oleg@ucla-cs.ARPA (Oleg Kiselev) (07/19/86)
>isn't it true that a man who had a vasectomy could still father a >child via artificial insemination? so that a vasectomy's effect >isn't irreversible with respect to function? Ability to use frosen sperm does not make it reversible! A QUESTION: Does the genetic information in sperm change over the time, with the newer sperm having different set of "encodings" than the older make? -- "The more you drive, the less mind you have!" Oleg Kiselev oleg%OACVAX.BITNET c234olg@LOCUS.UCLA.EDU
deb@gt-eedsp.UUCP (Deb Jackson) (07/24/86)
In article <17764@ucla-cs.ARPA> oleg@ucla-cs.UUCP (Oleg "Kill the bastards" Kiselev) writes: >A QUESTION: Does the genetic information in sperm change over the time, >with the newer sperm having different set of "encodings" than the older >make? > The age of the sperm doesn't have an impact on the "encodings". The genetic information is different in each sperm, be the age difference 10 minutes or 10 years. (At least that's what they thought when I studied bio.) -- Deborah J. Jackson Georgia Tech, School of Electrical Engineering, Atlanta, GA 30332 (404)894-3058 uucp: ...!{akgua,allegra,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo,ulysses}!gatech!gt-eedsp!deb
oleg@electra.cs.ucla.edu (Oleg "Kill the bastards" Kiselev) (07/25/86)
In article <153@gt-eedsp.UUCP> deb@gt-eedsp.UUCP (Deb Jackson) writes: >The age of the sperm doesn't have an impact on the "encodings". The genetic >information is different in each sperm, be the age difference 10 minutes or >10 years. (At least that's what they thought when I studied bio.) So then it is safe to assume that the BASIC encoding is the same (minus radiation exposure damage), frozen sperm is in no way inferior to the freshly produced one? (Just wondering if there are any OTHER reasons not to have visectomy (sp?). Not that I will -- I am too paranoid and I believe in disposable birth control methods) "... having someone special for dinner?" Oleg Kiselev _Cannibal Girls_ oleg%OACVAX.BITNET oleg@LOCUS.UCLA.EDU
rb@cci632.UUCP (Rex Ballard) (07/27/86)
In article <17764@ucla-cs.ARPA> oleg@ucla-cs.UUCP (Oleg "Kill the bastards" Kiselev) writes: >>isn't it true that a man who had a vasectomy could still father a >>child via artificial insemination? so that a vasectomy's effect >>isn't irreversible with respect to function? > >Ability to use frosen sperm does not make it reversible! > I just spent some time talking to our doctor about the various options. When discussing male options, I asked about reversable vasectomy or artificial insemination. It turns out that once the vasectomy is performed, the body starts developing immunities to the sperm which end up in the blood stream. This is the main reason birth control efforts are focused on women. Up to now, we've been using the combination condom/capsule, but are wanting a little more secure method. The cautions in the book that came with "the pill" samples was less than comforting. My wife doesn't smoke, but she's concerned about the cancer risks anyway. She also suffers from PMS, which, according to the booklet, means the pill is contra-indicated. Our doctor has a policy of not giving IUDs at all. Primarily because of the various lawsuits involved. This may sound sexist, but it seems like young men have a stronger desire for sex than young women. Appearantly, this changes with age. The point is, if young men are that "obsessed" with sex, it seems to make sense that more efforts should be focused on improving the options available to men. Is there ANY research into options available for men? I find it rather interesting that doctors are happy to experiment with womens bodies, and subject them to the various risks, but men's reproductive systems are "off limits". Is this perhaps because the doctors might be blamed for "loss of verility", even though this is a natural part of the aging process?