your penis to hit it elsewhere.

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/images/ency/fullsize/19073.jpg

Apr 06 12 - 10:16am
@ also:

local anesthesia is a needle itself buddy. two shots?!?!?!

Apr 09 12 - 2:49pm
chicken

numbing gel!

Apr 05 12 - 2:13pm
Keep the Condoms!!

Condoms are still incredibly important for preventing STI's and HIV!! PLEASE don't throw them away. We need everyone on board to keep them from spreading!

Apr 05 12 - 3:58pm
TheQuicheNiche

UM - I should clarify that I don't ACTUALLY condone throwing your condoms away...such a waste of money, amiright?

-JG

Apr 05 12 - 4:05pm
Al

This procedure does sound awesome for those also practicing safe sex. However I feel that a little needle prick into the scrot is a small price to pay compared to something like hormonal birth control, which can totally affect your emotional spectrum and decisions you make, or having your cervix stretched open to insert an IUD. That shit was painful for weeks in my experience. So huzzah for effective male birth control!

Apr 05 12 - 5:10pm
Ruby Ryder

So now women just need to be able to actually believe a man who tells them he's "had the shot". I think a tattoo ought to come with it!

Apr 05 12 - 5:59pm
Name

@ Ruby Ryder

Just like a man right now has to trust that a woman actually takes her birth control. There's no reason why both parties can't take control. It's twice as safe that way!

Apr 05 12 - 8:06pm
Show

I feel as if I should clarify that, as a serial monogamist, my long-time girlfriend and I would LOVE something like this. For couples, this is a godsend.

Apr 05 12 - 10:07pm
TOJ

That needed pointing out. For some reason, everyone seems to think guys are gonna go out and bareback every girl they met five minutes ago. This great for couples who can't stand the hassle of condoms or fucking up their girls hormones. I question this 100% claim though.

Apr 05 12 - 9:11pm
showgree

I love how it's assumed that no one will wear condoms anymore. I don't see how this would stop anyone from still wearing them.

Apr 05 12 - 9:36pm
Me

Hey misogynistic dickhead, I'd take 100 needles in the penis for her to not have to fck with her hormones or get a terrifying wire gadget implanted in her uterus.

Besides, it's a shot through the ballsack, not the dick.

Apr 06 12 - 3:09am
You are not a doctor

You don't know if it's a shot to the scrotum. They could hit the vas deferens elsewhere, good sir.
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/images/ency/fullsize/19073.jpg

Also, please learn some tact when speaking to others.

Apr 06 12 - 3:00pm
Hey, me

You are a wonderful man. Thank you.

Jul 03 12 - 10:36pm
Ethan

Pretty sure that the vas deferens doesn't pass through the penis, but around it (in that pic, it 's going "over" the penis"

Apr 05 12 - 10:19pm
kateldg

I think this is a fabulous idea if they can get it through the FDA and all of the money-hungry pharm companies (they make tons of money off of monthly payments for birth control for years and years at a time, but something like this will be a one time payment for 10 years- not in their best interest). I'm just worried that not enough men will want to get it. Long term birth control has been a female responsibility for ages and when I linked a different article on this Vasalgel business to several of my male friends they said they would never get it. Clearly Nerve readers are into safe/healthy/fun sex and this would be a godsend for them, but what about men with more traditional values?

Apr 07 12 - 8:02pm
Paul Byerly

kaeldg - I am pastor who does marriage and sex education - so I think I fit your "more traditional values" category. I've been following this for more than a year, and would very much like to be able to recommend it to folks. It's actually better for those I speak to, since disease spread is not usually a concern, and this would mean no more condoms. I'd also like to see it largely replace the pill an other hormonal methods because of a variety of problems with those - including long term, possibly permanent decrease in sex drive.
In short, this is a very good thing for the sex positive follower of Jesus!

Apr 05 12 - 10:41pm
George

The dude who wrote this article sounds like a total douche bag who probably sits at home reading PUA while wondering why his life sucks.

Apr 05 12 - 10:46pm
boothweiser

Wired had a big article on this. A year ago.

