Birth control and non-Catholics

[mercygate]

True, but then this thread was titled “Birth control and non-Catholics”

Exactly my point.

 

[1234]

I’m just curious, has the fact the SOME men
1.still have all the sex they want, esp with ABC,
2. still get women pregnant, because short of total abstinence SEX=babies
3. Some men still don’t take responsiblity, because after all WE USED CONTRACEPTION–it’s all her fault…
Changed because ABC is being used? I don’t think so. Contraception hasn’t helped women on this count at all. It hasn’t stopped rape, it hasn’t stopped all pregnancies, it hasn’t "liberated’ women at all.

I agree with the poster that spoke of chemially ravaging our bodies so that men can then ravage us is a horrible thought.

No, women and men can have all the sex they want.

contraceptives prevent most pregnancies. total abstinence as a program to prevent pregnancy and STD’s has utterly failed.

Men do take responsibility. Condoms are the most frequently used contraceptive in the world. Vasectomy is widely practiced.

No, contraception doesn’t stop rape, but it stops pregnancy due to rape, which is almost universally supported as one of THE indications for abortion, AND it helps prevent STD’s.

Sorry, birth control pills and especially hormone replacement therapy doesn’t chemically ravage the body. In many cases, it protects against diseases, especially ovarian cancer and endometriosis.

the title of this thread is Non-Catholics and birth control. Almost every non-Catholic group in the world practices birth control. The few who don’t are fundamentalist cult-like groups, and in some, such as the Amish and Hutterite, some sort of birth control is taking hold, because of the spread of genetic diseases and increasing difficulty in supporting large families. In Hasidic groups, it depends on the health of the mother, but the economics of the large family will also play a part in the future.

 

[Syele]

[Sorry, birth control pills and especially hormone replacement therapy doesn’t chemically ravage the body. In many cases, it protects against diseases, especially ovarian cancer and endometriosis

I felt pretty darned ravaged when I took the pill for a medical reason and began having extreme mood swings. (No adjusting dosage and brand didn’t help)The weight gain didn’t help either. how about the increased risks of Stroke,breast cancer, cervical cancer, liver cancer, DVT, heart attacks? AND chemical based contraception does not help prevent STDs.
[/quote]

 

[I_A]

**
contraceptives prevent most pregnancies**. total abstinence as a program to prevent pregnancy and STD’s has utterly failed.

Not according to documents I’ve read.

• “Disparities in Rates of Unintended Pregnancy
  In the United States, 1994 and 2001”
  In 2001, 49% of pregnancies in the United States were inintended. The unintended pregnancy rate was 51 per 1,000 women aged 15–44, meaning that 5% of this group had an unintended pregnancy. … Forty-eight percent of unintended conceptions in 2001 occurred during a month when contraceptives were used, compared with 51% in 1994.
• guttmacher.org/pubs/psrh/full/3809006.pdf

Well maybe that one study is flawed, lets look at another:

“Contraceptive Use Among U.S. Women Having Abortions in 2000–2001”
** Forty-six percent of women had not used a contraceptive method in the month they conceived, mainly because
of perceived low risk of pregnancy and concerns about contraception (cited by 33% and 32% of nonusers, respectively).
The male condom was the most commonly reported method among all women (28%), followed by the pill
(14%).
guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/3429402.pdf
The document states that 53.7% of women having abortions used contraceptives.

 

[1234]

I felt pretty darned ravaged when I took the pill for a medical reason and began having extreme mood swings. (No adjusting dosage and brand didn’t help)The weight gain didn’t help either. how about the increased risks of Stroke,breast cancer, cervical cancer, liver cancer, DVT, heart attacks? AND chemical based contraception does not help prevent STDs.

when were you taking them?

Modern birth control pills use a much lower dose regimen than the old ones. Re the alleged complications, none equal the complications of pregnancy and childbirth.

Cervical cancer is caused by the human papillomavirus. Not related to BC at all.

Liver cancer is very rare in the west, and is caused by viral hepatitis or adenocarcinoma which isn’t related to BC at all.

