The Pill
Many women know that the pill can cause blood clots, stroke, heart attack, weight gain, and decreased libido. Less well-known is that it is classified as a group one carcinogen for breast, liver, and cervical cancers, which is the same classification as cigarettes and asbestos. This risk is highest for women who have not yet had a full-term pregnancy. While it is true that the pill decreases risk of ovarian and endometrial cancers, these are rather rare types which most women have little risk of, while breast cancer is the most common cancer death among women of childbearing age. I hope your doctor has told you of these side effects if you are on the pill.Here is something that you probably were not informed of: the pill ages the cervix about two years for every one year of use. This is one reason why pill use can lead to infertility later on (and why the contraceptive industry fuels the multi-billion dollar infertility industry). The cervix produces different types of cervical fluid, and each type has a different function. When a woman is in the infertile part of her cycle, her body produces a type of cervical fluid that blocks sperm from entering her cervix and uterus. During the 100 hours of her cycle when a woman is capable of becoming pregnant, her cervix produces types of fluid that protect, nourish, and guide sperm to her possibly waiting egg, as well as filtering out defective sperm. One function of the pill is that it changes her cervix so that it increases the amount of crypts that make the fluid that blocks sperm and decreases the amount of crypts that aid conception. This process happens naturally with age, but it happens twice as fast for pill-users.
The pill also changes her chemistry and cellular function as to make a woman more susceptible to getting HIV/AIDS and other STDs. Pill-use increases susceptibility to HIV/AIDS, increases the rate of replication of the HIV virus, and speeds the debilitating effects of the disease. Pill and Depo-Provera use is a likely reason why more women have HIV than men.
The pill causes so many hormonal and physical changes in a woman's body that it seems there are always new discoveries about yet another way the pill affects a woman's body. Several studies have shown that the pill also affects the Major Histo-Compatibility (MHC) complex, which plays a role in immune function. Non pill-users are more attracted to a mate that has different MHC genes than her own. Though research is ongoing, it is suspected that this aids the immune function of their offspring, as the children would have a more complete MHC profile. Pill-users, however, are more attracted to MHC-similar mates, which leads some to suspect pill-use as contributing to the growing rate of children now dealing with various immune disorders.
IUD
In a healthy woman, the uterus is sterile. When an IUD is inserted, her body recognizes this as a foreign object and tries to expel it. Her uterus will contract, become inflamed, and shed its inner lining in an effort to remove the IUD, sometimes for months. Excessive bleeding can lead to anemia. For IUDs that contain hormones, these will reduce bleeding and cramping, but it has synthetic hormones and carries the same risks as the pill.IUD makers warn that users are at greater risk of developing Pelvic Inflammatory Disease, which can lead to infertility, hysterectomy, and even death. IUD users are at greater risk of developing pelvic infections. IUD users are at greater risk of getting yeast infections and Bacterial Vaginosis (BV), which is a change in the normal bacteria in the vagina. With BV there is more pathogenic bacteria than healthy bacteria. A BV infection can increase a woman's risk of contracting HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections. Other risks of IUD use include perforation of the uterus, uterine embedment of the IUD, infertility, and ectopic pregnancy. When an IUD fails, the pregnancy is extremely high risk to both baby and mother. Although I was unable to find scholarly articles on this, a suspicious number of women on various forums and other sites seem to have experienced their first seizure after IUD-insertion.
Depo Provera
Depo Provera is an injection of the synthetic hormone progestin. One function of the shot is that it alters a woman's cervical fluid. This ages the cervix and can lead to permanent infertility. (Please see "the pill" section for a more comprehensive explanation.) Women who use the shot are twice as likely to contract HIV/AIDS, have increased rate of HIV replication, and have an increased chance of transmitting the virus to others. A 2004 study concluded that the shot interferes with a woman's immune system and puts her at greater risk of contracting gonorrhea and chlamydia. Additional risks of the Depo shot include a double risk of breast cancer among recent users and bone density loss.Barrier Methods
As I was working on this post, 1flesh.org wrote about the risks of condoms, so as they've done a lot of my research for me in this area, I'll sum up their points, and if you want more details you can head over here. What many people don't know is that semen is very healthy for women's health. Semen acts as an anti-depressant and women who use condoms have higher depression rates than women who do not. To quote a 2002 study on the subject, "Not only were females who were having sex without condoms less depressed, but depressive symptoms and suicide attempts among females who used condoms were proportional to the consistency of condom use." Other studies have suggested that semen can regulate a woman's menstrual cycle, prevent preeclampsia in pregnancy, and reduce breast cancer risk.Spermicides irritate vaginal walls which makes women more susceptible to HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections.
Female Sterilization
Tubal ligation is a surgical procedure. As such it carries all the risks of an invasive surgery such as risk of infection, pain, blood clots, and death. Other risks include ectopic pregnancy and for younger patients, higher risk of hysterectomy later. Many women regret having the procedure and may become depressed. Women who have used the birth control pill prior to surgery may experience symptoms of Post Tubal Ligation Syndrome.Male Sterilization
In normal male function, sperm are produced in the testes, stored in the epididymis above the testes, and during ejaculation are expelled directly out of the body. Sperm and semen never interact with any other part of a man's body and do not enter the bloodstream. Normal men produce approximately 200 million sperm per day.Risks of sterilization include pain and swelling at the site. Some may acquire an infection. Some men will experience chronic pain and tenderness or may need to have a surgical removal of a sperm granuloma (a mass of sperm and immune cells).
A vasectomy does not inhibit sperm production. Instead of traveling through a tube to the outside of the body, after a vasectomy the millions of sperm spill into the male's body cavity and are recognized as foreign cells and are attacked by his immune system. After 6-9 months after a vasectomy, 90% of men had antisperm antibodies in their blood though the effects of these antigens has not been well studied. Some believe this may contribute to autoimmune disorders. Perhaps due to these antigens, it appears vasectomy is a risk factor for developing Primary Progressive Aphasia (PPA) later on. PPA is a form of dementia which impairs a person's ability to form words in speech, and as it progresses, it can lead to other symptoms of dementia like strange behavior, lack of judgement, and personality changes. In men who have developed PPA, those who had a vasectomy had an earlier age of onset of the disorder than men who have not had a vasectomy. Depression and regretted sterilization is also a risk.
What’s a Woman To Do?
The belief that we have no choice but to bear with the side effects and expense of artificial methods of birth control if we do not wish to have a child at the moment is false. Natural Family Planning is a method in which women learn to observe the changes in their bodies so they know when they are fertile. In India, one study included over 16,000 poor Hindu, Muslim, and Christian women using NFP. They had an effectiveness rate of over 99%. Likewise, in China the effectiveness rates of NFP have remained at about 99%. Furthermore, couples who try NFP tend to like it and continue using it. NFP has a higher continuation rate than all reversible methods of birth control.
Though Natural Family Planning is often mistaken for the old rhythm method, modern methods are based on science. One thing that many people do not know is that a woman is fertile about 100 hours a cycle. During the time when a woman is capable of conceiving, her body secretes a particular type of cervical fluid. This fluid is produced as a result of hormonal changes that stimulate egg maturation in preparation for ovulation. In fact, Drs. Billings, Brown, and Burger studied how women's observations of their fluid correlated with their hormonal changes, and in 1972 published their findings that women can know through simple observation where they are in their fertility cycle just as accurately as doctors and medical personnel in laboratories with fancy lab equipment.It might be misleading, however, to say that there are no side-effects of using NFP. There are some: NFP couples report increased respect for self and spouse; they almost never divorce; they report an increase in communication with each other and an increase in the quantity and quality of intercourse. For me, I think women deserve to have these side effects.
Links:
Chinese study comparing an NFP method with IUD
Information about the different NFP methods, including a quiz to find the one right for you.
Sources:
1. Department of Reproductive Health and Research, "Carcinogenicity of Combined Hormonal Contraceptives and Combined Menopausal Treatment," World Health Organization, (September 2005) accessed Sept 27, 2011 http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/topics/ageing/cocs_hrt_statement.pdf
2. Jared M. Baeten, Ludo Lavreys, Manish Sagar, et al. “Effective of Contraceptive Methods on Natural History of HIV: Studies From the Mombasa Cohort,” Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes, 38 (March 2005): Suppl 18-S19, accessed July 25, 2012, http://journals.lww.com/jaids/Fulltext/2005/03001/Effect_of_Contraceptive_Methods_on_Natural_History.13.aspx
3. Melinda Wenner, “Birth Control Pills Affect Women’s Taste in Men.” Scientific American, September 5 2008, accessed July 25, 2012,
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=birth-control-pills-affect-womens-taste
4. Sumar Musmar, “Epidimiology of Aerobic Bacterial Infections Among IUD Users in the Northern West Bank,” An-Najah University Journal for Research, 18 no.1 (2004): 13-24, accessed July 25, 2012, http://blogs.najah.edu/staff/employee/article/Epidimiology-of-Aerobic-Bacterial-Infections-among-IUD-Intrauterine-lrmDevice-Users-in-the-Northern-West-Bank
5. Centers for Disease Control. Bacterial Vaginosis: The Facts. CDC Publication 99-8825, accessed July 25, 2012, http://www.cdc.gov/STD/Bv/the-facts/E01_BV_dummy.pdf
6. Pam Belluck. “Contraceptive Used in Africa May Double Risk of H.I.V.” The New York Times, Oct 3 2011, accessed July 25, 2012, http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/04/health/04hiv.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all
7. C.S. Morrison, P. Bright, E.L. Wong, et al. “Hormonal Contraceptive Use, Cervical Ectopy, and the Acquisition of Cervical Infections,” Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 38 no.9 (Sept 2004): 561-7 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15480119?dopt=Abstracthttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15480119?dopt=Abstract
8. Rita Rubin. “Birth Control Shot Tied To Breast Cancer Risk, Study Says.” Vitals:MSNBC, April 5, 2012, accessed 25 July 2012, http://vitals.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/04/05/11023876-birth-control-shots-tied-to-breast-cancer-risk-study-says?
