Protest the pill?

[IDrinkaRum]

http://feministing.com/archives/009140.html
http://thepillkills.com/

June 7 is the day that made it legal for married couples to use birth control. The people of thepillkills.com want others to protest the pill so they can show the rest of the people of the States that birth control is bad, it kills pre-born babies and needs to be made illegal once more.

For those who don't know, I have some health problems that would make it bad for me to get pregnant right now. I would be under a doctor's care from day 1 & complete bed rest. Not sure if pregnancy would equal suicide, but it might be close.

I'm thinking of getting together people and counter-protesting the protesters. Is that bad of me? :)

[rahmota]

No that is not bad of you. That is a wonderful and excellent idea. Birth control needs to be availabel to those who want or need it regardless of what anyone else may think about it. If your religion prohibits it then fine it prohibits it for you but that doesnt give you the right to keep others frm having it just you.

[Lace Neil Singer]

To the peoplem protesting it, I say a bit "F*** you!" I have horrible periods; they are irregular to the point of ridiculousness, where I get 6 weeks without one then have two within a space of two weeks; I get terrible cramps, headaches and anaemia; plus I have PMS that would make Godzilla wet himself with fear. The pill stops all that; plus it means that I don't become pregnant at a time when I don't want babies.

[Norton]

I only briefly skimmed the protestors site. Too much bullshit makes me ill.

American Life League computed the following estimates for chemical abortions alone, from 1973 to 2003:
During this period, approximately 6,605,000 to 11,725,000 chemical abortions occured in the United States annually.
During this period, a total of 196,325,000 to 324,325,000 chemical abortions wiped out the equivalent of the entire United States population!


According to these idiots, if it weren't for BC, America would be teeming with unwanted children!

Yeah, that's a great idea. We need more kids to grow up in dysfunctional families with parents who either aren't ready for kids, or flat-out don't want them. Of course, we could always stuff all those unwanted babies into our stellar orphanages instead and let the infallible adoption system deal with them.
Oh, wait! Maybe if we took away BC, people would never have sex unless they wanted children! Yes, society would be a veritable Utopia without BC.

/sarcasm

I was going to write more, but this is starting to upset me to the point of incoherence.

[the_std]

I wish these people understood how birth control worked. You know, the fact that it prevents the egg from being released, rather than destroying the egg once it has been released.

"Chemical abortions", indeed. There's nothing to abort!

[AFPheonix]

Isn't it boggling how many people there really are who just don't understand basic sex ed? It's not like it's really all that difficult to understand either, they just refuse to even bother.

[Lace Neil Singer]

Not to mention the fact that it's far better for an egg to be prevented from being released or embedded than a woman smothering, drowning or strangling an unwanted baby, or perhaps leaving it in a dustbin cuz she doesn't want it and never will. Look at how many children are abused; both physically and sexually, and how many mothers are either actively participating in the abuse or just standing by and letting it happen. That goes to show that we need more BC, not less cuz there are people who should never ever be parents.

[IDrinkaRum]

It just seems scarey to me. The ignorance of these people who are saying the pill kills. I am a Roman Catholic. As one, I shouldn't be on BC, but my body is so screwed up, I'm surprised I got pregnant with Kelly in the first place, and my periods are even more screwed up since having her.

I have to take the pill 'cos I'll go for months (4-6) without a period. Which is bad. Bad things happen to a woman's innards if she's in her child-bearing years and not having a normal period. Then from January to March, I had no period and. I. was. on. the. pill. not. pregnant. I was scared about that. Fortunately, I have a great doctor. Whew!

My dad was raised Roman Catholic too. He got snipped. Because of this, he can be excommunicated from the church. Also, both of my SILs are Catholic like me and SIL1 had her hubs get snipped, and I'm pretty sure SIL2 either is on the pill or they use condoms (a form of birth control) because they haven't gotten pregnant yet - and they'll be celebrating their 6 year anniversary in October.

Ahem, yes, well, should we start up our Fratching Bus and go about the countryside protesting? :D

[Dreamstalker]

To the peoplem protesting it, I say a bit "F*** you!" I have horrible periods; they are irregular to the point of ridiculousness, where I get 6 weeks without one then have two within a space of two weeks
That's the reason I went on the pill. My base reason has nothing to do with not getting pregnant (although that is a bonus; no way in hell could I support a child now).

"Pre-born babies"? It's a couple cells at ovulation; if it isn't fertilized then there is no baby.

Not to mention the fact that it's far better for an egg to be prevented from being released or embedded than a woman smothering, drowning or strangling an unwanted baby, or perhaps leaving it in a dustbin cuz she doesn't want it and never will.
Exactly. There are far too many children out there wanting a home.

As far as "the pill is a chemical abortion", I'm in full agreement with the belief that there is nothing to abort. Both egg and sperm are cells. If they are prevented from meeting/dividing/growing, they're still just cells.

[Sylvia727]

I'm on the pill for PCOS, which is a syndrome where my whacked out hormones cause benign tumors to grow on my ovaries. Without the pill, these tumors can completely subsume my ovaries. Without the pill, I am incapable of childbearing. Counter-intuitive, huh?

Also, it's none of their business. I may take it for PCOS but that doesn't mean it's not a reassurance the morning after.

[MystyGlyttyr]

You know, and, I could be wrong, because I don't pay a lot of attention to my reproductive organs unless something malfunctions spectacularly, but how is birth control "killing" babies any different from my never having sex and therefore my eggs just end up down the toilet every month? I mean, doesn't that kill them too? :confused:

[Sylvia727]

Mysty, if you're menstrating, then the possibility of pregnancy has passed by. If you're using BC and having sex, then the possibility of pregnancy has been greatly reduced, thus you've had a chemical abortion.

I understand their argument, it's just stupid. That's all.

[MystyGlyttyr]

Mysty, if you're menstrating, then the possibility of pregnancy has passed by. If you're using BC and having sex, then the possibility of pregnancy has been greatly reduced, thus you've had a chemical abortion.

I understand their argument, it's just stupid. That's all.