Old er women who smoke on BC have a higher incidence of stroke and DVT. Advice: don’t smoke. Second, older women should use other methods.

No, BC doesn’t prevent STD’s.

The relationship to breast cancer is contentious and depends on age and duration of exposure. There is a definite protective effect of BCP and ovarian cancer, so much so that it will probably be used in women with a positive family history.

YOUR bad experience is not mirrored by the millions on the patch or modern birth control pills. I tolerated them well–but went with diaphragm and spermacidal cream, which worked fine.

Once again,

the vast majority of non-Catholics use ‘artificial’ birth control.

So do the vast majority of Catholics.

 

[Jennifer_J]

I felt pretty darned ravaged when I took the pill for a medical reason and began having extreme mood swings. (No adjusting dosage and brand didn’t help)The weight gain didn’t help either. how about the increased risks of Stroke,breast cancer, cervical cancer, liver cancer, DVT, heart attacks? AND chemical based contraception does not help prevent STDs.

Me, too. I was horribly sick on them. So sick the doc thought I had an ulcer or hiatal hernia and had to go through various invasive tests to rule that out. I was always sick because the artifical hormones make your body think it’s pregnant–I don’t do well with that at all. There’s a list of side effects for a reason and there are many people with medical conditions that shouldn’t take the pill at all, ever. So it’s not safe for many people and make many people sick–very sick.

 

[Sublime_Prince]

I am not catholic and am very much against birth control now. I use to think different, but my girlfriend has been a great mentor to me over our bible study lessons and has changed my views about it.

I have always been firmly against abortion or any pre-abortion methods.

 

[Syele]

when were you taking them?

Modern birth control pills use a much lower dose regimen than the old ones. Re the alleged complications, none equal the complications of pregnancy and childbirth.

Cervical cancer is caused by the human papillomavirus. Not related to BC at all.

Liver cancer is very rare in the west, and is caused by viral hepatitis or adenocarcinoma which isn’t related to BC at all.

Old er women who smoke on BC have a higher incidence of stroke and DVT. Advice: don’t smoke. Second, older women should use other methods.

No, BC doesn’t prevent STD’s.

The relationship to breast cancer is contentious and depends on age and duration of exposure. There is a definite protective effect of BCP and ovarian cancer, so much so that it will probably be used in women with a positive family history.

YOUR bad experience is not mirrored by the millions on the patch or modern birth control pills. I tolerated them well–but went with diaphragm and spermacidal cream, which worked fine.

Once again,

the vast majority of non-Catholics use ‘artificial’ birth control.

So do the vast majority of Catholics.

I got that list of possible side effects from a site promoting the pill. why do they list side effects you claim don’t exist? I remember reading them in the insert than came with the pills when I used to take them too.

And these things ARE linked to BC pills.
msnbc:

Cervical cancer cases typically affect women in their 30s — when many may be on the pill.Previous research has linked the pill to cervical cancer, but the Lancet study appears to show for the first time that this connection is temporary. Ten years after women stop taking oral contraceptives, their risk for cervical cancer is virtually the same as that for women who never took them.
The research was led by Dr. Jane Green of Cancer Research UK’s epidemiology unit at the University of Oxford.

wow 10 years to get back to normal. temporary maybe but that is a long temporary!
webmd.com:

Taking oral contraceptives for five or more years was associated with a doubling of cervical cancer risk

I cant say I find your facts impressive…
cancer.gov:

The risk of liver cancer is increased in women who take oral contraceptives and are otherwise considered low risk for the disease

not related at all…?

look, I don’t care if things are rare, its wrong to deny any relationship when there is one. I hope you are not that careless with the lives of your patients.

Mood Swings happen to be a very common side effect of oral contraception. So saying I’m one in a million with a bad experience is also misleading. I didn’t say I got liver cancer from it I said mood swing problems. google the pill mood swings and all the search results are full of forum posts in various place with women complaining of mood swings caused by the pill! It happens to be one of the most common side effect of it!

Millions of people drink too much alcohol and smoke too , doesn’t mean its good for them

 

[1234]

I got that list of possible side effects from a site promoting the pill. why do they list side effects you claim don’t exist? I remember reading them in the insert than came with the pills when I used to take them too.

