I want to have my penis and scrotum removed, however I really don't want to then rely on hormone suplemetation for the rest of my life.

So far the closest option to nullification that will be suitable for me would be to have a total penectomy, urethral reroute and scrotal reduction, yet I wouldn't be 100% content with this result.

Is there some surgery to relocate the testicles somewhere else in the body so that the scrotum could be removed? and are there any surgeons willing to do it?

fefefefe (imported) wrote: Sun Jan 07, 2024 6:31 pm I want to have my penis and scrotum removed, however I really don't want to then rely on hormone suplemetation for the rest of my life.

So far the closest option to nullification that will be suitable for me would be to have a total penectomy, urethral reroute and scrotal reduction, yet I wouldn't be 100% content with this result.

Is there some surgery to relocate the testicles somewhere else in the body so that the scrotum could be removed? and are there any surgeons willing to do it?

This is not desirable, since the temperature regime will be disturbed: after all, for them in the body this regime is regulated due to the existence of the scrotum...

as far as I'm aware, the temperature of the testicles only matters for sperm production. Which is something that I don't care about.

as much as I know, testicles that are not in scrotum have much higher probability to become cancerous. But it might not be big issue as the probability remains low in absolute numbers.

I thought this was refering to people who are born with undescended testicle and who's testicles develop while being undescended

The cancer, as others said, is much more common. But data over it is about children who born that way, with undescended testicles. I don't think it's known about cancer chances increase when adults puts them inside of the body, since it's a very unusual thing. Depending of your age and family cancer's history, it may affect more or less your chances too.

But I understand you, I also wouldn't want to rely on hormone supplementation

fefefefe (imported) wrote: Mon Jan 08, 2024 6:57 am I thought this was refering to people who are born with undescended testicle and who's testicles develop while being undescended

This is correct, because it is what the medical people have data on... A lot of what we base suggestions on here is based on data from other groups that aren't exactly the same as us, but are the closest thing we have... There aren't enough of us to study in the numbers needed to get statistically valid information, especially since most of us try to keep a low public profile, which includes not volunteering for medical studies...

Since we and our desires are not considered 'normal' by medical standards, the medical folks also seem to have little interest in studying them or seeing what the effects of them are. Most of the data that is relevant to us comes from the care of other 'normal' conditions - i.e. treating prostate and testicular cancer - never mind that a patient needing that sort of treatment isn't exactly 'normal' either....

(Note that I don't mean 'normal' in any derogatory sense, just that there are 'accepted norms' that we don't fit...)

It may be possible to get some relevant data from animal research, (such as the data that suggests pre, or near puberty castrations increase lifespan) but I don't know that anything like this has been done in terms of moving the testicles to an internal location...

(Obviously a moot point for me now, but I might have considered the relocation option if it had been an available choice, I can understand how it might appeal....)

WheelyFixed

I was thinking of an option that sounds very stupid so I'd like to know if anyone has any information regarding this:

intentionally causing testicular atrophy with anti-androgens, so that the testicles shrink to a point where the scrotum can be removed and the testicles can be pushed into the inguinal canals.

from what I understand, the testicular shrinking caused from atrophy is permanent, so stopping to take anti-androgens later shouldn't be problematic

fefefefe (imported) wrote: Mon Jan 08, 2024 7:39 pm I was thinking of an option that sounds very stupid so I'd like to know if anyone has any information regarding this:

intentionally causing testicular atrophy with anti-androgens, so that the testicles shrink to a point where the scrotum can be removed and the testicles can be pushed into the inguinal canals.

from what I understand, the testicular shrinking caused from atrophy is permanent, so stopping to take anti-androgens later shouldn't be problematic

No data, and haven't heard of anyone doing that approach, but I'd wonder what was the point? Presumably the atrophy caused by the anti-androgens would wipe out the hormone production function, (and you'd still want to be on some form of hormone replacement while using the anti-androgens) so all you'd have accomplished is to stuff two non-hormone producing 'cancer seeds' into your body, so you'd still be needing the replacement hormones.... (quite likely why nobody has tried it...)

Not directly relevant, but from reading the relevant threads, the members that have done in their balls w/ alcohol, CaCl, etc. have ended up with balls that are atrophied, but also at castrate T levels, so still needing replacement hormones...

WheelyFixed

from what I understand atrophy doesn't cause full loss of hormone production.

I just don't want to have any bone density issues and not have to rely on TRT.