Talk:Chemical castration

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Sexology and sexuality Low‑importance

	Human sexuality portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Medicine Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This is a lie and they use this to hurt children

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Alan Turing#Conviction for indecency|Alan Turing]] The anchor (#Conviction for indecency) has been deleted by other users before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 4 September 2019 and 4 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Hunter1205.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 17:17, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Punishment

A punishment reserved for sex offenders where? --Oldak Quill 23:05, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Is the same procedure used for female sexual offenders? Or is it more appropriate to simply pat them on the head and say 'run along' and 'write a book about your experiences' ?

Its not currently used as a punishment in Canada, but often as a voluntary treatment for male sex offenders, specifically pedophiles. Sexymurse 04:59, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Depo-provera injections are given to females as a contraceptive, like an injectible form of the pill or the patch.

These drugs do not have the same effect on women. I don't know if there is a similarly reliable way to reduce female sex drive to this extent. Inhumandecency (talk) 17:25, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I edited the "California" section. It previously said that offenders must accept chemical castration, "or accept physical castration". That's a very bold statement, and not supported by its citation, so I removed it. nhinchey (talk) 23:23, 27 February 2009 (UTC) This is one of manifold instances of misandry in our disturbed society of troglodytes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:600:8800:7DD:C879:81CC:C79E:6FE2 (talk) 23:32, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Side effects

A recent publication in the Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law suggests that the side effects are more serious than this wikipedia article suggests. Increased risks of diabetes, obesity, depression and coronary disease mean that, according to the authors 'testosterone deprivation therapy should include careful monitoring of side affects and their prevention and treatment. How should we change the article? Brrrtje

Citation or link to abstract or text would help. Zodon (talk) 21:39, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An assertion of "no evidence of adverse side effects," from a study more than 30 years old? On its face, this is suspect. Most medications have side-effects in at least some patients. Here, we're expected to accept the 100% absence of negative side-effects in an entire population forced to ingest a hormonal contraceptive. Doesn't pass the laugh test. A mere glance at the Depo-Provera article is sufficient to restore sensible balance.drone5 (talk) 12:41, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Article name

I think "chemical castration" is very strange term for this procedure. If I were heavily sedated, I wouldn't be able to walk, but I've never heard anyone call sedatives "chemical leg amputation". I can't figure out if this is some weird medical jargon (like calling a miscarriage a "spontaneous abortion") or a propaganda word made up by someone who doesn't (or does?) like it (like "female circumcision"). On the other hand, I can't think of a good name that is more accurate; "intentional drug-induced male sexual impotence" is sort of cumbersome. Will look around for other terms and consider a redirect. Boris B 02:28, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Castration: The act or an instance of making one incapable of reproducing sexually. JayW 17:03, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. I wasn't aware of that def. Boris B 10:39, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure it shouldn't redirect to 'chemically induced impotence' or similar? 'Chemical castration' would be more like using sulphuric acid to remove the reproductive organs, or a string soaked in zippo fluid as the rubber band. Although I suppose that would be 'pyrocastration.' At the same time, I can't say I've been snuck up on and jabbed with this stuff (dang near a dozen times now), but mostly it just makes you really sick, as in you abandon your family. Far as I can tell, it doesn't make you unable at all, just unwilling. Keep (jabee) away from the kids, I get that but I think the real value of this stuff [depo-provera and especially the ghetto depo-proveras] (to the people that use it on other people a lot) is that it makes it so they can go to the wife and say 'why is this guy spending all his time with hookers' and split up the family and get access to the newly-on-the-market wife that way, as well as the guys kids. As an aside here, see ku, specifically the references to 'poisoning with the purpose to acquire great wealth.'

Also, how many 'your father went out for cigarettes and never came back he must not love you' -type incidents do you suppose have been caused by this stuff, without trying to bring SHARPS or SAPRO into it.

