Hi JP,

Firstly, Dr Voegeli herself admits that it was "impossible to record
reliable statistics" ("Data on the Thermic Method for...") and says
that "for solid statistical backing, I would like to see my method
subjected to test in a number of laboratories" ("On Overpopulation").

Secondly, while Dr Voegeli believes that her method to be safe, Drs.
Ronald Swerdloff and Fouad Kandeel, in "Role of temperature in
regulation of spermatogenesis and the use of heating as a method for
contraception" (Fertil Steril 49:1 Jan 1988), have this to say:

-----

Hazards of Testicular Heating

Raising the temperature in the testis to values above the minimal
effective exposure (42C to 43C/107F to 109F in most species) may carry
a risk of a permanent testicular injury....raising the intratesticular
temperature of rats to 45C/113F for less than 15 minutes was capable of
producing severe testicular damage within 4 hours of exposure...at
48C/118F a complete destruction of all cellular elements, coagulation
necrosis of the connective tissue, and marked acute inflammatory cell
response were noted within the thickened tunica albuginea and adjacent
peritesticular tissue. In addition, adhesions to the scrotal wall and
extension of the inflammatory process into the adjacent fibroadipose
and muscle tissue had also occured.

----

We, along with Dr Voegeli, and Drs Swerdloff and Kandeel, are advocates
of further research on these issues. It may well be that heat-based
contraception done properly is as safe and reliable as Dr Voegeli
believed. But until more research has been done we do not feel that it
is responsible of us to encourage anyone to experiment on their own
bodies.

- Joe



--- jp40177 <jp40177@...> wrote:
> 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.

Yes, it is significantly less reliable. There are female contraceptives
on the market with >99% efficacy demonstrated over many years of large
trials.

>
> 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
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> malecontraceptives-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com