quote: If a new brand of birth control gets approved early next year, that time of the month could become the time of, like, the decade. Lybrel, a birth-control pill made by Wyeth, would be the first oral contraceptive to deliver an uninterrupted supply of hormones. Seventy percent of women who took it for six months were period-free, according to a preliminary study by the company.
Wyeth isn't the first pharmaceutical company to reimagine the menstrual cycle. In 1992, the FDA approved Depo-Provera, an injection that is repeated every three months. In 2003, Seasonale rescheduled the monthly period to four times a year. And in July, the government gave the go-ahead for Implanon, an implant that delivers a steady hormone stream for up to three years. But the pill is the favorite means of birth control of the nearly quarter of American women of childbearing age who take hormonal contraceptives. That means Lybrel—and the other brands that will surely follow—could change the menstrual cycle as we know it. The appeal is obvious: No more bloating, cramping, food cravings, and PMS jokes, not to mention the savings in unpurchased tampons and such. But in the end, for reasons both medical and cultural, it's not clear that putting the kibosh on the curse is a good idea.
Traditional pill packs contain a week of placebos for each monthly cycle, and, as a result, women who take them appear to menstruate. But it turns out that the bleeding serves no reproductive purpose. Since there's no egg to flush out, the bleeding is a symptom of withdrawal from progestin and estrogen, the hormones in the pill—in essence, it's a fake period. The inventors of the pill, which debuted in 1960, supposedly decided to mimic the menstrual cycle because they thought that would make women more psychologically comfortable with the product.
Western women today are estimated to average about 400 menstrual cycles over the course of their lifetimes. Pregnancy and nursing halt periods for a time, of course. And for years physicians have informally advised women with painful periods to practice "menstrual suppression" by taking hormonal contraceptives continuously. Birth-control medications tend to lessen menstrual and premenstrual symptoms to begin with, and some studies show that fewer periods may mean even more relief.
Now Lybrel is explicitly selling all of this, by prescription, at a drug store near you. Women can shut off their systems for law school, a trip around the world—even their entire 20s. Random spotting is common while using Lybrel, especially at the start. But in a study of another brand called Alesse, 90 percent of participants did not bleed at all after a year of use, according to Leslie Miller, associate professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Washington. "We can manipulate menstruation," she says.
Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
That is so appealing.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
If this is safe and doesn't cause any longterm damage (which I don't know if it could, maybe one of our medical experts will chime in) then my goodness it's awesome.
I was one of those women the doctor put on continuous pills, but he would have me take the placebos every third pack, essentially having a period every 12 weeks. It was great, until I started breaking through the pills, but then I had a host of problems eventually leading to a hysterectomy. For women without my problems, it would most likely have worked better.
I wonder if it's going to be for women with problems only, or something that's available to anybody. Imagine - if you can afford the monthly fee, you can effectively shut down your reproductive system for years at a time, perhaps even a decade. Changes how we look at things, no? What if unwanted pregnancy were a thing of the past? (of course, no medication is perfect - especially one that depends on someone remembering to take a pill every day, but still....)
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
Nothing beats stupidity. Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
Yeah -- I'm suspicious since it doesn't mention ANY negatives at all.
Like 1) what about if a couple decides they want to conceive? How long would it take to get this Lybrel out of their system and allow their bodies to go back to regular cycles again? 2) what does it do to sex drive? (the Depo-Provera shot my sex drive to absolutely zero when I tried it) That could be a problem for some couples. 3) Is there weight gain as a side effect? That is common among most types of birth control.
FG
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
If it doesn't mess up my system so I can't get pregnant later, I would LOVE this. It isn't just the period - I've had raging hormones since I was 13 and it really affects my life. This would be great.
Posted by Omega M. (Member # 7924) on :
I'm not a woman, but we may want to think about the end of this article before jumping up and down about this new pill:
quote:But if modern menstruation isn't completely natural, by prehistoric standards, suppressing one's period by taking hormones is even less so. No one knows the health effects for menstruating women of long-term continuous exposure, especially the risks of blood clots and breast cancer and the effect on later fertility. The uncertainties are especially troubling for adolescents whose reproductive systems continue to develop after they start menstruating, explains Jerilynn Prior, director of the Centre for Menstrual Cycle and Ovulation Research in British Columbia. Nearly one in five teens uses a form of hormonal birth control. Given the unknowns, perhaps doctors should consider setting a minimum age requirement for Lybrel, or limiting how long women can stay on it.
