I
IsMiseSteise
Guest
No stones from me either!
You’re doing the RIGHT thing!!!
You’re doing the RIGHT thing!!!
Priest says morally licit to use the Pill to augment couple’s use of NFP
- Status
H
hasikelee
Guest
Texas, what is your argument on this thread? What facts of conception do we have to argue about? Why are you being quick to put others down and think the worst of them?
Debating and learning more on this forum should be to share information with others and develop ourselves. Nobody is a master and nobody is perfectly intelligent.
I would like to hear one more response from you regarding your argument in a non-hostile, clear way, without skirting the issue. Hopefully we do have something to discuss instead of having to walk away out of charity.
M
maryj
Guest
As I do before I read the Bible, I find it very helpful to ask the Holy Spirit to guide my words here before I even hook up to the internet. Ask and you shall receive. God Bless.
A
astegallrnc
Guest
Just want to be clear that birth control pills (oral contraceptives) are not what maryj is taking. Using progesterone or progestin to induce cyclic bleeding is a different approach to anovulatory cycles. A woman’s health care provider should explain to a woman using NFP how the progestin/progeterone acts and what effects it will have on fertility and fertility signs i.e., the exogenous hormone will alter mucus, temps, etc.
T
Texas_Roofer
Guest
I do not understand your question; I do not know what you are looking for if anything. I simply have no argument, that is the problem with asking for data, other prefer to argue in the absence of data. If you read the thread you can find many misleading statements, and many incorrect statements. Why are people making such statements? If you look you will see the experts ( both MD & Priest) are the first dismissed, why is that? The best post in the thread was Karin (post #68) If you actually read the posts I made you will find very little opinion at all in my post. What doctors do, is what doctors do, what data supports is what data supports. When others make these
… statements, I ask them to show the data. That is when the personal attacks show up- the attack is in place of the data!The doctor prescribed the pill in the original post, other doctors concur with that prescription, you have seen that in writing (post #48). Additionally on some of these related thread, poster report similar situations. Yet, some refuse this treatment as valid, that is fine they can either (1)simply disagree with the doctor’s mentioned or (2) provide some data to show the doctor’s error, however all we get is (3) a personal attack on a poster.
A
astegallrnc
Guest
Texas Roofer,
As Br. Rich SFO “[a]ll of this becomes more of a medical question than a moral one”. The priest has given poor advice by stating that OCs may augment the use of NFP.
Autumn
Many women have been told that OCs regulate menstrual cycles but this is incorrect use of medical terminology that may result in confusion. Some of the posters are making a distinction between menstrual cycles and period cycles and are correct that the pill will not regulate menstrual cycles nor will it augment NFP.
As Br. Rich SFO “[a]ll of this becomes more of a medical question than a moral one”. The priest has given poor advice by stating that OCs may augment the use of NFP.
I suggest you contact the pharmaceutical companies, experts in family planning, etc. and voice your opinion on this matter.
Autumn
T
Texas_Roofer
Guest
I had to practically reread this whole thread to figure out what you were referencing, How about this, if you look at the underlined phrase can you do you see a different statement?
—Post # 79 -----
*Rewrite : Some believe the thinning of the endometrium associated with use of COC birth control pills could decrease the implantation of a fertilized egg, though this decrease is not proven, some experts believe a decrease is inevitable.
The facts: No expert to date has provided any data to support a decrease in implantation as a result of the pill. In fact not all endometriums are the same to start with and in fact the loss of fertilized eggs is common in control groups.*
Hope that helps
A
astegallrnc
Guest
What does this have to do with a mechanism of action? I suspect we define mechanism of action differently. I refer to my pharmacology texts. The alteration in the endometrium is properly identified as a mechanism of action. It is incorrect to imply that any alteration induced by a medication is identified as a mechanism of action, which IMO you did with this statement "actually it states “other alterations include changes" see if the drug increases ear wax that is another alteration, but it does not change conception”.
Would you accept it if pharmaceutical companies, experts, etc. used the language found in one of my physiology books which refers to antifertility effects?
M
maryj
Guest
Just like to chime in for a second. Yes the pills that I am taking are indeed perscribed for birth control, progesterone only. It took some looking for at the pharmacy but that is indeed what they are perscribed for in other women.
A
astegallrnc
Guest
Progesterone is not prescribed for birth control, so are you taking Provera, which is not prescribed for birth control either? There are several different progestins. The POPs (progestin-only pills) contain norethindrone or norgesterel. You also have to keep in mind that POPs are taken continuosuly.
M
maryj
Guest
See there I go braggin about how much I know…You are correct I am taking progestin pills which does contain norethindrone, but I am not taking them continuously. Only the last 10 days of the cycle. I did look this up and the info said that these pills are used for hormone replacement and birth control. So I stick by my decision, it works for me and allows my cycle to reset, allowing me to return to NFP. I have absolutely no problems with this, and I see no problems with other women with irregular cycles to augment NFP with this pill, if it results in them being able to return to NFP.
A
astegallrnc
Guest
I would not label this as taking birth control pills. You are taking the same hormone found in birth control pills but the dosage you are taking probably is not what is used in POPs.
I suspect that most women who state they are taking the pill to regulate cylces are taking combination OCs.
T
Texas_Roofer
Guest
So do you want to go on record claiming a drug can cause a change with out a “mechanism of action”?
A
astegallrnc
Guest
Ummmm, no. I will go on record that a mechanism of action describes how a specific drug produces physiologic and biochemical changes at the cellular, tissue, and organ levels. Your example of the ear wax describes a side effect, which is an unintended action of a medication.
Oral contraceptives are intended to prevent pregnancy (the medical defintion). The hormonal environment necessary for a normal pregnancy is such that the exogenous hormones in OCs interfere with many of the steps between intercourse and implantation.
I want to be clear that I consider the pill a *potential *abortifacient. Although I do agree that women should be informed of this potential, this information should not be presented as a primary mechanism of action.
H
hasikelee
Guest
So your stance on this thread is that someone with an M.D. or who has taken vows to the priesthood cannot be wrong?I do not understand your question; I do not know what you are looking for if anything. I simply have no argument, that is the problem with asking for data, other prefer to argue in the absence of data. If you read the thread you can find many misleading statements, and many incorrect statements. Why are people making such statements? If you look you will see the experts ( both MD & Priest) are the first dismissed, why is that? The best post in the thread was Karin (post #68) If you actually read the posts I made you will find very little opinion at all in my post. What doctors do, is what doctors do, what data supports is what data supports. When others make these
The doctor prescribed the pill in the original post, other doctors concur with that prescription, you have seen that in writing (post #48). Additionally on some of these related thread, poster report similar situations. Yet, some refuse this treatment as valid, that is fine they can either (1)simply disagree with the doctor’s mentioned or (2) provide some data to show the doctor’s error, however all we get is (3) a personal attack on a poster.
T
Texas_Roofer
Guest
I may be understanding, which doctor or doctors are you referring to? There seems to be an endless supply of doctors which concur with the pill oppressing ovulation, affecting the cycle, and not having seen data which indicates the “abortive affect” of the pill. As for Priests I do not discuss this issue with many Priests, but I see no church teaching that violates the OP’s condition though it is uncertain from that post if sexual activity and the pill are occurring sequentially. Similarly if the OP’s condition is a lack of success in pregnancy the situation is interesting as the intent is reverse to those who commonly use the same pill.So your stance on this thread is that someone with an M.D. or who has taken vows to the priesthood cannot be wrong?
A
astegallrnc
Guest
You want direct evidence that the mechanism of action (changes in endometrium) is abortifacient, because the “mechanism” itself is documented.
H
hasikelee
Guest
I am not referring to any specific doctors; I am addressing your posts. You said:
And I asked if you believe that an M.D. or priest can never be wrong.
So do you? Do you believe that a person with a medical degree or a person who has taken vows into the priesthood can never be wrong?
B
Black_Jaque
Guest
Perhaps Mike is mistaken about NFP. Perhaps he’s thinking of the old rhythm method in which counting days from the mense was crucial.
However, in the modern, more effective, forms of NFP you determine the fertile phase based on other criteria altogether. When the period begins is irrelevent to these forms of NFP.
Therefore regulating the cycle has little value in their use of NFP.
NOT TO MENTION the only morally licit use of the BCP is for non-birth-control purposes. It would seem that if you used it to regulate a cycle so that NFP was more practical - you are using the BCP for birth-control purposes and therefore it is evil.
Folks, you may want to steer away from couching the contraceptives only in terms of Catholic Teaching. We avoid contraceptives not because we’re Catholic, but because contraception is evil (That means it’s evil no matter who you are or what you believe).
However, in the modern, more effective, forms of NFP you determine the fertile phase based on other criteria altogether. When the period begins is irrelevent to these forms of NFP.
Therefore regulating the cycle has little value in their use of NFP.
NOT TO MENTION the only morally licit use of the BCP is for non-birth-control purposes. It would seem that if you used it to regulate a cycle so that NFP was more practical - you are using the BCP for birth-control purposes and therefore it is evil.
Folks, you may want to steer away from couching the contraceptives only in terms of Catholic Teaching. We avoid contraceptives not because we’re Catholic, but because contraception is evil (That means it’s evil no matter who you are or what you believe).
S
setter
Guest
This was what I was bumping my head against in discussion with this priest. He all together circumvented my contention that you are not really “regulating” the cycle as you are suppressing the natural fertility cycle.
Again, the priest in question recommended a doctor consultation for the medical necessity of BCP treatment of irregular menstrual cycles due to the difficulty in charting under NFP. As a stand alone medical issue (not in reference to NFP charting) the irregular menstrual cycle has never been a condition requiring medical attention. It was quite disappointing how this clergy representative of the Church made such an unveiled “pastoral” effort to circumvent clear and established Church teaching against ABC.
- Status