- Joined
- Jun 2, 2008
- Messages
- 64,951
- Reaction score
- 16,516
Men: Getting snipped. Yay or nay?
- Thread starter kombat
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
TX_Brewing
Well-Known Member
Unsubscribing. If anyone actually wants to ask me about my experience, then PM me. Good grief. Some people I guess.
kombat
Well-Known Member
Totally eliminating the risk of unwanted pregnancies isn't a "benefit?"
Also, I'm told sex without a raincoat is the bees knees.
Well if you understand the expectation process I've been discussing you will have picked up that while the probability of an outcome is something you should try to research the cost or benefit is something you assign based on how you think each of the outcomes will effect you. For me the marginal value of 8 nines (99.999999%) relative to 4 nines was nil. And using the logic that seems so popular in this thread I must have been absolutely right on this as I never had more issue than I wanted.
Of course in reality the benefit of these extra nines isn't really a benefit but rather a reduction in a cost: the cost of rearing a child which, as I noted in an earlier post persists over a lifetime but that's just a formalism. You can certainly call a reduction in cost a benefit if you like. The point being that if the addition of another 9 or 3 buys you enough benefit based on your own estimate of the benefit's value to outweigh the risks, as it clearly does for you, then you should go ahead.
Of course in reality the benefit of these extra nines isn't really a benefit but rather a reduction in a cost: the cost of rearing a child which, as I noted in an earlier post persists over a lifetime but that's just a formalism. You can certainly call a reduction in cost a benefit if you like. The point being that if the addition of another 9 or 3 buys you enough benefit based on your own estimate of the benefit's value to outweigh the risks, as it clearly does for you, then you should go ahead.
Yes and yes.
It really is. It's practically the only way I go.
I just have to take other precautions to prevent an 18.75 year parasite.
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2012
- Messages
- 2,418
- Reaction score
- 3,059
I think you're over analizing this.
pandamonium
Member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2016
- Messages
- 23
- Reaction score
- 14
Here's some numbers for your "expectational analysis" (who talks like that? Seriously?). Less than 1% risk of major complication. A 2-3 day average recovery time. And a 99.99% success rate in establishing sterility. Compare that to a 97% success rate for the next most effective form of male contraception. It's one of the most enormously successful and least risky operations a man can have, of any operation, period. AJ is hiding behind a wall of words and would be laughed out of any real medical conversation. I respect your opinions immensely regarding water chemistry, but please stick to what you know.
CGVT
Senior Member
I can't read through all of this, is there a Cliff's Notes version? How did the guy lose a testicle from a vasectomy? I had mine a couple of years ago and the worst part was the numbing shot. Nothing changed other than I can't knock up any more of your moms.
jspain3
Well-Known Member
Some guy says everyone here should make a Pro & Con list (like Ross did with Rachel) and decide if a vasectomy is a good choice for them. Some people will have more pros and others will have more cons. It's fine, because it's all based on each individual's own risk tolerances and perceived benefits. This is to be expected, but, if you have more pros, you're somehow wrong.
Also, instead of calling it a Pros & Cons list you have to call it Expected Value calculations and do some internet research about the methodology.
Pros definitely outweigh the cons. The worst part was the numbing shot. Still curious how one would lose a testicle during this procedure. If you have all the kids you want, do it. It really isn't that bad and is less painful than having the wife get her tubes tied.
stella_tigre
Queen of the Upper Mississippi
Also less expensive. I mentioned this thread to HWMO and after his surprise at the subject matter, he said to reply that it's great, in spite of the higher pitched voice and getting manboobs
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2012
- Messages
- 183
- Reaction score
- 210
Also less expensive. I mentioned this thread to HWMO and after his surprise at the subject matter, he said to reply that it's great, in spite of the higher pitched voice and getting manboobs
Not only did the pitch of my voice raise, I got manboobs, I can no longer read a map, and it forced my wife's ovaries to drop.