Nor is the pharmaceutical industry's track record on birth control exactly reassuring in weighing the risks and benefits. In 2002, the implant Norplant was pulled from the market after questions about its effectiveness and lawsuits by women claiming they were not adequately warned of side effects. In 2004, the FDA required that Depo-Provera include a label warning of risk to bone density. And last year, the FDA warned that the high levels of estrogen found in the Ortho-Evra patch increased the risk of blood clots after about a dozen young women died from clotting believed to be related to it. Maybe Lybrel will prove to be a dream drug with none of these problems; at the moment, we don't have the data to know. Periods, on the other hand, are time-tested. They tell you that you're not pregnant, and they're a sign that your body is working as it should. That's worth some fuss.
These studies appear to have been going on for no more than a year. If I were a woman, I don't think I'd take this pill unless my periods were so crippling that getting rid of them would be worth nasty side effects years down the road.
(Would you take a relatively untested pill that somehow kept you from having to go to the bathroom just so you could be rid of the hassle? Would you get one of those brain computers that always seem to be around the corner just so you could get on the Internet whenever you wanted?)
Posted by Wendybird (Member # 84) on :
I'm in the camp that says messing with fertility and the normal function of our bodies is dangerous. I'm one of the ones that wonder if long term birth control has been a contributing factor to the rise in infertility. Only time will tell I guess if this is safe. I just hope the long term effects aren't dangerous.
Posted by Megan (Member # 5290) on :
Omega, I don't think you understand how much worse periods can be than "just having to go to the bathroom."
That said, the only thing that would make me nervous about a continuous pill (and it isn't really a new concept, I don't think; I've heard of it before) is that how would you know if, in spite of everything, you got pregnant? That's the only reason I wouldn't be interested in getting rid of the darn thing entirely.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I am not an early adopter. I just got a cell phone a few years ago, and I still use a paper planner. I don't think I would use this until it had been tested out to Fiji. It would be nice, though, if I knew it was safe. I'm glad they are working on it. Posted by Libbie (Member # 9529) on :
I have a friend who has to be on Depo because she has a deformity in her fallopian tubes that makes the likelihood of her having a tubal pregnancy (which is, of course, life-threatening) very, very high. So she can't get pregnant, anyway, and if she did, she'd have to abort, which she doesn't want to go through. She'd probably love this pill, since she's been getting some allergic reactions to the shot site lately with her Depo. Interesting! I'll have to forward this to her.
She told me she quized her doctor about the whole "no period" thing, and her doctor assured her that it's okay for a woman to not menstruate. Her doctor said that in a woman who COULD conceive, it might possibly make it more difficult to conceive for a couple of years, but that was just her doctor, not a whole bunch of medical trials, so who knows?
Posted by Libbie (Member # 9529) on :
quote:Originally posted by Belle: What if unwanted pregnancy were a thing of the past? (of course, no medication is perfect - especially one that depends on someone remembering to take a pill every day, but still....)
Well, that's just the thing. The pill we have NOW is supposed to be 99.9% effective, so unwanted pregnancy SHOULD be a thing of the past. The problem is that few women, especiall young women, take the pill every day *and* at the same time every day, and in some women, being off by just a few hours could cause ovulation. That's why they came up with Depo and the patch and the ring - continuous hormones that you only have to renew every 30 - 90 days, depending on the type.
Of course, a lot of women will say they're on the pill and that it failed, when in fact they wanted to have an "unwanted pregnancy." I think the statistics on unwanted pregnancies or surprise pregnancies are all messy due to that factor. Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
For a humorous take on this issue, check out Connie Willis' Even the Queen.
Posted by Omega M. (Member # 7924) on :
quote:Originally posted by Megan: Omega, I don't think you understand how much worse periods can be than "just having to go to the bathroom."
That's why I said, "unless my periods were so crippling that getting rid of them would be worth nasty side effects years down the road." If a lot of women have periods like that, then a lot of women would want to take this pill and I wouldn't be worried. I said that because the article said things like, "Now you can turn off your period when you go on vacation to Europe, or go to law school!"; which by themselves seem like frivolous reasons to take a pill that could have bad side effects years later. I know that periods are much more than just "going to the bathroom"; I was making a reductio ad absurdum.
Posted by sweetbaboo (Member # 8845) on :
Without more information/testing on the long term consequences of this, I can't imagine it to be a smart choice no matter the discomfort/inconvience and overall ugliness of menstrating. (edit, I agree with Omega)
quote: Traditional pill packs contain a week of placebos for each monthly cycle, and, as a result, women who take them appear to menstruate. But it turns out that the bleeding serves no reproductive purpose. Since there's no egg to flush out, the bleeding is a symptom of withdrawal from progestin and estrogen, the hormones in the pill—in essence, it's a fake period. The inventors of the pill, which debuted in 1960, supposedly decided to mimic the menstrual cycle because they thought that would make women more psychologically comfortable with the product.
I didn't know about this though...and found it to be disturbing. What do we really know about any of these things we're putting in our bodies?
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I think eliminating some periods a year would be fine. Traditionally, that happened anyway - the sustained hormones came from getting pregnant every 18 months. If anything, have 12 periods a year for a decade is not what our bodies were designed to do.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
quote:Originally posted by katharina: I think eliminating some periods a year would be fine. Traditionally, that happened anyway - the sustained hormones came from getting pregnant every 18 months. If anything, have 12 periods a year for a decade is not what our bodies were designed to do.
This is exactly what I was about to say, kat.
-pH
Posted by Omega M. (Member # 7924) on :
Doesn't having a week of fake pills suggest that drug companies think (or at least thought long ago) that women are too stupid to remember "take this pill for 21 days, then wait 7 days"?
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Stupid is the wrong word. It takes a while to establish a habit. The entire point is to not have to think about it. The placebo pills allow a pattern to be established.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
Since pills have to be taken at the EXACT same time every day, which I can't stress enough. I don't think I could handle this pill simply because of that. Being even an hour off can make a huge difference for some women. That's why they have the placebo (or sometimes iron) pills.
-pH
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
I never take the placebos. It just seems to silly to me. It's nice to not have to jump for my purse when my alarm goes off for a week.
Posted by Samarkand (Member # 8379) on :
Yeah, I don't take the placebo week either. Why bother? I'm never anemic, so I don't need the iron, and otherwise they're just uneeded (if in miniscule doses) sugar.
Actually, doctors have been encouraging some women to take hormone pills straight through pretty much since the pill was invented, because it's effective in managing things like endometrios (sp?), some mood disorders, pain from periods, etc. So we're actually looking at 30 plus years of data.
I say, listen to your body. If anything causes you to gain weight, lose your sex drive, get migraines, etc. then it is not a hormone cocktail that your body personally likes. But there are a LOT of BC combos out there. I know my old pill essentially gave me morning sickness, which my current one does not. I'm never putting up with THAT again!
Down with bleeding for a week every month! Up with more cute underwear and getting more action!
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
This would certainly be a boon for competitive athletes.
Posted by Omega M. (Member # 7924) on :
Okay, that makes sense.
Isn't it ironic, though, that loss of sex drive is a side effect of birth control pills?
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Isn't it ironic, though, that loss of sex drive is a side effect of birth control pills?
Not really. In fact, ff the word ironic had an antonym, I'd say that it was that.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
quote:This would certainly be a boon for competitive athletes.
Depending on how competitive they are, they might miss periods anyway due to body composition (mainly in track&field iirc). But, yeah.
Aside: I can't remember my login for your forum, mack. I was gonna post there this morning demanding that you and your skinny gamer husband come to New Orleans to hang out. Just think -- great photos to be had all around the city and surrounding swampland. I know now isn't a great time with your various maladies and all, but it's never to early to start planning. Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: For a humorous take on this issue, check out Connie Willis' Even the Queen.
Posted by Zeugma (Member # 6636) on :
Uh, if these new pills deliver the same hormone combination as Depo, doesn't that mean they'll deliver the same increased risk of osteoporosis? Or is it safer for bones if it's taken in smaller daily doses instead of 3 month doses?
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by Samarkand:
I say, listen to your body. If anything causes you to gain weight, lose your sex drive, get migraines, etc. then it is not a hormone cocktail that your body personally likes. But there are a LOT of BC combos out there. I know my old pill essentially gave me morning sickness, which my current one does not. I'm never putting up with THAT again!
Down with bleeding for a week every month! Up with more cute underwear and getting more action!
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
quote:I think eliminating some periods a year would be fine. Traditionally, that happened anyway - the sustained hormones came from getting pregnant every 18 months. If anything, have 12 periods a year for a decade is not what our bodies were designed to do.
*nods* I would agree with this, just because I've felt so much healthier in the reproductive system since I started having babies-- even though pregnancy sucks. I can imagine if I was not advised never to take hormonal bc, it might have the same effect. Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
Oh! That story is the one I was trying to remember when someone asked about stories about women and reproduction! I read two lines and remembered!
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
Yeah, even when I didn't stay on hormones for more than a few months, it still kept things really great for a long time after I stopped. I think each time, there were about 2.5 years between when I stopped and when I had problems that made me need hormones again. Our bodies are weird.
-pH
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by ketchupqueen: I've felt so much healthier in the reproductive system since I started having babies-- even though pregnancy sucks.
Me too.
OTOH, I know someone who had the (extremely rare) complication of blood clots developing from taking oral BC, and now the stuff terrifies me.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
quote:OTOH, I know someone who had the (extremely rare) complication of blood clots developing from taking oral BC, and now the stuff terrifies me.
That would be my mom AND sister.
