Sodium Chloride Sterilization?

A injection of sodium chloride to the testicles could be used as a cheaper alternative to neutering your cat or dog. Not only does it cost less but it's also far less invasive. Would you consider this? Why or why not?
Sodium Chloride Sterilization?
Yes
Vote A
No
Vote B
Select gender and age to cast your vote:
Girl Guy
0 0

Most Helpful Girls

  • That's called chemical sterilization. Didn't they do this to women in Germany during WW2? They complained of pain and infections related to this method. I would not put my pet through this. When they start using it on humans with no issues, then I will consider it for my pet. If they are not using it on humans instead of surgery, then it is not as great as we are being led to believe...

    • I don't know I've never heard of this and I don't know how such a method would work on females care to elaborate?

  • Personally, I'd rather have them taken off. Firstly, so everyone else knows they are done, secondly, to completely know it's don't correctly and babies can't be made. It's just my preference

    • With this it might be obvious as well as they shrink after and if done the right way this is 100% effctive

    • it has been tested it's not the procedure is mostly pain free other than a little swelling. It's a more human way rather than having them surgeglicly removed because overall it's less invasive. It also cost a lot less takes less time and is very easy to perform. So in places like the pound with large number of pets it could be very helpful. What do you think about it now?

  • Yeah, why not? If it achieves the same result without any harmful side effects, then it could be a viable alternative.

    • Here is a article that explains it better let me know what you think after reading the article?

    • I mean there might be some swelling if you count that as a side effects but I'm sure being able to not have them removed would outweigh the swelling from the anamals perfective right?

    • Show All

Most Helpful Guys

  • Because it is total BS!! Sodium and Chloride are natural electrolytes ans required for normal bodily function!
    So many here OPENLY LIE, and tell stories that are BS!!
    Ryan245 has either been lied to, and passing on the lie, or he is DELUSIONAL. I can't say which, right now!!

  • Huh, I would need to do more research into it myself before deciding to have it done to my pet, but it sure sounds reasonable enough.

    • Let me know what you think

    • Maybe after finals. I don’t have a dog right now anyways.

    • Show All

Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions

What's Your Opinion? Sign Up Now!

What Girls & Guys Said

17 1
  • Salt? Really? What does it do to the testes?

    • It's just salt water and pure alcohol mixed together I don't know exactly what it does but it makes it so they don't work after

    • www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4784444/ it has been tested it's not the procedure is mostly pain free other than a little swelling. It's a more… [+]

    • That article should explain it better than I can lol

    • Show All
  • As long as it's safe and doesn't hurt them or cause long term effects, sure.

    • www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4784444/ it has been tested it's not the procedure is mostly pain free other than a little swelling. It's a more human way rather than having them surgeglicly removed because overall it's less invasive. It also cost a lot less takes less time and is very easy to perform. So in places like the pound with large number of pets it could be very helpful. What do you think about it now?

    • I definitely like it

    • Why do you like it more than the traditional method?

  • Now to test it out on some humans that really shouldn't be breeding.

    • It would work on humans more than likely

  • My cats are girls

    • If you had a male would you consider this as a option

    • I don’t know... I’ve never had a male... maybe neutercless?

  • if there's no additional side effects, i don't see why not. but i would like to look into this further before having a definite opinion

    • www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4784444/ it has been tested it's not the procedure is mostly pain free other than a little swelling. It's a more human way rather than having them surgeglicly removed because overall it's less invasive. It also cost a lot less takes less time and is very easy to perform. So in places like the pound with large number of pets it could be very helpful. What do you think about it now?

  • I wouldn't choose the cheapest option, what if it harms the animal?

    • www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4784444/ it has been tested it's not the procedure is mostly pain free other than a little swelling. It's a more human way rather than having them surgeglicly removed because overall it's less invasive. It also cost a lot less takes less time and is very easy to perform. So in places like the pound with large number of pets it could be very helpful. What do you think about it now?

    • I think I'd still prefer the tried and true way. It doesn't affect the animal, it just stops them from breeding. I also don't see how the way you suggested could always be effective.

    • The salt goes after the seminiferous tubules once that happens the immune cells come in and finish everything off. This it what causes it too happen if you were curious how it works.

