If I remember correctly Lister atomized antiseptic vapour into the air to destroy toxins (which he later abandoned if I recall correctly please correct me if I'm mistaken) as well as sterilized all body parts being manipulated, the surgeons, surgery table, and the tools involved. Lister traveled around Britain and America teaching about germ theory and the merits of sterilization, there was initial resistance as the Miasma Theory was popular. But once the merit of Lister's teachings were acknowledged were his teachings followed exactly? Or did the application change from hospital to hospital? Did hospitals introduce new sterilization guidelines to be followed? Did national/private hospital boards exist to oversee the quality of hospitals?

Thanks to all for reading!

Hello CF community! Have been lurking for a while here and I got curious about whether any of you ever had a more difficult time with getting sterilized because of certain medications you may be on for some health conditions. Like, maybe the doctor told you to stop taking said medicine a few hours/days before the procedure so as to minimise possibility of complications appearing after. Or maybe said medicine made you feel worse than you should have after the procedure l. Actually it doesn't even matter if it's your own experience or maybe of someone you know. I am looking forward to getting sterilised in a few years and I may or may not be in a similar situation, so I would be grateful to those who would like to share.

P.S.: I've come across some posts about people being able to get hysterectomies without having any issues down there, just because they wanted to get sterilised. And I was all like that pikachu surprised face meme, since any article I've read on websites from my country talk about hysterectomy only as the solution to a health issue. Just... why? I mean, I live in a pretty conservative country, but still...

SpayVac's DPX "lipid nanoparticle delivery system."

https://pic8.co/sh/nFBFPU.png

SpayVac produces the PZP infertility vaccine. Their DPX lipid nanoparticle delivery technology is the same Pfizer/Moderna/Etc uses for COVID vaccines. See "Pfizer Animal Health" division.

https://spayvac.com/f/covid-19-on-everyones-mind

The PZP vaccine doesn't cause immediate sterility, it takes over a year for it to appear. But PZP will cause short term menstrual cycle changes as causes the immune system to attack the ovary cells. The SAME menstrual changes are being seen in women WORLDWIDE.

https://www.businessinsider.com/covid-19-vaccine-impact-on-menstrual-cycle-30000-report-changes-2021-9

PZP requires storage temperatures down to -40C, unusual for most vaccines. Also, it requires two first shots given 2-6 weeks apart then a booster from 6-12 months, depending on species.

They created the DPX liposome technology to make sure the vaccine reaches its target destination and patented it under IMV Inc. IMV partnered with Pfizer in 2020 to produce the COVID vaccine, using the same liposome technology, now called the lipid nanoparticle delivery system.

This DPX lipid nanoparticle system is designed as a "NO-RELEASE" system. It will NOT release anything at the injection site. Rather only at the "target destination", which for the PZP vaccine was the ovaries and, also, the spleen which had similar receptors.

https://www.imv-inc.com/the-dpx-platform

The Pfizer injection also concentrates at the spleen and ovaries. Makes sense as they use the identical delivery system. Look at the below source in Table 1. Look at the concentration, NOT the % dose of injection. The small intestines have a huge % of dose but they are way larger than the ovaries. The ovaries have a massive concentration in regards to their size.

https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/covid-19-vaccines-dont-affect-ovaries-or-fertility-in-general-the-vaccines-are-highly-effective-at-preventing-illness-and-death/

It stays at the injection site, but the lipid nanoparticle will ONLY open at the target site. So effectively anything at the injection site is inactive and waiting to be released. This works like a long-acting drug. It will never open and release the treatment/mRNA at the site of injection - only as the lipid nanoparticle shella migrate from the injection site to a target destination will they open up and release the treatment.

The way the PZP vaccine works is it triggers an immune response against

Ah yeah tubal ligation (found the name) for females I meant as well. Male or Female I am talking for, I am male though. Though the rare chance of complications is probably way better than any of the other methods considering side effects of pills/medicines/etc and condoms ruining the point lol.

No amendments were proposed, we now move to a Final Division

B1287 - Involuntary Sterilization (Ban) Bill

A

BILL

TO

ban the practice of involuntary sterilization.