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
I'm suspicious that their aren't any draw backs. But oh how wonderful it would be if it were true.
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
If I may speak, as a male member of this forum, in regards to this entire thread.
ooooh, yuck, yuck,yuck, yicky yick yuck yuck,
Thank you.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by ketchupqueen:
quote:OTOH, I know someone who had the (extremely rare) complication of blood clots developing from taking oral BC, and now the stuff terrifies me.
That would be my mom AND sister.
To the extent that they required anti-coagulants, had to have blood levels checked a few weeks before any transatlantic flight, and it caused complications with fertility and maintaining pregnancy? (I had never even known such severe complications were even possible before this!)
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
Anti-coagulants and fertility/pregnancy problems for my mom; my sister had a mini-stroke and I don't know what else. Probably not as bad as that, but pretty bad at the time. Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Eek.
Ok, so now I know (of) three people with this complication. None of whom are blood relatives, but I think I will stay away from hormonal BC anyway!
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
Although depending on when they were on hormonal BC, they might've been on much higher doses.
Not sayin' you should play Russian roulette if you've got a family history, but if you don't, hormonal birth control is a lot safer nowadays. In some forms.
-pH
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I loved being on hormonal birth control. As soon as I stop being so dang lazy I want to go back on, just to avoid the raging hormonal seesaws and seven-day periods every month.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
pH, my sister was on low-dose hormones because of my mom's history; she knew the risks and decided to try it but then went off the deep end and started smoking, and had a mini-stroke (after which she stopped smoking as well as the pill, thankfully.)
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
(I agree that for many women it's safe and effective, though. But with my family history I agree with my doctors-- I'm never, ever taking it.)
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
I rather enjoy my hormonal roller coaster. makes life interesting.
Posted by scholar (Member # 9232) on :
I am fairly stable while pregnant and also while on the pill, but without them, I am crazy. I also did the whole Seasonale thing and loved it (though I had been doing the same thing on my regular pills for a couple years before seasonale came out). I think that the no periods thing would be great but would like to know about fertility afterwards. I know my sister was on regular pills and she went off to have kids and a year later, she still isn't ovulating. The dr thinks that this may be because she was on the pill for about a decade. I was only on the pill for like 8 years, but doing continuous cycling for most of it and I got pregnant very very quickly after I got off. Which was good because I was very close to deciding that I just couldn't handle being off. And I have already told my dr that I want to breastfeed, but I will not endure migraine and killer cramps to do so. He says he can probably find a solution that'll work, so we'll see.
Posted by Lalo (Member # 3772) on :
PMS is horrible. I'd want to wait a decade or so before asking my girlfriend to start this, but if it has no negative side effects... lord, I won't miss hormones.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I break up with people when the hormones are going crazy. I also pick fights on Hatrack. Fun for me, but the consequences aren't so much and it's not really fair to other people.
Posted by Yozhik (Member # 89) on :
Fertility after going off the pill must vary widely. I took OCs for fifteen years straight because of difficult periods. Stopped in mid-January. Baby due to be induced on Thursday (if labor doesn't start on its own before then). Do the math. Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
scholar, you'll probably have at least a few months without periods when you're breastfeeding. Not all women do, but most do. I personally get 5 to 6 months. And then your periods may be very light for a few months after that, even. So don't worry too much about it until you see what is going to happen. I had awful periods before I got pregnant, but when I'm nursing they're not quite so bad (once they come back.) I do get about 3 months of "pseudo PMS" before I start my actual period again, but it's a little cramping and a lot of irritability, nothing like the debilitating periods I had before. I only had one real actual as-before period before I got pregnant again.
In any case, there are also several hormonal bc options that don't diminish your milk supply.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
I was about to post something, but I see kq has already taken care of it.
Yozhik, did we know that? Congrats, and good luck!!! Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
Um, problems with clotting...
What does this mean exactly? I ask because in comparing by menstrual flow with other people's (in discussions) I seem to have many more clots in mine than is normal. Should I be worried about this?
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
O_O
You have WEIRD conversations. I was referring to INTERNAL blood clots (that is, within blood vessels) -- most common in the arms and legs, but particularly dangerous in the heart, brain, and lungs.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
If you are worried, maybe you should talk to your doctor. I pass a ton of clots and bleed heavily and for a long time, both during a regular period and after my first baby. After my second baby I was bleeding so heavily that the doctor gave me a shot of something I don't remember in the thigh to slow it, and had me on pitocin for about 8 hours after the birth to make sure the bleeding slowed down. It was wonderful, the bleeding was light and gone within three weeks instead of taking more than three months to stop!
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka: O_O
You have WEIRD conversations. I was referring to INTERNAL blood clots (that is, within blood vessels) -- most common in the arms and legs, but particularly dangerous in the heart, brain, and lungs.