Apr 05 12 - 11:29pm
Married

I'm married, can't use ANY hormone treatments- birth control or otherwise- because I'm at serious risk of stroke/heart attack if I do. My husband and I like to have sex (even after 14 years together!) without condoms. More kids are on "pause" for us for the time being, so a vasectomy is out. Anyone here relied on withdrawal method? It's really less fun. I know for a fact my husband would happily take a needle once every few years to the scrotum instead of withdrawing, because he once had tests done for months that required periodic injections TO HIS ERECT PENIS. And he chose to do it and never once complained and said it didn't really hurt. I guess he's just more of a MAN than most men.

Apr 06 12 - 12:42am
babyjane

The Catholic church opposes contraception, but permits married couples to use natural family planning to track ovulation in a similar way as women who are trying to conceive do. It's a silly loophole from a theological perspective, and nowhere near as effective as hormonal birth control, but it could be an alternative or supplement to withdrawal.

Apr 06 12 - 6:00am
Dude

This is not available in the USA yet, or anywhere for that matter. It is still under clinical trial in India.

Apr 06 12 - 9:12pm
Amputexture

This is noted in the article.

Apr 06 12 - 9:27am
Dixie Normous

Personally, gentlemen, I think the lead scientist who steamrolled the method of delivery is probably a jilted female who has a problem with men.

Apr 06 12 - 12:03pm
For reals

I know right? She should seriously just learn her place in the world.

Apr 06 12 - 10:19am
Bob

While containing the spread of STDS is important, male fertility control is about just that-male fertility control. This issue is so important because it will allow men to have control over their lives in a way the never have before.

Apr 06 12 - 11:48am
Wow...

you are all nuts.

Everybody just do what is right for you and your life situation; and then shut the fuck up about it.

(Oh wait, the internet was created for this nonsense. Carry on.)

Apr 06 12 - 3:37pm
mr. man

The thought of a needle in my Wang is not too exciting, but I would take one for the team for the upside.

Apr 06 12 - 7:14pm
FFS

This doesn't require a needle in the penis, you idiot. Do you even know where the vas deferens is?

Fix your article before you mislead even more people.

Apr 06 12 - 7:55pm
ThatOneGuy

I think you may not realize just how extensive your vas deferens is. You also don't know where the shot would be, so you are the one who should probably think about not misleading people.

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/images/ency/fullsize/19073.jpg

Jul 09 12 - 2:40pm
Wrong Again, OneGuy

I still don't think you understand WHERE the vas deferens is. Let me show you, with this fancy picture. http://www.dreamstime.com/male-reproductive-system-thumb18943168.jpg There is a tube running up from each testicle, and they are located to the side of the penis.

Apr 07 12 - 1:32am
Lol

Or just stay away from sex, ha.

Easy as that.

Apr 07 12 - 6:57pm
Paul Byerly

NO PENIS INJECTION INVOLVED!

One of the story links goes to a page that says "RISUG is injected by exposing the vas with the common “no-scalpel” method used around the world during “no-scalpel vasectomy” (NSV) (Sethi 1991). After numbing the area, the doctor pokes a hole in the scrotal skin that is so small that it doesn't require stitches–but that makes the vas easier to see and work on."

Apparently reading a story before repeating it is optional here?

Apr 08 12 - 3:28pm
PP

I think this is wonderful! By the way, I calculate I have been shot in the ass full of disgusting hormones approximately 60 times and had a speculum inserted approximately 20 times just to not worry about getting knocked up in my adult life. I'm sorry, did I just hear a man complain about getting poked once in the ballsack? * <-- look it's a teeny tiny violin playing a pity song!

May 25 12 - 2:45pm
someguy

i have to saysomething cuz i am bored at work and this conversation was pure retarded hah
i got 10 bucks most of the people losing their marbles in this convo have never even had sex before (40yo virgin FTW!) which i find slightly ironic considering you guys are blabbering on about sex and STI`s

and one more thing, people wont trust what anyone of you guys say cuz honestly they will trust their doctor over some blabbering baboon on the internet with no life whose left hand even turned its back on them.

have a wonderful day :)
sinceraly some guy

Jun 14 12 - 11:21pm
Some dude

I would and yes to someguy

Jun 28 12 - 5:37pm
Curious

I'd love to know how long the Indian trials have been going on. Since they want this to hit the market three years after US trials start, they must be using India to validate the "up to ten years claim."

Let's hope this doesn't end up like the Ocella recall.