posted
This is a topic of discussion that arose from an argument I was having last night...mainly, how effective IS birth control? I hear statistics like '99%' effective, etc...and I don't know exactly what it means?
Is it that 1 out of every 100 times you have sex it fails, and you get pregnant? I wouldn't want those odds. Is it 1:100 possible pregnancies? Is it that out of 100 women, one got pregnant? What?
If it's the first option, then I raise the question...why are we selling these things? One out of every hundred times, you get unlucky? You get better odds at some casinos. If it's number two, I'd still say it's a crap shoot. Whatever the new odds are, one of those times, you're gonna get hit...what if it's the first time, or the next one, etc?
How does that work? What is the REAL standard? Does it really work that well at all?
Posts: 3658 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm legitimately asking! I'm not trying to stick someone with a point, I want to know! What's wrong with that?
Posts: 3658 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually, condoms are only something like 70% effective. I've been wondering this too, but no one seems to understand the question. I think what you really need to do to be safe is be on birth control and use condoms, which should reduce the risk significantly. But I really don't know.
Posts: 4655 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's some kind of unit called "Woman years". I don't know exactly how it works, but its definitely not the first. I remember this time some guy couldn't grasp the probability of being in a plane crash. He was worried that if the guy sitting next to him were a frequent flyer, it might cause the plane to crash.
Each condom is only good for one use, of course. Definitely doesn't work like that dumb "sterile glove" puzzle.
Condom effectiveness has been 100% in 13 years for us. Unless I'm pregnant right now. Effectiveness varies with experience of use.
posted
Well, the thing with all forms of birth control is that they're effective if you use them properly. That's the difficult part. Condoms are significantly more than 70% effective, I believe, but they're not always used properly. Same with the Pill; you can forget to take it.
Posts: 9057 | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged |
Statistics don't work like that. 99% does not work out to 99 times out of 100. Someone has been teaching you very poor math.
It means that for every single time you have sex, there is a 99% chance it will not malfuction. The one percent is giving allowance for things like improper use, breakage, and prior exchange of bodily fluids.
[ February 23, 2004, 11:19 PM: Message edited by: John L ]
Posts: 779 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm pretty sure that in the case of birth control pills, it is from the testing they do before they release the pill onto the market.
So for the most effective types of pills, from a group of 3000 (say), 2 women became pregnant. Such trials are usually done over a year, with the same subjects.
Most pills now are 98% or upwards effective.
And why sell them if there's still a 2% chances? Well for most people, 2% is much better than no protection... And of course in the case of condoms, protection from STIs is another, very important, reason.
Posts: 4393 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, 99% effective refers to the fact that if you use birth control for a year, you have a 1% chance of getting pregnant. Actually, there are different statistics for perfect use and typical use. You know, in real life people often forget a pill or something, and I think (although this is from memory of classes I took a couple years ago, so I might be off) that typical use of oral contraceptives is about 95% effective, and perfect use is actually well over 99% effective.
It also has some things on the first clinical trials conducted (which were contentious, but because of side effects rather than effectiveness).
Posts: 4393 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Then...what ARE the odds? I still don't know how well they really work. I guess I'm still trying to get aroudn the '99% of what' thing.
Posts: 3658 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
A variety of people. The first trial was done in Puerto Rico, and women were paid handsomely, by Puertan Rican terms, to participate.
That approach has been critcised, and now testing takes place in first world countries. Volunteers are paid (usually a couple of hundred dollars).
The studies require different types of volunteers: the first phase tests side effects, so participants must not be able to get pregnant (tubal ligatomy, partner has a vasectomy, are abstinent etc). The second phase is effectiveness, and usually calls for people in committed relationships who are not actively seeking to become pregnant, but would not mind if they did fall pregnant.
Posts: 4393 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
"99 percent of you won't get pregnant - 1% of you will..."
That makes planning easy.
That makes for a really crappy argument. Yet another example of a wholly ignorant appraisal of how statistics work.