...but, by not even having sex, I'm achieving the same thing as by using birth control, so...I'm basically letting babies die every time, aren't I? The egg comes out regardless, right? I mean, I'm making a choice that prevents a baby from developing either way.

I'm not trying to sound dumb, I promise, I'm just trying to figure out what precisely they're protesting. Without opening this can of worms, I can understand protesting abortion of an already-developing fetus that COULD be aware, I don't understand protesting something that keeps an undeveloped, unquestionably unconscious egg from developing.

(Keep in mind that I have no idea precisely how this birth control stuff works, it could be magic powder for all I know...)

[Lace Neil Singer]

You could say the same about men all up and down the country, ahem, pleasuring themselves and loads of little wrigglers being flushed down the toilet. Maybe the protesters should protest against wanking? XD

[DesignFox]

These (horrible not nice thing I won't type right now 'cause these people make me so angry!!!) are not only protesting that the pill kills babies- they actually have the bigger agenda of wanting people to abstain from sex, especially before marriage.

They don't believe in having sex for pleasure. Sex is for having babies. That's why abstinence is ok. Abstinence is not a sin. Sex is.

These people scare me, infuriate me, etc. etc. I don't know how you get that ignorant.

And Mysty- I am not sure because I haven't done the research, but I believe that some religions would consider "wanking" to be equally sinful...you know the Monty Python song, "Every Sperm is saaaaaaaaaaaacred!"

[blas87]

My stance..

Safe sex or no sex (unless you're married or in a long term relationship or trying to have babies). Birth Control is a blessing!

Anyone who wants to try to patronize me or chastize me for being on the shot is warranted a punch in the face. I do NOT want children. I regret saying this, but if I were to get pregnant, I'd probably get an abortion. I really DO NOT want kids. I make men wear condoms on top of my shot, because I want extra protection.

Wait for marriage? I think not. I'm an adult, and as long as I'm not hurting anyone or myself, what is the problem? If I'm playing it safe and responsible, what's the big deal? I'm not 12 for Pete's sake.

I had a doctor who came highly recommended refuse to do my Pap smear because she is Catholic and refuses to see patients who are on or are considering BC. I have nothing against Catholics, but I just found that very unprofessional.

[Amethyst Hunter]

Hooooo-boy...

1) These assholes can kiss my fat white nonsexual Pill-popping-because-of-screwy-periods ass and go straight to the Not Happy Place Where Things Are All Burny,

2) I would bet serious money any day that a good bunch of them are NOT necessarily ignorant about how the Pill works; I think they know damn well how it does and does not work - it's more that they want to spread ignorance on to the next generations so that their sick little agenda of oppressing women can be achieved that much easier (Ignorant population = less resistance). It's not about helping or saving anybody; never was and never will be. It's about who gets to control females. Hence, the lies and horror stories about BC (With abstinence as the Magical Holy Grail Cure to boot).

3) The lovely (not) little organization behind this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Life_League) is no angel: (Bolded parts my emphasis)

ALL helped to establish the "rescue movement", which utilizes aggressive tactics against abortion and related services (As in, birth control). These tactics, adopted and popularized by ALL, include sidewalk counseling, clinic blockades, and the offer of abortion alternatives to abortion-seeking patients (Note: "Offer" in this case very likely translates as "harassment/coersion," given the notoriety here; also, considering that an awful lot of the so-called "pregnancy crisis centers" are in fact set up and run by bona fide dominionists for the express purpose of obtaining new recruits, I'm inclined to distrust strongly any offers of so-called 'help' from such groups...especially since those offers DO come with certain strings attached!). ....ALL filed suit to challenge the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act. (This act makes it illegal for such groups to engage in said harassment by literally blocking women from entering the buildings)

In the mid-1990s, the American Life League boycotted the Walt Disney Company over the film Priest, in which a Roman Catholic priest deals with a variety of issues including his own homosexuality. Subsequently, ALL charged that Disney had concealed subliminal sexual messages in a number of its animated films, including The Lion King, The Little Mermaid, and Aladdin. Disney denied the ALL's claims.

Guess all of us who grew up on a diet o' Disney are now thoroughly corrupted, eh? :rolleyes:

[Sylvia727]

I had a doctor who came highly recommended refuse to do my Pap smear because she is Catholic and refuses to see patients who are on or are considering BC. I have nothing against Catholics, but I just found that very unprofessional.

Did she refuse to take you as a patient? Or did you get all the way into her exam room and into the paper towel they think is a modesty gown? I can see degrees of unprofessionalism in this story. If she runs a private practice and wants to manage it a certain way, eh, that's a little sucky but one moves on. If she sprung this little surprise on you in the exam room, that is far worse. "Now that I've accepted you as a patient, here's a list of the services I've decided to deny you." Basically, she needs to very upfront with prospective patients about what care she will and will not provide them, so that they can make an informed decision.

[blas87]

Sylvia, I had just gotten my own insurance and had to get a new doctor because my insurance didn't have a partnership with my old one.......she was the one I picked. So no, it wasn't a spur of the moment, there's a few of them there, but only 2 females, so I had to go with the other one.....I just think that if your religion or personal beliefs get in the way of your job that much, you need to get a different career.

[tropicsgoddess]

Why should birth control be illegal just because some religious zealots want it to be? Seriously, there is no "chemical abortion" with the pill, all it does is just keep the egg from releasing. Chemical abortion is using something like RU-486 or Methotrexate to terminate an early pregnancy as opposed to using a pill that will prevent a pregnancy. I firmly believe that it is the individual's choice to use contraceptives and/or engage in pre-marital sex and nobody else's.

[Sylvia727]

That's pretty bad, then.

I just think that if your religion or personal beliefs get in the way of your job that much, you need to get a different career.

Or make it very clear that is a religious practice. If she was doing this at a Catholic or pro-life clinic, then it wouldn't have been a problem. Her patients would have known what she was doing, and it wouldn't have interfered with their rights. For her to do this to you with no warning did interfere with your rights - she gave you the choice to compromise your position or to give up on the time, effort, and money you'd already invested in her.

