"Money is only useful when you get rid of it. It is like the odd card in Old Maid; the player who is finally left with it has lost." - Evelyn Waugh

SavingAdvice.com Blog

Bridging the gap between saving money and investing


Join Now or Login

birth control

Will Men Be Willing to Use Injection Vaselgel Birth Control?

By 4 Comments

Vaselgel birth control for men should be available by 2017
For years, women have born the brunt of the responsibility for birth control. However, this seemingly unfair but unavoidable fact of life may not be the status quo for much longer. There’s been talk for some time that a male birth control pill is coming, and it now appears an injection male birth control called Vaselgel is only a few years away. Yes, the male pill is still in development, but by 2017, Vaselgel, which is a non-hormonal injection administered just above the testicles, should be on the market.

Vaselgel works in a similar way to the vasectomy, by blocking sperm from flowing through the tubes. The main difference is that it takes three months to start working and can be easily reversed. Human testing begins for Vasalgel in 2016 but so far, the injection has worked well on baboons and rabbits, and if those trends continue, we could have a male birth control option as soon as 2017.

The question is, will men actually use it? The Daily Telegraph posed this question to Donna Dawson. She’s a psychologist specializing in behavior and thinks that the odds are not so good for women finally being able to share responsibility for contraception.

“I don’t think men will opt for it,” she says firmly. “They’ll either say it’s the women’s job, or they’ll be too squeamish. They’re not used to taking that amount of responsibility for birth control. They don’t have the pain threshold women have. Women are more conditioned and acclimatized to taking birth control. Men have had no experience of it. Most men won’t even have the snip, making most women have their tubes tied instead.”

So what do men think? A quick ask around the office brings back mixed results. Some say, “No thanks – it’s just too sensitive down there.” One kind fellow says he’s keen to relieve his partner of the dangers of the pill and another says he’d do it, but would probably use condoms anyway so, “What’s the point?”

Ultimately it comes down to having a choice. Once the options start opening up for men, there’s no doubt that women in committed partnerships, especially women who are currently on birth control, will be well within their rights to ask for a break.

Emeritus Professor John Guillebaud, one of the experts currently working on the male pill, says he’s an advocate for sharing the responsibility. “As a choice, it’s been very unfair on women really. In stable couples, where they share their bodies together, why shouldn’t they also share any problems, or risks involved, by six months of the man taking contraception, then six months of the woman?”

This same half yearly formula may not be applicable for Vaselgel, but as 2017 approaches, relief is in sight for the millions of women who suffer silently through the various side effects of birth control because they’ve simply had no other choice.

(Photo courtesy of Tony Alter)

Bill Gates Wants to Give Remote Control Micro Chip Birth Control to Women

By 1 Comment

MIT Bill Gates Foundation to test microchip contraceptive birth control
Women might be saying goodbye to taking a daily pill (or other birth control methods available today) in the the coming years. The future of birth control may come in the form of a microchip, at least if the Bill & Miranda Gates Foundation Family Planning program and a team at MIT have anything to say about it. The MIT team, led by Robert Langer, is hoping to adapt a microchip developed by MicroCHIPS to be used as a contraceptive implanted under a woman’s skin. The chip has been used to deliver other drugs and the concept has been proven to work, but there are still issues to resolve and testing to be done. The MIT team wants to get FDA approval for pre-clinical trials beginning next year, and if all goes according to plan, have the microchip contraceptive available for sale by 2018.

The chip is tiny, measuring only 20 x 20 x 7 millimeters, and it has been designed to last 16 years. It would deliver 30 mg of levonorgestrel daily. Levonorgestrel is used in a number of current hormonal and emergency contraceptives, so it’s not the birth control medication which would change, but the way it’s delivered.

