kombat
Well-Known Member
What's dumb about it?
Men: Getting snipped. Yay or nay?
- Thread starter kombat
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
What's dumb about it?
Gameface
Well-Known Member
That your coworkers will make fun of you like you only have one testicle.
I guess if I worked with people that had the maturity of little kids I'd gladly take that over making a baby. Then laugh at them when they knock some girl up and have to pay child support for the next 18 years.
Please be aware that he was only ridiculed behind his back, that he did only have one testicle after the doctor screwed up, and that what he did was done on demand of Mrs and irreversible (especially after he lost the marble). If you don't see what's dumb about that then God help you! He certainly came to lament his stupidity.
Thereby demonstrating your maturity.
There are, actually, ways of preventing Malthusian Catastrophe that do not involve the risk of irreversible emasculation.
And, BTW, a father's responsibilities, finanancial and otherwise, do not end 18 years after the birth of a child.
hunter_le five
Sheriff Underscore
Not following...
Millions of men successfully have a vasectomy free of complications of any sort, but this one guy is dumb because he chose to have one and the doctor fvcked up?
Does that sum it up? Or am I missing something here?
Millions of men successfully have a vasectomy free of complications of any sort, but this one guy is dumb because he chose to have one and the doctor fvcked up?
Does that sum it up? Or am I missing something here?
ncsuwerewolf
Well-Known Member
I had orders to produce a sample within the hour. Kinda tough when the doc is 25 minutes away and your watching the 2 toddlers that have to be ready to go prior to producing the sample. And for those who want to laugh. Let them know i aint bagging it ever again. Got 3 beautiful children and a wife who is happy. I will now continue to drink Homebrew.
I'd say so and he would agree. He accepted the risk, and I am sure that he was informed of it and signed off on it but later decided that he was pretty dumb to have accepted it. What did it buy him? And this was a guy who knew a lot about expectation. Hell, he didn't even get the transistor radio!
There are other reasons that I used to counsel the younger guys not to take this step but as I sense that even citing the very real risks here is politically incorrect I think I'd better slink back off to Brew Science.
I am basically for anything that stems population growth.
There are other reasons that I used to counsel the younger guys not to take this step but as I sense that even citing the very real risks here is politically incorrect I think I'd better slink back off to Brew Science.
I am basically for anything that stems population growth.
hunter_le five
Sheriff Underscore
Gameface
Well-Known Member
Vasectomies are more reliable and far safer than tubal ligation.
I've personally known about 6 guys who've had one and in that group recovery was pretty easy.
Vasectomy is a wonderful option. Not only for married men who can prevent their wife from having a far less reliable and far more invasive and risky surgery. But if you're a single guy who has sex with more than one woman and you don't want to be a daddy, ever, then this is easily the best possible option.
But here again we have the macho "ain't no one getting close to my manhood" attitude that serves no one.
pandamonium
Member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2016
- Messages
- 23
- Reaction score
- 14
AJ, exactly what risks are you talking about? The complication rate in "experiences" hands (i.e. Done by a doctor who does >50 per year) is like 1%. You keep referring to the stupidity of vasectomy in a very vague way but why don't you just come out and say what you have to say. With statistics. What do you mean when you say a man is emasculated by vasectomy? Do you think his testosterone level is being affected by vasectomy? Do you think his libido goes down? Do you really a mans "manliness" goes down when his semen doesn't have sperm in it? If so, just say it, so we know what you mean. It sounds like you have some very strong opinions about this, and I can respect that, but please think about providing some statistics before you come on here and try to discourage people from considering one of the most effective and safe forms of birth control that there is.
jimmerz
Well-Known Member
Listen, I had an Orchiectomy on my right testicle for testicular cancer, while I was under I asked the Dr to do a vasectomy. I'm pretty sure my testosterone and libido are as normal and healthy as they were prior to this procedure. My recovery was painless and quick. I'm 45 and could have as much sex as my wife would allow...
As I didn't say that I can't answer the question.
I think Larry's was - by 50% (unless there is some feedback system which would cause the remaining gonad to try to take up the load of the missing one.
When I first posted here I didn't realize that the title was misleading and that only acquiescense would be tolerated. I try to encourage people to think for themselves (with amazingly small success rate). In any medical procedure there is the risk of iatrogenic (and other) mishap. People making a decision as to whether to have a procedure of any kind done should be aware of what those risks are, what their costs are and what their probabilities are. If there is a 1% chance of risk (let's take your number) the expected cost of the procedure is 0.01 times the cost of the mishap. If the expected reward is greater than the expected cost you go ahead. What was the cost of the physical pain poor Larry went through (he walked with a list for a long time) plus the cost of his anxiety over the year and a half it took to resolve all this plus the cost of half his testosterone? I couldn't even put numbers on it.
If it happened to him it can happen to you. Persons contemplating doing this should estimate the cost to them of such an outcome and multiply by their estimates of the probability that this will happen to them. There are, of course, other unpleasant possible outcomes with their own costs and probabilities whose expected costs must be added in to obtain the total expected cost. Then that needs to be compared to the expected rewards. If the transistor radio is worth more than the expected costs then you go ahead.
