Why would they say it on the package insert then? Even if it only probably does, it’s the paper-bag-in-the-street argument.
Right
Right, but it’s not an acceptable means for family planning b/c it is actively avoiding the possibility of conception, whereas, NFP is a non-act (that’s how it was explained to me). If this is so, then even if the pill is proved not to be abortifacient, it is still not acceptable, correct?
:banghead:
How about potential abortifacient? Of course, the incidence of chemical aborition does not matter.
Actually, NFP is 99% effective when used correctly. Isn’t there a greater possibility of contracepting on the pill or with a condom? NFP can be used as selfishly as ABC. The couple must have serious reasons to avoid pregnancy. NFP is 99% effective when used correctly - that doesn’t leave one very open to the possibility of conception happening.
Consider this, there is a difference between the odds of getting pregnant and mutilating an act to avoid getting pregnant. Participating in the act when the odds are against getting pregnant is not the same as mutilating an act to avoid the possibility of procreation.
many drugs are potential abortofacients, as they can cause cytotoxicity to a fertilized egg or developing embryo. Amioderone, Welbutrin, MAOIs all could be considered in some way abortofacients. hence as long as the Pill keeps about the same rate of implantation failure oxicity of these drugs (if it REALLY does do that), it will remain considered a therapuetic drug.
yes, but the potential abortifacient effect of those medications is disclosed women. This is not done at the same rate with hormonal contraceptives.
Even with evidence, there are those who will maintain that the pill is contraceptive becasue it will not terminate a pregnancy (defined as beginning with implantation).
I"m sorry, I’m confused? How is the Pill a therapuetic drug? It’s sole purpose is to render a women infertile–therefore it’s a contraceptive. It does not cure any disease. The hormones put a woman into a state of thinking it’s in early pregnancy nearly allk the time (except for the time of breakthrough bleeding when the hormones are taken away for a week). Please expound upon this…
When I was much younger, I had a terrible case of cramps, month after month. I’m talking about being so sick I would scream in pain. I would also throw up my Midol or whatever else I was taking. This was back in the 1960’s. The doctor put me on the pill, and the pain was completely gone for the few months that I remained on the pill. I stopped the pill (I didn’t like some of the side effects) and had a baby. Having a baby seemed to “cure” my problem. However, it came back with a vengenace after my second child. In addition to being completely disabled with pain, I had heavy bleeding and clotting. Going on the birth control pill would always completely cure my pain, clotting, and heavy bleeding as long as I was on it. I was worried about the other side effects, and I was also worried about being on the pill for twenty or more years. I ended up with a hysterectomy, but I have to say that the pill totally relieved my problems while I was on it, making my life more normal. I don’t think healthy people understand how utterly disabling these problems can be.
The Pill didn’t cure you, it masked your symptoms. Just like taking pills to decrease stomach acid doesn’t cure what’s causing the excess stomach acid (been there, don’t that–btw, it was the Pill causing the trouble at the time). The Dr needed to actually figure out what was going on and treat you. My best friend in highschool had terrible trouble with pain and bleeding. I watched her go pale and nearly pass out several times. I know it can be horrible. But why would you not want to fix the problem instead of just covering it up? There are dr’s and resources available now to help women figure these problems out. But most dr’s find it easier to just proscribe the Pill and go on their merry way…
I agree that hormone contraceptives are prescribed rather easily. However, one must remember that not everyone has access to these medical practitioners and not every woman responds the same to a given treatment/management.
Of course I wanted to fix the problem - I tried everything I could think of like eating more healthy food, taking iron, etc. All of the doctors I saw couldn’t find anything wrong with me. I did fix the problem - by having a hysterectomy!! After the doctor removed my uterus, he said he found some adenomyosis. I looked that word up very recently on a reputable medical Web Site. It said that some women can have this with no symptoms. It also said that women who have adenomyosis with severe symptoms can only be cured with hysterectomy and that even the pill doesn’t help them. My symptoms were totally “masked” when I took the pill, so theoretically I guess I could have taken the pill instead of having the hysterectomy and gone on to have more children. If there are women on these forums who had these problems and solved them by some “natural” means, I would be interested in hearing about it. For some women, using the pill to “mask” their symptoms could mean saving a uterus. It is obviously too late for me, since I would be past menopause now even if I had a uterus.
actually everything i have read about the currently used IUDs they are not what you are implying,
John
excellent post my exact feelings the “INTENTIONS” are the same
Johnyou are very misinformed about the pill< there is a topic on the other uses of the pill and its allowance by the church in the apologetics area, but the “cramps” are not stomach acids as you have been blinded into believing, lots of times this is the startings of a serious problem called “endometriosis” the pill is usually the first line defense in curing this problem, this is the bleeding of the OUTER uterine walls, Left untreated will eventually cause at the least a hysterectomy, or worse uterine cancer.
John