Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
Why not imagine it in a way that works?

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


                                         

population control

add contraceptives to public water source (a la flouride)
  (+4, -5)
(+4, -5)
  [vote for,
against]

Even with all the current options for contraception there are still way too many un-expected (&/or un-wanted) babies being born. This is because a separate action must be undertaken to prevent pregnancy; my idea is to change that default so that a specific action, other than sex of course, must be taken to become pregnant.

Develope a chemical contraceptive that can be added to municiple water supplies and will equally affect male and females of the species. A counter-agent will be made available, at no cost, to anyone wishing to become pregnant.

argent, Dec 24 2003

Reversible Sterilization http://www.halfbake...ble_20Sterilization
by Vernon. [calum, Oct 04 2004]

The Church of Euthanasia http://www.churchofeuthanasia.org/
[Letsbuildafort, Oct 04 2004, last modified Oct 21 2004]

Voluntary Human Extinction Movement http://www.vhemt.org/
[kropotkin, Oct 04 2004, last modified Oct 21 2004]

Moof2's link. http://www.hartford...rchives/24/042.html
no charge for this service [po, Oct 04 2004, last modified Oct 21 2004]

[link]






       that is really sad....you are suggesting that you take the consequences away from the action. I think if you have sex, then you put up with the risk that you will get pregnant. me and my husband got pregannt when we were not planning it and would not have planned it, yet it has come out to be the best thing we have done. although i do see the good side of this, i still have to fishbone it out of principle.
babyhawk, Dec 24 2003
  

       //me and my husband got pregannt //   

       How DID that go for your husband? Is he Alright? Was the baby a natural birth, or a C-section?
Letsbuildafort, Dec 24 2003
  

       you dork.....my husband did not get pregnant physically, he got pregnant in the sense that it took both of us, so he was apart of it with me. duh.....:)
babyhawk, Dec 24 2003
  

       So cesarean section, right?
Letsbuildafort, Dec 24 2003
  

       yup, all he needs is the feeding breasts for men, and i could sleep all night...:)
babyhawk, Dec 24 2003
  

       [babyhawk] search: breasts for men, top left.   

       instead of putting this "agent" in the general population water supply, followed with an anti-agent to reverse the affects, why not have the agent go in the presonal water supply of that who wants to use it. It could be used as an alternative birth control. But what would happen if you drink too much of this tainted water? hm..
v0rtexx, Dec 25 2003
  

       // Develope a chemical contraceptive that can be added to municiple water supplies and will equally affect male and females of the species. A counter-agent will be made available, at no cost, to anyone wishing to become pregnant. //   

       Does anyone read this and think "magic"? You're wanting a contraceptive that works on men and women? One with no side-effects? And a counter-agent for contraceptives - does such a thing even exist? And of course you want it available at no cost.
kropotkin, Dec 26 2003
  

       // Does anyone read this and think "magic"? //   

       Yup.
waugsqueke, Dec 26 2003
  

       Read the book "Ishmael," in which the subject of the limit of our human habitation of this world, and our natural assumption that we belong here because we are here, at the top of the food chain, and that we place ourselves and our own selfish needs far above the needs of the millions of animal and plant species which predate us by millenia, is addressed with rather a unique approach in this book, using a non-human representative of the animal kingdom to attempt to put us back in our rightful place. Starvation is one natural limit which is addressed, but there are others. As people begin to overpopulate an area (the study of community phsycology), they will eventually approach a critical mass wherein they become less able to accomodate one another, anger comes easier, homicide rates soar, survival of the fittest takes over. However, such problems can be offset when both food and water is made plentiful, and when people are generally satisfied with their lives due to an economy which supports an ability to do more with their life than work, eat and sleep. Look at the parts of the Middle East now: often, feelings of despair and hopelessness lead to deadly suicide attacks and homicide attacks. War is another natural form of population control, which unfortunately will never go away. Disagreements between nations over beliefs, religious and otherwise, land and other natural resources, like oil, will at times lead to war which in turn leads to population control. War is an ugly fact of life that will never go away entirely. We will never have population control in our water supply unless the majority of the population favors self-destruction, which it never will, because of our strong will to survive. Any organization that attempts to stop human reproduction on a massive scale will eventually be put out of business, one way or another. Even if many humans were to die off, our human population will find another way to rise again at some time in the future, unless the incectoids are given a chance to gain a foothold, develop superior intelligence and take over first ... I'm thinking now of that comic rendering in which a circle of cockroaches in the foreground are dancing and having a big party while nuclear mushroom clouds are rising in the background, which effectively deletes their competition for world dominance!
zythman, Dec 28 2003
  

       Overpopulation is definitely no myth. We are already living unsustainably. If we continue to consume at our present rate, and do not develop technologies that make our current consumption levels sustainable, then we will follow the path Jared Diamond describes in _Easter_Island's_End_ (http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/24/042.html): survival will eventually become so difficult that the population will fall well below even today's *sustainable* level (which is itself already several times below the current population), and life will be much less comfortable for future generations than it is for us.   

       Can we innovate fast enough to make our current consumption level sustainable? Maybe. Technological innovations have helped us in the past to stretch the limits, but, as with the stock market, past performance doesn't guarantee future success.   

       Can we reduce our current level of consumption? Maybe. Total consumption depends on population, and birth rates are dropping in many countries. If political and cultural thought can be aligned with reality, we still might be able to preserve something close to our current quality of life as we ease back to sustainable levels. But until the dangers of unsustainable resource consumption and overpopulation are widely understood and respected, no democracy will support mandatory sterilization, whatever the means.   

       As for a more intelligent species... why wait for nature? Evolution is slow. Bioengineering will be very quick. We just have to be sure that we don't blow ourselves up or exhaust our resources before the technology is developed.
moof2, Dec 28 2003
  

       I think this is a pretty creative idea. I don't think that pregnancy should be a necessary "risk" of having sex, despite what _babyhawk_ said. Although, overall, I'd rather see more information out there about sex, sexuality, and reproduction instead of technological and medical "fix its." There are much cheaper, easier ways of controlling contraception and it begins right inside us: by understanding our bodies and our fertility (read: ABSTINENCE EDUCATION DOESN'T WORK).   

       Another thing: yea, it is asking for magic, I think. If we had something this wonderful, it'd be in use.   

       Third thing: kudos to _argent_ for suggesting female AND male contraceptive control. All too often women are pegged as the ones who must "control" their fertility -- when most of us are only fertile a week or so during the month. Men, on the other hand, are constantly fertile and, as this culture tells us, "ready for action." It never ceases to amaze me how little research has been put into male birth control pills. Oh, yes, they exist.   

       Anyway. Now I sound like a total feminazi, so I'll stop now. Heh.
zaza the amazon, Oct 26 2004
  

       1. It's magic.
2. It's one step from placing control of individuals' fertility with the State. Would you like to be told with whom you can breed next?
Fish.
DocBrown, Oct 26 2004
  

       [marked-for-deletion]: magic.
yabba do yabba dabba, Oct 26 2004
  

       zythman I could not have said it better myself.
EvilPickels, Oct 27 2004
  

       So: a contraceptive that works on male and female humans, but not on other species, with no side effects? Plus, it should be cheap enough to be made freely available in drinking water as well as wasted in wash-water?   

       Sure sounds like magic to me.
Freefall, Oct 27 2004
  
      
[annotate]
  


 

back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle