Help! Side Effects of Pill, Post 1990

  • Thread starter Thread starter Traci
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Traci

Guest
I have a guy who is disregarding all of the information I have given him on the cancer risks of oral contraceptives because he is saying that all of the studies are on women who took the pill when it was “high-dose” prior to 1990, and that the low-dose pill his girlfriend is on is safe because it says it reduces ovarian cancer on webmd.

Anyone out there know any information that I could give to this guy to show how bad the pill is?
 
The BCP is linked to higher rates of breast cancer pregnantpause.org/safe/abckahl.htm and in July 2005 World Health Organisation researchers reported that although uterine and ovarian cancer risk is lower, there are higher risks of cervical and liver cancers with combined birth control pills.
abortionbreastcancer.com/news/050831/

This is a highly controversial subject and researchers who speak out about the risks they have found are typically blasted as ‘crypto-prolifers’. The truth is that many who considered themselves pro-choice have found that their resarch has been ignored or scorned and it is only pro-lifers who will listen to their concerns.

Is it any wonder that they, in turn, come to despise the hypocrisy of their ‘colleagues’ and reject the pro-choice position that puts politics ahead of women’s health and lives?
 
Have the man read all the disclaimers that come along with the pill packet. Tell him first to buy a good magnifing glass.
 
Thank you for your replies.

I gave him the link to the WHO information on the IARC Press Release that states oral contraceptives are carcinogenic. I gave him the ABC website and I forwarded him .pdf files of the patient inserts on a couple pills. He just keeps saying that all the research was done on the high dose pills of the 60s, 70s and 80s and that none of that applies to the post 1990 pill, which is a lower dose and “much safer”. I pointed him to the part of the abortionbreastcancer.com/news/050831/ article that says "Some experts say they will continue to prescribe oral contraceptives because the studies were based on higher dose oral contraceptives, not low dose oral contraceptives. Yet, one commentator cleverly responded, “Is a little arsenic better than a lot of arsenic, or is it still poison?”

He didn’t even consider it, his heart is definitely hardened on the issue. I just pray that I planted a few seeds to make him think about it.

I know that there are a lot of people on this website that have done a ton of research on oral contraceptives, so I was just hoping that someone had some info on the newer “low dose” pills. I am assuming that they are just too new to have any long term studies done?!?!?!? At least I am having a hard time finding anything!
 
I take it he doesn’t care about the abortifacient nature of the Pill?

Is he a Christian? If so, tell him that he will one day have to answer to God for the lives of any children of his who were chemically aborted.
 
Eileen T:
I take it he doesn’t care about the abortifacient nature of the Pill?

Is he a Christian? If so, tell him that he will one day have to answer to God for the lives of any children of his who were chemically aborted.
Good point about the abortifacient but he won’t listen, he says that it is debatable when it is a life, and he quoted some guy that was supposedly quoting a Leviticus bible verse that says “blood flows at 18 days” so he says that a baby isn’t a life until blood flows at 18 days. He says he and his wife go to a Methodist church because the “people are nice” and that basically all Christians have the same “core” beliefs…aka believe in Jesus and live a good life so it doesn’t matter what church you go to and that all Catholics are paid off…it breaks my heart to hear his arguements…they are so unsupported.

He is very close-minded and it is difficult to express your side of anything because he just ignores your arguement and believes what he wants, saying that everything I am telling him is “Catholic biased” so he won’t even consider what I am telling him about the pill or the beliefs of the Catholic Church. He says his wife is a nurse and she knows that the pill isn’t harmful, at least at the low dose that is in the pill today. There is an article on webmd that doesn’t say the pill is harmful so that is all he is going by, he says it is a reputable source, but what is frustrating is that the whole article only had ONE reference to one book that a lady wrote. Somehow that must be more reputable than WHO and IARC…note my sarcasm in this last statement.

It is so frustating…he just wants to debate and won’t listen to any reason. He has an answer for everything.
 
40.png
MommaKat:
Have the man read all the disclaimers that come along with the pill packet. Tell him first to buy a good magnifing glass.
Honestly- this isn’t a bad suggestion at all. Have you read what’s in there? Paragraphs of tiny print about risks for cancer and heart conditions. (Oh, and the side effects. Blech. That’s enough to deter someone right there.)

And yes, the abortifacient nature of the pill should be explained too if he doesn’t know that yet…
 
40.png
Traci:
Good point about the abortifacient but he won’t listen, he says that it is debatable when it is a life, and he quoted some guy that was supposedly quoting a Leviticus bible verse that says “blood flows at 18 days” so he says that a baby isn’t a life until blood flows at 18 days. He says he and his wife go to a Methodist church because the “people are nice” and that basically all Christians have the same “core” beliefs…aka believe in Jesus and live a good life so it doesn’t matter what church you go to and that all Catholics are paid off…it breaks my heart to hear his arguements…they are so unsupported.