BE IT ENACTED by the Queen’s Most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows –

1. Definitions

(1) The term “sterilization” refers to any sort of chemical or surgical medical procedure or treatment with the goal to permanently sterilize a person. These may include, but are not limited to: tubal ligation, hysterectomy, vasoligation, castration, and/or transluminal procedures.

(2) The term “medical practitioner” refers to an accredited member of a recognised medical association.

(3) The term “consent” refers to a person's ability to knowingly understand the consequences and ramifications of their decision, and to willingly, and without coercion, agree.

2.Ban on Involuntary Sterilization

(1) It is prohibited to perform sterilization procedures on an individual without their consent.

(2) It is the responsibility of the medical practitioner to ensure the patient is made fully aware of the benefits, risks, and ramifications of a sterilization procedure.

(3) It is the responsibility of the medical practitioner to obtain and keep a record of the patient's consent to the sterilization procedure.

(4) If a person is deemed unable to provide consent due to mental disability, physical disability, or for any other reason, it is prohibited to perform a sterilization procedure.

(5) Any individual found guilty of performing, either by direct or indirect means, a sterilization procedure as outlined in Section (1) without obtaining consent from the patient, shall be found Guilty of an Offence.

a)If the individual found guilty is a medical practitioner at the time of the offence, they shall be immediately expelled from their professional affiliations and permanently banned from practicing medicine.

b)If the individual found guilty is not at the time of the offence a medical practitioner, they are ineligible for any future membership in any professional affiliation and from ever practicing medicine.

Section 3. Extent, commencement, and short title

(1) This Act shall extend across England

(2) This Act shall come into force immediately after receiving Royal Assent.

(3) This Act may be cited as the Involuntary Sterilization (Ban) Act 2021.

**This B

I don't get it. I just don't get it. They're against abortion, but also against elective sterilization? That's a fucking contradiction if I ever heard one. They're against the "murder" of a fetus so shouldn't they agree that the ones that want to be sterile should have that choice so it prevents the very thing they're against??? I somehow encounter these swine and it just makes my brain short circulate.

Edit: yes I am aware they are not "pro life" but I used the term for clarity sake

My husband and I are expecting our second child. The baby will be born via c-section because my first delivery was long and difficult. I'm considering getting my tubes tied right after the c-section, since the two procedures can be combined seamlessly. However, my husband is strongly against it because he wants us to have at least one more kid (or at least keep that door open).

In short, I've always wanted 2 kids, but my husband wants at least 3. It's been his dream to have 3 kids since he was a kid himself, and he wants it more than any career or financial accomplishment either of us could ever achieve. Before we got married, I made it clear to him that I can only promise to try for 2 kids. He reluctantly accepted that, but possibly hoped that I'd change my mind. Years later, I have not changed my mind. During that time, I've had a miscarriage, a difficult delivery with my wonderful first baby, and a rough second pregnancy. And I will be having a c-section next year, which will probably mean another long recovery. I want to be done with pregnancy and birthing after this baby is born.

As for birth control, we've previously relied on the fertility awareness method and pulling out, alternating them in a way where if either method failed, we could get pregnant. That was an okay risk for me then, but I don't want a third child so I don't want to keep rolling the dice. Regarding other options, I had a bad reaction to birth control pills once, and would like to avoid all hormonal birth control because of it. Also, my husband doesn't like condoms, and doesn't want to use them regularly. I've heard too many horror stories about the copper IUD for me to be brave enough to try it.

Would it be okay for me to proceed with getting my tubes tied against my husband's wishes, or would that only cause problems in our marriage?

tl;dr: I want to get sterilized after my second baby, but my husband wants us to have one more biological kid.