9. Gordon G. Jr. Gallup, Rebecca L. Burch, Steven M. Platek, “Does Semen Have AntiDepressant Properties?” Archives of Sexual Behavior, 31 no.3 (2002): 289-293, accessed 25 July 2012, http://www.springerlink.com/content/wrkl9lc5ueu43rh8/
10. Gretchen Cuda Kroen, “What Spermicide Users Should Know, But Often Don’t.” Shots: NPR’s Health Blog, Feb 6, 2012, accessed 25 July 2012, http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2012/02/06/146343080/what-spermicide-users-should-know-but-often-dont
11. M.M. Cohen, “Long-Term Risk of Hysterectomy After Tubal Sterilization.” American Journal of Epidimiology, 125 no.3 (March 1987): 410-419, accessed July 25, 2012, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3812448http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3812448
12. “Getting Your Tubes Tied: Is This Common Procedure Causing Uncommon Problems?” WebMD, Last modified Jan 30, 2005, accessed 25 July 2012, http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=51216
13. K.S. Tung, “Human Sperm Antigens and Antisperm Antibodies I. Studies on Vasectomy Patients.” Clinical and Experimental Immunology, 20 no. 1 (Apr 1975): 93-104, accessed 25 July 2012, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1538169/
14. Maria Paul, “Vasectomy May Put Men at Risk for Type of Dementia.” News Center: Northwestern University, Feb 13, 2007, accessed July 25, 2012, http://www.northwestern.edu/newscenter/stories/2007/02/vasectomy.html
15. Sandra Weintraub, PhD., Christopher Fahey, MD., Nancy Johnson, PhD., et al. “Vasectomy in Men with Primary Progressive Aphasia.” Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology, 19 no. 4 (Dec 2006): 190-193, accessed July 25, 2012, http://journals.lww.com/cogbehavneurol/Abstract/2006/12000/Vasectomy_in_Men_With_Primary_Progressive_Aphasia.4.aspxhttp://journals.lww.com/cogbehavneurol/Abstract/2006/12000/Vasectomy_in_Men_With_Primary_Progressive_Aphasia.4.aspx
16. R.E. Ryder, "'Natural Family Planning': Effective Birth Control Supported by the Catholic Church," British Medical Journal, 307 no.6906 (18 Sep 1993): 723-6 accessed Sept 27, 2011 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8401097
17. Shao-Zhen Qian, “China Successfully Launching Billings Ovulation Method.” Shangai Institute of Materia Medica, Chinese Academy of Sciences, (presented at International Jubilee Conference, 50th Anniversary of Billings Method, Universersity of Melbourne, Australia, (Mar 28-30, 2003) accessed July 25, 2012, http://www.woomb.org/bom/trials/chinaLaunching.html
Wow! Amazingly thorough. I'm sharing this because I agree with you: women (and men) deserve to know what they're really putting into their bodies!
ReplyDeleteThank you!
DeleteI had no idea that was how a vascectomy worked! Everyone thinks that is the "safest options" for the couple!
ReplyDeleteWe love NFP, and we love each other, so we respect each other's bodies and reproductive abilities. God decides when it is time for us to have a child, it is not up to us!
Thanks for the wonderful information!
Good info! Thanks for sharing.
ReplyDeleteAwesome. Awesome! Loved every word. If women think the pill is beneficial because it protects against ovarian and endometrial cancer, I would argue that breastfeeding protects against these diseases as well - without the other side effects of the pill.
ReplyDeleteMommynts, Even though it sounds cynical, I've pretty much gotten to the point where if anyone tries to convince me that an unnatural way of doing things is superior to nature's way, I think, "What are they trying to sell?" We see this argument come up again and again. In the 50's everyone thought formula was superior to breastmilk. Or people believed that pesticides on crops were so awesome. Now we know that organic is better for the environment and our bodies. Today people believe, and we actually have medical professionals telling women that the pill is healthy for us, or it's companies trying to sell us on GMO crops...etc. I think it's now just a basic belief of mine that natural is healthy, and deviating from that has consequences. Obviously if something is wrong then we might need to intervene, such as surgery for legitimate problems in the body. But if things are working the way they are supposed to....good! Don't try to change it.
ReplyDeleteAmen!
DeleteThank you, April, for doing somehow both a comprehensive yet succinct post on the dangers of contraception! You incorporated several points many NFP promoters (including myself) don't fully know about or speak about as thoroughly as other points, particularly on sterilization and the IUD.
ReplyDeleteAgreed, too, about the point of "What are they trying to sell?" Just follow the money....I wish I had a printer to print this out to every doctor (especially Catholics that prescribe contraception) I see!
NFPworks, I think you are the first person in my life to have ever called me "succinct".
DeleteVery interesting. However, what about the fact that the part of her cycle when a woman is fertile is usually the time she will most want to and most enjoy sex? Seems a shame not to be able to enjoy that without risking unwanted pregnancy.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous, that is a very good question and one that concerns a fair number of people. While that could be a blog post all on its own, I'll just recount some things that I've noticed from my own experience. It's true, when a woman is fertile, she is most attracted to her husband, and she is most giving, cooperative, and energetic. She's emitting pheromones that make him really want her too. What I have noticed is when my husband and I really want to come together, if we aren't able to do that physically...it seems like we end up doing that emotionally. Most of our really great connecting, sharing moments where I feel like I've gained some deep insight into who my husband is, or I feel deeply known and understood, seem to happen when I'm fertile and we're abstaining. Because of this, it's my personal opinion that the periods of abstinence have strengthened our relationship and made sex the rest of the time really satisfying. As such, I've actually come to really treasure and even look forward to my times of ovulation and even miss them when I'm not ovulating due to pregnancy or breastfeeding.
Delete[This is a different Anonymous from above] The Pill doesn't provide an answer to Anonymous' concern about enjoyment, either. A woman on the Pill has a lower libido.
Delete"Researchers found that women who used a hormonal method of birth control — mostly oral contraceptives — had lower levels of sexual desire and arousal than women who used nonhormonal methods like condoms or no contraception at all."
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1987870,00.html
April's response is very accurate in how NFP wives do not feel "shortchanged" by having to abstaing in their most fertile time. After 17 years practicing NFP I have experienced something very similar to what she shares. Our marital embrace has not been less pleasurable for me because it has not always been during fertile phases, and yet it has been enriched so much by the spiritual and emotional embrace that has consistently grown and develop over the years.
DeleteIf you're married to someone who doesn't have HIV/AIDS, I have a hard time understanding how using a condom with spermicides (which most condoms don't have) increases the risk of getting it. And to the depression point: presumably a women abstaining from sex is going to have the same amount of semen inside of her as a woman who's having sex with a condom: no semen at all. So how is that a valid point?
ReplyDeleteIf someone isn't having sex with an HIV positive partner, they aren't going to get HIV. I intended this post for the general population and did not make the assumption that all readers would be married and monogamous. A lot of people are having sex with people that they don't necessarily know the sexual histories of and use various barrier methods with spermicides without knowing about this risk.
DeleteIn regards to your second concern, if people are using NFP to avoid pregnancy, they abstain from sex for about a week. She would get the benefit of semen the rest of the time, unlike couples who consistently use a condom.
Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteIf you want to take on the risk factors that come along with contraception in it's many forms that is fine. I know that NFP has really saved my life because it helped me to discover that I have a major hormonal imbalance that in time would have become life threatening if not treated properly. I also would have become permanently infertile. When I was on BC pills from a OBGYN for "medical reasons" before I was married. I came to find out that those symptoms were symptoms of my hormonal imbalanced that were mistaken for severe PMS but the OB didn't want to take the time to actually find out the source of the symptoms. Instead he chose to just stick a "Band-Aid" on the problem in the form of BC pills. Because he was a doctor and at that time I was naively believing, like many others, that doctors were good at their jobs and actually knew what they were talking about, I went along with what he said for 9 years. I took the pills as prescribed yet the symptoms got worst year by year, every year he would change the type of pill upping the hormonal dosage until I was so ill from morning sickness that I was almost unable to leave my home for graduate level course at some points in the month.