Posts: 779 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
So, don't just call them crappy statistics...explain the real ones! That would be a perfect answer to my question...what ARE the real odds, for me and my theoretical partner?
Posts: 3658 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
But there's also considerations like when a woman is moost fertile. Like if a woman has sex during her period there's a very low chance she'll get pregnant regardless of whether or not she's using birth control. So how is something like that taken into account in birth control statistics?
Or am I the only person weird enough to have thought about that?
Posts: 4655 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Whenever you sigh like that in a post, it's akin to saying "Silly, naive mortals. Haven't you heard a word of what has proceeded from my mouth?"
posted
Human, if you can't work them out, you need to learn to do research and not demand. Start with Suneun's link. If you want to know about the chances for you and your prospective partner, my advice is: if you aren't sure, best to not do it. I actually can't stomach the amount of 15 - 17 year old parents I see regularly, all because they can't operate something as simple as a condom correctly or follow through getting a more effective birth control.
The trouble is that there is no specific number for each, and all of the statistics have a wide margin of error, mostly depending on the habits of the persons using the method. One could get pregnant from only minor or hardly any (practically no) penetration. So, if tab A makes contact with slot B at all, even with "just" extremely heavy petting, then the chances increase exponentially.
Posts: 779 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
The 99% effectiveness means that of every 100 times currently FERTILE women have sex while employing this particular method, 1 currently fertile woman will get pregnant. The chances of getting pregnant from any individual act of sexual intercourse is significantly lower than that.
Unless of course we're talking about two teenagers in the back of a car, in which case the chances jump to near 100%.
Anyway, the 99% is a statistic originally derived from statistics on self report of use of a particular method and the obvious outcome of pregnant or not pregnant.
And properly used, condoms are 100% effective. The people who get pregnant using condoms are: 1) using them improperly 2) using expired condoms 3) typically -- using a lubricant that dissolves the silly thing. 4) carrying diaper bags as we speak.
Notoriously bad (ineffective or dangerous) methods of birth control are:
- Cervical cap, especially if you don't also use a spermicidal jelly - coitus interruptus. Also known as the "oops" method. - Spermicide by itself -- well, let's just say anything that needs to be "timed properly" isn't a good candidate. - IUD -- does anyone even get these anymore? - Rhythm method -- only if the woman is very regular in her cycle and/or lucky enough to have fairly obvious signs of ovulation (some women's mucus, temperature and sensations from the ovaries are very obvious, others are not.
Methods that actually work well: - Condoms - BCP - Abstinence
Man...I've been assuming that many of the young people here are sexually active AND not wanting to be parents. Do you really not get taught this stuff anymore?
NOTE: I know some of what I have in here (like IUDs) must be horribly out of date. But still...I'm recalling these lessons from about 30 years ago. It takes no more than an hour or two to get educated on this stuff.
Don't get your information from a Web BB, for crying out loud!!!
<Quaint old geezer leaves thread in a huff... KIDS these days!>
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I didn't want to give that run-down, Bob, because it's not even that simple. It really does depend on the actions before the condom is even put on, the physical condition of the female and male, as well as proper usage (and preparation). It's not that it's difficult, it's that it's easier to forget one of the many little things just once, and that's all it takes.
Posts: 779 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Suneun, can you explain the "woman years" thing? I kind of know what it means but don't really know how to explain it.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
My high school sex-ed class mostly taught abstinence...but our particular health teacher insisted on including a lot about different kinds of birth control as well. I don't know if anybody ever uses IUDs, but we still did learn about them. But yeah, a lot of teenagers are totally unaware of their chances of getting pregnant/impregnating someone. It's sad.
Posts: 9057 | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged |
John L...Yeah, it still amounts to improper use, though. I think even if a person is planning to abstain from sex, it's important to know about birth control methods.
I guess I shouldn't go into too much detail on a family BB...but for crying out loud, I've heard some really uninformed things from sexually active young adults and it makes me very concerned.
