On May 5, 2002, Kirsten wrote,

"Elaine and I are both concerned about men using heat methods at home
for two reasons:

1) You may become permanently sterile.
Applying heat to your testicles is not totally benign. If the heat is
not within a very specific range (+ or - 1 degree Fahrenheit), you
may kill the cells that make sperm, instead of just temporarily
disabling them. This is of much more concern with hot baths than with
suspensories.

2.) (method is not perfect)..."

The preceding message is vague and without source citation support.
How PROBABLE is permanent sterility? Does the permanent sterility
hypothesis derive from reliable research or from rumor? Is correctly
used wet heat significantly less reliable than various female
contraceptives, none of which is perfect? These questions are
unanswered.

I would like especially to resolve the permanent sterility
hypothesis. For example, if permanent sterility is likely, then
perhaps wet heat could be a safer (non-occlusive), more convenient
(non-surgical) alternative to vasectomy. If permanent sterility is
unlikely, or even impossible, then wet heat may be suitable for fail
safe contraception, in case the woman's method fails, or if she
forgets.

To learn more, I acquired the paper of Dr. Marthe Voegeli, a
researcher referenced at malecontraceptives.org. Her paper is

Contraception through temporary male sterilization; Voegeli, Marthe;
1956; (Unpublished paper, available for US$4.00 from Curator, Sophia
Smith Collection, Smith College, Northampton, MA 01063).

Voegeli studied and refined wet heat contraception in the lab with 9
volunteers, at various temperatures up to 125F, for 10 years. She
taught the method to many field volunteers for an additional 20
years, again at temperatures up to 125F. No permanent sterility ever
occurred. On the basis of her research, Dr. Voegeli said that her
method was reliable, although like any contraceptive, not perfect,
and she also specifically addressed the permanent sterility
hypothesis and emphatically declared it impossible.

To resolve the conflict between Kirsten's message and Voegeli's
paper, would Joe and Kirsten please cite the source of their
permanent sterility hypothesis?

Thank you,

Jim