Once my husband proposed to me I started looking into alternatives to the BC pills because I knew the catholic church's teachings on contraception. When I asked for an alternative for the BC pills, That OB pretty much told me I had no choice, and if I decided to use NFP I'd have 20 kids, and all the symptoms would only get worst. For once I did not heed his advice and discontinued use of my BC pills, learned NFP and found an NFP only provider.
Now that I am receiving in-depth treatment and am seeing an endocrinologist most of my symptoms have resolved and I am following the truth of the church. I know that NFP is hard from some and I'm not down playing those difficulties, but for my family, NFP was a God send.
what about nuvaring? i know it has the same properties of the pill but it is different in the ways it is absorbed and i never really understood how it works monthly...does it STOP working afer 3 weeks?
ReplyDeleteThe NuvaRing is very similar to the pill. For pill users, most are designed that the woman takes the combination hormones for three weeks, then takes a placebo pill for a week, then starts the process over. The placebo causes withdrawal bleeding so a woman has her "period" (though this is not a true period, it's hormone withdrawal bleeding). The same is true for the NuvaRing. She gets a steady dose of hormones for 3 weeks, removes the ring for a week (which has the same purpose of the placebo pills in oral contraceptives), then inserts another ring after that. As such, it has the same risks as the pill.
DeleteI know this is old, but I used the NuvaRing for a short time. I was in horrible pain. I don't know what caused the pain exactly. My doctor pretty much told me that it was all in my head and that there was no way that the NuvaRing caused the problems but within 30 minutes of insertion the cramping/sick feelings started and my back hurt around the mid lower area. (kidney?) It was terrible sickness until I decided to take it out, then within about 30 minutes to an hour I started feeling better. All in my head? Or a sickness caused by hormones that should have never been in my body?
DeleteMy husband has been trying to convince me for years that taking his semen was healthy...Should I tell him that I found scientific proof that he's correct? ;)
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteI am just curious as to where the information came from. I am sure that with every medication there are side effects, but sometimes the pill is necessary for other health problems such as pcos or endometriosis. Contiually reading how I could end up with breast cancer because of choices I had to make so I could somewhat function with never ending pain is frustrating. I understand that birth control isn't condoned in nfp, but sometimes the words written and not explored in depth can cause more harm than good.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous, I would mirror what the Baroness said in looking into NaPro Technology if you haven't already. NaProTechnology.com The thing I like about NaPro doctors is that they are committed to getting to the root of gynecological disorders and treating the causes, not just covering everything up with the pill as in mainstream gynecology. The downside is that there just aren't NaPro doctors in every community. I, myself, had to travel an hour and 45 minutes to see one. So the reality is that NaPro just might not be possible for some women, or they might just feel NaPro is not right for them.
DeleteSo, yes, it's important to let women know about the option of NaPro because many don't know it exists, but either way, the woman faced with these difficult circumstances has to decide what's right for her, and (I don't know your religious affiliation) but I think it's also important to know that the Catholic church is not opposed to the pill when used for medical reasons.
Yes it is, the Catholic church told me even facing death, after so many operations, that any form of contraception was still wrong.The bible has not changed. It's a very difficult decision for many women, but God knows your heart & why we choose what we do, so forgiveness will be granted if you ask.
DeleteI guess my answer wasn't completely correct regarding the Catholic position on treating menstrual abnormalities with birth control. Here is an in-depth explanation of the Catholic position from American Life League: http://www.all.org/nav/index/heading/OQ/cat/Mzc/id/NjgyMg/ Although it doesn't mention NaPro Technology, it does mention other remedies for more common ailments.
DeleteAmerican Life League is more Catholic than the Pope.
DeleteHumanae Vitae 15 (written BY the Pope) addresses the issue directly. You were right the first time.
Anonymous is incorrect, the Church's teaching on birth control for medical necessity is that it is acceptable as the PRIMARY function of it is NOT to inhibit conception.
DeleteJust as getting a hysterectomy specifically to sterilize oneself is wrong, having a hysterectomy due to medical necessity is not wrong.
There are some treatments that the secondary result is infertility, that does not make it wrong to use according to the Church. But the Church does recommend one search into other treatments before using one that causes infertility as well as states for those who ARE on BC for medical reasons still chart their cycle and abstain during the fertile times (which can still be seen by temperature).
If someone in the Catholic Church DID truly say that, then they are not teaching from the Church and they are wrong. This is why people need to look into Church teaching themselves instead of just what a priest or religious person may say--I've had some tell me masturbation is perfectly fine, which according to the Church is certainly not the case as it is a mortal sin.
I'm like Anonymous. I spent 18 years of my life (9-27) just trying to SURVIVE the pain of my cycle. I can't even count the number of days of school and work I missed. How many times I landed in the ER getting eye rolls and glares from male doctors who could not believe or understand how I could POSSIBLY have cramps so bad I needed to be in the ER. I can't even count the number of times I was drug tested to ensure I wasn't there just trying to "score".
DeleteI wasn't even sexually active till I was over 22 years old. So I was never on the pill or anything. And I was absolutely miserable. My cycle was never regular. I used to say it was a hurricane. I never knew when it would hit or how bad it would be till it was over and done with. It was a horrible existence. Getting on the pill, I had a TON of side effects. BUT I was regular and the pain was significantly reduced. But I came off them when my libido dropped and it was affecting my relationship. Now, some 7 years later, after god knows how many variations of the pill, I'm on the nuva ring and my side effects are minimal enough that I can function normally (I should note that as I don't (ever) want children, my Dr has me using the ring constantly. I wear it for 3 weeks then replace it immediately without a bleed...for those who are curious).
I'm aware of the risks. And I'm aware of how often new ones seem to turn up. But after 18 years of struggling just to function normally, I gotta say, if I even get 20 years of healthy, normal life out of this, only to die young from cancer, I'd rather that then spend my ENTIRE life in dread of my cycle and in fear of my period.
Which is really all it was. Fear that I was preggers cause it wasn't on time. Fear it was going to be a really bad one cause it was so late. Fear I wouldn't stop bleeding this time cause it went on for so long. Fear I didn't bleed enough. Fear my pain was a sign of something really wrong with me. Fear I'd get my cycle during an important time for me and not be able to show up or function that day. Fear I'd bleed too much and ruin another pair of pants/skirt. Fear it would start unexpectedly while I was out somewhere without the proper "tools" to handle it. And ultimately, fear I'd live my ENTIRE LIFE like that.
So yeah. My risk of cancer is increased. Especially considering my mother died of Uterine Sarcoma. She suffered for two years before it finally took her. And the sad thing is, all I can think is that if I could go back in time and get on the pill at age 9, I would HAPPILY trade all those years of misery for two of absolute sickness with death looking over my shoulder. That's just how miserable I was. And I'd never, EVER, be willing to go back.
Snooch,
DeleteI'm so sorry for all the misery you've gone through, and I really feel for women in your situation. That really is no way to live. I'm not a doctor or anything, but I usually just try to make women aware of NaPro Technology. And I say this, not to tell you what to do, but just to make you aware of it if you weren't already. NaPro doctors are often able to treat the underlying causes of such symptoms without the risks of birth control. I only mention it because a lot of women haven't heard of it and might want to look into it if they knew about it.
All the best!
I was diagnosed with pcos in high school and the doctors tried fertility drugs (less chance of bad side effects, I was told, and since I wasn't sexually active it shouldn't be a problem), eventually birth control pills, and then some further treatments just to try to get it under control. Some so barbaric that the nurse refused to be in the room when it was administered (injection needle the size of a roofing nail, anyone?)
DeleteI finally got fed up when I was in college and quit all treatments because they were making me se sick. I've since found a vitamin (Inositol) listed on Wikipedia, of all places, which regulated my cycle. It doesn't treat any of the other symptoms, of course, but has worked beautifully for that one thing.
There is a reason that we say doctors "practice" medicine. It's not always as exact of a science as they would have us believe. I would encourage anyone to explore their options as much as they can instead of relying on long-term synthetic hormones to "fix" a problem. Trying natural alternatives is no different from trying the mainstream medical offerings, really. Sadly, while doctors yell about the alternatives being medically unsound, untested, and unsafe, so many of their own pills are just as unsafe! Do your own research.
I was diagnosed with PCOS when I was in High School. They originally put me on BC Pills but I have the most horrendous migraines during the by-week that I stopped taking them. Cut forward about 10 years and I discovered that I actually had a thyroid problem exasperated by a gluten and dairy intolerance. If you have a hormonal problem, don't rely on your OBGYN to help, that is not their expertise. Go to an endocrinologist, or even try alternatives like acupuncture or a naturopath or even a homeopath.