Not just here by the way. I mean stuff like what pH is alluding too. Misinformed or uninformed people who ARE sexually active. That shouldn't even be possible.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Bob: I agree. You have no idea how utterly pissed off I was when I found out that one of my friends had to get the morning-after pill...because her boyfriend just "forgot" to use a condom (no, seriously. I mean that there was a pause right in the middle in which he just said "...oops"). And on top of that, she waiting for _him_ to tell her what to do. Which means she didn't get there for a couple of days.
posted
Mkay. This is how I interpret the chart, though I may not be absolutely correct (though this is definitely the gist of it).
Lets take 1000 women in sexual relationships who use the combined pill form of birth control pills. Also, lets look at 1000 women using Depo-Provera, the shot. And lets take 1000 women who use no contraception of any kind.
Lets look at them over 10 years.
1. After 10 years, for the 1000 women using BCPs, about 500 will have become pregnant, give or take. So, half.
2. After 10 years, 30 out of 1000 of the women taking Depo-Provera will have gotten pregnant.
3. And, after 10 years, almost all 1000 women taking no birth control measures will have become pregnant. ----- The problems with extending the statistics over 10 years are numerous. You can't just add them up like I did. Some women will never get pregnant no matter what. But these are nice, ballpark figures.
Also, the "lowest expected" use rate for BCPs would only result in 10 pregnancies out of 1000 women over 10 years. That's if they took the pills at the same time every day for 10 years.
----- Right. I forgot to add. They do this by averages. If, in a hypothetical sexual relationship, the couple mates like nymphomaniac bunnies, the chances of pregnancy are much higher than if the couple gets around to It once a week. YMMV (Your Mileage May Vary)
posted
Bob - IUDs are still used, but mostly in women who have already have kids (and not by C-section). Apparently it is extremely uncomfortable to have fitted if you haven't had a natural birth previously.
Implanon is a new birth control that sits under the skin of the arm. It lasts for 3 years and nothing needs to be done during that time - so no issues with forgetting, throwing up after you take the pill, excess vitamin C (which severely impacts the effectiveness of BCPs) - and is in many ways much more practical for younger people. Who should always use condoms as well for STD purposes.
Suneun - the statistics can't be added that way. If there is a 95% effectiveness rate for 1 year, there will be a 95% effectiveness rate for the next year. Ie - over 10 years in the group of 1000, there will not be 500 pregnancies.
Posts: 4393 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Probabilities in these situations should be multiplied, not added. So it's .95 *.95 * .95... or .95^10. This would lead to a 59.8% chance of not getting pregnant in 10 years.
But even that is the correct way to do it, because it ignores whether some people become pregnant twice or more, which would "lower" the total number of people who got pregnant at least once.
Finally, multiplying is only valid for unrelated chances. However, it's safe to assume that if pregnancy while on the pill is mostly related to human error, and the type of person most likely to commit one error is also more likely to commit another one. And it ignores the fact that women can't get pregnant when they are pregnant.
In short, there are so many variables that the only way to determine how effective the pill is over 10 years is to run a 10-year study.
I've always heard that companies have to use the "99%" figure when selling BCP because of liability. As has already been said here - there are so many variables - mostly human error -- that can cause pregnancy. But they don't want to be sued by someone saying "I got pregnant on the pill", so they have to give that 1% possibility to protect themselves from lawsuit.
Because people do dumb things ("let me stroke you just a couple times without the condom on first") and then try to blame the companies that make the birth control.
If used properly, as instructed, with absolutely no mistakes, your chances of getting pregnant while using birth control is very slim.
Bob gave pretty good statistics (which my daughter DID learn in health class), and good advice.
quote:If used properly, as instructed, with absolutely no mistakes, your chances of getting pregnant while using birth control is very slim.
I agree. Unfortunately, manufacturing errors can make condoms imperfectly. And, lets say the condom's put on correctly. There are still things that will break that condom. But they'll void your warranty Posts: 1892 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've been trying to avoid posting but I can hold out no longer.
Bob, older versions (circa 1975) of the IUD weren't effective. IUDs today are one of the most effective forms of birth control around because there's no chance of you screwing it up by forgetting something.