Also I notice goading people into a reaction so they can hit them with a bicycle crank and say they were defending themselves seems to be another popular, effective use of the sneakjab. Incidentally, cycada is worse, because that'll _really_ screw up your memory too and makes it just about impossible to function in school, professionally, socially, etc. It's especially effective in getting convictions in criminal cases too, especially if the targetee is innocent. Also for active ingredient we should likely be looking at the NECC/Ameridose poisoning incident and not on the labeling. A little exserohilum or powdery mildew goes a long way when youre injecting 'biopharmaceuticals,' I'm sure.

However, the 'chemical sterilisation' disambiguation link to the very article this is the talk page for, as you can readily verify for yourself, says "For the administration of medication designed to reduce libido and sexual activity, see chemical castration," so they are admitting it doesn't make incapable, just reduce. Hence it should be '[chemically] induced impotence' and not '[...] castration,' or the sterilisation page should be changed to 'incapable.' For consistency.

Also, should we mention the antidote, using herbalife herbal supplements as a body wash or kiestering a square inch of bacon? just kidding. Although I still wonder where 'buccaneers' really comes from. And dont forget the kelvar shorts! Especially if you're going to the bike shop - 55378008a (talk) 06:02, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Prolactin

Have there been any attempts to use prolactin in addition or instead of the other treatments? Obviously there is the risk of causing lactation so I assume the dose would have to be low and might not be effective but it sounds like something which could help Nil Einne 16:06, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Result was merge Compulsory castration in California into Chemical castration

Recomment merge of Compulsory castration in California into this article. I don't see the need for a separate article Bwithh 05:44, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd have to disagree. Compulsory castration in California is about the law in California while this is about the procedure to sterilize men. Granted it needs plenty of expansion so that it doesn't look like a pointless fork. ★MESSED ROCKER★ 05:12, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See Chemical_castration#Chemical_Castration_in_the_United_States. Are you going to create separate subarticles for each of the six states? Bwithh 05:21, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to merge the two articles. ★MESSED ROCKER★ 05:30, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with merging - but I can see re-arranging the material in the two articles under Chemical Castration (biology) and Chemical Castration (political policy) - the first article describing the chemicals and the effects; the second article the political applications and objections

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.158.234.190 (talk • contribs)

Merging seems like good idea. Centralize coverage rather than several small articles. Zodon (talk) 00:22, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When I posted the above comment I reintroduced the merge templates on both articles. There being no further discussion I merged the articles. Zodon (talk) 21:56, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Drug Dosage

I felt that the statement “Most men will receive 400mg to 500mg per week, equal to 2.5 ml in each buttock. In some cases, men given oral doses as high as 700 mg/day have still reported regular sexual arousal and fantasies” was unclear. Which drug is being refereed to here, Depot Provera, tamoxifen, the Herb chrysin, or something else? Although the statement tends to lean to Depot Provera, I don’t believe it is explicit enough. Since every drug has different dosage requirements, it is important to be clear on this subject. Since I am not a doctor I do not have the medical knowledge make this change. 69.247.112.220 06:08, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect Citation

"Chemical castration also occurs as a natural consequence of hormone treatment for male-to-female transsexualism. However, unlike the treatment used on sex offenders, the hormones commonly used lead to permanent infertility.^[1]"

Except this reference has nothing to do with infertility caused by MTF HRT. Perhaps this should go somewhere else? Nebarnix 20:53, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ A New Tool in the Treatment of Sexual Addiction by Dr. J L Schaller