I got that, I just wanted to make sure that blood clots within the menstrual flow didn't signify that internal blots clots were happening as well.
As to the conversations, just don't ask...
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Ok, now I'm doubly sure I don't want to be on hormonal BC! I also tend to have heavy bleeding, and the postpartum bleeding after my second was bad enough I believe a hysterectomy was discussed. Instead they SAT on my abdomen to stop the bleeding (pitocin alone was not enough).
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
Just the doctor or the whole medical team?
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
My doctor was on her way back. Two nurses took turns, I think. I admit to not remembering it very well. I was scared and in pain, and had just had a baby!
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by blacwolve: I got that, I just wanted to make sure that blood clots within the menstrual flow didn't signify that internal blots clots were happening as well.
Now that I think about it, that's a really good question. And now I have something else to worry about! >_<
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
rivka, they had to do that to my aunt, too. Three nurses and two aides, while the doctor frantically called people to find out whether there was anything he could do.
She ended up hemorrhaging the next day anyway and they had to do the hysterectomy anyway. (This was 1973. When her daughter, my cousin, hemorrhaged after her first child, they did some thing where they inserted a kind of balloon and inflated it while administering, like, five kinds of drugs. It worked, she's had two more kids. )
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
From what my doctor told me, in my case, at least, it's probably because my periods are so heavy that my body is trying (and, apparently, failing) to slow down the loss of blood.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
(I'm talking huge clots, here, btw, and several an hour. I've always been told that a few small clots are nothing to worry about.)
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
It would make sense if that was the case for me too. While they're not as bad as before I had kids, mine are quite heavy.
Then again, after my most recent kid, while they did put me on pitocin for quite a while after the birth, I didn't have any major complications. And the miscarriage I had between the two births involved no medically-significant complications either.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
My miscarriage didn't involve excessively heavy blood loss, or after-effects. My cousin didn't have extremely heavy bleeding after either of her other two births (although heavy enough that they did put her on pit.) Maybe it varies.
I'm actually on my first post-partum period right now, and it's just spotting and a little cramping. *crosses fingers that it will stay like that a while*
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
(This thread has certainly taken an interesting turn. )
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
It's my understanding that the stuff that comes out during your period isn't just blood, but also uterine lining. Which probably looks kinda like a clot, I'd guess.
-pH
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
pH, the uterine lining breaks down. I'm talking about large, blackish-red, CLOTS.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
Well, I get...they're not black, but they're darker, and....not liquid.
But I always figured it was uterine lining.
-pH
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
I know mine are clots because when I was 16 I was confused and showed one to my mom, a registered nurse. She said, "Yes, that's a clot."
I'll see if I can find a picture for you.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
Here is an article on menstrual clots. I will look for a picture some more.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
I'm giving up on the picture. They generally look like a big... jellied lump of old blood, kind of.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dan_raven: If I may speak, as a male member of this forum, in regards to this entire thread.
ooooh, yuck, yuck,yuck, yicky yick yuck yuck,
Thank you.
I'm a WOMAN and I feel that way! EW! I don't know why those things have to even exist... At least I did something about it because I just couldn't take it anymore...
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
Yeah, I get those, kq. Less now that I'm on birth control.
-pH
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
Okay. Those are clots. Sometimes small amounts of non-broken-down uterine lining ARE passed, but they are different. They are, like, little lumps of what looks like tissue, that flattens if you poke it, that may have some blood drops in the middle. That is normal for some women, too, especially, I think, if resuming periods after not having them for a while for some reason. But it's different from clots. Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
*does not even want to go into detail about the horrible 4th day thing* *hates being a woman sometimes*
Posted by Theca (Member # 1629) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka: Ok, now I'm doubly sure I don't want to be on hormonal BC! I also tend to have heavy bleeding, and the postpartum bleeding after my second was bad enough I believe a hysterectomy was discussed. Instead they SAT on my abdomen to stop the bleeding (pitocin alone was not enough).
What's your new reason? I can't figure out what changed your mind. Er, added to it, anyway. Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
Poor Syn. (((hugs)))
Personally, I think most men on the forum have learned to stay out of threads with "menstruation" in the title by now, because they know what will happen... If not, they will soon.
And I don't mind discussing it, I think it's good for women to be able to discuss these things, and if men are curious, they can lurk around and have their curiosity satisfied without offending any women when they butt into a "girl-talk" conversation, saying, "Hey, ladies, while you're on the subject, I've always wondered..." Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
Of course, I also had a ridiculously heavy, long cycle before I started bc. I had to wear the super plus tampons and change them every ~2 hours.