The pill, when taken on a regular schedule is the most time-tested and effective form of birth control currently in use.
The condom is great at preventing stds, unlike many other forms of birth control, but people tend to be less effective at using it. (i.e. it's more difficult than swallowing a tiny pill once a day)
Let us remember the following: Even if intercourse involves a person who has had either tubal ligation or vasectomy, you still have a chance of getting pregnant. It happens. Don't ask me how, but it does.
Also, often times casual sex turns into pregnancy for two reasons. One, drugs/alcohol are involved which impair reasoning. Two, because many youth are challenged to avoid sex, they don't carry condoms or aren't on the pill because to do either is to admit promiscuity. For admittedly sexually active females, including married women, birth control failure rates are very low.
If you are absolutely adamant about avoiding pregnancy, use two methods that don't interfere with each other. For women who are on Acutane, the acne medication, serious birth defects can be caused by the drug, so sexually active women are encouraged to use both the pill and a condom. This is good advice for anyone that is that paranoid.
Posts: 995 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Condoms can fail. (Personal experience) Even if you do everything right. Fortunately, I was on back-up birth control at the time. This one probably was due to faulty manufacturing or something. Just remember, it is utterly possible that YOU will be the unlucky shmo who got the undetected poorly made one. Unlikely, but definitely possible.
Posts: 3141 | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
peterh, I had no idea IUDs were still in use, let alone that anyone was doing research on them to make them better!
Jenny...that is true. Any manufactured product will also have a failure rate that's greater than zero. For obvious reasons, the manufacturers try to keep the failure rate on condoms down very low. But it does still happen.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, IUDs are definitely still in use. The person my roommate is having sex with has one, or at least so she asserts and he says he can testify to.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
The IUD is our method of choice. It works beautifully and is even more effective than the pill (according to my wife's OB-GYN) and 100% less trouble. Mirena makes IUDs that are effective for up to 10 years. When it is taken out, there is no "uncertain waiting period" like there is when you go off the pill. That's important us, because in our situation we need to very closely plan when we will get pregnant.
Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Another benefit of an IUD over the pill is that it doesn't affect hormones. One pill that my wife was on gave her an aggravated case of PMS. The one she's on now, doesn't, but an IUD is hormone free.
On the other hand, if I remember correctly, no one is sure exactly why an IUD works. I think it has something to do with copper, but no sure facts. Am I thinking straight on this? Any medical types wanna clear this up?
Posts: 995 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Our health class was abstinance only. This sentence sums up what we learned about birth control, "birth control is not 100% effective, only abstinance is 100% effective, if you aren't abstinant you can get these STDs" cut to three graphic chapters about the horrors of STDs. The thing that bugs me is that, even though I'm planning on remaining abstinent until I'm married, I'm definately not planning on remaining abstinent AFTER I'm married! And it's not like being married is automatic birth control or anything. Posts: 4655 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
It is my understanding that some IUDs still use hormones. Not all IUDs use copper. It has a similar effectiveness rate to pills (98-99%). It helps prevent fertilization (by interfering with sperm migration and egg movement).
posted
IUD's prevent implantation, not fertilization; that is why most Catholics, and anti-abortionists will not use them.
FG
EDIT: Well, okay with the new ones (per the link above) do both, prevent fertilization and implantation -- the hormone does the first, the device the second.
posted
Actually, the IUD my wife uses is not copper, but releases hormones at a controlled rate.
Dag, I've heard arguments both ways, even competing views from gynecologists. Just about the same as I've heard about the pill. I've personally never felt uncomfortable about it.
Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Hail]](graemlins/hail.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Blushing]](graemlins/blushing.gif)
(Personal experience) Even if you do everything right. Fortunately, I was on back-up birth control at the time. This one probably was due to faulty manufacturing or something. Just remember, it is utterly possible that YOU will be the unlucky shmo who got the undetected poorly made one. Unlikely, but definitely possible.
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Grumble]](graemlins/grumble.gif)