So I'm looking for a book that I think is called the asclepians. it's about a island that has insanely Advanced Medical Technology. that was created by Nazi scientists during World War II. not that this is public knowledge in the book of course it's in the it's in the lore of the book. and this guy joins he's a doctor he was accepted to train as a doctor for the island, there private doctors that charge insane amounts of money. and they can cure any disease or any ailment. there's a secret plan to sterilize the world or at least the world's poor and only let the Chosen Few survive the so-called chosen few and I've been looking for at least six years I think it was published in the early 2000s. Or that could have been the latter half of the 2,000's. I think the book is called the asclepians the future of medicine has a dark past . the future a medicine has a dark or it might be something that is on the cover of the book I've been looking for this book for a while. I've looked on eBay, Z library, library Genesis, Amazon, so obviously what I think is the title is not the title otherwise I would have found it by now. however I think it might be a foreign book maybe British or Italian translated to English. on the cover it has a caduceus the snakes inTwining a staff. I think it has a guy in a hood it sounds similar to another book by a guy named Colin something frzeue or something but it's not it. sounds so close that I wonder by the same author but I wasn't able to find anything. so I don't know there is also a subplot where the characters who don't complete the training at the Island are actually killed when they leave, and they say they hide the bodies by Suicide. and some sort of slug is the thing that enables all this genetic experimentation and genetic illness. as some sort of slug that was discovered in the 40s by the Nazis whatever and they created this miracle drug, or whatever that cures almost everything but they have different scientific experiments that use the drug in different ways it's also set in an alternate modern-day well modern 4 mm or so although it literally could have been published earlier I'm not sure I hope you can help me find it cuz I really want to I think it's a young adult book!

30F, Nulliparous

So I had my first surgical consult yesterday at the hospital. I drove in super excited, I was bouncing up the elevator excited, I could barely sit still in the waiting room chair. I left sobbing and I punched the elevator wall so hard my knuckle is bruised. It was the most degrading, dehumanizing, disrespectful meeting I've ever had. #6 is a doozy

1. She didn't say her name, introduce herself, tell me what kind of doctor she was, none of that.
2. As soon as I sat down she looked at the screen, I tried to find common ground by commenting on my glasses fogging up in my mask and did she have any tricks. She then proceeds to get my age wrong and starts telling me who I am based on the screen.
3. In under 10 seconds she tells me without asking anything about me "The decision has been made to refuse you for this surgery."
4. She refused to hear about me wanting to be childfree, she focused on my periods and trying to fix them with more hormones and inserting a mirena both of which I made clear I did not want. I told her I want it to be permanent not something I need later to fix/remove/replace. I said I wanted a hysterectomy but understood the risks for complications were pretty high and therefore I was asking for a tubal ligation and ablation because I thought I'd be more likely to receive it without a fight.
5. She told me the risk of regret was the reason for refusal and then asked if I had been raped, I said yes 12 years ago but I got therapy. She then tells me I'm basically wanting to be childfree because of trauma, even though I handed her a list of 30 points as to why I wanted to be childfree that had "the ability to be raped and bare a child if contraception fails/is no longer available". I mentioned the Texas abortion situation which she dismissed as impossible.
6. I was mid sentence when her F&^KING PHONE RANG! In my sterilization appointment she got up and left to talk to her kids daycare of all places.... what the actual heck.
7. She tried to get me to accept the decision, take the prescription and leave, I asked to speak to Dr Pattel directly and she said give me 15mins. So I waited in the waiting room for 30mins.
8. I never saw any other Doctor, she came back and said I would be reconsidered if I went and saw a Psychiatrist and a Psychologist to deal with my fear of childbirth, rape, parenting, motherhood etc. She wrote me a script and dismissed me.

I have never wanted to be violent before in my life but the second that ele

I think if doctors would allow people to get sterilized that abortions would drop drastically.

I used to browse the child free sub and so many people are denied sterilization because the doctors think they are too young. These people were also told they would change their mind when they were older, etc.

It shouldn't be anyone's choice except the patient. These same doctors that wont sterilize people will perform abortions because then you can have a pregnancy later on.

If people can know they are gay, transgender, etc at a young age then why aren't they allowed to get sterilized at a young age.

A person should have the right to do anything to their own body.

I hate the pro lifers who are against abortion and women's right to chose, but then in the same breath will refuse the Covid vaccine because it's their body their choice.

Ending an unwanted pregnancy is better than forcing women to give birth who then might abuse, neglect or kill their unwanted children later on because their right to end a pregnancy was taken away.