Turing

Is Alan Turing's sexuality under question, or are they questioning whether or not he was chemically castrated? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.143.135.191 (talk) 14:05, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

recividism rates

I contest the point purported in this article, that says recidivism rates among sexual offenders is very high. One, "very high" is relative and doesn't relay much. What constitutes very high? Secondly, in the sexual offender article I believe it says recividism rates are less than 5%, and in some cases less than 1%. Can someone verify? 125.161.213.109 (talk) 07:38, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I looked at the link cited by that particular statement ( recidivism rates being "very high" ) and the site it links to says that recidivism rates are approx. 5.3% after 3 years. I don't think any normal human being considers this "very high". I most definitely think this should be removed or rewritten, as the statement and the information in the link contradict one another. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.16.26.238 (talk) 16:02, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Recidivism rates are very low compared to other crimes: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/crimoff.htm#recidivism —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.199.91.229 (talk) 19:23, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thisglad argument for reverting 173.16.26.238 removal of the recidivism rate comment was "it was sourced". But the source doesn't state that the recidivism rates of sex offenders are "very high". It merely gives a number as a result from a study, higher than other recidivism rates (like murder), much lower than others (like other crimes) in the same study. Recidivism rates are a debated topic. I proposed a wording that may be more neutral : "are considered high". At the very least, I don't think it is reasonable to keep the "are very high" wording. 69.204.249.129 (talk) 18:42, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure that works well either. How about using just the word "high"? — Jake Wartenberg 02:14, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Registered Sex Offenders have the lowest rates next to murder. This article has either biased or ignorant information which needs to be filled with actual numbers rather then emotional vagueness. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.101.124.18 (talk) 14:26, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the mention of the recidivism rate until its inclusion can be justified. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.6.48.199 (talk) 22:57, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is a good edit. I don't believe it is necessary for the article to make claims about recidivism at all; it is enough just to say that chemical castration is meant to prevent re-offending. The issue of sex offender recidivism has already been dealt with in this article, anyhow... best to leave it there and not reduplicate it. Could we perhaps link to that article as a "see also" and avoid dealing with the issue here? Joren (talk) 02:49, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

merge Medroxyprogesterone acetate treatment

Seems like Chemical castration and Medroxyprogesterone acetate treatment are both covering the same topic (from different angles - law enforcement vs. medical). Since both articles relatively undeveloped, suggest they be merged. Don't know which would be the more appropriate title for combined article. Zodon (talk) 09:06, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Am not sure how to reply so I've clicked on edit. I don't think this should be merged into the other page, as the other page is about a specific trial using a specific chemical and this page is about chemical castration in general. 94.196.52.119 (talk) 22:34, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense. So merging from MPA treatment to here seems to be the way to go. Zodon (talk) 09:12, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect citation?

There is a link to a news page about SSRIs being used for chemical castration of paedophiles due to their known side effects. Although there is no doubt that this is a side effect of SSRIs (I have permanant PSSD (total loss of libido)from taking paxil years ago) I cannot find any evidence that it's been used specifically for this purpose. I wish it were the case as, if a accurate source could be cited, more people would accept PSSD as a result of the medication, rather than say it's psychological.

The article that was used as a citation does not make it clear if SSRIs were used to chemically castrate paedophiles or if it was just part of the overall treatment program (which included therapy) to prevent them reoffending. 94.196.52.119 (talk) 22:44, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think the article was fairly clear that the SSRIs were being used as part of a treatment program, not as another method of chemical castration. The quote is "Treatment which focuses on reducing libido is unlikely to be offered in isolation. Alongside counselling, many sex offenders are prescribed anti-depressants." So counselling and antidepressants are both referred to as adjuncts to treatment for reducing libido. I've removed the comment in the article. In any case, serotoninergic antidepressants reduce sex drive enough for it to be a serious side effect, but not nearly reliably or severely enough to use them primarily for that purpose. Inhumandecency (talk) 17:31, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The efficency of compulsary chemical castration

How efficient is compulsive chemical castration? Some people involved in such treatment in Sweden have claimed that chemical castration only works on a voluntary basis since sex drive is easily restored with anabolic steroids. If so the treatment may only work for sex offenders which has committed their crimes in desperate need for sex but not offenders motivated by other psychological factors. For example it may not work at all for male rapeists motivated by a need to disprove their own feeling of being subordinate to women. If I understand it correctly, antiandrogens have only marginal effect on women. So antiandrogen treatment should have little effect on female sex offenders. Anyone who can verify this?