[Ree]

[
For those who don't know, I have some health problems that would make it bad for me to get pregnant right now. I would be under a doctor's care from day 1 & complete bed rest. Not sure if pregnancy would equal suicide, but it might be close.
Are these health problems a temporary thing, and you are planning more children in the future?

If not, then why not opt for a tubal ligation, then?

Women can get pregnant on the pill, and it does cause the body to abort the fetus in the form of a miscarriage.

[AFPheonix]

Are these health problems a temporary thing, and you are planning more children in the future?

If not, then why not opt for a tubal ligation, then?

Women can get pregnant on the pill, and it does cause the body to abort the fetus in the form of a miscarriage.

From Wikipedia:
Combined oral contraceptive pills were developed to prevent ovulation by progestogenic and estrogenic suppression of gonadotropin release. Combined hormonal contraceptives, including COCPs, inhibit follicular development and prevent ovulation as their primary mechanism of action.[2][20][58][59][60]

Progestagen negative feedback decreases the pulse frequency of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) release by the hypothalamus, which decreases the release of follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) and greatly decreases the release of luteinizing hormone (LH) by the anterior pituitary. Decreased levels of FSH inhibit follicular development, preventing an increase in estradiol levels. Progestagen negative feedback and the lack of estrogen positive feedback on LH release prevent a mid-cycle LH surge. Inhibition of follicular development and the absence of a LH surge prevent ovulation.[2][20][58]

Estrogen was originally included in oral contraceptives for better cycle control (to stabilize the endometrium and thereby reduce the incidence of breakthrough bleeding), but was also found to inhibit follicular development and help prevent ovulation. Estrogen negative feedback on the anterior pituitary greatly decreases the release of FSH, which inhibits follicular development and helps prevent ovulation.[2][20][58]

A secondary mechanism of action of all progestagen-containing contraceptives is inhibition of sperm penetration through the cervix into the upper genital tract (uterus and fallopian tubes) by decreasing the amount of and increasing the viscosity of the cervical mucus.[60]

Other secondary mechanisms have been hypothesized. One example is endometrial effects that prevent implantation of an embryo in the uterus. Pro-life groups consider such a mechanism to be abortifacient, and the existence of postfertilization mechanisms is a controversial topic. Some scientists point out that the possibility of fertilization during COCP use is very small. From this, they conclude that endometrial changes are unlikely to play an important role, if any, in the observed effectiveness of COCPs.[60] Others make more complex arguments against the existence of these mechanisms.[61] And some scientists argue the existing data supports such mechanisms.[62] The controversy is currently unresolved.

So no, it's not proven that chemical birth control is an abortifacient at this point in the game. If it turns out that it does, it would be true in a vanishingly small portion of the population. It's PRIMARY method of preventing birth is by what has been said repeatedly in this thread: preventing gonadotropins from stimulating follicle maturation and ovum release through negative feedback on the pituitary gland.
Tubal ligation is a surgery with risks, and while birth control certainly has risks, they are less so than an invasive surgery. I would recommend that her husband get snipped before I'd recommend that she be cut open.

[Ree]

So no, it's not proven that chemical birth control is an abortifacient at this point in the game. It hasn't actually been proven that is isn't an abortifacient, either, as evidenced by the use of the word, "unresolved" in the quote that you used.

Just because something only happens in such a small percentage of the population, that doesn't mean that it doesn't happen, period. It simply means that the frequency is not enough to affect a study.

There are still some scientists, and not necessarily pro-life scientists, who claim it does cause the body to miscarry.

Since the risk of pregnancy while on the pill is 0.1 per 100, it can't be said with 100% certainty that pregnancy will not occur while on the pill, because it does occur in very rare instances.

If it does occur, that's a pretty small test group, so of course the miscarriage rate among that .1 per 100 women will be very small as well, but it is not saying with 100% certainty that miscarriage will not occur, or that the miscarriage was not the result of the pill.

And as for my tubal ligation suggestion, idrinkarum is the one whose health and life are at risk if she becomes pregnant, so, while having her husband get snipped is also a good suggestion, my thinking was that, since it's her extreme risk, what happens if, lord forbid, she should end up with a different partner down the road? It made more sense to me that she get her tubes tied.

[Zyanya]

There are still some scientists, and not necessarily pro-life scientists, who claim it does cause the body to miscarry.

There are still some scientists who believe in geo-centrism.

There are SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO many factors that can cause a woman to miscarry that if we were to ban all of them, we'd have to move to a different planet and become a different species.

If they want it banned, they must first show conclusive evidence that it does cause miscarriages. They cannot. Therefore they have no right to claim it should be banned. AND EVEN IF IT DID, they would have no right, because the health of the woman outweighs any risk to an unwanted non-sentient parasitic organism.

Forced-birthers are little different from rapists.

It made more sense to me that she get her tubes tied.

Okay. Sure. All she needs to do is find a doctor who won't tell her 'oh, but you'll change your mind' or 'we don't do that unless you are over 35 and already have two children'.

I've inquired with nine doctors now. Haven't found one yet.

You say that like it's so easy. There are women who have been trying for years to get a tubal and haven't found a doctor yet.

[BlaqueKatt]

I'm going to play devil's advocate here(I usually do though :D )

I don't believe in protesting for the reasons they give however I do believe "the pill" is bad very very bad.

reasons:

a woman is only able to conceive for 72 hours out of a menstrual cycle-why are you pumping your body with excess hormones for the entire month?

The endocrine system is set up to function in a certain manner, when you add more hormones to the mix it can have severe repercussions later. this is one of the reasons it can take up to a year for a woman's cycle to regulate after gong off the pill-the body can indeed "forget" how to manufacture hormones when it hasn't had to for a long time.

the hormones from BC pills are excreted in urine ad not removed by sewage treatment plants-so they are going right back into the water table.

There have been studies done on fish that spawn in the water downstream from sewage treatment plants and the males of the species have functioning ovaries from the hormones in the water.


as far as taking them for medical reasons-

PCOS/endometriosis-caused by a hormone imbalance-why are they not tring to find out the cause ad treat that rather than just taking the cop out of treating the symptoms? To me that is bad medicine.

