CAUTION! THIS SPECIALIZED ITEM DOES NOT CURRENTLY EXIST. ANY EQUIVALENT THAT MAY CURRENTLY EXIST SHOULD BE CONSIDERED UNSAFE TO USE FOR THIS PURPOSE UNTIL PROVEN OTHERWISE.

The womb is somewhat of a delicate place. It's interior might be described as being roughly equivalent to an open wound. Messing around in there can be fatal. IUD birth-control devices sometimes were, for example (to say nothing of abortions gone wrong).

It occurred to me that while the womb's interior surface is specialized to accommodate the implanting of an approximately embryonic human, what if that surface could be altered to prevent it? In theory an IUD does something like that, although last I heard, the details were not understood. So how about a more direct approach: SEAL the inner surface of the womb.

If some sort of sealant could be applied to a womb's inner surface, no implantation could occur. The sealant would only last until menstruation begins (because then the womb's inner surface sloughs off and is replaced). The sealant would have to be reapplied after menstruation ends, and would in theory prevent pregnancy until the next cycle.

My first thoughts along the line of womb-sealant involved something like the well-known product "ScotchGuard", but I knew at once this stuff is probably toxic. DON'T EVEN THINK OF TRYING THAT! --But, CAN there be a safe sealant for the interior of a womb? And can it be applied safely?

As a possible first-approximation "yes" to the question of whether or not a safe sealant can exist, see link. Whether or not it or any currently-existing equivalent of it is actually safe for this purpose remains to be determined.

Regarding applying such a sealant safely, this is another matter altogether. Mechanically, partly inserting a tube having spray-nozzle at that end should be easier than fully inserting an IUD. But the gases typically involved in a common spraying process are another matter altogether. Some may be toxic inside a womb. Perhaps a simpler "atomizer" approach would be better, where hand-pumping compresses and sprays the liquid sealant, no gases involved.

To be determined....
-- Vernon, Dec 27 2005

Spray-on sealant, safe for external use. http://www.cpr-save...andage%20spray.html
As mentioned in the main text. [Vernon, Dec 27 2005]

of course, it would be far simpler to seal off the end of the penetrating tool instead!
-- po, Dec 27 2005


I suspect the copper-containing IUDs work like this.
-- bungston, Dec 27 2005


Oh, [Vernon]. I feel sure to miss the sense of this Idea, but I'll venture on.

As to the womb "being roughly equivalent to an open wound", I think you'd be better served to view it as you would that cavity between your eyes through which passes your nasal breathing, and include if you will the lachrymal ducts and paranasal sinuses.

I consider your front concept, contraception, the more difficult to imagine. This could work, but had better work completely, because if the barrier were inefficient there would likely be an increase in ectopic pregnancies to above the current 2% rate, a disastrous outcome.
-- reensure, Dec 27 2005


[po], if you are talking about something like a "male urethra plug", well, logically that could work, but what about leakage and back-pressure? If you are talking about condoms, well, that's an OLD Idea, so I couldn't very well write about that. :)

[bungston], yes, I also was thinking that copper IUDs "poison" the surface of the womb with respect to implantation. If it was that simple, I would imagine a woman going to a hardware store to buy a nice length of #8 solid uninsulated copper wire (electrical-wiring copper is as pure as they make), then cutting off maybe a 2-cm piece, sanding the cut ends smooth and rounded, cleaning it thoroughly, and then inserting that. REALLY CHEAP AND SIMPLE. Much to the drug companies' dismay.

[reensure], about the open wound thing, good point; mucus is a surface-protector for skinless flesh. About the other thing, it is my understanding that ectopic pregnancies are mostly caused by the fertilized egg not being able to get out of the fallopean tube easily. I wasn't expecting this womb-coating thing to be so thick that it would block the exits of the fallopean tubes into the womb. One more thing To Be Determined, I'm sure!
-- Vernon, Dec 27 2005



random, halfbakery