2009-08-18 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.

Did I respond to this and get oversighted/revdeleted or is it my imagination? (with text incorporated into retroricks post, below). I seem to feel my points were something as follows (the original did not contain any nonpublic, nonprivate info not availabel eslewhere form a public source, incidentally if this indeed was the rationale. However, even if it was why would my oversight/revdeleted comment end up recycled in retroricks post?

1) its more efficient for the jabber than the jabbee

2) its not efficient, but its effective. This is a recycled quote from a news article some 8 years old; I have been looking for the source article myself if you can find it Id appreciate it. Feel free to post on my talk page if you need more context.

3) It doesnt get used for the stated purpose. Near as I can tell, its used mostly for ku, specifically acquiring assets by poisoning. See (1), above

4) Given most poisons that cause impotence are going to be anticoagulants, specifically anticoagulant venoms but also say clover litch (silage - 'warfarin') these kinds of things (coumarin, heparain, coumadin, so on theres another big one Im forgetting) in nastiest cases, lonomia (ebola like symptoms) its bound to be a bad idea to try to counteract an anticoagulant with a steroid. Even mdpv or whatever the name of the progesterone is, even if thats actually whats used to cause the impotence/sickness around, say, women Ive never heard of estrogen being safely combated, for lack of a better word, with another steroid or something like, say, testosterone, or even, god forbid, farnesol. Again, trying to counteract an anticoagulant with a steroid in my view is probably too much like mixing uppers and downers, which as far as I know is what causes most lethal drug interactions, such as, say benzocaine and propofol, for example. To reverse an anticoagulant, you probably want vitamin k or something [similar]. Possibly high cholesterol eggs (likely unobtainium currently or (more arguably) 'prothrombin' or 'procoagulant,' whatever those are.

5) In order to really find out how effective it is, you really need to ask the people doing it. Better yet, put them under 24/7 surveillance. [This part was publicly available elsewhere. Tell me if you need the lawsuit case number.]

UPDATE: as of December 2016 the case was dismissed, possibly illegally as my understanding is the purpose of the John DOE case is to act as a placeholder until the defendant is named. Offer still stands though if you need the case number feel free to let me know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 55378008a (talk • contribs) 18:29, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

6) An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Get yourself some kevlar shorts and something that covers your spine area. Lock your doors at night. Especially when people you don't know as well as you thought you did are over for company.

7) Think they got me again last october. See (6), above. Watch out for yelling goodbye to cover the sound of the gas canister so you open your doors thinking theyve actually left.

8) Near as I can tell, it doesnt make you unable, only unwilling. The real value is driving apart families to maThe real use of this stuff iske the children easier to take advantage of, making people no fun to be around and stasi - type purposefully wrong medical treatment / zersetzung (literally 'dissolution,' 'disassociation,' 'discombobulation' etc) / gaslighting [similar to any removal of this response prior and editing of history], rivalry/competition for promotions and relationships, etc.

9) Basically, youre asking how efficient it is to poison people to ruin the economy. Maybe we can get an expert to weigh in on this, someone with a solid understanding of economics? All I can tell you for sure is its highly unpleasant and again, probably more efficient for the jabber than the jabbee, just so long as the former stays above the law anyway.

