Men: Getting snipped. Yay or nay?

[CGVT]

EIEIO=Man who owned a farm

 

[mxstar21]

= 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!

No I don't know.

 

[Bambooshoot]

Here's some numbers for your "expectational analysis" (who talks like that? Seriously?). Less than 1% risk of major complication.....

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]

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.

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.

 

[Jonakr]

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.

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]

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.

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.

 

[blizz81]

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.

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!

 

[ajdelange]

Here's some numbers for your "expectational analysis"

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.

(who talks like that? Seriously?).

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.

AJ is hiding behind a wall of words.

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.

and would be laughed out of any real medical conversation.

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.

I respect your opinions immensely regarding water chemistry, but please stick to what you know.

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)?

 

[ajdelange]

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]

So let's see your numbers...

 

[ajdelange]

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.

YES, YES, that's it exactly.

This is to be expected, but, if you have more pros, you're somehow wrong.

Awsh*t! The guy never said that!

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.

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).

 

[ajdelange]

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.

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.

 

[mxstar21]

Okay. You are right. Totally not worth doing the outpatient procedure that rarely has a negative outcome.

 

[blizz81]

On The A Priori Vasectomy, Or: Was Life On Earth Even Worth It? A Treatise In 14 Parts By Immanuel Kant

 

[kombat]

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?

 

[gunnuts]

I've been poking fun for 17 years.... best investment ever.

 

[ajdelange]

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.

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.

Condoms?

As Rocky said "Condominiums? Nah, I don't use them things".

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.

That's what rusty coat hangers are for.

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!

There are actually some pluses in having children and some costs in not.

 

[ajdelange]

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?

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?

 

[blizz81]

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 to. At ages 71 and 68 nature has taken care of that for us.

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]

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?

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).

 

[ajdelange]

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.

That, in a nutshell (pardon my choice of words) is it. I knew a couple of guys would eventually get it. Where were you earlier?

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).

Speaking of your house, how do you think the insurance company sets your premium?

 

[ajdelange]

Okay. You are right.

Yes, I am when I say that the fundamental concept being discussed here is terra incognita to you. Try some of the other guys's posts and see if that will drive it home.

 

[kombat]

Also did you put idiot in quotes as a recognition of the fact that I never called him an idiot?

Sorry, you called him "dumb." Totally different. My apologies.



Also, I think many of us were operating under the assumption that you were much younger than you apparently are. Given that we now know you're elderly, and the person you referred to was a former co-worker, it seems that your colleague had the procedure done much longer ago than we were assuming. In such case, surely you'll concede that the state of the art has advanced considerably in the intervening decades, and the risks of such negative outcomes has diminished substantially, altering your expected value calculations?

 

[kombat]

There are actually some [...] costs in not [having children].

Such as ... ?

 

[Gameface]

@ajdelange

You're supposedly teaching us a lesson in regard to expected value. My understanding of expected value comes from my casual poker playing. Typically when a person who understands expected value starts talking about it they provide the numbers.

You can't accurately determine expected value without doing a little math.

So, umm, let's see your numbers. If you can't provide them then I think we should all point and laugh at the guy lecturing us on something he himself doesn't understand.

 

[bob1852]

@ajdelange

You're supposedly teaching us a lesson in regard to expected value. My understanding of expected value comes from my casual poker playing. Typically when a person who understands expected value starts talking about it they provide the numbers.

You can't accurately determine expected value without doing a little math.

So, umm, let's see your numbers. If you can't provide them then I think we should all point and laugh at the guy lecturing us on something he himself doesn't understand.

There's a big difference between expected value and pot odds...

Here's an example of expected value related to lottery:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/did-math-415-million-powerball-175731046.html

But, the pot odds are looked at as getting a 830,000,000:1 return on your investment. A poker player would take those odds every day and twice on Sunday. A Mathematician would not.

 

[Gameface]

There's a big difference between expected value and pot odds...

Here's an example of expected value related to lottery:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/did-math-415-million-powerball-175731046.html

But, the pot odds are looked at as getting a 830,000,000:1 return on your investment. A poker player would take those odds every day and twice on Sunday. A Mathematician would not.

I know that there is a difference between pot odds and expected value. Expected value can be used in poker and involves more than pot odds. Expected value incorporates assumptions as to what range of cards the player might be holding, the frequency at which they bluff, the possibility of cards to come, the expectation of future bets, etc. Pot odds are but a very small part of getting at an expected value in a poker hand.

But either way, let's see the numbers.

And p.s. I do not calculate +ev or -ev when I play poker. I have a hard enough time figuring out if I have a straight,

 

[Gameface]

Many top poker players have a degree in game theory. They aren't limiting themselves to figuring pot odds.

 

[bob1852]

Many top poker players have a degree in game theory. They aren't limiting themselves to figuring pot odds.

Oh, I completely agree...

Many are excellent Mathematicians.....not to mention skilled in many other ways.

You had just mentioned "casual" poker players. See, AJ, I read the posts.

 

[kombat]

Many top poker players have a degree in game theory.

I think they just call them "math degrees." AFAIK, there's no such thing as a "Bachelor's of Game Theory." It's just a B. Sc. in Math, possibly including one or more elective courses in game theory, in addition to all the other math prerequisites.