-pH
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
Yeah, that's how I was before I started having babies. Except I couldn't use tampons, they caused my cramps to get EVEN WORSE (which I hadn't thought was possible until I tried them.) I used overnight ultrathin pads and changed them every two to four hours (depending on which day of the period it was.)
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
Taking bc helped... But even if I take it all the time and don't take the placebos I STILL sometimes will get a period anyway! It will only las ta little while a day though, but it's still annoying and better thann the full awful thing with its 4th day thing. Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
kq, I got ridiculously nauseous and also had crazy food cravings. I actually lost weight once I started nuvaring, I think partly because I wasn't stuffing my face for like two weeks (my periods were 2 weeks-ish, with maybe, MAYBE a week off if I was lucky).
I've gotten a little nauseous at night this week, but it's my last week before I take the ring out, so that probably has something to do with it. Or the muscle tension I started that thread about.
kq, I forget, you use the iud, right?
-pH
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
I do, although I'm approaching my deadline for the pain to stop or I'm getting it taken out. The IUD without hormones, of course.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
Oh, and I seriously got symptoms like I was pregnant, but with cramping, severe cramping, most periods. Migraines, nausea, blackouts, food cravings, I had it all... The only thing that made them bearable at all was when I was finally prescribed my miracle drug (which I took WITH three Advil.)
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Theca: What's your new reason? I can't figure out what changed your mind. Er, added to it, anyway.
Original reason: the hell my friend is going through because of her reaction. Regardless of the fact that since I'm not related, the odds are far lower for me (I'd assume). New reason: Now I suspect that perhaps I am also likely to have a higher risk of clotting issues than I did before today.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
You mean because of our similar period issues?
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
That, and simply because I never considered before that clotting issues that I have had might be a warning sign of potential problems.
IOW, before it was general "this really bad thing can happen because of hormonal BC" but not really thinking of it in terms of my personal medical history.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
Gotcha.
Hormonal BC would be really tempting to me, because of my awful periods and because of my experiences with other forms of bc (ay!), if I didn't have such a family history.
I'm not glad that my mom had problems or my sister had a stroke (although it didn't end up permanently impairing her brain function, she noticed something was wrong in time, called my mom, and my mom left work and drove her to the hospital), but I am glad that I know that these tendencies run in the family, because it pretty much means I don't have to make the decision. Once I explain my family history to gynecologists, they tend to tell me that it would be irresponsible of them to recommend that I try hormonal BC.
Posted by Valentine014 (Member # 5981) on :
May I just take this moment to sing the praises (once more) of Depo Provera? I have no mood swings, no periods, and seem to be mostly unaffected by its very common side effect of weight gain (I've lost 22 lbs. since February). I can have sex any day of the month. You may now be jealous.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
Well, technically ANY of us CAN have sex any day of the month....
-pH
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
Not those of us with crippling, debilitating periods.
Well, maybe we could, if we didn't mind killing our partner in the process.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by pH: Well, technically ANY of us CAN have sex any day of the month....
Speak for yourself, Toots. Posted by Theca (Member # 1629) on :
I've never heard of heavy bleeding/clotting during menses having any relationship to DVTs or other dangerous types of clotting, in general.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Good to know. Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
quote:Of course, I also had a ridiculously heavy, long cycle before I started bc. I had to wear the super plus tampons and change them every ~2 hours.
I used to use a super plus tampon and a super heavy pad and still had to change them every hour. And then I still had accidents.
My last period, I had one tampon last not even 15 seconds before it soaked through. I'd made one step away from the toilet before it leaked. Later that day, I had a blood dribbling accident in the dining room while talking to my sister in law - that tampon lasted less than a half hour. And it was a messy, messy, messy accident. With lots of blood on the floor. That I had to clean up. And my clothes... >_<
I wish mine lasted two hours.
Okay, in all fairness, they usually do most of the time. It's just these freak hemmhorraging things that bug me. Well, no, the cramps and nausea and migraines and dizziness and everything else bother me, too, but cheese whiz, did we really have to add the hemhorraging bit to the list? Really?
Posted by imogen (Member # 5485) on :
Speaking of periods and sex...
(This is a ask the rebbetzin type question)
Rivka, I was reading the other day about the practice observed by some orthodox Jews in regard to non-touching of their husbands (and by extension no sex) during the period and for 7 days afterwards. (I forget what it's called. I'm sure you know. )
The article made the point that the day on which marital relations resume often coincides with the fertile phase of a woman's cycle, making the practice beneficial for those couples wishing to conceive.
I was wondering what happens in cases where a woman has an exceptionally short cycle and ovulates in the 7 days post-period. Would not being able to fall pregnant if the practice was observed be justification enough for not observing it?