10) >"Anyone who can verify this?"

short answer: so far, no

Ill try to tidy this up later. I know this isn't a venue for life stories. If you want you can oversight this again. Allegedly, the B. Atrox is known to do a real number on memory as well as the cycada. Not only that, but supposedly theyre using Pichia pastoris to mass produce the stuff with glycol which is readily available online, even on amazon (Batroxobin) So your antidote for thats going to be a alkaloid like for redback. See (4), above. 55378008a (talk) 06:15, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

12) Almost forgot. Main use I think is causing violence against women. I think its very effective at that, cant begin to tell you how efficient that is. Chesters tend to have the resources to acquire antidote, which is how they get access to the children to begin with. This stuff is really only going to work at getting children from newly rendered out of work folks from socioeconomic groups who cant invoke the law to protect themselves. 55378008a (talk) 06:24, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pedophile priests

The article should consider examining whether the widespread use of chemical castration on pedophile priests has ever been suggested by experts within the Roman Catholic Church, and whether such a policy would have any noticeable effects on efforts to reduce clerical crimes and abuses. A related issue would be to verify whether non-pedophiles among the priesthood could benefit from this as well, on a voluntary basis, in a bid to correctly maintain their celibacy, like what certain eunuchs of the early Church were doing (cf biography of Melito of Sardis the eunuch). ADM (talk) 04:12, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Something like this has apparently happened... see here on page 3: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb3094/is_n2_19/ai_n28684113/. Excerpt:

In recent years, the Catholic church has been barraged with accusations of sexual abuse of children by Catholic priests.(53) In response to the outcry, the Catholic church in the United States began a treatment program for pedophile priests.(54) The program, called the St. Luke Institute, began treating priests in 1985.(55) The St. Luke Institute uses chemical castration in its treatment program to "suppress libido."(56)

If anyone can find the following article that was cited for this excerpt, that might also be useful: Patricia Edmonds, Priests' Path to Redemption After Sex Abuse, USA Today, July 30, 1993, at A6. Joren (talk) 01:51, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

History and use

The article begins the history section with the 1980s, but I read an article this morning stating that Alan Turing underwent chemical castration in 1952 as punishment for having a homosexual relationship. BillyDinPVD (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:35, 11 September 2009 (UTC). see http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/09/11/alan.turing.petition.apology/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.154.202.4 (talk) 13:06, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I merged the sections on use and history together and tried to add some info. I'm surprised how hard it is to find information about early use of chemical castration... :/ Joren (talk) 01:39, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

no permanent physical change is caused in the body?

Many men after receiving chemical castration develop breasts, it might be a stretch, but i believe this is permanent physical and psychological damage done to the body directly caused by the introduction of chemicals. I think that sentence needs to be removed, or a clause added discussing permanent side effects —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.165.46.56 (talk) 19:13, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a source that says that? Personally, the idea of castration in ANY form gives me shudders... HOWEVER - that does not change the fact that we need a citation before making an edit like that. Can you provide studies or journals that say this? For a topic like this I bet they oughta be pretty easy to find... Joren (talk) 23:36, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I know this by no means carries the credibility of a scientific study, but it's an interesting case that came before the Victorian Mental Health Review Board (http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/vic/VMHRB/2006/3.html). The man in it had been on mandatory 300mg per week of Depo Provera for approx 5 years after committing an unstated sex offense. No breasts, but he developed osteoperosis which is a known risk when women take Depo Provera at a standard dose of 150mg per 3 months. This man is on a dose 2400% higher than indicated for contraception in women. It makes sense that the risk of osteoperosis would be greatly increased.Billy Tallent (talk) 09:25, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Duh use google! Making changes to ones hormones will naturally have numerous effects and side effects. Depletion of testosterone can cause bone loss, gynecomastia, impotence and a swarm of negative psychological effects such as depression and suicide. The side effects of the 'medicine' alone are extensive, look it up. The symptoms of low testosterone is almost universially negative, just ask anyone on HRT. To 'chemically castrate' a person will be very unhealthy and have long lasting irreversible consequences. It's a very harsh punishment with a devastating impact on the body. It's often combined with antipsychotics, this will make the person a living zombie. It would be much more humane(and cheap) to amputate some of his penis. I also find it appaling that doctors participate in this and call it 'treatment'. Reminds me of the Nazi doctors. It's a punishment, designed to pacify the prisoner regardless of the health effects, like a lobotomy. At least be honest about it. 93.161.107.239 (talk) 19:22, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Women

The article should make mention of use on women, even if it is to state that it is not used on women, because, as some above comments indicate, depo-provera's effects on females. I won't add anything since I no absolutely nothing on the subject, but it should be added to flesh out the article, at least, and make it more complete. --Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû 06:18, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Сan't create Russian part of this article

because it is part of Castration article. Can someone help me please? Rustam-aka (talk)Rustam-aka

Why is this only about judicial chemical castration?

