Tuesday, December 1, 2015

Yet Another Argument For Vasectomy

Along with reduced expenses and nuisance.  From The etiology of prostate cancer: What does the epidemiology suggest?

This study finds a substantial protective effect of vasectomy, an event that is accompanied by reduced prostatic function and size, but this result is thus far statistically insignificant.


  1. That sentence from the end of the abstract makes no sense. Does "this result" refer to protective effect of vasectomy, or reduced prostatic function? And if the result is not statistically significant, why mention it at all except in reference of failing to disprove the null-hypothesis?

  2. I believe the vasectomy. The phrase "thus far" implies that they think more data might move it into statistical significance.

  3. Statistical insignificance means irrelevant. This is not an added benefit of vasectomy based on the cited research.