Seriously, though, I was snipped while coaching a martial art. I only took two vicodan during recovery, but it was a good 3 weeks before kicking above the belt didn't pull on my stitches. I had plenty of discomfort, I had some lingering pain and had to be careful about position for about 3-4 months.
However, my wife not needing the pill, and not needing condoms or other birth control has been well worth it.
Also less expensive. I mentioned this thread to HWMO and after his surprise at the subject matter, he said to reply that it's great, in spite of the higher pitched voice and getting manboobs
Not sure what HWMO means, I am not that great with all of the acronyms. He can say what he wants. A vasectomy does not change testosterone levels or cause man boobs. Funny he he is the ***** on the couch though!
jspain3
Well-Known Member
stella_tigre
Queen of the Upper Mississippi
= humor. Ar, ar, ar. He thought that such a subject thread on a brewing board was humorous, ya know?PS pretty sure that BOTC is not appropriate description for him.... but hey you gave us a great new acronym to use! Yay!
Last edited:
Thanks!!!
CGVT
Senior Member
EIEIO=Man who owned a farm
PS pretty sure that BOTC is not appropriate description for him.... but hey you gave us a great new acronym to use! Yay!
No I don't know.
Bambooshoot
Member
Does the "major complication" category ever include losing a nut? I think AJ may have mixed up vasectomy with castration. They're similar though so I can see the confusion. The expectational analysis for castration is usually pretty poor, not a lot in the "pro" column, other than (presumably) sterility. Still seems like a fairly extreme form of birth control.
kombat
Well-Known Member
A little late for you, but for anyone considering the procedure, I'd highly recommend seeking out a doctor who performs the "no needle, no scalpel" version of this procedure. I didn't have any stitches, just some glue that flaked off after a week. I had almost no discomfort whatsoever. No bruising, no swelling, no bleeding. A slight, dull ache for a week or so, but that was it. I never took a single pain pill.
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2012
- Messages
- 183
- Reaction score
- 210
Yeah, I'll keep that in mind for next time.
There's no way I'd have it undone to test the latest and greatest, though.
broadbill
Well-Known Member
They are actually not that similar, and I don't think castration is considered a form of birth control by modern medicine.
To my knowledge, castration would only be done in the cases of severe disease/trauma to a testicle, necessitating its removal.
I think he's given up this bout of sophistry - hasn't answered my question as to which method(s) he's currently employing to achieve 99.9999% effectiveness or whatever.
Of course, for those playing along at home, my next begged response would be to mention how much worse those methods are than having a vasectomy. Condoms? No thanks...my coefficients must be way different than his on that one. Any number of female preventative methods? Well, that's up to the female (SWMBO will always take something as she prefers that for general hormonal management), but I want more protection than just those / don't want to be dependent on the female.
Also appreciate the purely mathematical computation on bringing a child into this world in terms of money. Because that's why I never want to have kids!
The probabilities are, as I noted (I really wish you guys would read the posts) are the easy part (relatively). It is assigning the costs that is more difficult and you must do that.
Seriously? Scientists, engineers, statisticians, psychologists, researchers, military planners, economists, financial analysts, business men, insurance companies, marketers.... Perhaps a light comes on if I used terms like 'cost function', 'loss function' (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loss_function).
Clearly there is too much emotion among you all as sex is involved in the current context. Perhaps an example from another field. During world War II Blechley craked the Enigma machine which allowed the Brits to decode the German Navy's radio transmissions. They received a message that Lincolnshire (? don't remember the actual city) was to be attacked. Clearly they could have moved resources to protect Lincolnshire (if that was indeed the place) but Churchill decided not to. Explicitly or implicitly he did an expectational (or cost function, if you prefer) analysis and decided that the expected loss of that city and its citizenry was less than the expected gains from being able to read the Krauts' mail in the future.
You are hiding between a wall of stupidity so high that I can't believe that it is for real i.e. I think this is flame bait. Or perhaps people come here only after very heavy consumption of their home brew.
