Study: Ultrasound halts sperm

Discuss

18 Responses to “Study: Ultrasound halts sperm”

  1. BookGuy says:

    Well, MythBusters already did the “brown note,” so they better get on this one.  A friendly tip to Kari:  When you hear the words, “Well, we’ve tried this in small scale, so it’s time to try the ultrasound-treated sperm in a real human uterus…” it’s probably time to quit and get your own show.

  2. Mike MacKenzie says:

    Stick your finger briefly into the  active part of a running ultrasonic humidifier to find out why this is a bad idea.

  3. putty says:

    Is that an ultrasound in your pants or are you just happy to see me?

  4. kjh says:

    So ultrasound is safe for unborn babies?

    • None of them have ever complained, so it must be.

      And it’s not like they share any traits at all with sperm, so no worries there, right?

    • PicardFacepalm says:

      I’m studying to be an ultrasound tech so here is some information from what I understand. I just passed my physics board so I should be able to answer this well heh. There are different kinds of ultrasound, one being therapeutic (used for physical therapy) and diagnostic imaging (the kind for organs and babies.) The therapeutic ultrasound operates at different frequency levels than the diagnostic ultrasound. Diagnostic ultrasound goes by the “ALARA” principle or, “as low as reasonably achievable” meaning using the smallest amount of power that turns sound energy into thermal energy. 

      The truth is that diagnostic ultrasound does “heat up” the tissue, but it’s in such tiny tiny minute amounts that it’s impossible to measure. The therapeutic ultrasound as I mentioned operates at different frequencies and the physical therapists need to hold the transducer fixed in place for a certain amount of time for it to be considered therapeutic. Whereas with diagnostic imaging ultrasound, we move the transducer around gathering images, we don’t pause long enough to have any adverse effects on internal tissue. Hope this explains some a bit. If there’s someone who knows more about this than me please chime in. I’m just studying to be a tech, not an ultrasound physicist:) 

  5. Michael Schott says:

    “The team needs to ensure that the ultrasound produces a reversible effect, contraception not sterilization…”
    thats the trick, I guess.  

  6. dculberson says:

    Rob, just know that your endless hours spent hunting for the most ludicrous stock photo from shutterstock are not wasted.  This is the pinnacle of absurdity to date.

  7. ercpman says:

    Reminds me how in WW2, some Navy guys would have their buddy point the radar at their testicles prior to shoreleave; someone figured out that it rendered them temporarily infertile.

  8. Jeffety says:

    Millions of guys poking around without any fear of knocking someone up? If it goes to market, I’m investing in AIDs and STD drugs.

  9. oldtaku says:

    It’s okay baby, I just got zapped yesterday. I swear. Would I lie to you?
     

  10. Don says:

    Cellular biologists routinely use ultrasound to break cells apart, to get at the goo inside.  Using it on living cells (that belong to me) sounds like a Bad Idea.

  11. Antinous / Moderator says:

    Can you hear me now?

  12. AirPillo says:

    In the meantime, I understand that blasting Nickelback is also an effective contraceptive.

    Sadly I think that may just lead to more conceptions among people who like Nickelback. And we really do not want that.

  13. cjporkchop says:

    Even if it did cause to sterilization, it wouldn’t necessarily be a bad thing. It might turn out to be a cheaper, less-invasive, less-squick-inducing alternative to a vasectomy.

  14. JhmL says:

    This is proven, playing Celine Dion totally turns me off.

Leave a Reply