(*Apologies for any incorrect assumptions/explanations etc)
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:I was reading the other day about the practice observed by some orthodox Jews in regard to non-touching of their husbands (and by extension no sex) during the period and for 7 days afterwards. (I forget what it's called. I'm sure you know. )
First of all, it is not some Orthodox Jews. (I am sure someone will disagree with me, but) It is generally agreed that the minimum standards of observance that constitute "Orthodox" are keeping kashrus, Shabbos, and Taharas haMishpacha (family purity, which are the laws you are asking about).
Secondly, it's quite a bit more complex than I feel comfortable discussing publicly. I will say that having an extremely short cycle is a definite issue, and that it would be a CYLOR (Consult Your Local Orthodox Rabbi) question. Except in this case, most LORs would refer the couple to a specialist -- there are rabbis who specialize in the details of Taharas haMishpacha questions.
Since it is not something I ever dealt with, I only know that there are solutions, but they are not simple.
Posted by imogen (Member # 5485) on :
Fair enough.
Sorry if I made you uncomfortable.
Let's go back to haemorrhaging talk....
Seriously, quid, that's hideous! I thought I had it bad bleeding through a night pad - not a patch on what you go through. Ick indeed.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by imogen: Sorry if I made you uncomfortable.
You didn't. Posted by Jhai (Member # 5633) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka: Eek.
Ok, so now I know (of) three people with this complication. None of whom are blood relatives, but I think I will stay away from hormonal BC anyway!
I'll chime in as another person who had a Very Serious blood clot the month after I started the Pill. Serious in that it stretched from my calf to at least my abdominal region (the doctors couldn't trace it any further than that), and fully blocked up every vein in the area. After that happy incident I had a lot of genetic tests done which show that I have a couple of unknown genetic disorders that cause clotting, including Factor V Leiden, one of the more common disorders (one in twenty white woman in the US have it).
Net result: coumadin for life, regular blood tests, serious pregnancy/fertility issues (I've been told to have all my children before 30, if I can), and permanent damage to the blood valves in my right leg (no more running )
So, yeah, if you start any BC that has estrogen, be aware of the potential problems, and be on alert to any possible troubling signs of blood clots. On the other hand, Depo has been shown to not increase the clotting risk in both the general population and the clot-prone population. I'm on it and I love it - no noticable side-effects other than stopping my period, which is great since periods on coumadin are Not Fun.
Posted by porcelain girl (Member # 1080) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lalo: PMS is horrible. I'd want to wait a decade or so before asking my girlfriend to start this, but if it has no negative side effects... lord, I won't miss hormones.
Oh, there's an upside and a downside, sugar. not all pms hormones are hard on significant others.
mcwink.
¡Don't have sex, just say no to drugs, stay in school, kids!
I'm deeply suspicious of most things that mess with the natural reproductive cycle, despite my deep disdain of menstruating and all that comes with it.
Posted by Theca (Member # 1629) on :
Depo might cause some osteoporosis, especially if used for over two years. So it's not entirely side effect free. I'm also quite surprised to hear it doesn't have any clotting effects at all.
Posted by Jhai (Member # 5633) on :
It's already accepted in the journals that it doesn't affect the normal population's clotting chances. My OB-Gyn has connections to researchers at Berkeley (she's really awesome), and they've completed some not-quite-yet-published research that shows that it doesn't increase the potential to clot in the clot-prone population as well. Not enough to be statisticlly significant, anyways. It does have the osteoporosis problem, since it's basically convincing your body that you're a post-mentoposal woman - but calcium pills are a fairly good counter to that, as well as strength training.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
You know, I read somewhere that weight gain probably isn't a side effect for as many pills as we think it is. I mean, lower hormones make it less likely, I'm sure, but I'd read (I'm trying to find the article) that most of the time the weight gain is pretty typical of just people getting older and being sedentary.
But I'm not sure I believe that. Maybe it's more true after the first three months, when your body's adjusted to the hormones. I gained 10-15lb. when I was on the Patch, and I was only on that for about two months. Maybe three.
-pH
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
Just wanted to chime in and say that I'm on Mirena (an IUD) and have had NO menstration whatsoever and no negative effects whatsoever.
Life is good. Posted by scholar (Member # 9232) on :
The problem is weight gain on average is 0. For some women with some pills, you go on and feel like puking all the time so you eat less and so there is weight loss (the first pill I tried I lost like 15-20 pounds). Personally, I think this balances out the people who gain weight. When I went to continuous cylcing, I gained 15-20 pounds. My dr said it wasn't the pill, but that the hormones in my body signalled hunger so I ate more than I normally did. I was like, um, the pill made me hungrier, I am going to blame the pill. Or perhaps if I had had a warning that I would be naturally hungrier so that I could actively monitoring what I ate instead of just trusting my body to know...