The guys I worked with were engineers and knew how to compute and use expected values. I fully appreciate that of all the readers here there may be one who understands what I am talking about.
I may have made it clear that I think getting a vasectomy isn't very smart but I have not, intentionally, tried to discourage anyone from considering it. Considering it, up and down sides, is exactly what I want people to do. That satisfies my compulsion to try to make people think. In fact I hope that you will all go out and get one or more than one (in India it was soon discovered that you could get more than one transistor radio by showing up more than once and many did that thus balancing the expectational analysis to the benefit side). There are too many people in the world and I am for anything which ameliorates that. Malthusian Catastrophe is, despite my earlier comment upon us (if not perhaps in the way it was originally conceived).
hunter_le five
Sheriff Underscore
Anyone who chooses to get behind the wheel of a car is dumb. Don't they know the risks involved?
There's the first one willing to publicly announce that he doesn't understand expectation.
hunter_le five
Sheriff Underscore
I'm not entirely convinced you do, based on your absurd posts in this thread.
I've always appreciated and respected your posts in the brewing science section. But now you are truly baffling me.
hunter_le five
Sheriff Underscore
And I suspect it's less to do with the lack of acquiescence and more with the fact that you've been nothing short of a condescending prick since you entered the discussion:
Try looking up Expected Value in Wikipedia. That will explain the math involved but you may have trouble applying it to situations where the costs are not solely in $. Yet psychologists tell us that we make life decisions based on the same principles.
hunter_le five
Sheriff Underscore
And there it is again. Thank you for making my point.
If you walk around with a "kick me" sign on your back you have to expect that someone is going to take you up on it.
hunter_le five
Sheriff Underscore
More. More.
Enough!
hunter_le five
Sheriff Underscore
No. More. More.
I can only maintain this erection with a constant stream of abuse and humiliation. A side effect of my botched vasectomy, you understand.
I can only maintain this erection with a constant stream of abuse and humiliation. A side effect of my botched vasectomy, you understand.
My thoughts exactly. I read up on it. There are risks. I had higher than average pain levels and longer recovery time than most from the research I did. And I would 100% recommend it to someone in similar circumstances to me.
2
hunter_le five
Sheriff Underscore
Do you have anything to contribute besides anecdotal evidence and *****ey remarks?
For all your blather you've presented very little evidence in support of the argument you are trying to make. We can discuss this topic like reasonable people, or you can continue being insulting and vague. But the latter sure doesn't sound very productive, and will probably just end with the thread getting locked.
For all your blather you've presented very little evidence in support of the argument you are trying to make. We can discuss this topic like reasonable people, or you can continue being insulting and vague. But the latter sure doesn't sound very productive, and will probably just end with the thread getting locked.
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2008
- Messages
- 64,951
- Reaction score
- 16,516
I'm so confused. Then again, it's probably a result of dimished brain power following my flawless vasectomy...
The problem here is that people don't read the posts through before they start typing. This is clear from the nature of the responses. In the one case where the poster sincerely tried to get information the question was posed as "what do you mean when you say...." and then inserted something I never said.
If you will ask a rational question that reflects something I wrote I will try to give you an answer/explanation (without being condescending) but I really suspect this is flame bait.
Assuming that you are sincere I will summarize the argument I am trying to make.
I hope everyone here, and a whole lot of other people too, get vasectomies (or tubal ligations or pessaries or whatever) but that is not part of the argument. The argument is:
Expectational analysis is a very powerful tool for making decisions widely used in industry, government, academia etc. A simple example of this is that the expected value of an insurance company's received premiums has to exceed the expected value of its paid benefits if it is to stay in business. If you are contemplating a vasectomy, or any other medical procedure, or making any other major decision you should do the analysis.
Now were you a young employee of mine asking whether you should get a vasectomy I would tell you to do the expectation analysis and give you some guidance as to what to put in the cost column and let you decide what to put in the benefits column. I would tell you about L. Marble. I would also tell you that IMO the equation is likely to come up on the don't do it side.
OK. There it is. One more whack at the tar baby.
If you will ask a rational question that reflects something I wrote I will try to give you an answer/explanation (without being condescending) but I really suspect this is flame bait.
Assuming that you are sincere I will summarize the argument I am trying to make.
I hope everyone here, and a whole lot of other people too, get vasectomies (or tubal ligations or pessaries or whatever) but that is not part of the argument. The argument is:
Expectational analysis is a very powerful tool for making decisions widely used in industry, government, academia etc. A simple example of this is that the expected value of an insurance company's received premiums has to exceed the expected value of its paid benefits if it is to stay in business. If you are contemplating a vasectomy, or any other medical procedure, or making any other major decision you should do the analysis.
Now were you a young employee of mine asking whether you should get a vasectomy I would tell you to do the expectation analysis and give you some guidance as to what to put in the cost column and let you decide what to put in the benefits column. I would tell you about L. Marble. I would also tell you that IMO the equation is likely to come up on the don't do it side.