And these things ARE linked to BC pills.

wow 10 years to get back to normal. temporary maybe but that is a long temporary!

I cant say I find your facts impressive…

not related at all…?

look, I don’t care if things are rare, its wrong to deny any relationship when there is one. I hope you are not that careless with the lives of your patients.

Mood Swings happen to be a very common side effect of oral contraception. So saying I’m one in a million with a bad experience is also misleading. I didn’t say I got liver cancer from it I said mood swing problems. google the pill mood swings and all the search results are full of forum posts in various place with women complaining of mood swings caused by the pill! It happens to be one of the most common side effect of it!

Millions of people drink too much alcohol and smoke too , doesn’t mean its good for them

the theme of this thread is BC and non-Catholics.

You didn’t like birth control pills.

So?

Millions of other non-Catholics (and Catholics) tolerate them well.

so, use another form of birth control. There are several barrier methods for women and men.

WHAT is your problem?

WHY do you and so many others try to shove YOUR bad experiences down other people’s throats?

 

[1234]

I am not catholic and am very much against birth control now. I use to think different, but my girlfriend has been a great mentor to me over our bible study lessons and has changed my views about it.

I have always been firmly against abortion or any pre-abortion methods.

Wait until you have three children in three years. Maybe you won’t be against birth control then.

 

[1234]

Not according to documents I’ve read.

• “Disparities in Rates of Unintended Pregnancy
  In the United States, 1994 and 2001”
  In 2001, 49% of pregnancies in the United States were inintended. The unintended pregnancy rate was 51 per 1,000 women aged 15–44, meaning that 5% of this group had an unintended pregnancy. … Forty-eight percent of unintended conceptions in 2001 occurred during a month when contraceptives were used,* compared with 51% in 1994.
  guttmacher.org/pubs/psrh/full/3809006.pdf

Well maybe that one study is flawed, lets look at another:

“Contraceptive Use Among U.S. Women Having Abortions in 2000–2001”
** Forty-six percent of women had not used a contraceptive method in the month they conceived, mainly because
of perceived low risk of pregnancy and concerns about contraception (cited by 33% and 32% of nonusers, respectively).
The male condom was the most commonly reported method among all women (28%), followed by the pill
(14%).
guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/3429402.pdf
The document states that 53.7% of women having abortions used contraceptives.

No one can prove that women or men who use contraceptives use them for each and every act of intercourse. Women coming in for abortions may not want to admit that they use them some of the time or weren’t sure whether they used them or not. It’s a little late for that.

It’s all very simple. Women who use contraceptives 100% of the time don’t get pregnant. Men who use condoms 100% of the time don’t impregnate. I suspect the low failure rates that do exist are due to error in usage or reporting. When I used a diaphragm and spermacide, I didn’t get pregnant. When I stopped using them to get pregnant, I got pregnant. When I no longer wanted to get pregnant, I got sterilized. Period.

 

[Syele]

the theme of this thread is BC and non-Catholics.

You didn’t like birth control pills.

So?

I’m a non-Catholic. What has this got to do with anything? You don’t see me talking about BC on a thread about say , papal infallibility. there is NO reason why I should refrain from posting in this thread about BC. I am completely on topic.

Millions of other non-Catholics (and Catholics) tolerate them well.

Goody for them. I was asked my opinion and I gave it. Millions of people tolerating them well does not erase all risk. It does not make it true to say there is none. It does not mean that thousands of others who had problems on them don’t exist.

so, use another form of birth control. There are several barrier methods for women and men.

WHAT is your problem?

I was asked my opinion and I gave it. You gave misleading info as if it were facts, so I corrected it. I don’t have a problem, but it appears you do.

WHY do you and so many others try to shove YOUR bad experiences down other people’s throats?