  • Why not if less invasive and it works with little to no side effects. Win win

    • www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4784444/ it has been tested it's not the procedure is mostly pain free other than a little swelling. It's a more human way rather than having them surgeglicly removed because overall it's less invasive. It also cost a lot less takes less time and is very easy to perform. So in places like the pound with large number of pets it could be very helpful. What do you think about it now?

  • It's too weird for me

    • www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4784444/ it has been tested it's not the procedure is mostly pain free other than a little swelling. It's a more human way rather than having them surgeglicly removed because overall it's less invasive. It also cost a lot less takes less time and is very easy to perform. So in places like the pound with large number of pets it could be very helpful. What do you think about it now?

    • I wouldn't do it until my cat / dog doctor tell me to do it.

  • I wouldn't trust it until I knew more about it and maybe even seen the after effects.

    • www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4784444/ it has been tested it's not the procedure is mostly pain free other than a little swelling. It's a more human way rather than having them surgeglicly removed because overall it's less invasive. It also cost a lot less takes less time and is very easy to perform. So in places like the pound with large number of pets it could be very helpful. What do you think about it now?

    • The same.

    • https://goo.gl/images/3gPmja here are some pictures of how it effects the insides

  • No, it could affect its overall health or cause mutations

    • It's been proven to be safe in trials all ready

    • What about long term effects?

    • www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4784444/ it has been tested it's not the procedure is mostly pain free other than a little swelling. It's a more human way rather than having them surgeglicly removed because overall it's less invasive. It also cost a lot less takes less time and is very easy to perform. So in places like the pound with large number of pets it could be very helpfu with no known long term effects bother than some shrinkage of the testicles. What do you think about it now?

    • Show All
  • I dont think that safe, what if it harms them?

    • www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4784444/ it has been tested it's not the procedure is mostly pain free other than a little swelling. It's a more human way rather than having them surgeglicly removed because overall it's less invasive. It also cost a lot less takes less time and is very easy to perform. So in places like the pound with large number of pets it could be very helpful. What do you think about it now?

    • well i think its wrong, because animals are made to create other animals, and its just wrong to remove an animal's parts, if you don't want your pet to make babies or to produce babies, don't own a pet, simple, humans wouldn't like if their genitals were remove so why do it to a innocent animal, only for their satisfaction? Just ridiculous, leave it be.

    • But that leads to over population of pets as many of them are having to be put down at shelters every day

    • Show All
  • I don't know.. I wouldn't do that to my dog. I want puppies. But even if I didn't I doubt I would do that. Just because it's cheaper doesn't mean it's safe or hassle free.

    • But people are talking about doing this to anamals in places like the pound how it would work and be far less expensive invasive and less time consuming

    • Ok. Is it tested? If it was, how was it tested? Is it pain free? Who tested it? Why would it matter if we already have a system that works?

    • www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4784444/ it has been tested it's not the procedure is mostly pain free other than a little swelling. It's a more human way rather than having them surgeglicly removed because overall it's less invasive. It also cost a lot less takes less time and is very easy to perform. So in places like the pound with large number of pets it could be very helpful. What do you think about it now?

    • Show All
  • It doesn't sound safe.

    • It's safe no known side effects

  • No. Too tricky if I had a pet

    • How's it too tricky it would most likely be done at a veterinarians office

    • Because it’s not natural

    • Neither is having them surgeglicly removed if anything this is more natural as they at least get to keep them

    • Show All
  • I think that it is very safe but I am not sure how effective it is.

    • The salt goes after the seminiferous tubules once that happens the immune cells come in and finish everything off that's how it works and it's 100% effctive if done right

    • I'd try it if I ever get a dog.

    • Yeah it seems far more human than having them surgeglicly removed don't you think

    • Show All
  • sounds good why isn't it already in practice

    • Because it was just recently discovered a few years ago and needs time to get set into place

    • oh ok

    • I mean over all it seems far less invasive

    • Show All
  • Maybe. But I will go see the veterinarian before using. Dicuss.

    • www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4784444/ it has been tested it's not the procedure is mostly pain free other than a little swelling. It's a more human way rather than having them surgeglicly removed because overall it's less invasive. It also cost a lot less takes less time and is very easy to perform. So in places like the pound with large number of pets it could be very helpful. What do you think about it now?

  • Wtf no!!!

    • Why no it's more human then getting them surgeglicly fixed isn't it?