I would rather have women rid the fetus from their bodies instead of hearing abuse stories from kids that grew up with abuse, neglect and knowing their parent(s) never wanted them in the 1st place.

Kids know and then it effects them their entire lives most of the time.

I had to switch doctors just to get a referral for this specific doctor. His name is Dr. Veersema in case we have any people in the Netherlands still looking for a proper doctor willing to do procedures if you're under the age of 35. (He's already on the list here. It's how I found him).

He explained to me that a lot of doctors are hesitant to sterilize women when they're young based on outdated literature stating that women at a young age can regret it later in life. The bit of information that is often skipped over in this literature is that the group of women who end up regretting it are women that already have children. Women that already know they don't want children from a young age are NOT the ones regretting it. Feel free to use this bit of information in case anyone bingos you about it again.

Time to get my insurance stuff in order and schedule that surgery. Big thank you to whoever listed this doctor on this sub. My conversation with him lasted less than 15 minutes and he took everything I said to heart.

There are many posts about using a microwave to sterilize glass jars, both for and against. Most don't make much sense to me as a physicist. I have searched for any peer reviewed published research or government reports on this, and could not find anything. I can see how the method of washing, rinsing with water, and 30+ seconds or until dry would not guarantee sterilization. But I would think that you could effectively steam sterilize the jars if you fill the with a small amount of water, loosely cover them, and heat in the microwave until they have boiled for a sufficient time. Why wouldn't this be the equivalent of doing so with the water heated any other way? My suspicion is it can work, but it may not take less time than doing so in a pot on the stove or in the oven. For boiling, this would be 10 minutes. This might also be why the 30+second heat/dry won't work in the microwave: it is just an insufficient amount of time near boiling to insure all microorganisms are killed.

Me being from the United States, I see myself getting a vasectomy and making it past the four month anniversary as a sort of means of escaping the breederdom and authoritarianism propagated by political figures by people such as Ron DeSantis, Greg Abbot, and Tom Cotton, as well as the hyper-Christian, pronatalist culture which permeates the cultural and political landscape of the Southern United States.

I see sterilizing myself as a means of making it physically impossible for American conservatives to force me to participate in the dominant cultural paradigm which got Trump elected and almost caused democracy to collapse in the United States this past January.

I see having kids as an act of emulating the culture of the Southern United States, and all the negatives that come with it such as sprawling and uninspiring cities, loud and bombastic rhetorical mannerisms, and hospitality which composes friendly interactions on the surface and judgement for those who don't conform beneath the surface.

On the other hand, to be childfree is to emulate the cultural values of places such as the Pacific Northwest, the Netherlands, Sweden, Vancouver, etc. All of these places are filled to the brim with progressive, educated, secular, authentic, and childfree people (especially educated, intelligent, progressive, secular, empowered, and independent women), in addition to walkable and inspiring cities.

If Ron DeSantis, Ted Cruz, etc. were to hypothetically become president of the United States, and force Americans to procreate like Nicolae Ceaușescu did in Romania, me having a vasectomy would physically incapacitate me from complying with such a draconian measure, and there wouldn't be anything they or their Evangelical base could do about it. Maybe I get sent to prison for a decade, but that sounds like heaven compared to being forced to raise kids.

Does anyone else see sterilization as a form of liberation from the dominant pro-natalist political and social paradigm of their society?

B1287 - Involuntary Sterilization (Ban) Bill - Final Division

A

BILL

TO

ban the practice of involuntary sterilization.

BE IT ENACTED by the Queen’s Most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows –

1. Definitions

(1) The term “sterilization” refers to any sort of chemical or surgical medical procedure or treatment with the goal to permanently sterilize a person. These may include, but are not limited to: tubal ligation, hysterectomy, vasoligation, castration, and/or transluminal procedures.

(2) The term “medical practitioner” refers to an accredited member of a recognised medical association.

(3) The term “consent” refers to a person's ability to knowingly understand the consequences and ramifications of their decision, and to willingly, and without coercion, agree.

2.Ban on Involuntary Sterilization

(1) It is prohibited to perform sterilization procedures on an individual without their consent.

(2) It is the responsibility of the medical practitioner to ensure the patient is made fully aware of the benefits, risks, and ramifications of a sterilization procedure.

