O.K., HERE (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17130058/wi ... 3?GT1=9033) is the news story.

The natural next question is, can this be done to testicles?

If so, there is a whole new range of castration themes for stories that might be written.

How about "To Eunuch and Back Again"

The number of stories using this theme are limitless. We could even have a Eunuch singer castrated pre-puberty, who after full growth is achieved, has his frozen testicles re-implanted. That could make some women very, very happy, not to mention the "no longer" Eunuch.

Instead of "Frozen Sperm Banks" we could have "Frozen Testicle Banks".

So, somebody, let's have at it!

Even better, it says that they can actually do an ovary transplant from one person to another! I can't imagine that it would be more difficult to do a testicle transplant, and that means that testicle transplants are possible today!

Double Cross (http://www.eunuch.org/Alpha/D/new1doublecross.htm), one of my favorite stories, involves a testicle transplant, so this is great news.

ChemistryKid (imported) wrote: Wed Feb 14, 2007 3:42 pm Even better, it says that they can actually do an ovary transplant from one person to another! I can't imagine that it would be more difficult to do a testicle transplant, and that means that testicle transplants are possible today!

Double Cross (http://www.eunuch.org/Alpha/D/new1doublecross.htm), one of my favorite stories, involves a testicle transplant, so this is great news.

If it were this possible, they'd be doing it already.

When they can do micro surgery as fine as required I am sure more will attempt it. But the vessels inside the testicular cords are Quite small. They just havent gotten things worked out quite yet. But give them (docs, whoever) some time...

ChemistryKid (imported) wrote: Wed Feb 14, 2007 3:42 pm Even better, it says that they can actually do an ovary transplant from one person to another! I can't imagine that it would be more difficult to do a testicle transplant, and that means that testicle transplants are possible today!

Double Cross (http://www.eunuch.org/Alpha/D/new1doublecross.htm), one of my favorite stories, involves a testicle transplant, so this is great news.

Just remember, according to the article, the people involved were sisters (already somewhat genetically similar), where one had provided bone marrow to the recipient of the ovary (thereby reducing/eliminating rejection issues).

The other cases mentioned involved identical twins, where rejection issues are not usually a factor.

For this to work on testicles, not only would the microsurgery issues need to be further resolved, but the donor would have to be a near-identical match genetically. This means likely at worst, a sibling with the same parents, and at best an identical twin.

Yes, they transplant other organs between non-related people all the time. The recipient pretty much winds up taking anti-rejection drugs for the rest of their life, however. If the side effects of chemical castration, or physical castration, worry you then take a look at the side effects of those drugs.

Rather than going through all that, it would be a heck of a lot easier to just use somatic cells from the father to fertilize an egg donated by the mother. Of course, we are a bit away from practical application of that as well.

BossTamsin (imported) wrote: Thu Feb 15, 2007 2:38 am Yes, they transplant other organs between non-related people all the time. The recipient pretty much winds up taking anti-rejection drugs for the rest of their life, however. If the side effects of chemical castration, or physical castration, worry you then take a look at the side effects of those drugs.

As I understand it, "anti-rejection" is just a pleasant name for "immune system suppression." In other words, you should be fine so long as having a working immune system is not a serious issue for you.

Imagine you are in a car accident and when you wake up they tell you that you've been in a short coma and they've fixed you all up during that time. There's no sign of injury now, and for some reason you're ball are over twice the size that they were and you've got a 10 inch erection. Of course, a stray chunk of metal neutered you in the accident and they had to transplant in the penis and balls from the other driver to take the place of yours. No doubt, by order of the courts.

Now the problem is that you have to take these pills every day or else your manhood will die and fall off. But of course the pills make you sick half the time. So what do you do? It's a tough call...

kristoff wrote: Wed Feb 14, 2007 10:24 pm When they can do micro surgery as fine as required I am sure more will attempt it. But the vessels inside the testicular cords are Quite small. They just havent gotten things worked out quite yet. But give them (docs, whoever) some time...

Are the testicular cords actually necessary? Sure, it would be nice to be able to have children, but if you are faced with having no balls at all, just having real, working balls in your sack would be a bonus over being a eunuch.

People actually pay money to get those cords snipped in a vasectomy, right?

This woman was trying to avoid early menopause, not just trying to make it so that she could have children. I bet if the had that ovary implanted but not fully hooked up she could avoid menopause and avoid mensturation: the best of both worlds, still whole without being fertile, still enjoying sex without having to worry about birth control.

Correct me if I'm wrong, please, because I'm just guessing.

In the long run, having your own "spare parts" grown from stemcells might end the need for anti rejection drugs. There could be a problem with some organs however, and I think maybe testicles could be among them since testicles are affected by the ageing process.

If you were to grow a pair of new testicles from stemcells, I guess they would be mostly dormant - unless you also had the technical/medical means to subject them to a fake puberty before implanting them. Otherwise they would be quite useless.

That could be tricky - and at the very least it would mean that there would be a rather long waiting period.

Of course, all of this assumes that one would WANT a new set of testicles... *s*

ChemistryKid (imported) wrote: Thu Feb 15, 2007 2:06 pm Are the testicular cords actually necessary? Sure, it would be nice to be able to have children, but if you are faced with having no balls at all, just having real, working balls in your sack would be a bonus over being a eunuch.

People actually pay money to get those cords snipped in a vasectomy, right?

This woman was trying to avoid early menopause, not just trying to make it so that she could have children. I bet if the had that ovary implanted but not fully hooked up she could avoid menopause and avoid mensturation: the best of both worlds, still whole without being fertile, still enjoying sex without having to worry about birth control.

Correct me if I'm wrong, please, because I'm just guessing.

The cords to the testicles are not merely suspensory, they also carry the blood vessels which sustain the testes. In a vasectomy, only the vas deferens is clipped in order to prevent sperm from make a complete journey.

ChemistryKid (imported) wrote: Thu Feb 15, 2007 2:06 pm Are the testicular cords actually necessary? Sure, it would be nice to be able to have children, but if you are faced with having no balls at all, just having real, working balls in your sack would be a bonus over being a eunuch.

People actually pay money to get those cords snipped in a vasectomy, right?

This woman was trying to avoid early menopause, not just trying to make it so that she could have children. I bet if the had that ovary implanted but not fully hooked up she could avoid menopause and avoid mensturation: the best of both worlds, still whole without being fertile, still enjoying sex without having to worry about birth control.

Correct me if I'm wrong, please, because I'm just guessing.

It would probably be easier to hook up the blood vessels and then the hormones would circulate into the blood than it would be to hook up the vas deferens.

But yes, the fallopian tubes would have to be functional before she could be fertile. But the point is that she wanted to be fertile.

Anyways, somebody writes us a little story, now...