DeleteTaking the pill if you have PCOS just masks your symptoms and can leave you with more problems. My best friend has PCOS and took the pill for years as a band aid. It left her with damaged fertility, permanent physical impairments, a permanently low libido and massively reduced ability to sleep. She has struggled with ongoing depression and has fought full-blown diabetes as a result. If you have PCOS, PLEASE do not take the pill. That is like taking aspirin for heartburn.
DeleteAnonymous,
ReplyDeleteLook into the Creighton Method and Napro-Technology. Napro-technology specializes in PCOS and Endometriosis. It is Scientifically proven.
You might also look into joining http://livingthesacrament.com. It's an NFP forum and support group.
Fascinating! I'm so glad I have never nor will I ever use any of the above mentioned contraception. Shared and reposted because we all deserve the truth. Thanks for blogging!
ReplyDeleteHi, I really liked your blog and posted it on my Facebook status as a "good food for thought." I wholeheartedly support the use of NFP and wish more people knew about it as a viable option! After posting your blog post, a friend countered it with this website- referring to seaman as an antidepressant. http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/200210/crying-over-spilled-semen. Any thoughts on this?
ReplyDeleteThe article your friend posted from psychology today is about the 2002 study that I referred to (and linked to) in my Barrier Methods section. Yes, semen acts as an antidepressant and women who use condoms (male or female) have higher depression rates as they don't get semen's antidepressant benefits.
Delete"...more women have HIV than men." - Actually, far more men have HIV than women. Not sure where you found this.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I believe a previous Anonymous's point regarding depression, condom use, and abstinence was that if the absence of semen increases the rate of depression, wouldn't the depression risks of condom users simply be comparable to other long-term abstainers from sex? (i.e. virgins, widows, divorcees, wives of deployed military, etc.) If the risk of depression or suicide resulting from condom use is actually significant enough to be a reason for people to stop using condoms, wouldn't it also be enough of a reason to stop promoting abstinence?
My source comes from The World Population Institute, as linked to above. Though not cited, I also found this 2001 study set out to determine why HIV strikes more young women than young men. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11686466
DeleteRegarding the depression issue, I've been wondering the same thing. What about people who don't have sex? My guess is that for some of those people, (like wives of deployed military and widows) they probably are at increased risk of depression, but it'd probably be pretty hard to differentiate the cause between lack of semen and the loneliness and stresses that come from having a deceased or deployed spouse. But for other groups, I decided to do a little research on this issue. And I found this http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15450635 . It's a 2004 study showing that sexually-active adolescents have higher risk of depression. (It doesn't say that sexual activity causes depression, just that they have higher rates of it). So, I guess my answer to your question is that I really don't know, (or if anyone knows), but that my guess is that the stresses that come from being in an unstable relationship (as most adolescent relationships are), and the stresses of unplanned pregnancy and such would probably outweigh semen benefits.
Thanks for the clarification on the HIV. I guess I just assumed that you were talking about the United States rather than urban Africa.
DeleteI've done a little more digging and it looks like worldwide, men and women have roughly equal infection rates. However, when one looks only at the numbers for heterosexual couples (which is what would be more pertinent to the discussion here as it's heterosexual couples in which women might be contracepting) women have higher infection rates.
DeleteExcellent post! Thank you so much for sharing this vital life changing (and saving!) yet disgustingly purposely withheld information. I am so thankful that I have never taken or used any form of contraception in my lifetime. It is so disturbingly easy to be convinced by those who love and care for you to purchase and consume a toxic pharacutical without giving informed consent. Another majorly unrecognized danger of contraception is the devastating affect it is having on our ecosystem. It is causing genetic mutations in our marine and wild life not to mention being an (unwelcome) addition to our drinking water!
ReplyDeleteAs for the semen/depression and non sexually active women debate, I think it is pointless to compare these types of women. There are countless reasons why a woman may neither want to; be able to or have the possibility to have intercourse, that you can not compare them to women who are having sex. I think that the results of the study show just what you have said, that there are mental health risks to using condoms if you are having sex. If you have chosen to be completely abstinent then this post does not really have much impact on you anyway, unless of course you then decide to be sexually active.
I think you're right that NFP is a valid alternative to intercentitive methods of contraception.
ReplyDeleteHOWEVER. I would be really really really hesitant to suggest it to a woman who was not in a monogamous and/or stable long tern relationship. I feel like NFP is a family choice which, to be successful, requires commitment from both sexual partners. I cannot imagine it working for my 20-something promiscuous self in the slightest.
That NFP requires at least a modicum of respect for self and partner, I think is a big strength of NFP. I mean, birth control that is effective, not harmful, AND encourages respect?! After all, isn't respect what women really want?
DeleteI agree, NFP requires a different mindset, but maybe that is what women are hungry for. It strikes me as ironic that our culture is okay with women taking these risks and making these sacrifices to our health (some which can be long term, or even fatal) for men who don't really care that much about us and who aren't going to be there for us in the long run.
So should we not make birth control for women whose mindset regarding sex differs from yours?
DeleteIf women choose to use artificial methods with full consent, that is certainly their choice. I have no doubt many women will read this post and still choose artificial methods. I am concerned however, about women who use artificial methods without full consent or because they don't know other options exist.
DeleteAnonymous,
DeleteWomen in pre-birth control times had a much lower likelihood of being promiscuous. Why? Because they were terrified of becoming pregnant because of the possible consequences of their actions and societal stigmas. If you became an unwed mother society would shun you and their was a good chance that your family would disown you. Back then Sex had consequences. And if you were promiscuous within a marriage you were branded and most everyone in your area knew what you were doing. Natural deterrence of the time.
Sharing the link to this post on the Great Sexpectations blog! Thanks April!
ReplyDeleteAwesome!
DeleteI have used NFP for 21 years and think it is the healthiest for my body, but it is hard work as when you naturally desire your partner, if you are avoiding pregnancy, you cant do anything & this can lead to frustration.(especially if religious beliefs are added to this method). Saying all this we have 8 children, because we have tested the boundries & everyone's body is different, as my cycle doesn't fit the normal pattern, and at times I couldn't be bothered charting myself, I am really over charting, but my husband believes this is our only choice being catholic & I believe in not poisoning my body, so for us its the best choice. Doctors think we are crazy, me especially as having 4 natural & 4 c-sections can get really dangerous, but we believe GOD is in control & we need a lot of self disapline. Doctors & drug companies are not in control of my body, I am....
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI think that natural family planning deserves a place at the table of modern medicine because it is effective (and free/cheap) if used consistently and correctly. I think that each individual woman deserves to know about it and have the choice to take care of their bodies in the best way possible, whether she chooses it or another method. I also think that it is dangerous to promote it at the cost of all other forms of birth control, especially when they are actually safe. I tried to find research to back up the claims you made, but found that a lot of it is either unsupported or has been disproven altogether. I won't refute each point, but saying that oral contraception increases the risk of cancer, for example, has been shown over and over by robust and current research to just not be true. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1995533/ Oral contraception may reduce the overall rate of cancer, but at the very least does not increase it.
ReplyDeleteThe American Cancer Society publishes the WHO list of carcinogens and they have this to say about OCP's: Estrogen-progestogen oral contraceptives (combined) (Note: There is also convincing evidence in humans that these agents confer a protective effect against cancer in the endometrium and ovary).
NFP can be great, but it is not for everyone. This is clear from its efficacy numbers. There are 2 efficacy numbers published for every form of contraception, "perfect use" and "typical use." "Perfect use failures" describes the people who get pregnant while using the method with no mistakes, and "typical use failures" describes how often the average woman gets pregnant using the method with average consistency. (For the pill, typical use includes things like missing a day. For NFP, it includes things like having sex on a day when fertility is questionable.) While the perfect use failures for both the pill and NFP are both less than 1%, the typical use failure rates are much different (9% for the pill and 24% for NFP). Many people need another option for family planning, and it is irresponsible to scare them out of using other methods with unfounded data.
citation for those last stats: Contraceptive Technology, 20th edition, 2011 and Trussell J. Contraceptive failure in the United States. Contraception 2011; 83:397.
DeleteLeah,
DeleteMy source for the carcinogenicity of oral contraceptives comes from the World Health Organization. There are five classes of carcinogenicity. A group one classification is given only with clear evidence of carcinogenicity in humans.
In regards to the method and user effectiveness of NFP, I find it quite difficult to find well-done studies on its effectiveness for a few reasons. One reason is that many studies group NFP and Fertility Awareness Methods together. They are similar, but usually the main difference is that NFP calls for avoidance of all genital contact during the fertile phase, while Fertility Awareness accepts the use of barrier methods during the fertile phase. I don't use these studies in my research and do not promote the use of barrier methods during the fertile phase because, frankly, barrier methods don't have high user effectiveness rates, and such studies reflect this. I mean, if someone stops a natural method and uses a barrier method during their fertile phase...well, the method is only going to be as effective as the barrier method that they use.