I had edometriosis-I say had because it has reversed itself almost completely thank to an OB/GYN that did his research into possible causes for it-he refused to put anyone on BC pills to "treat the symptoms"-he looked through research for the root cause, and treated that, and was doing his own research, which was highly unpopular due to the nature of what it was showing(going against what was considered normal/acceptable)

I do still take some herbal remedies for cramps and heavy bleeding-that is not due to endo, but to my body still trying to regulate itself after being on BC pills for over 10 years---and trust me they do more than bc pills ever did(going from 7-10 days of bleeding, changing tampons(super plus)every hour to 3-5 days very light bleeding(the first and last day I'm fine with a pantyliner)


Ayone notice girls are maturing quicker-hitting puberty much earlier-they say it's because of better nutrition-but no one ever looks into the possibility that it could be all the residual hormones in the water/environment-because that would be unpopular, and would hurt the profits of some large companies.


Most "medical studies" in the US are funded in whole or in part by the companies that stand to lose major profits if the study shows the product to be dangerous-plus the people doing the research are normally promised further grants from the company for other purposes.

Do you really think if they discovered that BC pills caused infertility they would release that study? Or would the pharmacuetical companies just make more money selling infertility drugs?

[kibbles]

Even if it is proven indefinitely that the pill does cause the body to abort or miscarry, it still doesn't give a group or anyone the right to prevent someone from putting what they want in their own body.

JMO of course.

[DesignFox]

Also, while most doctors say it takes a year for your body to be fertile again...it isn't necessarily true. A friend of mine went off the pill to prep her body so she could have a baby in a year....and got pregnant within a month or two.

So, don't go off that pill if you aren't sure you want that baby, because you may be in for a surprise.

[blas87]

I'd never consider the Pill anyway, I'm the result of what happens when you rely on the Pill as your only form of BC....and obviously, mum never miscarried with me.

I don't have any evidence or links to back it up, but my current doctor is actually a big fan of the Depo shot, and was telling me that women who stay on the shot for years have less chance of endometriosis. Unfortunately, a higher risk of osteoperosis.

Of course there are risks with the Pill, the Shot, etc etc....but that's why you find out which one is right for you, and don't protest it or try to ban it. There's risks with all kinds of meds and drugs.

[Zyanya]

a woman is only able to conceive for 72 hours out of a menstrual cycle-why are you pumping your body with excess hormones for the entire month?

If you are 28-day regular.

However, quite a few of us are on the pill precisely because our periods are NOT regular.

The endocrine system is set up to function in a certain manner, when you add more hormones to the mix it can have severe repercussions later. this is one of the reasons it can take up to a year for a woman's cycle to regulate after gong off the pill-the body can indeed "forget" how to manufacture hormones when it hasn't had to for a long time.

I threw up after taking the pill one morning. Got pregnant.

the hormones from BC pills are excreted in urine ad not removed by sewage treatment plants-so they are going right back into the water table.

There have been studies done on fish that spawn in the water downstream from sewage treatment plants and the males of the species have functioning ovaries from the hormones in the water.

Proof?

PCOS/endometriosis-caused by a hormone imbalance-why are they not tring to find out the cause ad treat that rather than just taking the cop out of treating the symptoms? To me that is bad medicine.

So you vote give them a hysterectomy? Awesome. Now convince the doctors that women should actually have a say in their reproductive health instead of being told that the cure for endometriosis is 'have a kid'.

I had edometriosis-I say had because it has reversed itself almost completely thank to an OB/GYN that did his research into possible causes for it-he refused to put anyone on BC pills to "treat the symptoms"-he looked through research for the root cause, and treated that, and was doing his own research, which was highly unpopular due to the nature of what it was showing(going against what was considered normal/acceptable)

You are lucky. Not that you had a good OB/GYN, plenty of us have those. You were lucky in that your root cause was treatable.

Ayone notice girls are maturing quicker-hitting puberty much earlier-they say it's because of better nutrition-but no one ever looks into the possibility that it could be all the residual hormones in the water/environment-because that would be unpopular, and would hurt the profits of some large companies.

You mean earlier than 200 years ago when women were getting pregnant/married at 12?

[Ree]

Okay. Sure. All she needs to do is find a doctor who won't tell her 'oh, but you'll change your mind' or 'we don't do that unless you are over 35 and already have two children'.

I've inquired with nine doctors now. Haven't found one yet.

You say that like it's so easy. There are women who have been trying for years to get a tubal and haven't found a doctor yet.Odd. I guess I just come from a different part of the country, but almost all the women I know in my group have had a tubal ligation, knowing they did not want any more children, and none of them got any grief from their doctors about it.

[Amethyst Hunter]

as far as taking them for medical reasons-

PCOS/endometriosis-caused by a hormone imbalance-why are they not tring to find out the cause ad treat that rather than just taking the cop out of treating the symptoms? To me that is bad medicine.

Maybe, but I doubt any of us who have those disorders are willing to sit around and wait for a cure while suffering the symptoms (some of which are excruciating) - which could take YEARS, if ever. I've spent at least ten years if not more with a wonky cycle. I'm not waiting around for a Miracle Cure that may never come. The pill works just fine for me and I'm quite happy with it, thankyouverymuch.

almost all the women I know in my group have had a tubal ligation, knowing they did not want any more children, and none of them got any grief from their doctors about it.

There's your key. For women who do not want ANY kids at all and who have *not* had any at all, it's damn near impossible to get a doctor who will do a tubal or other form of sterilization (at least, not without a lot of BS runaround), especially the younger one is. Partly this is a CYA measure - thanks to the few fools that did go and get themselves spayed/neutered and then turned around and decided to sue, doctors are now leery of winding up in costly lawsuits. But a lot of it is also due to a certain mentality that "you're not a real woman unless you have kids."