(3) It is the responsibility of the medical practitioner to obtain and keep a record of the patient's consent to the sterilization procedure.

(4) If a person is deemed unable to provide consent due to mental disability, physical disability, or for any other reason, it is prohibited to perform a sterilization procedure.

(5) Any individual found guilty of performing, either by direct or indirect means, a sterilization procedure as outlined in Section (1) without obtaining consent from the patient, shall be found Guilty of an Offence.

a)If the individual found guilty is a medical practitioner at the time of the offence, they shall be immediately expelled from their professional affiliations and permanently banned from practicing medicine.

b)If the individual found guilty is not at the time of the offence a medical practitioner, they are ineligible for any future membership in any professional affiliation and from ever practicing medicine.

Section 3. Extent, commencement, and short title

(1) This Act shall extend across England

(2) This Act shall come into force immediately after receiving Royal Assent.

(3) This Act may be cited as the Involuntary Sterilization (Ban) Act 2021.

**This Bill was written by Rt Hon Dame SapphireWork GBE

#Involuntary Sterilization (Ban) Bill

A

BILL

TO

ban the practice of involuntary sterilization.

BE IT ENACTED by the Queen’s Most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows –

1. Definitions

(1) The term “sterilization” refers to any sort of chemical or surgical medical procedure or treatment with the goal to permanently sterilize a person. These may include, but are not limited to: tubal ligation, hysterectomy, vasoligation, castration, and/or transluminal procedures.

(2) The term “medical practitioner” refers to an accredited member of a recognised medical association.

(3) The term “consent” refers to a person's ability to knowingly understand the consequences and ramifications of their decision, and to willingly, and without coercion, agree.

2.Ban on Involuntary Sterilization

(1) It is prohibited to perform sterilization procedures on an individual without their consent.

(2) It is the responsibility of the medical practitioner to ensure the patient is made fully aware of the benefits, risks, and ramifications of a sterilization procedure.

(3) It is the responsibility of the medical practitioner to obtain and keep a record of the patient's consent to the sterilization procedure.

(4) If a person is deemed unable to provide consent due to mental disability, physical disability, or for any other reason, it is prohibited to perform a sterilization procedure.

(5) Any individual found guilty of performing, either by direct or indirect means, a sterilization procedure as outlined in Section (1) without obtaining consent from the patient, shall be found Guilty of an Offence.

a)If the individual found guilty is a medical practitioner at the time of the offence, they shall be immediately expelled from their professional affiliations and permanently banned from practicing medicine.

b)If the individual found guilty is not at the time of the offence a medical practitioner, they are ineligible for any future membership in any professional affiliation and from ever practicing medicine.

Section 3. Extent, commencement, and short title

(1) This Act shall extend across England

(2) This Act shall come into force immediately after receiving Royal Assent.

(3) This Act may be cited as the Involuntary Sterilization (Ban) Act 2021.

**This Bill was written by Rt Hon Dame Sapph

For those following here is my update a month after the appointment. The original post is in my history and has a lot of replies and answers for those interested.

Update 2. 11/1/22 So I have been emailing the complaints department for the hospital, with not quite success but at least some compassion and interaction. Basically they advised me on 17/12/21 that it could take 35days or longer to compile all the information before I received any communications from them, but they did say if I had any questions to send them through. Well I replied back instantly (even though I know that's a standard email sign off line) that I wanted to know " 1. Is it WRITTEN into a procedural manual somewhere that ALL women are required to get a psychiatrist AND a psychologist evaluation for ANY kind of permanent sterilization? " BUT I made sure to add into my email, which I will be doing in all correspondence from now, that I expected a reply by end of business week.

I asked some other questions specific to my complaint against Dr Rose, but to be honest my anger with her has settled and I'll let them do their jobs dealing with her. I dont want to lose sight of my actual goal right now which is to change how Childfree women are treated in my state hospital. My own sterilization is not urgent, I timed it so I had enough time to go through all this red tape and be on the wait list for a few years. So right now I'm ok.

I would like it noted that I am currently happy with how things are proceeding, but we shall see in the next week if that changes.