Another reason it is difficult to get good statistics is because not that many people practice NFP in the US, so it's hard to get enough people to have a representative sample. A third reason is sometimes studies are just really poorly done. I have even seen one study that compared all methods of family planning, including NFP, but the study did not differentiate between people using NFP methods to avoid pregnancy and those using the method to achieve pregnancy! Not surprisingly, that study showed a high "failure rate" among NFP users, but who knows how many of them in the study were actively trying to get pregnant.
All of the above are reasons why I am very particular in the studies I will use. One reason I like the Ryder Study so much is because it's users used NFP, and did not rely on barrier methods during the fertile phase, and it included over 16,000 women (enough to have a representative sample). In this study the method effectiveness was 99.08% effective; the user effectiveness of this India study, a German study conducted by J. Roetzer, and a China study conducted by Dr. Zhang De-Wei all show user effectiveness around 99%. Other smaller studies have shown user-effectiveness of NFP around 97-99% effective, showing NFP to be an acceptable form of spacing pregnancies.
One issue that I have with the study that you cited is that it was performed by someone who works with family planning clinics, whose business it is to sell and distribute artificial contraceptives. As another writer has said, this is like trusting Malboro to do a trustworthy study on the safety of cigarettes over other studies whose researchers do not materially benefit from its use.
You say you are particular on which research you used. Did you even read the full articles you cited??? Last line of the first article was:
DeleteSeveral WHO committees work on creating
evidence-based family planning guidelines
and on keeping them up-to-date on a
continuous basis. They regularly review
the safety of COCs and assess the balance
of risks and benefits of COC use and they
have determined that for most healthy
women, the health benefits clearly exceed
the health risks.
Sounds to me that you read the part that help your opinion and ignore the rest. Found the same basic thing in the HIV article as well. People need to do their own research and not rely on some scare tactic blog as actual proof.
Believe me, I am very aware that WHO and the medical community in general feel that the pill's benefits outweigh its risks. In fact, I have written a post addressing what I feel is their rather disappointing response to the evidence. http://www.myfemininemind.com/2012/01/hand-washing-and-white-washing.html
DeleteWhy not just pull out during your fertile time, what is the harm in it?
ReplyDeleteAlthough some older studies found that preejaculatory fluid did not contain sperm, it seems the most recent study on that topic found that it often does, and therefore can lead to pregnancy.
Deletehttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21155689
Doesnt work I have 3 extra children using this method, & it goes against the teachings & religious views.
DeleteWow--the Catholic church sure is far reaching. I don't see how they can claim that is wrong!
DeleteThe fact that pulling out is wrong is biblical. In Genesis 38, God strikes Onan dead for doing just that. In fact, artificial birth control was originally referred to as "Onanism,' hearkening back to its biblical roots.
DeleteIn that passage, Onan was supposed to get the woman pregnant, so his sin wasn't really the pulling out/using birth control, it was that he was not fulfilling his duty. This reference doesn't seem to say that birth control is wrong; only that not doing what you are supposed to is wrong. The passage was not about a couple deciding not to have a child at the time, it was about a man that didn't want to fulfill his duty.
Deletewow. it's worked for me for 10 years with two different sexual partners, my ex of 3 years and my husband. i was also able to conceive in the first month of trying with all three of my children. but i have heard the intact(not circumcised) men are more able to feel and control when they are about to ejaculate, so i think that plays a big role in why it has worked for me.
DeleteAnonymous, we know the sin of Onan was the separation of unity from procreativity. The Bible also states very clearly what the punishment is for a man who refuses to get his brother's wife pregnant--he is to be brought before the village elders, scolded and berated, humiliated and spit upon--not death.
DeleteTo see this, you can look at Jacob, who refused to give his dead brother an offspring, he did not fulfill his duty, but he was NOT struck dead.
Onan was struck dead not because he refused to give his dead brother's wife a child, but because he withdrew and spilled his seed upon the ground (quite graphic in the Hebrew actually). His separation of unity/procreation and pleasure was so sinful in the eyes of God that he was struck dead on the spot. His sin was the misuse of sex, not because he didn't fulfill his duty.
How can I subscribe to this awesome blog! I think it's time to remove my non-horomonal IUD...
ReplyDelete:) The subscribe button was on the bottom of the page, but now I moved it to the more prominent side bar.
DeleteI agree with Leah above. Promoting NFP as a viable method is important and more people should know it's available, but why must you promote it while damning everything else with negligible research? I'm sorry but a lot of what you posted here is complete nonsense and scare tactics. A woman should be able to pick the birth control method that works best for her and her partner. If it's NFP, great. If it's not, so be it.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous,
DeleteAll of the research above is sound and medically proven. I know the risks of taking all of the drugs I ingest both over the counter and prescriptions. Ever read those little pamphlets that come in medicine? Kind of scary. Most of them are. She is not using scare tactics she is only telling the truth.
On a side note: I've noticed that most of the desenters are too scared to use their names and prefer to use Anonymous. (Just an observation)
I have tried to be very straightforward and have included links to various studies and articles. Those items that have not been well-studied and are mere suspicion by myself or others, I have stated so.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteBrilliant and well researched post! I hope more women take the time to learn the risks and costs of all forms of birth control.
ReplyDeleteWhat about other barrier methods such as diaphragm and cervical cap? I know it goes against the Church's teachings but are there health implications as well?
ReplyDeleteThank you. What about women in or post-menopause who inserts two times per week Estradiol to avoid vaginal dryness? My pediatrician cousin tells me that hormones, whether synthetic or bio-identical hormone replacement therapy (BHRT), are basically the pill. Yikes! If true, am I vulnerable to the same level and type of risks that you write a younger women who takes the pill is? I also rub on progesterone cream from the compound pharmacy (BHRT) on my soft parts of my thighs every night.
ReplyDeleteFrom what I understand, vaginal estrogen is not systemically absorbed. I'm a registered nurse and finishing a master's degree in nursing (Family/All Ages Health; Nurse Practitioner stream). In my practica, I saw women who were put on vaginal estrogen to deal with atrophic vaginitis. We could put them on this even if they didn't want to or couldn't take systemic estrogen because of the minimal absorption. You should not have any major problems.
DeleteWhat about Essure?
ReplyDeleteI used NFP for about a year after my first son, and was able to conceive my second after one cycle, but now I'm finished having children. Whereas NFP was reliable with me, I no longer want to go through the effort and plan on sterilization via Essure.
Okay, I typically support blogs like this, but this one is leaving me frustrated.
ReplyDeleteIf you read the study that you linked to regarding the higher sperm antibodies, you'll find that the study even states that there were too many variables, that the test after sterilization was more sensitive, and many other possible reasons - not at all what you described. In fact, it directly argues against what you are saying in the blog. So my first comment is to make sure you read studies completely before you use them to back up what you are saying.
Please also note that not all leftover sperm spills into the bloodstream. The increase in sperm signals a reduction of production, and they degrade and die within the testes. I'm not sure if you are just trying to scare people or just haven't done any research on this other than the study that you didn't read completely and construed into what you wanted it to be.
Also NFP is only as accurate as you want it to be. If we attempted to put every woman in the world on NFP, we would have those that are irregular struggling with it, those that just don't care about it not following it - it's a recipe for disaster. You say you are speaking to the general population.... the general population does not want to or cannot accurately follow NFP. I'm a supporter of NFP, I really am - but I'm not a supporter of everyone using it. It's just not a good idea.
Also, you mention all the risks of IUD's, including PID. These risks mostly apply to women who are not monogamous - which are not recommended to be on the IUD. I have Mirena, I did DAYS and DAYS worth of research on it, and I find it rather deceiving that you don't mention that it's not recommended for women with multiple partners and that is where the risk comes from.
Also, the risk of perforation is like 0.03% if I remember correctly - it's so insanely small.
But I think what really floored me about this blog was the blame being put on the doctors. Whenever you go fill a prescription, you receive an insert. Do you not read it? Because by filling and taking that prescription, you are stating that you HAVE read it. All of the risks are outlined in that piece of paper. Still not confident? Go to the medication's website - you'll find more complete pharmaceutical information. But I just want to point out that this article makes you look ridiculous, because a doctor is not supposed to review every risk with you - YOU are supposed to decide if something is right for you. So if you are here ranting about a provider that didn't tell you about a risk that is lower than 0.1% (which many of them mentioned here are....), then look at the other fingers pointing back at you, because you should have read the required reading.
Thank you, Anonymous, for this comment! My husband had a vasectomy prior to our marriage, which included cauterization instead of just cutting the tubes, so the sperm doesn't just "spill into the male's body cavity", and also increases effectiveness of the procedure. This causes an increase in sperm levels in the testes and epididimus, which signals sperm production to decrease, while excess sperm die.