The vast majority of chemical castration is not for judicial purposes, but rather for medical reasons: either cancers or transsexualism. There should be a section on its use for cancer, and another for its use in transgender. Chemical castration is actually very common, but not for judicial purposes discussed in the current article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.48.66.38 (talk) 04:07, 23 February 2010 (UTC) I added a section about chemical castration therapy for advanced prostate cancer. I suggest a split between criminal chemical castration, gender modification chemical castration and medical chemical castration. My understanding is that castration in the criminal sense seems to have a high failure rate. I can only quote my wife, a retired psychologists. Too much to do on the cancer side to work on criminal matters.Bgordski (talk) 01:55, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bgordski! Thanks for participating in Wikipedia; I look forward to the perspective and knowledge you will be able to bring to these articles. I wanted to move the section about prostate cancer here so that we can work on it a little - it needs reliable, verifiable sources. I can see you put a lot of specific information (120,000 people, etc) so I'm guessing you already consulted some references in order to add this. So... if you just let us know what references you used, then we can get to work :) Here it is:

Prostate Cancer and Chemical Castration workspace

Medical castration (MC) for males is the removal of the testicle/s for cancerous growth or for removal of the gonadal hormone (T), in humans. It is either permenant removal of the testicles (orchiectomy) or temporarily, by hormone therapy drugs that cause a time limited drop in (T) production. Orchiectomy is necessary for the treatment of testicular cancer and was used as early as 1890 as a mostly unsuccessful treatment for prostate cancer (CaP). Male (T) is 290-1300ng/dL in males under 50 years old.

Main article: Prostate cancer

CaP is known formally as carcinoma of the prostate. Only humans born male will have a prostate gland. One/sixth of the male population[[1]] or in 2010, 217,730 in the US will get PCa and 32,050 will die of the uncontrolled castrate resistant PCa CRPC, androgen independent AI or hormone refractive PCa HRPC[[2]].

It is thought that this number is so high because of a diet high in fats (lipids) and carcinogenic exposures. Some 2010 information points to varicocele which can bathe the prostate in excess (T). Varicocele is due to an anatomical weakness in male humans which can cause a failure of a one-way valve in a vein in the groin. This leads to varicose veins of the scrotum (varicocele).[[3]] There are also some carcinoma concern regarding the virus XMRV which has been found in CaP tissue. [[4]][[5]]

CaP's primary therapy is either surgical removal of the prostate gland :: radical prostatectomy , some form of radiation treatment, cryotherapy or ultrasound that destroys the prostate gland.

CaP therapy involving hormone manipulation is the science of endocrinology specifically the sex steroids. In CaP treatment it is used primarily to block the production of gonadal (T). The secondary (T) from the adrenal glands is usually controlled by blocking the (T) receptors. Different manufacturers describe this process with their own terms: hormone ablation or by its specific hormone name androgen with the therapy called androgen deprivation therapy (ADT).

In 1941, Charles B. Huggins published studies in which he used estrogen to oppose testosterone production in men with metastatic prostate cancer. This discovery of "chemical castration" won Huggins the 1966 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. The role of the hormone GnRH in reproduction was determined by Andrzej W. Schally and Roger Guillemin, who both won the 1977 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for this work.

