AIBU to think the Adam male contraceptive implant could be beneficial if they can develop it without bad side effects?

[Carla786]

In a hypothetical situation where Adam works well & without any bad side effects (which is by no means guaranteed right now), I think it could be really positive.
I definitely don't think women having ONS or other kinds of casual sex should rely on a man saying 'I've got Adam, don't worry about condoms ', (which obviously should be worn for STD protection anyway) but I do think it could work well for women in relationships.
Obviously the side effects of the pill that we've heard about increasingly recently don't affect everyone, but ideally I think it's best for to be able to regulate without pills which disrupt hormones-IUDs are a good solution but can also have side effects. Condoms too but risk of breaking and of course affects sensation. A recent trend promoted cycle tracking, and that CAN work well - only provided it's done perfectly.

Obviously Adam might not be fully effective (likely not) and would probably be used by lots of couples along with something else.

Previous male contraceptive trials I've heard about were for pills, I think an implant is much better given it only takes one mistake for the man to potentially get his partner pregnant, and clearly he wouldn't bear the physical consequences.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2025/apr/24/non-hormonal-male-contraceptive-implant-lasts-two-years-trials

So, YANBU- Adam could be good news if it develops effectively

YABU- if it works, it won't be very helpful or even have bad effects

I’ve always been in favour, I think it would be great for men to burden the cost of side effects for once. Having said that, I have just thought about how certain men could abuse it and it’s ultimately the woman’s body at risk… Controlling men for example could intentionally miss doses.

Why would it not be beneficial? Who is against it? I haven't heard anyone saying that it's not a good thing at all?

I agree with this. I think it would be great in situations with 100% trustworthy partners you know are getting their dose. But in others it could backfire.
I do think a lot of men would probably want to take it though.

I still doubt any male contraceptive will ever be approved with the current testing system.

Medicine is setup to balance risks against benefits. There are no physical risks to men from pregnancy (which is what these contraceptives are trying to avoid), so therefore no benefit from a contraceptive. Therefore any side effects have to be essentially null, in my understanding.

Or this is what has been said previously as to why male contraceptives never come through.

They can’t manage to develop women’s contraceptives without bad side effects 😂 I think they should fix that first!

So side effects have to be null to make development worthwhile in the eyes of the medical approvers? Really? That seems too strict. A lot of men would see non-physical benefits in an implant. After all, women generally take the pill to postpone pregnancy rather than avoid it entirely

I think if they could make any contraceptive with no side effects it would be beneficial, and it would be good for there to be at least the potential option for more men to take the burden of contraception.

However, on the other hand:

• I think for more casual arrangements condoms should always be used due to STIs, let alone having faith the man isn't lying to you since you'llbe the one with the pregnancy.
• it would be pretty damn annoying if they put the money into making a "side effect free" contraceptive because it's for men, when that effort has not applied to women for so many decades.
• Men can already take responsibility for contraception (condoms) and yet many don't. Do we think those men who won't even use condoms will use the implant? Probably not in my view. So probably gives more choices to a (small?) group of men who are already taking accountability, probably not making more men in total take accountability.

Isn't it an implant?

You'll never be able to alter someone's hormones without side effects.

I mean sure, I can't see why it would be a bad thing...although there is always risk of men saying they have it in a relatively new relationship (but not casual ONS) where a woman may feel pressure to have 'unprotected' sex thinking she was safe....I mean stupid and naive but possibly understandable. A lot of men don't like condoms and no man gets pregnant (ie suffers the consequences of contraceptive failure) so its not hard to see how this could be abused. Women have fewer reasons to behave similarly..the 'baby trapping' stories are both vanishingly rare and not quite the same. Men can and do walk away. Women v v rarely would, or would have to have an abortion which is not nothing.

I agree partly with this but at least men wouldn't have the excuse/reason not to use : 'condoms don't feel so good' etc.

Yes.

So how will anyone miss doses?

Yes, I think this is the case. (Maybe not literally zero side effects, but certainly nothing serious).

It does make sense, given they work on an individual basis for the cost/benefit. For example, we know the pill increases a woman’s risk of blood clots, but pregnancy increases the risk of blood clots even more. But if a male contraceptive caused an increased risk of blood clots, it wouldn’t be protecting them against something that would cause an even higher risk, it would just be increasing their risk.

I think if men had a contraceptive that wasn't a condom and didn't involve surgery mankind would die out.

I think a vast number of women who thought there were TTC, actually wouldn't be, IYSWIM.

The accidental pregnancy path to marriage would be gone and in my circle of friends that would be about half.

Yes, that wouldn't happen with an implant.

I note this comment though : ' Oatley said that while the Adam implant could be a strong contraceptive option for men, uptake may be limited. “Given a choice of a pill, patch, injectable or surgery, I believe that most men would choose pill or patch over surgery,” he '

That's an issue. Still, it's not like there is an effective pill for men right now, or patch or injectable. The fact Adam is non-hormonal might be a draw even if there were others, ad this makes side effects a bit less likely, I think?

Are you a man?

Do you think most men, given the choice, don't want to marry or have kids?

The female contraceptive pill wouldnt have met the threshold for ethics if it was being tested today. That was widely reported when they came up with that "glue" thing for males. A temporary contraceptive that would block the tubes for months at a time. I thought they were going to release that.

Would Adam cause this though?

Adam is non-hormonal : the best equivalent would be the copper IUD, not the pill.

That's very telling re the female pill, sadly.

That doesn't make sense. This would give e them every reason to use that excuse to not wear a condom....'its fine babe, I've got the implant.'

I think it is more that they have tightened up ethics since. I believe there are other medications that are the same. We still use them today but we would have never have been able to test them sufficiently to release if we invented them today.

If anything it makes it easier for them..sadly there a lot of women who will feel they can't refuse.

Good point! I mean, the individual man might be more motivated to use as there would be no effect on sensation. But yes, they could definitely use that as an excuse..

The reality is that there is only one way to solve the issue of men lying about having it and it is not a tasteful one.

You would have to make men legally (read:financially) responsible for any pregnancy which they did not take reasonable steps to prevent (maybe exclude condoms and only focus on this implant and vasectomy). This would also mean that he could opt out of legal responsibility where he DID have take those steps but pregnancy still occurred.

That is the only thing that would overwhelm the incentive to lie.