He is very close-minded and it is difficult to express your side of anything because he just ignores your arguement and believes what he wants, saying that everything I am telling him is “Catholic biased” so he won’t even consider what I am telling him about the pill or the beliefs of the Catholic Church. He says his wife is a nurse and she knows that the pill isn’t harmful, at least at the low dose that is in the pill today. There is an article on webmd that doesn’t say the pill is harmful so that is all he is going by, he says it is a reputable source, but what is frustrating is that the whole article only had ONE reference to one book that a lady wrote. Somehow that must be more reputable than WHO and IARC…note my sarcasm in this last statement.

It is so frustating…he just wants to debate and won’t listen to any reason. He has an answer for everything.
Well, I know where he got that line about “18 days”. That came off of CSI, for crying out loud! Since when is a fictional TV show a reliable source for medical information, for crying out loud???
That is scary. I hate it when people close their minds like that!
Well, it may not help, but I, who am speaking, I am Methodist, & I about went balistic over the nonsense on that show. They were making up their so-called “evidence” as they went along!! Not one bit of it was based on anything other than advancing the story line!!
 
40.png
Celia:
Honestly- this isn’t a bad suggestion at all. Have you read what’s in there? Paragraphs of tiny print about risks for cancer and heart conditions. (Oh, and the side effects. Blech. That’s enough to deter someone right there.)

And yes, the abortifacient nature of the pill should be explained too if he doesn’t know that yet…
I keep reading that the pill may cause abortions**…where can I get info about this **as the info that comes with the pill (yes all the tiny print that I do read for all medications ) does not mention this.:confused:
 
40.png
Traci:
I have a guy who is disregarding all of the information I have given him on the cancer risks of oral contraceptives because he is saying that all of the studies are on women who took the pill when it was “high-dose” prior to 1990, and that the low-dose pill his girlfriend is on is safe because it says it reduces ovarian cancer on webmd.

Anyone out there know any information that I could give to this guy to show how bad the pill is?
low dose pill is just as bad, especially for women who smoke, and has the added advantage of being much less effective, therefore generating potential income for the abortion business.
 
40.png
Karin:
I keep reading that the pill may cause abortions**…where can I get info about this **as the info that comes with the pill (yes all the tiny print that I do read for all medications ) does not mention this.:confused:
Hi Karin, That’s a valid question. The package insert on birth control pills probably won’t come right out and say “abortion”. What it probably describes is method of action. The thinning of the lining of the uterus (endometrium) may result in what we are refering to as “abortions” because a fertilized egg (which has all the DNA of a unique individual separate from the mother) is less likely to implant in a woman’s uterus when she is using the birth control pill.

I did a web search and found an article that sites lots of references which documents this better.

From
http://www.epm.org/articles/bcp3300.html

"The* Physician’s Desk Reference* is the most frequently used reference book by physicians in America. The* PDR*, as it’s often called, lists and explains the effects, benefits, and risks of every medical product that can be legally prescribed. The Food and Drug Administration requires that each manufacturer provide accurate information on its products, based on scientific research and laboratory tests.
As you read the following, keep in mind that the term “implantation,” by definition, always involves an already conceived human being. Therefore, any agent which serves to prevent implantation functions as an abortifacient.

This is the PDR’s product information for Ortho-Cept, as listed by Ortho, one of the largest manufacturers of the Pill:

Combination oral contraceptives act by suppression of gonadotropins. Although the primary mechanism of this action is inhibition of ovulation, other alterations include changes in the cervical mucus, which increase the difficulty of sperm entry into the uterus, and changes in the endometrium which reduce the likelihood of implantation.[

Hope this helps you understand what we are refering to when we speak of early abortions from the birth control pill.[5[/color]]“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birth_control_pill"The Pill prevents pregnancy in three ways. It works primarily by preventing ovulation,but it also makes the uterus less likely to accept implantation of an embryo if one is created. The synthetic hormones thicken the mucus in the cervix making it more difficult for sperm to reach any egg.”](http://www.epm.org/articles/bcp3300.html#_edn5)
 
40.png
gardenswithkids:
Hi Karin, That’s a valid question. The package insert on birth control pills probably won’t come right out and say “abortion”. What it may describe is method of preventing conception. The thinning of the lining of the uterus (endometrium) may result in what we are refering to as “abortions” because a fertilized egg (which has all the DNA of a unique individual separate from the mother) is less likely to implant in a woman’s uterus when she is using the birth control pill…
Gardenswithkids…
Thank you that was VERY helpful. I can now understand what ya’ll are talking about
🙂
 
The pill also increases the chance of gum disease. I read that on the ADA website.
 
It is also linked with obesity migranes and a lack of libido. Just what every woman wants.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top