NO one is forced to read this thread. I stated my opinions as my opinions. If people feel forced to stop using chemical BC because I said so, well, I’d be shocked. Why is it somehow evil for someone who had a bad experience to say so? Why obscure risks and say they don’t exist? I only wanted the truth. “XXX is a risk but really rare” “yyy is a risk but the risk goes away 10 years after you stop taking the stuff” Those risks are real. rare and temporary maybe but REAL. Lying to people causes real harm. Why do you think people are too stupid to make decisions for themselves?

Why are YOU on a Catholic website where people are NOT going to agree with you trying to force YOUR view down peoples throats? You are the one claiming to be a Doctor and not giving all the information. I just a protestant woman with an opinion. Why are you so threatened by me?

 

[jmcrae]

Wait until you have three children in three years. Maybe you won’t be against birth control then.

Actually, three toddlers running around the house would provide the most natural birth control of all - hard work and sound sleep.

 

[mercygate]

Actually, three toddlers running around the house would provide the most natural birth control of all - hard work and sound sleep.

Throw in a few cloves of garlic, and you can’t lose.

 

[I_A]

No one can prove that women or men who use contraceptives use them for each and every act of intercourse. Women coming in for abortions may not want to admit that they use them some of the time or weren’t sure whether they used them or not. It’s a little late for that.

It’s all very simple. Women who use contraceptives 100% of the time don’t get pregnant. Men who use condoms 100% of the time don’t impregnate. I suspect the low failure rates that do exist are due to error in usage or reporting. When I used a diaphragm and spermacide, I didn’t get pregnant. When I stopped using them to get pregnant, I got pregnant. When I no longer wanted to get pregnant, I got sterilized. Period.

So is the Alan Guttmacher Institute and the supposedly scientific data they published not to be trusted?

 

[emeraldcoast]

Ovarian Cancer is an issue that I try to keep up on since a female family member has been diagnosed with it almost two years ago. Here are a couple of articles that were interesting for me about oral contraceptives and ovarian cancer.

“Oral contraceptives cut women’s risk of ovarian cancer for more than 30 years after they stop taking them – giving the pill a net anticancer effect.”

webmd.com/sex/birth-control/news/20080124/contraceptive-pill-cancer-protection

“Oral contraceptives slightly and temporarily increase the risk of breast and cervical cancer. However, the slight increase in breast cancer occurs during and in the 5 years following the use of these contraceptives, and usually at a time and age when risk is very low,” said Debbie Saslow, PhD, director of breast and gynecological cancers at the American Cancer Society.

cancer.org/docroot/NWS/content/NWS_1_1x_Birth_Control_Pill_Use_Cuts_Ovarian_Cancer_Risk.asp

FYI-
ovariancancer.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Page.viewPage&PageID=769&CFID=21118980&CFTOKEN=55fd3efd0101430c-A578FA4A-15C5-E1E2-3EA2BA3C2587D5A7

God Bless!

 

[Amolibri]

This begs the question… Are you a baby killer then???

This is precisely the type of inflamatory **** that really disturbs me. What cause would you have to say a thing like that?
I believe you owe Dr.1234 an apology.

 

[TLara]

This is precisely the type of inflamatory **** that really disturbs me. What cause would you have to say a thing like that?
I believe you owe Dr.1234 an apology.

Why, a direct question was asked if you don’t like the fact that many doctors kill babys I don’t know what to tell you. To further the thought if someone takes the pill knowing that sometimes conception occurs and is aborted, they also can be properly labeled as a baby killer

 

[BlestOne]

This is precisely the type of inflamatory **** that really disturbs me. What cause would you have to say a thing like that?
I believe you owe Dr.1234 an apology.

It was a legitimate question… would you rather the use of the term abortionist? I asked because 1234’s preoccupation with calling anyone that disagreed with her about ABC and abortion stupid. That was cause to believe that 1234 may be in the business of killing babies. I don’t believe I owe anyone an apology… but thanks for your opinion…

 

[BlestOne]

Wait until you have three children in three years. Maybe you won’t be against birth control then.

I had twins and 22 months later had another. This means I qualify and yes I am against birth control… oh… and just to be totally clear… the twins weren’t my first, they were numbers 2 and 3.

NFP is great for spacing out children if you felt so inclined as well as ecological breastfeeding… personally, I planned all my children.