ADT is used for advanced CaP patients. In the Jewel cancer staging system, the CaP designation is D2. Using the newer T,N,M system the CaP is listed as T3, N0, M0 or higher. These are patients who have failed primary therapy. This is also called biochemical failure. The biochemical marker of CaP is a rising prostate cancer antigen PSA which is measured as a blood sample. The normal range of PSA is between 2.0-4.0 ng/mL
ADT is also a form of cancer therapy which is part of an oncology medicial practice and is grouped as chemotherapy although it is not cytotoxic unlike so many other chemodrugs.

CaP in its early stages is driven by the hormone (T). When it was discovered that surgical castration could temporarily block the spread of CaP; ADT drugs were developed. One of these ADT drugs is zoladex (Goserelin Acetate) , a luteinizing hormone releasing-hormone LHRH agonist.[[6]] It is given as an injection, called a depot injection, into the abdominal fatty tissue. It blocks the hypothalamus from signalling the pituitary gland to produce a hormone gonadotropin that the gonads (testicles) (Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Receptor)

(GnHR) recognize as a signal to produce (T). This signal from the hypothalamus to the pituatary is normally only an intermittent squirt and when too much is produced the body shuts down gonadal (T) production. This stoppage continues as long as the pituatary gland is blocked from sending the GnRH signal. [7]

A level at or below 20.0 ng/dL (T) is considered castrate level.[8]

The adrenal glands (T) is suppressed by a different approach using an antiandrogen drug like the teratogen casodex (Bicalutamide) [[9]]. This drug blocks normal androgen receptors so all (T) is blocked. These drugs are sometime given together because of the way the LHRH agnostic functions. Before the pituitary gland shuts down the production of (T) it causes a temporary surge (flare) of (T) which can cause any bone metastasis to be painful. When used with an LHRH agonist, Casadex is given as a 50mg pill (in the US) with a 30 day supply and is taken orally daily.

Glossary

Again, it just needs some sources for these claims and the statistical figures as well. I'm sure it will make an excellent section once we have worked on it a bit. Thanks for your contributions!

-- Joren (talk) 03:48, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We still need citations for the explanations given above. I've marked some with ^{[citation needed]}. Also, keep in mind this article is specifically about chemical castration. There is a separate article about castration and Inguinal orchiectomy. Thank you for your hard work!

-- Joren (talk) 03:37, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Castration, aggresion and testosterone.

There is no indication that a lowered testosterone level inhibits sex drive nor for that matter aggresion. The causant of all aggresion is an attempt to resolve an internal or externally impinging irritant, and neither of those two have anything to do with testosterone levels.

Case in point, before you start blurbing original research to satisfy some form of political current day rational: A woman´s testosterone level is LOWER than a males, HOWEVER, it is overall true that females are fastly more aggresive than males although not in the same form nor manner. It is also true, that OLD age lowers the testosterone level, BUT, does NOT lower the aggresive drive to REMOVE irritants (and that gentlemen, is clearly visible in most any political process. The politician being both the aggresor and the beaten dog at the same time, some form of sado-masochistic drive to scratch an itch called irritant.)

Lot´s and lot´s of studies, from prison studies to army studies to bully sindrome and groupism.

Castration, does NOT lower the incidence of child molestation, NOR aggresion, it changes the form and manner that an internal or external irritant is reacted too.

For those with some scientific interest, the correlational data is MASKED by and through a third variable, and that variable is not sex drive, nor aggresion, but irritants and resolving in such a form and manner that those irritants no longer impinge on the neuronal system. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.94.180.110 (talk) 19:52, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ahhh, and one smallish detail, the above statement. POST, is never PRE. Castration does not lower the incidence because those that follow within the overall SD conglomerate, aren´t castrated, therefore each post inhibited does not inhibit a pre, especially if your legislation is off such a manner that the penalization onto an allready overstressed and depresive instance is none-existant.