DeleteThe original post refers to the mental health benefits of semen, not sperm specifically. Post-vasectomy sex fits this bill. However, I wonder if the lack of non-barrier sex is a symptom of the depression and not the cause of it (the article on 1Flesh.org did not specify a causal relationship between the two).
When I go to the auto mechanic, I just want them to fix my car, but my car-minded brother is likely to ask specific questions about what was wrong and what options there are to fix it. With doctors as with auto mechanics, many people just want to be fixed, but patients can take responsibility for what is put in your body by simply asking for more information about the problem and what other options there might be. Many doctors are aware of various drug risk factors or other treatment/medication options, but sometimes they might not be right for your specific situation so they aren't mentioned by the doctor. Do your own research, read any information included with your medications, and ask your doctor if you have any questions. Give them the opportunity to explain why, with their training and experience, they recommended the course of treatment they did over other options you've found. If you don't find their answer satisfactory, get a second opinion, but you might find there are other factors involved that greatly minimize your risk or rule out other treatments for your specific situtation. (Studies are general, but doctors work with specific situations.)
Anonymous,
DeleteI am not sure if there is a misunderstanding here or not, but I think it is clear that vasectomies do contribute to the increase and the type of antisperm antibodies in the blood. What has not been well studied and is up for debate is exactly what the effects of these antibodies are. Also, now I could be wrong here and could do more research on this, but I was under the impression that the decrease in sperm production that can happen following a vasectomy is likely due to damage to testicular tissue due to sperm buildup, not due to any feedback process. This is concerning since testicular damage can lead to a reduction of testosterone production.
Also, I don't feel the problem stated in the blog is the sole responsibility of the doctors. As I stated in my introduction, I think this is a multifaceted problem. One issue is that contraceptives are extremely profitable, whereas NFP really isn't. It's simply people knowing how their body works and then using it to plan their family size (or to monitor their gynecologic health). Some may choose to use charting software, fertility monitors, or to buy paper charts and stickers, but all of these products are optional to the method and people can also choose to use none of these and simply record their signs themselves on a calendar or spreadsheet. I think this dynamic does contribute to a lot of the ignorance surrounding NFP. Looking at things realistically, there is an industry that thrives because so many women don't know about the NFP option. Even though there are about 50 years of practice and research showing its effectiveness, people still think it's the rhythm method, that its not accurate, that a woman has to have regular cycles, and so on.
Another issue is that this is not taught in med school. I hear over and over again stories of women being almost ridiculed by their doctors for choosing NFP. Many doctors themselves think its the rhythm method. I'm sure these are mostly well-meaning people who went into this profession because they want to help others, but even they are not educated about it. They are mostly only taught about the various types of artificial birth control. So there is again, the issue of women who would be open to hearing about and learning NFP, but even their doctors can't help them and sometimes even outright discourage them.
On the other hand, there are doctors tha do know better and should be held accountable. In regards to oral contraceptives being classified as group one carcinogens, there are medical personnel who know of this risk and don't bother to inform their patients. Even the World Health Organization says that while yes, it's carcinogenic, they feel the benefits outweigh the risk. That is also the response of WebMD, and pretty much the medical community as a whole. I am of the opinion that they do not have the right to make that decision on behalf of women. They need to inform women of this risk, and let the patient herself decide if she feels that whatever benefits she receives from the pill is worth this risk or not. It's not the doctor's place to make that decision for her.
When all these factors come together, we have the situation we are currently in, women who choose whatever method of birth control for whatever reason who make that choice not having full knowledge of all their options.
The blog doesn't mention the fact that the hormonal forms all have a back up plan so that if ovulation does occur and the egg is fertilized you miscarry because the lining of the uterus is so thin that it cannot support implantation. Most women do not want to kill the baby if they do conceive.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous, you wrote:
ReplyDeleteAlso NFP is only as accurate as you want it to be. If we attempted to put every woman in the world on NFP, we would have those that are irregular struggling with it, those that just don't care about it not following it - it's a recipe for disaster.
I started using NFP because I was irregular. I was 19 and not sexually active, but because my cycles varied from 27 days to 92 days in length, I learned how to chart so I could know when my period was going to come. My doctor did not care when I told him about the irregular cycles, but I guess even if he had cared, he'd probably have put me on the Pill, which would have....well, it would have made me bleed every 28 days. Hooray? I'd have looked normal. But really, it was only by using the data my charting gave me that I actually corrected the problems with my cycles. So perhaps irregular women are the ones who would benefit most.
And as for women who "just don't care" about not following it: maybe those women actually want a baby? Maybe these women are undecided and facing the question month after month would force them to actually decide? It seems a shame that women are filling their bodies with artificial hormones when they "just don't care" whether they conceive. After a woman has a baby, she's going to care whether she has another one. Are there are any women out there who end up with twelve children because they just can't be bothered to look at the toilet paper after wiping? ANd if that's the case, wouldn't these same women also "just not care" enough to take a pill every day? I figure "just don't care" is a straw man argument. Or straw woman. Women do care about whether they become pregnant and spend their next eighteen years raising a child.
I think it's also worth saying that many women who are on the Pill also "just don't care" to remember if they took it or not.
DeleteI don't understand why people think Charting is so difficult to do, you wake up, you take your temp, you record it and sometime during the day, you check your mucus.
With a pill, you wake up, you take your pill at some point, try to remember if you are on anything that might stop the pill from working (antibiotics, fever, flu, vomiting, diarrhea)and so on.
Women who are on contraceptives also "don't care" to follow what they are supposed to do, so how is that an argument?
Also, I too was one who is irregular, about 4 times a year I double ovulate and I've had some months go from 19 days to 42 days for my cycle. Since charting, I've been able to see how diet and exercise have helped regulate my cycles.
"...the pill ages the cervix about two years for every one year of use. This is one reason why pill use can lead to infertility later on (and why the contraceptive industry fuels the multi-billion dollar infertility industry)." Thank you for making known this crucial information. I've heard i for the first time in 1994-1995. Could you give me a source, please? Thank you!
ReplyDeleteSource:
DeleteMercedes Arzu Wilson, "Master Teacher Institute for the Ovulation Method: Related Readings." (Family of the Americas: Dunkirk, MD, 2005) R6.39
If you are interested in learning more, a lot of what we know about the various types of fluid produced in the cervix and their differing functions comes from the work of Dr. Erik Odeblad, Department of Medical Biophysics at the University of Umea in Sweden. You could do a google search on him and probably find out more. Thanks!
What if you take the bc pill for heavy bleeding during your cycle? What are the alternatives besides having surgery?
ReplyDeleteA really good book that addresses a lot of women's health issues is by Marilyn Shannon, called "Fertility, Cycles, and Nutrition." It's a good book that discusses a lot of ways women can address menstrual issues by making simple changes to their diet or lifestyle. Otherwise, for more serious issues that are not addressed through simple changes, I recommend seeing a NaPro doctor. This link includes a list of NaPro doctors in the US and Canada, though they are located throughout the world. http://www.fertilitycare.org/ (I don't receive any compensation for recommending either the book or NaPro doctors).
DeleteBecause I am 35, infertility issues not due to blocked tubes, however recently discovered I have no opening from my uterus to my tubes (unknown cause), I have to wonder if my issues were caused by 15 years of BC use to prevent pregnancy .... and how I wish I could go back & erase that use :(
ReplyDeletep.s. I'm using anonymous bcuz it was the easiest pick :)
While I like the science in the post, and more widespread knowledge of side effects is a good thing, the underlying message of this article scares me.
ReplyDeleteThis assumes women in monogamous long term relationships, and the NFP method assumes women with regular cycles. NFP is also the most prone to screw-ups, as a simple miss-reading or poor counting ability can result in unwanted pregnancy. Also, there is a much higher risk of STIs than with a barrier method (condom)....
This article seems to have a bias towards anything OTHER than NFP, which is both problematic and misleading.
For example, while "Spermicides irritate vaginal walls which makes women more susceptible to HIV/AIDS...", the chances of them actually catching HIV/AIDS if the male is wearing a condom is much lower than if the sex is unprotected and the vaginal walls are undamaged.
Articles like this are misleading, and stand to do more harm than good.
Anonymous,
DeleteNFP can be used for women who have irregular cycles and even various gynecological disorders. It is not the rhythm method. Because it relies on the signals in the individual woman's body that alert her to the approach of her fertility, it is comparable to the better artificial methods. It has a 99% method effectiveness, and, according to various well-done studies, around 95-99% user-effectiveness, which is similar to the pill.
Although I'd be lying if I claimed not to have a preference for NFP, (I do, I really like it. If women choose to use other methods, that's their choice, but they should do so with complete knowledge. There's a lot of misinformation out there about NFP, and incomplete info about the artificial methods, which causes many women to falsely believe that the only effective methods are artificial ones.