Posted by Amanecer (Member # 4068) on :
quote: better thann the full awful thing with its 4th day thing.
Maybe I'm just being dense, but I have no clue what you're talking about. On my 4th day, it's usually starting to get better. The 2nd and 3rd days are the days that suck. Do you mind elaborating?
Posted by maui babe (Member # 1894) on :
quote:Originally posted by scholar: For some women with some pills, you go on and feel like puking all the time so you eat less and so there is weight loss (the first pill I tried I lost like 15-20 pounds). Personally, I think this balances out the people who gain weight.
It's small comfort to tell someone who has a significant weight gain that she's "balancing" someone who lost weight on the pill.
I've been following this thread and have stayed out of it because my experiences are similar to many of yours. I loved Depo due to not having periods, but gained weight and had some issues with depression (which were undiagnosed at the time). BCPs made me feel pregnant for the first few months with nausea, breast tenderness and moodiness. I never took them long enough to know if they would cause me weight gain or not.
When I was having my children, there were far fewer options and I had more than one unplanned pregnancy (though no unwanted ones). I'm happy my daughters have more options than I did.
No one here has mentioned Norplant. I had one implanted shortly after they were FDA approved (and it was the first BC that worked consistently for me) and had it for about 5 years. I didn't notice a weight gain, but I had just had a baby, and I did have a hard time losing the weight compared to my earlier pregnancies, but I figured that was more because of aging and similar issuse. Are Norplants not available anymore?
I've been out of the BC market since my divorce, so I'm not all that up on the news.
Posted by breyerchic04 (Member # 6423) on :
There is now a new product like NorPlant but I think it's easier, it only has one bar. I haven't done much research on it though.
Posted by Omega M. (Member # 7924) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head:
For a humorous take on this issue, check out Connie Willis' Even the Queen.
I just read this story, and I'm not that impressed. I knew it was supposed to be funny, but nobody on either side of the menstruation issue seemed to speak as if they had real passion for their views, and the ideas they espoused weren't interesting enough to make up for that. (Maybe they'd be more interesting if you'd never before thought of women trying to turn off their periods.) Also, I think it took too long for me to figure out how all the people were related to each other.
And this story won both the Hugo and the Nebula? (Sorry if I've insulted someone's favorite story here.)
Posted by breyerchic04 (Member # 6423) on :
Ok I looked on Wikipedia, Norplant was discontinued in 2002, but Implannon is now available. It is similar but only uses one strip and lasts three years instead of five.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by maui babe: It's small comfort to tell someone who has a significant weight gain that she's "balancing" someone who lost weight on the pill.
I doubt it's all that helpful for the one who is losing weight and shouldn't be either.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by Amanecer:
quote: better thann the full awful thing with its 4th day thing.
Maybe I'm just being dense, but I have no clue what you're talking about. On my 4th day, it's usually starting to get better. The 2nd and 3rd days are the days that suck. Do you mind elaborating?
It's horrible. It seems like it's going to stop. it gets lighter. Then it comes back WORSE THAN EVER! Do I need to elaborate? It's truely horrible and it's why I hate that stupid thing so much and cannot understand WHY i have to go through it. I am on bc continuously and still get periods which last a few days longer but are lighter so it only goes on for a small part of the day and it's super light, but I willstill get something simular to this on at least the seventh day or so. I really want to be a man.
Posted by Amanecer (Member # 4068) on :
Ah, I'm sorry Syn. Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
Syn, that was me. Nothing would control my bleeding. That's why I finally had to have a hysterectomy. The only think that worked was Lupron injections, which is essentially putting your body into chemical menopause. Since I couldn't stay on Lupron forever, I finally had the hysterectomy and my stars, do I love it!
Naturally, this is not a solution for someone who wants to maintain their fertility. I'm so sorry for what you're going through. I had pain and bleeding for nine years (not counting the times I was pregnant) and I know how miserable it is.
Posted by porcelain girl (Member # 1080) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka:
quote:Originally posted by maui babe: It's small comfort to tell someone who has a significant weight gain that she's "balancing" someone who lost weight on the pill.
I doubt it's all that helpful for the one who is losing weight and shouldn't be either.
i would love to be that person. hello six meals a day and a happy happy girl.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Well, yeah, so would I. Except my impression (from someone who had this side effect) is that it's not so much that you can eat whatever you like, as food is no longer at all appealing. Which is something I experienced with my pregnancies, and it's really not much fun at all.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
You can eat six meels a day to lose weight, y'know. It seems to be pretty effective. You just can't eat six gigantic meals.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Changes how we look at things, no? What if unwanted pregnancy were a thing of the past? (of course, no medication is perfect - especially one that depends on someone remembering to take a pill every day, but still....)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)