FDA: Stop Giving Away Sperm!

FDA Orders man to Stop Giving Away Sperm

Trent Arsenault, a 36 year old California man, wants to give away his sperm. He started a website called Trentdonor.org in order to reach out to women and couples who are seeking to conceive a child. On his site he posts his medical evaluations and proof that he is free of STDs, his diet, hobbies and physical attribute. He claims to have fathered at least 13 children, with 4 more on the way.

He charges nothing for this service, and occasionally he is intimate with his donees.

In 2010, the FDA ordered him to stop "MANUFACTURING" sperm, and cease his donation operation!

Since that time, Arsenault has been fighting the agency's efforts to shut him down -- in particular, disputing the notion that he is a "manufacturer" of sperm, given that he packages his semen and distributes it in a cup. He has petitioned for a hearing to prove that even though he does not have sex with his recipients, he is a sexually intimate partner to them (a term the FDA currently does not define) and therefore is exempt from regulatory requirements that apply to manufacturers.

The real trouble for Arsenault began in 2010, when the FDA's Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research inspected his home and found him in violation of numerous regulations, including failing to properly protect himself against communicable diseases.

Traditional sperm "donation" is something of a misnomer. The act of transferring frozen sex cells to women hoping to conceive is big business in the U.S., carried out primarily by large, commercial institutions. They recruit scores of donors and then spend months screening them for STDs and genetic diseases in accordance with federal regulations aimed at preventing the spread of communicable diseases, before freezing their sperm with liquid nitrogen. Sperm donors -- the majority of whom request anonymity -- are typically paid between $50 and $100 per sample.

For the women, the process can be expensive. Donor specimens at institutions like California Cryobank, one of the best-established in the industry, run from $355 to $715 per vial, and many women require several attempts before becoming pregnant.

I can't say that I am surprised by the FDA's reaction. Of course they want to stop him, ($$$$$$) but do they have the right? I'm no doctor, and admit my ignorance as to the pros and cons of this type of thing. I got pregnant the old fashion way.

What do you think ATS. What kind of can of worms can the FDA open? Can they really stop this kind of thing from happening? I think that the more they try to supress this, the more "Trent Arsenaults" will unfulr their "arsenals" to give to women who are seeking sperm.

I love the FDA, telling us what we can and cannot put into our bodies...

I personally don't know why anyone would look for this type of "donor" - but if they want his services I fail to recognize the FDA's so called authority on the matter. This isn't dealing with foods or drugs.

The FDA barely regulates and tests food imports, they should spend their time better protecting the whole population, and not chasing small farmers and wacko sperm donors. Wonder how much this fiasco will cost the taxpayer.

I think that as long as someone wants it, it should be left alone. I'm not surprised at the FDA.

I do think he should keep donating, but only the old fashioned way

Oh and I wonder what they mean by intimate, as sex is not in the definition of intimate.

I don't know about if FDA should intervene, but some sort of organization should intervene.

you think all sperm comes out of a man is 100% healthy? it needs to be tested for motility and other simple features and possibly other important tests before they do an insertion of a foreign particlest into another person.

Oh don't forget about genetic disorders that lay dorment.

reply to post by luciddream


What if a man was to go through the rigors of the traditional sperm bank testing, then he decides to go rouge? Would there still be those controversial dangers? I'm just asking, as it seems that you know more about this than I.

reply to post by windword


he should have a government paid castration

how dare he give his sperm away for free and cut into the sperm banksters profits!

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by luciddream

 

What if a man was to go through the rigors of the traditional sperm bank testing, then he decides to go rouge? Would there still be those controversial dangers? I'm just asking, as it seems that you know more about this than I.

Do you mean if a man is tested ok to deliver sperm through a Traditional Sperm Bank and then he diecided to do his own "business"?

Sperm is made almost everyday in your body, there is always variation of factors that affect it's outcome, such as stress, health and definitely the age. I'm not sure of the testing periods on a sperm bank but i would assume they do test each time you donate sperm.

Originally posted by luciddream

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by luciddream

 

What if a man was to go through the rigors of the traditional sperm bank testing, then he decides to go rouge? Would there still be those controversial dangers? I'm just asking, as it seems that you know more about this than I.

Do you mean if a man is tested ok to deliver sperm through a Traditional Sperm Bank and then he diecided to do his own "business"?

Sperm is made almost everyday in your body, there is always variation of factors that affect it's outcome, such as stress, health and definitely the age. I'm not sure of the testing periods on a sperm bank but i would assume they do test each time you donate sperm.

So, lets say that you have a married couple. The man is having problems with his job and is stressed out. He and his wife have been fighting over money and he goes out drinking with his friends. When he comes home, his wife apologizes, and they have make up sex, She becomes pregnant. Is his sperm likely to have problems because of the stress and drinking. Is the baby at more risk then say, a week earlier?

Originally posted by windword

Originally posted by luciddream

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by luciddream

 

What if a man was to go through the rigors of the traditional sperm bank testing, then he decides to go rouge? Would there still be those controversial dangers? I'm just asking, as it seems that you know more about this than I.

Do you mean if a man is tested ok to deliver sperm through a Traditional Sperm Bank and then he diecided to do his own "business"?

Sperm is made almost everyday in your body, there is always variation of factors that affect it's outcome, such as stress, health and definitely the age. I'm not sure of the testing periods on a sperm bank but i would assume they do test each time you donate sperm.

So, lets say that you have a married couple. The man is having problems with his job and is stressed out. He and his wife have been fighting over money and he goes out drinking with his friends. When he comes home, his wife apologizes, and they have make up sex, She becomes pregnant. Is his sperm likely to have problems because of the stress and drinking. Is the baby at more risk then say, a week earlier?

Simple fights, small stress and quick rounds of vodka is not going to affect the outcome of the child. Also sperm variation is not instant either, just because you drank a cup of radioactive liquid today, does not mean the sperm produced tomorrow would be affected. Its more of a chronic exposure....

Where is PETA and the animal rights folks in this?

Should they argue that the FDA is outside it's jurisdiction?

Why isn't the USDA involved instead?

Still, if the guy is just GIVING IT AWAY, can they really go after him?

Originally posted by davidchin
Where is PETA and the animal rights folks in this?

Should they argue that the FDA is outside it's jurisdiction?

Why isn't the USDA involved instead?

Still, if the guy is just GIVING IT AWAY, can they really go after him?

PETA? USDA? As you inferring that this qualifies as animal husbantry?
OH, Where's the HUMANITY?!?

I don't see any reason for the FDA to get involved except to protect sperm bank profiteers. In fact, I don't see how this is under the jurisdiction of the FDA in the first place. Health and Human Services, maybe, but certainly not the FDA.

It says he's clean of STDs and otherwise is in good health. As for checking for motility and genetic defects, don't we all take that chance? There's no money exchanged so it's not like he's trying to scam anyone.

The FDA shouldn't get involved but this is just kind of disturbing....
If any woman or couple takes his sperm without even knowing who the heck he is, they have some serious problems

I think they very well could be stepping on Trent's first amendment rights to freely practice his religion.
I'm not going to say I know what religion he subscribes to, if any, but there are many religions that forbid "spilling of one's seed". So Trent's putting his seed to use. If he were to donate it to a sperm bank, he has no assurance that some of it will not be wasted.

If these women and couples are willing (and presumably happy, he's saving them big $$ afterall) to accept his donations, how would this be more of a health risk than if he were to be having intercourse with all these women?

The government should stay away from this.

No then, if only our collective voices had an effect on our run-away power hungry, unsupervised government agencies. They have no common sense.