One of the most intriguing aspects of this microchip birth control is the ease with which a women would be able to turn it off and on. If at some point she decides she would like to try and conceive a baby, all she would need to do is turn it off with a remote control, then she can turn it back on again when she no longer wanted to conceive. This allows her not to have to think about taking birth control when she wants the protection, but she has a simple way to stop if she decides she no longer wants to use it.

While the news is focused on birth control, the technology will likely have a much larger impact than this single area. Each microchip contains a reservoir array where the hormone is contained and protected, but any drug could conceivably be placed in it and released over time at a pre-programmed schedule.

In fact, the first human clinical trials with this chip were to deliver an osteoporosis medication. The chip was implanted under the skin using a local anesthetic in a process which tool less than 30 minutes. The post-menopausal women received the medication for a month, and there were no adverse immune reactions to the chip. This trial has given hope it can be used to deliver birth control in the same way without causing any negative immune reaction.

While the concept results look positive and give high hopes to the MIT group that this will work, there are a number of issues which need to addressed as well. One of the main ones will be to encrypt the chips so the data they hold is secure over wireless systems.

While there is no estimate on the cost of this type of birth control at this stage, the personal financial savings for women could be huge. A remote controlled birth control that lasts for half their child bearing life would give them simple and effective control over their reproduction wants without the fear of forgetting to take the medication. If it proves to be effective without major side effects, it could have a major impact on how women in the US, and possibly the world, take birth control in the future.

(Photo courtesy of Sarah C)

Can a Company Prevent Free Birth Control Access? The Supreme Court Will Decide

By 10 Comments

The Supreme Court will decide if for-profit companies like Hobby Lobby can exempt birth control from the Affordable Care Act on religious grounds
There are a couple of big cases before the Supreme Court which have the potential to have a major impact on the finances of women and families. In two cases before the court, Sebelius vs Hobby Lobby Stores and Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp vs Sebelius, the justices will have to decide whether for-profit companies must abide by the Affordable Care Act mandate to provide no-cost prescription contraception as part of most health insurance plans offered.

As part of the Affordable Care Act, most insurance plans must provide certain preventive care services for free to beneficiaries. The Obama administration included all FDA-approved contraceptives for women as part of these preventative services. At issue is whether or not for-profit companies should have to provide contraceptives to women if it goes against the religious beliefs of the owners of those companies.

While some non-profit and religious organizations are exempt from this mandate, the law doesn’t allow for-profit companies to be exempt. The owners of Conestoga Wood and Hobby Lobby (both for-profit companies) say they have no problem offering birth control to women, but they do have issue with certain types of birth control. They’re specifically against providing emergency contraceptives such as Plan B and Ella, which can prevent pregnancy when taken after a sperm and egg have united. They argue their religious freedom is being violated because they view this specific type of birth control as an abortion. Since emergency contraceptives are able to prevent a fertilized egg from implanting into the uterus of a women, they consider using them the same as a very early stage abortion.

While the two companies’ owners consider this abortion, the majority of the medical and scientific communities don’t. As part of the lawsuit, ten medical groups, including the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, submitted a brief that states, “There is a scientific distinction between a contraceptive and an abortifacient and the scientific record demonstrates that none of the FDA-approved contraceptives covered by the Mandate are abortifacients.” They hold this view since the medical and scientific communities usually define pregnancy beginning at the time a fertilized egg implants in a woman’s uterus. This is the conflict which the Supreme Court must decide.

If the court rules in favor of Conestoga Wood and Hobby Lobby, and for-profit companies can decide to opt-out of providing no-cost birth control, it could have big financial consequences for women and families. For those women who can afford birth control, it would simply mean paying more out of pocket for this service. For those who can’t afford birth control on their own, however, it could mean an unwanted pregnancy and the huge cost of a raising a baby for the entire family. While the financial implications aren’t the main focus of the debate, they certainly will come into play for a large number of families if the for-profit companies win the case.

Arguments for both sides have already been made to the Supreme Court, and a decision on these cases is expected later this month.

(Photo courtesy of Nicholas Eckhart)