[Ree]

There's your key. For women who do not want ANY kids at all and who have *not* had any at all, it's damn near impossible to get a doctor who will do a tubal or other form of sterilization (at least, not without a lot of BS runaround), especially the younger one is. Ah, but you see, before Zyanya decided to make my comments into a sweeping commentary on the availability of tubal ligations for all women, I was addressing them specifically to idrinkarum, who has had one autistic child already and has stated that pregnancy for her could be fatal, so I would think it might be easier for her to find a doctor willing to do the procedure.

[BlaqueKatt]

If you are 28-day regular.
However, quite a few of us are on the pill precisely because our periods are NOT regular.

yes and there are specific identifiable signs that you are ovulating even if you are not a 28 day regular-I was actually 37 days with two ovulation cycles-once I learned how to tell when I was ovulating and off the pill I did not get pregnant again as I knew when I was fertile. It was 3 years between the birth of m son and my tubal and I used no form of birth control outiside of being aware of what my body was doing-now I use that to figure out when m erratic periods will come.



I threw up after taking the pill one morning. Got pregnant.

I was on the pill used a condom(that didn't break) and still got pregnant-your point?


Proof?

first result from a 5 second google search (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/12/061222092956.htm)
The estrogen ethinylestradiol in contraceptive pills that women secrete via urine and feces is not always degraded in purification plants and can leak into ambient water with purified wastewater. "We have been able to show that male fish that are exposed to municipal wastewater in certain cases begin to produce an egg yoke substance that normally only occurs in sexually mature females. We have also managed to detect the natural estrogens, the contraceptive pill estrogen ethinylestradiol, and the estrogen-like chemicals nonylphenol and bisphenol A in purified wastewater. The same estrogen substances were also found in gall fluid from fish that had been exposed to wastewater, which shows that fish take up the substances from water,"



So you vote give them a hysterectomy? Awesome. Now convince the doctors that women should actually have a say in their reproductive health instead of being told that the cure for endometriosis is 'have a kid'.


where exactly did I say that don't go putting words in my mouth, and no the "cure" is to stop using products laden with dioxins(tampons and other bleached paper products)


You are lucky. Not that you had a good OB/GYN, plenty of us have those. You were lucky in that your root cause was treatable.

the root cause was dioxin-from tampons-my doctor had me start using menstrual sponges(sea sponges) and menstrual cups(the diva cup)two years later it was 50% reversed, less bleeding and less cramps and no big pharma involved, I'm actually part of his study as childbirth did not reverse it and actually made it worse-and before you ask here's your proof for that: dionxin and endo linked
(http://www.ourstolenfuture.org/newscience/reproduction/Endometriosis/2002/2002-1215rierandfoster.htm)

evidence from animal and human studies indicating that dioxin (and other dioxin-like compounds) causes endometriosis via its ability to disrupt immune and endocrine system function. They conclude that existing data support this interpretation but that the details of the mechanisms are not yet clear.

and this (http://www.endo-resolved.com/dioxin.html)

There is much research underway around the world today, with huge amounts of money being invested, looking at ways to treat Endometriosis. But if as much money was spent looking at how the disease starts in the first place, then developing treatment that leads to a 'cure' would be much more focused and meaningful. The key problem here is economics and the relationship between pharmaceutical companies and research funding.

Then in 1993 researchers from the Harlow Primate Center at the University of Wisconsin published dramatic and unexpected findings. Their study was of monkeys used in research on the long-term reproductive effects of dioxin.(my doctor knew the researchers as I live in Madison where the primate center is-and we have several herbal pharmacies here as well that sell the diva cup and menstrual sponges)

When three of the dioxin treated animals died of severe endometriosis, a new study was initiated to compare the presence and severity of endometriosis with the animals exposure to dioxin. The study found a dose-dependent relationship between dioxin and endometriosis. Animals with more exposure were more likely to develop the disease, and the greater a female monkey's exposure to dioxin, the greater the severity of the disease.


You mean earlier than 200 years ago when women were getting pregnant/married at 12?

no I'm talking around the age of 4-7

The average age of menarche, or first menstruation, had already fallen dramatically from age 17 between the middle of the 19th(1800s 200 years ago) century to age 13 the middle of the 20th--mostly owing to improvements in nutrition.----what's that about pregnancy at twelve 200 years ago?--that looks like the number 17 to me.

and proof (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101001030-58388,00.html) for that as well

"Laura Stover took her daughter Karen to a specialist when the girl began growing pubic hair at age 5. " If these were isolated cases, they might be chalked up to statistical flukes. But the truth is that all anyone knows for certain is that the signs of sexual development in girls are appearing at ever younger ages. Among Caucasian girls today, 1 in every 7 starts to develop breasts or pubic hair by age 8. Among African Americans, for reasons nobody quite understands, the figure is nearly 1 out of every 2.

Significant numbers of white girls--some 15%--were showing outward signs of incipient sexual maturity by age 8, and about 5% as early as 7. For African Americans, the statistics were even more startling. Fifteen percent were developing breasts or pubic hair by age 7, and almost half by age 8.

doctors say early development has become too widespread to be treated as a medical aberration. In the past, girls who developed breasts before age 8 were often given hormone therapy to slow things down. But in a report being prepared for the Pediatric Endocrine Society, Kaplowitz and co-author Dr. Sharon Oberfield of Columbia University argue that most girls between 6 and 8 who develop breasts or pubic hair should be reclassified as normal and left untreated.

[the_std]

yes and there are specific identifiable signs that you are ovulating even if you are not a 28 day regular-I was actually 37 days with two ovulation cycles-once I learned how to tell when I was ovulating and off the pill I did not get pregnant again as I knew when I was fertile. It was 3 years between the birth of m son and my tubal and I used no form of birth control outiside of being aware of what my body was doing-now I use that to figure out when m erratic periods will come.

You know, that's awesome that this technique works for you. It really is. It's a fantastic method that uses no intrusion from anyone or anything and is completely natural from listening to the flow of your body.