Amen, anonymous! Thanks for writing! :)
DeleteI really encourage you to look into the Lady Comp and tell me your thoughts. I've been practicing NFP with my partner for over 2 years successfully, but I'm still cautious and hope to purchase a Lady Comp within the next few months. I really think it could help young women transition from the mentality that "if you don't use BC you WILL get pregnant"
ReplyDeleteHere's a novel concept...husband and wife having sex...not using artificial birth control (because it's sinful)...and...not using NFP (because the criteria for it's use doesn't apply to most). Yes, that's right - just having good old fashioned married sex, and being completely open to God's blessings. Oh, that's radical.
ReplyDeleteOh yes, radical indeed! You mean you and your spouse are doing it the way God intended? Open to the "possibility" of new life, even if it doesn't happen? And yes, although this article brings up many medical and scientific reasons for NOT using artificial Birth Control, which are good reasons, the bottom line is, to use any artificial means to separate the procreative from the unitive aspects of marital sexual intercourse is indeed sinful.
DeleteI love that all your post on your blog that are science related have the studies and facts to back them up! A lot of times you are told this is how it is believe it, but without the research to support it it's hard to trust the information given to you. I feel it's so important that we put the fact out there that the negative views of birth control are supported by science not just because we feel they are "evil" or something.
ReplyDeleteSo thank you for this wonderful blog!!
I completely agree that it's important to know the science too. I'm glad you like my blog!
DeleteI wholeheartedly agree! I was on the Pill for 1 year only because I had very irregular menstrual cycles due to PCOS. (This was before I was married.) I stopped the Pill at the time my husband and I were married because of the Church's teaching. I also found that the people made me VERY irritable and gave me the WORST cramps I have ever had. (Women in my family don't tend to do well on the Pill - a number of them have been on it and had serious problems.) I started on metformin in an attempt to get pregnant, but we decided to wait to get pregnant after I was already on it. That said, I have been on metformin since before our marriage because it makes me cycle regularly and the side effects are minimal (consider this: doctors will only prescribe metformin for diabetes/PCOS, but they will prescribe birth control for any woman - when metformin has FEWER side effects and is in fact a SAFER drug to be on!). That said, metformin will really only work for PCOS as it increase insulin sensitivity. At this point, I have been off the Pill for a year and a half and we suspect that I am about 5 weeks pregnant!
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, every single woman I have ever known to try the NPF method has at least one child (and way earlier than they were planning) so that's not super hopeful for someone like me, who has known since they were five they do not want children and have several compelling medical reasons for this as well.
ReplyDeleteSecond, what's a person to do if their partner has already undergone sterilization surgery? Are they evil baby killers or is there some grace for couples who absolutely do not want to get pregnant ever, ever, ever?
What a wonderful and informative read! Thank you for sharing.
ReplyDeleteA while back I began feeling convicted about using hormonal birth control due to the risks of abortion (which my doctor not only didn't tell me there were risks, she all out told me there were NO risks) But all these other risk I had not heard of. I had no idea condoms or sterilization wasn't an easy safe option.
Thank you for sharing
[another, different anonymous] :) I think this is an amazing post. I haven't used hormonal birth control for years, just because I didn't really like it.
ReplyDeleteIf anyone here is interested in starting to practice NFP or FAM (fertility awareness method), I highly recommend the book Taking Charge of Your Fertility. FYI- the only difference between NFP and FAM is that FAM users don't necessarily abstain during the fertile phase, they just use a barrier method at that time.
I love the knowledge I have about my body now since charting. I wished that I were taught these things in sex ed., just for the health of it. I was not sexually active in high school, but there is so much information gained from charting, and I feel it's very empowering for women.
In the spirit of friendly discussion, I'd like to point out some things about the "Barrier Methods". I'm not saying the studies are wrong so much as they are not taking everything into account. For example: "Semen is very healthy for women's health. Semen acts as an anti-depressant and women who use condoms have higher depression rates than women who do not." Are women more likely to use condoms in non-monogamous sexual relations? Therefore, could the increased depression be due more to not having a monogamous relationship than exposure to semen? What I got from this article is that the safest use of condoms, aside from no use, is to skip the spermicide and use them only during the fertile period. My husband and I do this, and while there is a 1-2% increased risk of pregnancy over abstaining during the fertile period, we think that's acceptable.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you. From a personal standpoint, I do not have a problem with condoms (they're actually my contraceptive of choice). From a scientific standpoint, I have to call logical fallacy on My Feminine Mind. Both the Psychology Today article and the paper "Does Semen Have Antidepressant Properties?" both state that a correlation was found, not a causation (and there is a huge difference between them).
Deletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation
Gallup et al. even state in the discussion section of the paper, "It is important to acknowledge that these data are preliminary and correlational in nature, and as such are only suggestive. More definitive evidence for antidepressant
effects of semen would require more direct manipulation
of the presence of semen in the reproductive tract and,
ideally, the measurement of seminal components in the
recipient’s blood."
You have to keep a few things in mind with this paper:
1.) No medical evidence. What they are presenting are the results of a questionnaire that asked participants to report sexual activity and their feelings (based on the Beck Depression Inventory).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beck_Depression_Inventory
2.) 293 is a large sample, but it is not representative. In the grand scheme of things, it's actually quite small given the number of women in America, let alone the world.
3.) These women were all attending State University of
New York at Albany, so they were all roughly in the same area.
4.) Since they're in college most of them were probably very similar in age.
Age and area can have a huge impact on how participants answer questions.
In order for causation to be remotely possible this study needs to be replicated, not once but multiple times, in different parts of the country, with different age groups, and different backgrounds. There also needs to be medical evidence to back it up (and it too needs to be replicated and performed multiple times with varying samples of women).
So in closing, as far as we scientifically know, semen has not been shown to have anti-depressive properties.
End Rant
Although this is a great post...and one I fully support (NFP user of 4 years)...I think it's highly misleading and cruel to bandy around terms such as "only fertile 100 hours a cycle" or "abstain for only a week". If you are actually a NFP user I can't believe you would say such things. I know SO MANY couples (myself included) who have to abstain for weeks on end because of long/unpredictable follicular phases, irregular cycles, breastfeeding, unclear fertility signs, etc. It is unfair to advertise a short time of abstinence, when in practice, most couples must abstain for much longer than that.
ReplyDeleteJessica,
DeleteThank you for your input. To address some of your concerns... I feel it is very truthful and scientific to state that women are fertile about 100 hours per cycle. With the right kind of cervical fluid, sperm can survive up to 5 days in a woman's body. As women age, this time likely decreases. Even if she has more mucus than this, she is only capable of conceiving for about 100 hours a cycle, because sperm can't live in her body for weeks on end. I also know that sometimes there are times when longer abstinence is needed. For myself, when I was dealing with continuous mucus, health issues, and was postpartum and breastfeeding, there was a period of a few months where my husband and I had to abstain for several weeks out of the month until I figured out my cycle with the help of my instructor. And I know it can be frustrating, but I don't feel that this is reflective of the majority of my 6+ years of using NFP. We had more abstinence until we figured out my body but once I gained confidence in recognizing that fertile window, it was easier. Also, now that I have become an instructor, when I'm with clients in difficult circumstances, I know one of my goals is to help my clients gain confidence and understand their cycles as quickly as possible so that they don't have extended periods of abstinence, because it can be very difficult. I don't want to discount women's experiences who have had different experiences than me, but at the same time, I'm not sure if it would be accurate to say that ongoing, extended abstinence is the norm. As I'm presently breastfeeding, even this last month, I had a little more abstinence so I could figure things out, but now I feel confident that I am understanding my body. Perhaps I should qualify that there will be times when longer abstinence is needed, but I don't want it to seem as though this is the norm either.
Hi Jessica, some time ago I wanted to do a series of guest posts about people who experienced challenges in practicing NFP and how they overcame it/worked through it...but I didn't have any takers. I still am interested in doing such a series, I don't know if you or anyone you know would be willing to reflect on their experiences to share in a post?
DeleteI would certainly be open to doing an email interview about my experience with NFP...but I should clarify that I am not Catholic and as such am not morally opposed to using condoms. We do use them occasionally when we've had an especially long stretch of abstinence. So you may not like my perspective since I'm not a strict NFP user :) If you're still interested feel free to email me at handmaidenbirth [at] gmail [dot] com. Otherwise, I thank you for the request and am honored.
DeleteThank you for the clarification above...I guess I know too many ladies who have ovulated 8 days after dtd on the third completely dry day and still gotten pregnant. It seems sperm are more hardy than we think sometimes ;) I'm paranoid and very conservative with TTA. We mostly just employ my luteal phase because of continuous mucus and because my cycles are impossible to predict at the moment due to breastfeeding causing me long follicular phases (21-30 days, but changing every month). I am TTA too seriously to use my follicular phase and risk a freak early ovulation.
While I think it's wonderful that you are promoting women's health and encouraging people to seek more information about their options, their bodies, health risks etc. I find it very short sighted for you to have given the people the impression that you're presenting them with the facts that they need to make a decision about birth control. I suspect that many people will take your blog post at face value without looking deeper into your sources which is unfortunate. So many of the articles that you have referred to are not current. Sourcing information that is many years old (2002, 2004, 2007 etc.) is simply not acceptable in this case and is extremely misleading. With developments in healthcare research happening so rapidly it's important that you keep up to date.