OK. There it is. One more whack at the tar baby.
hunter_le five
Sheriff Underscore
Yeah, I think most of us got that part already. But thanks for explaining it again in plainer terms so us simpletons can understand. You're still not presenting much in the way of evidence for why you think the analysis results in A over B, you're just continuing to be condescending. I'm well aware of what expectation is.
Continuing to blather on about what expectation is not an argument for why getting a vasectomy is "dumb".
That would be like my boss asking me why I think parking all of our cash reserves in municipal bonds is a bad idea, and I just replied "numbers".
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2008
- Messages
- 64,951
- Reaction score
- 16,516
If the experience of one person is what goes into the analysis, that's not a very good expectational analysis, IMO.
I heard of a guy who drank too much water and died as a result, therefore my expectional analysis says I should never drink water...
Apparently not.
Again it's clear you don't understand. I cannot offer evidence as to how your analysis will come up because I don't know what numbers you will put into it. I can tell you why it came up negative for me though. If there is no expected benefit (and I don't see any) but there are expected costs then the equation comes out negative then the net expected costs are negative and to go ahead is dumb. If, conversely, you see expected benefit that outweighs the costs (the transistor radio in the Indian government programs for example was sufficient) then it is not dumb and you go ahead.
Were that the case we would be arguing about the magnitudes of the costs and benefits and their probabilities and there would indeed be a basis for intelligent discussion but you can't seem to grasp the fundamental concept. I am sorry if that is insulting but you probably never had training in decision theory and can't really be expected to. You could always look it up but when I suggested that last night you took it as an insult.
No it isn't but then if you had read the post you would know that this isn't what I am arguing.
Were I your boss my reply would be "Let's see those numbers". What you are missing is that it isn't the algorithm that gives the answer: it's the numbers put into it.
If you can grasp this I will continue but it doesn't look hopeful at this point and I will go back to Brewing Science where the impedance match is better.
hunter_le five
Sheriff Underscore
Get off your damned high-horse already and say something of substance.
You make very generalized comments on how getting a vasectomy is dumb, and then continue to hide behind assumptions that we're not on your level to avoid discussing details. You're a real piece of work.
I guess it's real easy to avoid losing arguments when you refuse to make them.
Expected benefit could be debated until the cows come home, and obviously that's going to very from person to person. If the sole reason you think vasectomies are dumb is because you personally don't perceive a benefit to yourself, then that's not much of an argument.
We all agree that there are risks and there are costs. The what and the how much and the probabilities are what interest me, but you refuse to even address these other than to assert that they exist and that they are unacceptably high, along with a thoroughly uncompelling anecdote about your sample size of one.
OOPS ...... looks like someone had one or two beers too many while posting in this depressing thread!
hunter_le five
Sheriff Underscore
No it isn't but that works both ways. You can't say the fact of Larry's bad experience, by itself, means that you shouldn't get one any more than the fact that you had one without problems means you should. But those are both data points that should be combined with an ensemble of others to help you estimate the probabilities that you put into your equation. As for the costs, only you can really put numbers to those.
That would be a very flawed analysis. First, this information tells you what can happen if you drink too much water which isn't really relevant to your decision to have a drink when you are thirsty unless you are in one of those stupid radio station contests which have killed people. Of more relevance here is the probability that you will suffer the bad consequences of drinking too much water (arrythmia from electrolyte depletion say) even though you drank a normal amount. This is a finite probability, should be multiplied by the cost of such an outcome and put into the costs column. But other things go into the cost column too. The consequences of not drinking water, their probabilities and the product of the probabilities with the costs. Then in the benefits column you would put the benefits of proper hydration multiplied by the probabilities of realizing them. Such an analysis would clearly lead to the conclusion that it would be dumb to forswear water even though there is risk associated with it. If you repeated this for too much water you would conclude that it is dumb to enter one of those contests.
Is this understandable?
I have patiently explained things at a level school children should be able to understand and I'm not going to continue repeating to a brick wall.
Well you clearly aren't.
Thanks
I don't think I've lost any arguments here because no one has refuted the argument I have made. Several people, especially you, are trying to refute the argument you think I am making because you aren't reading what I am posting.
Duh!
But then that's not the argument I'm making.
Had you read my previous post you would have seen that I said that those are exactly the things that we should be discussing. I note with interest that you did not mention them until after I did.
Never said that. I said the expectation equation with my personal assessment of the risks , rewards and probabilities came out negative = dumb.
It was pretty compelling to him and his colleagues. I think it is fair to say that p and $ were both higher in the minds of the guys that he worked with than perhaps the in those of the general population.
There comes a time when one has to realize that if he argues with a fool there are two fools arguing and I think that time has come and in reality passed.
If anyone has reasonable questions or comments I will address those.
If it were possible to travel back in time, I'd be a urologist, and also a genealogist. And I'd take this thread with me.
You may be able to say "Tar Baby" in Quebec, but since it's been politically incorrect here in the U.S. since the 1960's and the rise of the politically correct movement, it would behoove you not to use it too much! Just to let you know ;>) or you might get trashed just for using that phrase!