I wish it worked for everyone that way. My aunt was a strict, true believer in the planning method and it worked for her for ten years. She had two kids when she wanted them because she knew when she was fertile, and she had no scares in between. She didn't want any more than two children, so she carried on how she always had, taking temperature, monitoring mucous levels, everything... And she became pregnant. It was a very complicated pregnancy due to some of her health issues (one of the reasons she didn't want to get pregnant again) and nearly cost her her life. She's fine now and her youngest daughter is a healthy kid, but it just goes to show that nothing is 100%. Nothing works the same for everyone.

I tried the planning method for a while when I was single, but because I'm young and my cycle is still settling (I'm nearly 20), it's not stable enough for the planning method to work. Yet I still wish to be sexually active without the risk of having children. So, birth control it is for me then. I don't really have much other choice.

Yes, it will be a happy day when we can move away from synthetic hormones and "toxin"-infused health products, but our society as a whole just isn't at that level yet. It can't happen overnight. Cost and availability have a role to play in all of this as well.

[AFPheonix]

It hasn't actually been proven that is isn't an abortifacient, either, as evidenced by the use of the word, "unresolved" in the quote that you used.

Just because something only happens in such a small percentage of the population, that doesn't mean that it doesn't happen, period. It simply means that the frequency is not enough to affect a study.

There are still some scientists, and not necessarily pro-life scientists, who claim it does cause the body to miscarry.

Since the risk of pregnancy while on the pill is 0.1 per 100, it can't be said with 100% certainty that pregnancy will not occur while on the pill, because it does occur in very rare instances.

If it does occur, that's a pretty small test group, so of course the miscarriage rate among that .1 per 100 women will be very small as well, but it is not saying with 100% certainty that miscarriage will not occur, or that the miscarriage was not the result of the pill.

And as for my tubal ligation suggestion, idrinkarum is the one whose health and life are at risk if she becomes pregnant, so, while having her husband get snipped is also a good suggestion, my thinking was that, since it's her extreme risk, what happens if, lord forbid, she should end up with a different partner down the road? It made more sense to me that she get her tubes tied.
I recognized that while it was a possibility, it was a vanishingly small one. While it's possible that Mrs. Duggar's miscarriage was due to birth control pills, it's more likely there was another cause. I'll go out on a limb too and say that perhaps she's miscarried a few other times in between her 17 kids and perhaps didn't know it. Those would have just resulted in an heavier period. Should those be chalked up to the BC she took more than 20 years ago, too? My point is that it's incongruous to say with all certainty that BC causes abortions when we still don't know at this point, but studies are suggesting that it's far more unlikely than some activists would like to think.
Idrinkarum takes BC for reasons other than just avoiding pregnancy, as evidenced by a post further down page 1:
I have to take the pill 'cos I'll go for months (4-6) without a period. Which is bad. Bad things happen to a woman's innards if she's in her child-bearing years and not having a normal period. Then from January to March, I had no period and. I. was. on. the. pill. not. pregnant. I was scared about that. Fortunately, I have a great doctor. Whew!
So what she's doing is appropriate care for her, although of course that's between her and her doctor.

[Zyanya]

Odd. I guess I just come from a different part of the country, but almost all the women I know in my group have had a tubal ligation, knowing they did not want any more children, and none of them got any grief from their doctors about it.

Where is this part of the country? I'll get on a plane. And there are several hundred other women who will also be headed in that direction.

It isn't LA, tried there.

Or New York, my friends have tried there.

[Zyanya]

Ah, but you see, before Zyanya decided to make my comments into a sweeping commentary on the availability of tubal ligations for all women, I was addressing them specifically to idrinkarum, who has had one autistic child already and has stated that pregnancy for her could be fatal, so I would think it might be easier for her to find a doctor willing to do the procedure.

You'd be shocked.

yes and there are specific identifiable signs that you are ovulating even if you are not a 28 day regular

If you have free time in the morning to make all the observations. Some of us have busy schedules.

I was on the pill used a condom(that didn't break) and still got pregnant-your point?

Try looking at the quote my comment was in response to. That BS about needing a year to be fertile again.

first result from a 5 second google search

Sorry dear, but I read the entire article. It's full of can-bes and possiblies. It also covers how to solve the problem.

where exactly did I say that don't go putting words in my mouth, and no the "cure" is to stop using products laden with dioxins(tampons and other bleached paper products)

Funny. I've been using tampons since I was 11 and have never had the problem. So, again, Proof? And by that I mean REAL proof. Not supposeds and paranoid conspiracy theories.

See, unfortunately for you, I'm familiar with how animal testing tends to work. They inject far more of a substance into an animal than a human could intake in a lifetime, then gasp in horror as problems develop.

no I'm talking around the age of 4-7

From your article - But the truth is that all anyone knows for certain is that the signs of sexual development in girls are appearing at ever younger ages.

They do not know what causes it. If you do have some sort of proof, you should probably share it with the rest of the world. I'm sure they'd appreciate it.

My great-grandmother had her first baby at 11. Obviously, this isn't a new problem. It's just getting media coverage now.

While it's possible that Mrs. Duggar's miscarriage was due to birth control pills, it's more likely there was another cause. I'll go out on a limb too and say that perhaps she's miscarried a few other times in between her 17 kids and perhaps didn't know it.

Something like 9 in 10 fertilizations result in miscarriage. I'd say it's a certainty that she has been pregnant more than 19 times.

[Dreamstalker]

a woman is only able to conceive for 72 hours out of a menstrual cycle-why are you pumping your body with excess hormones for the entire month?

BCP is also used to regulate hormones for reasons unrelated to endo/PCOS. Before I went on the Pill, things were so whacked out that I was bleeding 3 weeks out of 4 and at a risk of becoming seriously anemic. I have neither of the two conditions, my OB/GYN wasn't exactly sure what was going on but the pill has fixed it. Nothing else did or does.

[BlaqueKatt]

See, unfortunately for you, I'm familiar with how animal testing tends to work. They inject far more of a substance into an animal than a human could intake in a lifetime, then gasp in horror as problems develop.


try reading the UW study-they did not inject anything-they were exposed to the same levels as a human is through their food/water. And it was done after they found a colony of monkies living near a paper plant the all of them had high levels of dixon and all had endo-a further part of some studies was to test dioxin levels in breastmilk from breastfeeding mothers and monitor the children after puberty.