Cases of kidnapping and sex molestation are cases of KIDNAPPING, and NOT cases of child molestation and should not be handled as if they were anything BUT, cases of kidnapping. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.94.180.110 (talk) 19:46, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I’m not sure who said all this above but it’s completely false. Men are more aggressive than women. That’s been tested over and over. Higher testosterone levels are associated with aggression. This is why steroids cause increased aggression. Lower levels decrease aggression. This is also known. This “irritants and resolving” argument is silly. The data is not masked by such a variable because first off aggression part of resolving it. You successfully argued that testosterone levels apparently don’t effect aggression because it just so happens that people with higher levels of testosterone are more likely to have irritants that are not resolved… This reeks of narratives about sexual offenses that suggest that they are only about power and sex drive plays no role. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1007:B030:3EBF:B92F:834A:C1E8:CFBD (talk) 17:41, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of female libido decrease.

The whole article seems a bit rusty and wrong if you ask me. Right from the first sentence it clearly specifies that chemical castration is to reduce libido, and since "castration" can also be synonymous with oophorectomy, or to lower libido in general as if for gonad removal, it's contradictory to assume that the function is only applicable to males because they have testicles when the ovaries are the anatomical equivalent. Also, it's been proven that removal of the ovaries is very common to cause HSDD in women, among vaginal dryness, lack of sexual urges, and many other factors, including automatic menopause, all due to the loss of testosterone that the ovaries provide, which is roughly 50% or more in some cases. Since no one has fixed that problem, I will.

Putting a list of medicinal names on the main page ?

I feel the need for more information on the main page about what kind drugs there are. I'm not so good about searching these names online/ofline can somone please add them ? maybe in a colum whise manour? tnx Retrorick wikipedia (talk) 19:32, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

80 per cent of stuff on the planet is poisonous, any of those you would think would have the detrimental effect apparently being sought. As stated above, most will be anticoagulants. Are you seriously proposing to add millions of substances? Maybe a link to category:anticoagulants? Seems it would be more productive to add a section on the psychology and politics of penis envy. 55378008a (talk) 16:06, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Recent legal precedent

I'm curious no one has mentioned Brock Turner in this context. With the memory loss, that sounds like habu or Bothrops atrox (batroxobin). Am I correct, people never mention commonly attributed to marijuana -type memory loss or even 'apathy' as a symptom of the progesterones? Or am I missing something. It happens. 55378008a (talk) 16:14, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I remember now the other guy that really surprised me, Jared Fogle. Wouldn't that guy be a prime asset for a little 'wouldn't want you to get hurt yourself' pseudo-experimental nip in the buddin'? 55378008a (talk) 07:24, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Chemical castration. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:35, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chemical castration. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120315010638/http://www.noi.md/ru/news_id/10565 to http://www.noi.md/ru/news_id/10565
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=639-653.1

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:40, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chemical castration. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:06, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Scientific critique section

Apologies, I'm still new to editing here and the article is semi-protected so unable to edit directly, but the paragraph right after the Scientific Critique section beginning with:

"Spaying is observed to cause female animals to stop mating in the same way as castration causes male animals to stop mating. However, in animal species where females continue their mating behaviour after being spayed, the males also continue to mate after being castrated..." should be completely removed or at least extensively reworked. It feels random and completely unrelated to the previous section, and really to the topic as a whole. Chimera22 (talk) 09:34, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 26 January 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Edit "hot flahes" to "hot flashes", as this is clearly a simple typo. 51.9.253.240 (talk) 19:45, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done Cannolis (talk) 21:26, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are a bunch more grammatical issues in the side effects section. There are a bunch of run-on sentences. Before the lists of side effects there should be an “and” or (and, preferably, in my opinion) there should be periods to make the lists their own sentences. There should also be commas before the final points in the lists of side effects, and the page may flow better if there was a paragraph break between the male chemical castration intent and side effect sentences and potentially for the female intent and side effect sentences too. Pigter (talk) 02:02, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] A New Tool in the Treatment of Sexual Addiction by Dr. J L Schaller

[1]