Haven't been so far. If your doctor cannot discuss treatment for any condition with you on this basis, he didn't go to medical school. Get another doctor. Now I grant you that when I ask for the probabilities of certain outcomes the answer is often "The sample size isn't big enough." or "That aspect of it hasn't been studied" but in many cases it has and your MD can steer you to research.
What I propound in discussing water chemistry is sound science. This is sound science too. Lots and lots of research is expended in studies (not always good studies). Your inability to comprehend it in no way diminishes its validity or worth.
Do you think I make this stuff up in order to look foolish? Have you checked out any of this in a textbook or on the internet? Don't you think it is a little risky to try to challenge something you clearly don't understand (simple though it be)?
I think you're over analizing this.
An intelligent comment! Thank you, thank you! I may not fully agree as I am an analytical type guy, but that is a reasonable comment.
Gameface
Well-Known Member
So let's see your numbers...
YES, YES, that's it exactly.
Awsh*t! The guy never said that!
The guy has never heard or Ross or Rachel. He called it an expected value calculation because that's what it is usually called when used in industry/science/medicine/finance etc and that's how he knows it but he also said that psychologists have been aware that this is basically how people make decisions. What the guy can't fathom is that no one on this thread is aware of any of this. Until you came along. He said way back when that he had trepidations about posting as there was probably only 1 guy on here who would understand it. He's hoping for 2 (or more).
Another failure to understand the basic premise. Whether they do or not a-prori depends on your assigned risk/reward assessment. A - posteriori it depends on whether you think it was worth it. Larry had a bad time of it when it happened for sure but he did survive, he was able to grow a beard and perhaps if we asked him today he would say it was all for the best.
I can't tell you many of the details (or perhaps mercifully he withheld them) but infection, multiple additional procedures to try to reduce the problem etc. were involved). Eventually it turned hard as a rock and the doc said it had to go.
Okay. You are right. Totally not worth doing the outpatient procedure that rarely has a negative outcome.
kombat
Well-Known Member
But the risk of that happening was exceptionally low. The fact that it DID happen to him doesn't change that - it simply means he was an unlucky outlier.
So how was he an "idiot" for having the procedure done?
So how was he an "idiot" for having the procedure done?
Ah, so that's what "What's the status quo / four nines in use currently?" means! You wan't to know how I achieve 4 nines. If you are patient you will get there too. At ages 71 and 68 nature has taken care of that for us.
As Rocky said "Condominiums? Nah, I don't use them things".
That's what rusty coat hangers are for.
There are actually some pluses in having children and some costs in not.
As you clearly have no concept as to how expectational reasoning works, even though that is how you make decisions whether you are aware of it or not I cannot explain it to you. But the explanation is in this thread. Several times. Also did you put idiot in quotes as a recognition of the fact that I never called him an idiot?
I would agree that you have analyzed the coefficients correctly in your algorithm that helped determine a vasectomy would not be a great decision in your case.
I realize you're trying to get people to think past a colloquial-level of risk assessment as people are normally exposed to / wont to perform. Hopefully you can understand with your tone re: Larry that while you purported this a purely subjective mathematical exercise, you came off as suggesting objectively that if people looked into the procedure of a vasectomy further with a more complete mathematical analysis, more people would determine it would be a bad choice. If you had come off more as pondering this openly vs. purporting it, well, we could be back to our normal comfort zone of talking about dicks and balls.
broadbill
Well-Known Member
The probability of the event is extremely low, but its value placed on it is extremely high (but in a negative way); thus the expected result will always come out to the negative because this one event skews the whole equation towards the negative.
What he is basically saying is that that one event is so horrendous that there isn't any positive events that could possibly balance out the negative and make it worth having a vasectomy. We all have obviously put different values on these adverse events, otherwise we would not have had the procedure either.
Whatever...if you did this sort of analysis in other parts of your life and put such extreme values on such small probability events you would never leave your house (but you probably would not be able to stay in it either).