BCP is also used to regulate hormones for reasons unrelated to endo/PCOS. Before I went on the Pill, things were so whacked out that I was bleeding 3 weeks out of 4 and at a risk of becoming seriously anemic. I have neither of the two conditions, my OB/GYN wasn't exactly sure what was going on but the pill has fixed it. Nothing else did or does.

again treating the symptom-an OB/GYN is NOT an endocrinologist. and the pill has not "fixed" anything it's made the symptoms go away. Would you consider making the pain of cancer(a symptom) go away fixing it? Or would you want to treat the actual cause of the symptom? Remember I was on BC ills for over 10 years to "treat" edometriosis, all it did was alleviate the symptoms I still had endo, and it was getting worse-my mother was told I needed a hysterectomy at age 14 because it was that bad-now I'm 32 and do not have it anymore, if I had kept just treating the symptom I'd be in worse shape than when I was 14, as I couldn't take BC pills anymore, and my "treatment" would have been a hysterectomy(at age 25), that was obviously not needed, as I've been "cured". Thyroid problems(for example) can cause excessive bleeding-an OB/GYN cannot test for that-but a endocrinologist will.

[Zyanya]

try reading the UW study-they did not inject anything-they were exposed to the same levels as a human is through their food/water. And it was done after they found a colony of monkies living near a paper plant the all of them had high levels of dixon and all had endo-a further part of some studies was to test dioxin levels in breastmilk from breastfeeding mothers and monitor the children after puberty.

I did. I also noticed the name of the website. Then I actually looked at the studies, not what the article claimed the studies said.

Funny how the study said right up front -

Small hospital-based case-control studies have failed to provide compelling evidence for or against an association of environmental contaminants and endometriosis.

And admitted -

Rodent studies support the plausibility for a role of environmental contaminants in the pathophysiology of endometriosis although a convincing mechanistic hypothesis has yet to be advanced.

[IDrinkaRum]

I want another child. My OB/GYN and my regular doctor think that if I lose weight, and get my blood pressure down to an acceptable number, I might have a successful pregnancy. Might is such an iffy word though, you know? And there is no guarantee that my next child will be a normally developing child in all aspects. (And for the record, I've asked my husband if we can adopt, and he's against it ... for right now).

I'm on the pill mainly because my body isn't function correctly. Going for months at a time with no period, then having a gushing one (please excuse the crassness) and then either just spotting or going back to having no period just isn't normal. And there is no physical reason why I shouldn't/can't have periods. I've had my blood checked for reasons, I've had ultrasounds to look at my ovaries. Zip. Zilch. Nada. is. wrong. with. me.

The only thing I can figure is my weight. Whereas some women get too skinny for periods, some women can get too fat. I'm 265 pounds. I'm 5'3" tall. I have a blood pressure range of like 135/89. I've always had painful periods that were unpredictable. Because of my blood pressure, my general doc has heard congestion around my heart. I have, probably, edema. My legs from my thighs down to my feet are swollen. All the time. No matter how much water I drink, I can't get the swelling to go down. I'm going to have to get another medication, I think. Plus, I'm an emotional eater (that's for another post/rant somewhere else). I'm a mess both physically and mentally. I had PPD with my daughter that went undiagnosed for 2 years before it morphed into full blown depression.

I still believe the pill is a God send to me and others who are like me or just don't want kids right now, but want them in the future. Really, do these nuts (and I'm not talking about people on this board who are against the pill) really want to ban the pill & have women go back to either getting BC from black markets or having back alley abortions again?

Just my 2 cents.

[Zyanya]

Really, do these nuts (and I'm not talking about people on this board who are against the pill) really want to ban the pill & have women go back to either getting BC from black markets or having back alley abortions again?

Just my 2 cents.

Yes. They do. They figure if a woman dies from an abortion, she deserved it for going against god's law.

One of these freaks actually stated he would 'make' his wife die if she got an ecoptic pregnancy rather than 'allow' her to get an abortion because it was god's will.

[Ree]

One of these freaks actually stated he would 'make' his wife die if she got an ecoptic pregnancy rather than 'allow' her to get an abortion because it was god's will.Well, that's just a stupid way of thinking, and he is then guilty of murder.
An ectopic pregnancy is not a viable human being as there is no way that it would survive to full term.

For the record, I don't want to see the pill banned, but I also don't want the truth about its harmful qualities to be swept under the rug, either.

[blas87]

I'm not a doctor, but isn't ectopic pregnancy an accident, and not necessarily something the woman did to herself to make it happen?

I'm not even sure I know what an ectopic pregnancy is...I think it's one that occurs in the fallopian tubes and not the uterus....but it just doesn't sound like something a woman can make happen to herself just to rid herself of a baby.

[Dreamstalker]

again treating the symptom-an OB/GYN is NOT an endocrinologist. and the pill has not "fixed" anything it's made the symptoms go away.
I am completely healthy save for that (I can't remember what-all was tested for but it was fairly comprehensive). I figured that the existing risks associated with the pill (which are few for me) were worth being able to function normally.

Once I went off the pill to "test" things (no sexual activity so that wasn't an issue)--bam, 3-week bleeding again after a day or two. Yes, I don't know if that was my body not knowing how to cope with no hormone infusions, but I know what happens when I don't take it and I have a reasonable certainty there is no underlying condition (I've been on the pill since age 16 or so, btw--if there was something worse I'm sure it would have manifested itself long before now).

[Zyanya]

For the record, I don't want to see the pill banned, but I also don't want the truth about its harmful qualities to be swept under the rug, either.

And it isn't. In fact, when a doctor prescribes you the pill, he/she goes over it's side effects for you, just like they do with any other type of medication.

However, the pill is nowhere near as dangerous as the propaganda makes it out to be and quite a few characteristics attributed to it are downright falsehoods. It's positives vastly outweigh it's mostly fictional negatives.