ReplyDeleteAs well, referencing just one source to back up a statement is inappropriate. For example, it's especially discouraging that you suggest that the pill is a "group one carcinogen", liken it to something like cigarettes and then source an old statement from the WHO as your evidence. The WHO clearly states that they regularly review the safety of COCs and assess the balance of risks and benefits of combined oral contraceptive (COC) use and they have determined that for most healthy women, the health benefits clearly exceed the health risks.
I could go on as almost every point you have made isn't backed up properly which makes it seem less like you want women to get all the information about their available choices and more like you want women to use natural family planning (which, as the previous poster pointed out, is not quite what you say it is either).
I think the most important thing that we can take away from this post is that it's important for people to get as much information as possible about their health. We need to question the information that is presented to us (especially if it's on a blog post like this!). It's even a good idea to question research - make sure that it's current and unbiased, know who funded it and see if there is other research that supports it.
Take charge of your own health, make sure that you do build rapport with your physician and that they spend an adequate amount of time with you especially if you're in the process of making an important decision about birth control.
Anonymous - believe me. I am well aware that WHO still recommends the pill despite their group one classification, as well as most of the medical industry as a whole. In fact, I have written a post addressing what I feel is their rather disappointing response to the evidence. http://www.myfemininemind.com/2012/01/hand-washing-and-white-washing.html Also, although the classification was given in 2005, the pill still is classified as a group one carcinogen, and I encounter women all the time who are on the pill and don't know this.
DeletePosting such a scathing critique of what obviously took a great deal of time and effort to put together is one thing, but to post as Anonymous gives YOU absolutely NO credibility whatsoever. Therefore, your comments mean nothing.
DeleteThank you so much for this post. It means a lot to my wife and I as we talk to others concerning this topic thank you.
ReplyDeleteThank you!
Delete"Semen acts as an anti-depressant and women who use condoms have higher depression rates than women who do not."
ReplyDeleteThis right here tells me that old, creepy white Republicans backed this article to be written. That is all.
Your comment made me laugh. If you would like the task of finding out who funded this research, please do so with my blessing. :)
DeleteIt didn't make me laugh, it made me shake my head in disgust. Whoever wrote that is a complete idiot.
DeleteI find the comments on condom use really problematic - how is the causal link drawn? It seems to me that women who experience depression are more likely to be cautious in nature and also experience anxiety - and therefore not be comfortable having sex without condoms. It is a really ridiculous stretch to say that because there is a correlation between condom use and depression that condom use causes depression. Also the idea of semen as an anti-depressant suggests that any woman who is not sexual with cis-men is going to depressed. Also incredibly false.
ReplyDeleteThere is evidence of a link between the two, but as we discussed in other comments above, the evidence stops short of a causal link. As with so many other things, new research is going on all the time. There is research to support health benefits of semen, one of them being it has anti-depressant qualities. But you're right, this doesn't mean that if you don't have it, its absence will cause depression, though I feel it's a nice perk amongst all the other perks I get from being with my awesome husband :) And it's cool to me to think of how his body helps make things easier for me in his very biology, which mirrors all the other things he does to make things easier for me in our life together. But yes, I personally know lots of religious and other people who are perfectly happy without semen.
DeleteStating that depression can arise from lack of semen and linking to that study is misleading to readers. The study compared college girls who had sex with condoms to college girls who had sex without condoms. Those who used no condoms were likely in a committed relationship and did not have to worry about STDs. Those who used condoms were probably in more casusual sexual relationships. Let us stop and wonder if maybe the women in committed relationships were happier for a reason other than semen - how about love? Using condoms vs. no condoms as a measure of "semen absorbed in the reproductive tract" also doesn't account for the fact that not all who have condomless sex finish the act... internally (I'm trying to keep this pg!). Another irony I find in this argument against condoms is that having babies - even those that were very much wanted - often causes depression via post-partum depression. However, I do not see articles urging women not to give birth because it leads to depression ;). Condoms may not be for everyone, but the reason you state above is not scientifically coherent.
DeleteExcellent article. I will be sharing this with my FB friends as well as those on my e-mail list.
ReplyDeleteThank you! I worked hard on it. :)
DeleteMore on "the pill" here:
ReplyDelete"Baseball, Steroids, the Pill and Russian Roulette"
http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/baseball-steroids-the-pill-and-russian-roulette/
This article is draw assumptions that are not supported by facts. If you are going to say that a form of birth control will increase your chance to get HIV/AIDs then cite the source from which it came from. This article was based to get people to stop using birth control in favor of family planning to support the churches stand of birth control. If you are going to make certain accusations about the harm from birth control then you better be using evidence based articles.
ReplyDeleteI'm not exactly sure how you can say that given the number of links, and the long list of footnotes contained in this post. I linked to this study ( http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/content/45/3/360.full.pdf+html )in the text which examines various studies on the issue and comes to the conclusion that while there is some evidence, more study is needed to know definitively, and I also link to this study (http://journals.lww.com/jaids/Fulltext/2005/03001/Effect_of_Contraceptive_Methods_on_Natural_History.13.aspx) whose results showed increased HIV infection, transmission, and progression among women using hormonal contraception. Is this understood fully? No; research is ongoing. Is all the effects of the pill and other forms understood fully? No. The pill causes 150 chemical changes in a woman's body that we are aware of. We don't know all the effects of all of these changes. The notion that women can take something that simply stops ovulation and has no other ramifications on the rest of her health and functioning is completely false. If people are okay with all those unknowns and want to take it anyway, no one's trying to stop them. I, however, am not okay with these risks, and I'm guessing a fair number of other women wouldn't be okay with them either if they knew about them. Also, you can make assumptions about my motives in writing this post and say that my real goal is to convert everyone to Catholicism or something - my blog is an open book, but you are commenting anonymously, so I wonder what your motives are in trying to discredit me. Just a passerby? Or someone who is in the business of distributing contraceptives? It just makes me wonder.
DeleteYou obviously didn't read the article, or you would have noticed the overwhelming number of citations for every fact given. Plus, your hatred of the Catholic Church doesn't change the fact that she has sound, logical, soul-saving reasons for not wanting people to use artificial methods of birth control. However, this article left religion completely out of the picture and focused entirely on medical and scientific facts, so your attack on the Church is completely misplaced.
DeleteThanks for this heads up to lots of women who have NO idea of the truth. For LOTS of wonderful resources on these topics be sure to visit: www.OneMoreSoul.com There is even a national directory to find an NFP doctor.
ReplyDeleteFor people the believe birth control is wrong for biblical reasons, read your bible. When God told Noah to be fruitfull and multiply, there was 8 people on the planet. There is now almost 1,000,000,000 times that many people. We have fulfilled that command rather well. Also, an IUD has no chemicals. It is a little bit of copper and plastic. An IUS, intrauterine system, is the one with chemicals. As for stuff being harmfull and what not, a glass of wine or a beer has both positive and negative aspects. An drinker will tell you the positive, and a non drinker will likely choose to quote the harmfull aspects. This was a great article, but I do feel the author missed real life a little bit. My wife and i have a 2yo and newborn twins. Emotionally and physically (she has very high risk pregnancies)it would be very hard on us and our children if we concieved again. And we cant time sex to her cycles, as they arent reliable because of breast feeding, and did i mention we have twins? We cant time sex by a cycle, we gotta take advantage of any little burst of energy or romance we can! At the moment i think the stress, and complications with that and yet another high risk pregnancy is much more dangerous than getting fixed or other forms of non-abortive birth control.
ReplyDelete"Pill-use increases susceptibility to HIV/AIDS, increases the rate of replication of the HIV virus, and speeds the debilitating effects of the disease."
ReplyDeleteOn what basis was this statement made?
I agree with anonymous above. I didn't believe in Birth control either...had 4 children in 4 years...couldn't handle anymore at the time so we did the Natural Planning Method...got pregnant...had another child 12 months after my 4th...definitely needed to do something...went on the Pill...have never felt better...moods consistent...more patient...have 5 wonderful children that I can spend quality time with.
ReplyDeleteSometimes life experiences give you a better answer than science. If I didn't go on the Pill, I would have had 20 kids and I don't believe I could have handled that. God has given us a brain and I think we must use that too.
ReplyDeleteOlder IUDs were certainly associated with infection. Recently trained and well informed physicians are aware that newer IUDs do not carry these same risks.
ReplyDeleteIUDs do NOT contain estrogen, and therefore do NOT confer same risks that estrogen-containing birth control pills do (blood clots, cancer, etc).
IUDs I think can be a such a blessing to those with very heavy periods and significant menstrual pain. They can be an incredible money-saver and stress reducer for women seeking a safe, effective, long term method of birth control.