[Amethyst Hunter]

I'm not even sure I know what an ectopic pregnancy is...I think it's one that occurs in the fallopian tubes and not the uterus....but it just doesn't sound like something a woman can make happen to herself just to rid herself of a baby.

*nods* Ectopic pregnancy is when the fertilized egg, for whatever reason (an accident, as you said), implants itself in one of the fallopian tubes instead of the uterus. It WILL kill you if left to itself - there's no question about it - because once it reaches a certain maturity, it ruptures the tube and causes massive internal bleeding. (The uterus was meant to expand; the tubes, not so much) This is why women who get any kind of sterilization procedure done are strongly encouraged to use at least one backup method of birth control until it's proven beyond a doubt that their method of sterilization has taken.


For the record, I don't want to see the pill banned, but I also don't want the truth about its harmful qualities to be swept under the rug, either.

What Zyanya said. By far the biggest risk most women who take oral contraceptives will face is the risk of blood clots, and even that is *extremely* low (unless one is a smoker, which is why women on the pill are told not to smoke) - like a 0.0002% or something, from what I remember reading on the blurb of my pill information packet. Given that something of 80 - 90% of all American women are on the Pill at least once in their lifetimes, I call those pretty good odds.

Most women who have problems on the Pill report things like mood swings, nausea, infrequent spotting, or period irritability. Some of those symptoms are temporary and will disappear on their own in short time; some of them won't. (My biggest - and only, so far - problem on the pill in the 6 months that I've been taking it are these godawful tension headaches that hit me during the placebo pill week - Excedrin Migraine has become my new best friend.) This doesn't mean that they're in any serious danger - it simply means that the pill is having some normal side effects, or maybe isn't working for them, and they may or may not prefer a different method of birth control. It all depends on the person's health history and preferences.

Other things the pill *can* do that have been *proven*:

- lower one's risk of ovarian and uterine cancers; possibly colorectal cancer as well (studies pending on the last)
- clear up acne
- eases symptoms of PMDD (pre-menstrual dysphoric disorder, which is basically PMS times a hundred)
- carries over these benefits well into years after pill-taking has ceased

Things that the pill is commonly accused of but DOES NOT and has NOT been conclusively proven to do:

- cause abortion (if it did, we wouldn't have Pill-babies)
- cause breast cancer
- cause any cancer in general
- cause infertility (Depending on the individual, it may or may not take time for the cycle to reinstate itself once someone goes off the pill; generally speaking, most doctors agree that it is relatively easy to conceive once a pill regimen has been ended)

As far as the breast cancer one goes, the reason women who are diagnosed with it are told to go off the pill (if they're on it already at the time of diagnosis) is because it is thought that the hormones can possibly stimulate the cancer cells into further growth; as far as actually causing the cancer itself? No way. Anyone who says so is either badly misinformed or outright lying.

For fun, here's a quick link I dug up:

National Women's Health Resource Center's site on the Pill (http://www.healthywomen.org/healthtopics/birthcontrolpills) Do note that all risks listed are *extremely* rare and, like with any medication, dependent more on the person's health history than anything else.

[Seshat]

I will say this:

If you have a disorder of your reproductive endocrinology (a fancy way of saying 'your female hormones are messed up'), taking a randomly chosen dosage of reproductive hormones will - big surprise! - mess you up.

Doctors should check women for the signs and symptoms of PCOS and other reproductive hormone problems before prescribing any version of the pill.

Doctors should prescribe different versions of the pill to different women, based on an assessment of their likely personal variation of reproductive hormones.

Doctors should make patients aware of the potential side effects of the pill, and the warning signs that they're getting more or less of each repro hormone than their body needs.

And yes, if they have a patient with a moral objection to abortion (or whatever else they might have a moral objection to), doctors should make the patient aware of the potential, however small, of abortion (or whatever) in any particular treatment.


If you have a doctor who does all of that, then the pill is likely to be harmless to you. Otherwise, you may well experience the side effects of excess oestrogen and/or progesterone. The most likely are water retention (bloating), menstrual disorders, and severe mood swings. All will pass if you stop taking the pill.

However, if you do have those experiences, demand to see an endocrinologist before going on any hormonal birth control (except the Mirena IUD, which I'm told doesn't add progesterone to the bloodstream, only the uterine environment).

Edit to add: I am not a doctor. I'm just an opinionated stranger on the internet. Talk to your doctor. (See your doctor if pain persists!)

[Lace Neil Singer]

I once came off the pill for a while due to various factors; and the horrible PMS, debilitating period pains, extremely heavy bleeding and headaches all came back with a vengance, reminding me that it was better on the pill than off it. My periods off it are horribly irregular, in fact, so irregular that it's impossible to predict when I have one; I bleed for at least a week and so heavily that I end up having to wear a tampon as well as a pad, and I end up extremely ill all that week, too. Not to mention the PMS that temporarily changes me into Godzilla... O_o

Plus, I don't want children. Not now, not ever. I can't get my tubes tied cuz my doctor won't let me, so I take the pill and my boyf uses a condom. Are all these fanatics ready to look after all the unwanted kids in the world? I agree with whoever said that forcing a woman to become pregnant and give birth is in a way, a form of rape. It's taking control of her own body off a woman and giving it to someone else. We might as well go back to the days when a woman and all her belongings were owned by her husband, and she spent her life barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen.

[McDreidel09]

I didn't read this whole thread, so if someone already said this, sorry.

I was recently put on birth control because the doctor's found ovarian cysts. Some may know that it is normal for a female of my age to have them, but they were causing me so much pain, that in order to regulate my hormones and cease the pain, they put me on birth control. I'm not using them so I can have all the sex I want and not get pregnant. In fact, if it weren't for the cysts, I wouldn't be on them. I'm using them to function properly. The pain was so bad, I couldn't stand up at work (and that's what I have to do all shift,every shift.)

Just because some religious groups don't like the idea, doesn't mean that the rest of us, who have no problem with them and actually need to use them for big things should have to suffer for it.