SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Count natural family planning among the ways young people are hearkening back to the practices of their grandparents as Olga Khazan reports at The Atlantic that new apps are letting women know if they can have sex with their partners without a condom or a contraceptive pill using calendar-based contraception. The underlying motive is not so much trendiness as it is a dissatisfaction with the Pill, which is still the most common form of birth control for women. In a recent CDC study of 12,000 American women, 63 percent of women who stopped using the Pill did so due to its side effects (PDF). And while as of 2010, only about 22 percent of women used “periodic abstinence," an umbrella term that includes counting days, measuring temperature, and tracking cervical mucus to predict fertility, their ranks may grow as new apps and other technologies make it easier to manage the historically error-prone task of measuring, recording, and analyzing one’s cycle in order to stay baby-free.
CycleBeads, for example, is an iPhone app that allows women to track fertility based on the Standard Days Method, a system developed by Georgetown University's Institute for Reproductive Health in which specific days of each woman’s cycle are considered infertile. While the method is not as effective for women who have cycles outside of the 26-32 day range, Leslie Heyer says that its success rate is about 95 percent for “perfect use” and 88 percent for “typical use,” which would mean it beats condoms and falls just short of the Pill. “At first [my husband and I] were worried,” says Kate, a woman who began using CycleBeads nearly three years ago after experiencing weight gain and moodiness on the Pill, “but then we got used to it and have grown to trust it. I honestly can't imagine ever going back on the Pill.”
(Score: 2) by dyingtolive on Thursday December 11 2014, @10:45AM
Yeah, maybe I'd chance that if I was married to her. Maybe. Twelve percent is a pretty big margin of failure for the consequences.
Don't blame me, I voted for moose wang!
(Score: 1) by xorsyst on Thursday December 11 2014, @12:03PM
88% is fine if children wouldn't be a disaster. Maybe, as a couple, you don't want kids right now but want them in a couple of years, for example. If it fails, well, it's not a big deal.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 11 2014, @12:57PM
Women do not give a fuck about "their" man. They care about baby and money.
Young girls care about the man sometimes.
Marry female children.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 11 2014, @11:42PM
That really escalated quickly.
(Score: 4, Funny) by dyingtolive on Thursday December 11 2014, @01:56PM
I mean, that's like a 1 on a d8. My odds of doing that are about 90% or so.
Don't blame me, I voted for moose wang!
(Score: 3, Funny) by DeathMonkey on Thursday December 11 2014, @06:34PM
Don't worry. The D&D method of birth control is still 99.9% effective.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Kromagv0 on Thursday December 11 2014, @01:15PM
One of the best methods if you don't want any or more children is to just go get a vasectomy. My wife was surprised at my lack of reservations in having it done. As a side benefit I got to play the doctor said I can't do anything for 3 days since you don't want to pop a stitch card . It isn't bad and if you have ever had saddle sore it feels like a bade case for about 4-5 days. I'll gladly take that than more children.
T-Shirts and bumper stickers [zazzle.com] to offend someone
(Score: 1) by xorsyst on Thursday December 11 2014, @02:09PM
Agreed - not good if you're planning to have kids in the future, but when you're done having them a nice easy solution. Until then, the injection for women is pretty underated.
(Score: 2) by Wootery on Thursday December 11 2014, @02:36PM
Agreed - not good if you're planning to have kids in the future
Why?
"Put it on ice, doc."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 11 2014, @03:05PM
IUD is better than the injection - even the ones with slow release hormones are better than injections because the amount of hormones is much less since they are delivered right where it matters most. Biggest downside is if she likes powerful sex toys (like a sybian) then it isn't safe.
(Score: 2) by Covalent on Thursday December 11 2014, @05:07PM
Agreed! Mine hurt for about a day but I milked it for an entire weekend of sports, Star Trek, and food brought to me couch-side.
I'd get one once a month if such a thing were possible. And I love my 2 children a lot more than I would if I have 6. :)
You can't rationally argue somebody out of a position they didn't rationally get into.
(Score: 2) by cafebabe on Friday December 12 2014, @10:17PM
I was under the impression that a vasectomy felt like getting kicked in the testicles twice [craigslist.org].
1702845791×2
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 11 2014, @03:01PM
> Yeah, maybe I'd chance that if I was married to her. Maybe. Twelve percent is a pretty big margin of failure for the consequences.
The context of contraceptive effectiveness numbers isn't intuitive - it is not 12% chance of pregnancy each time they have sex, it is 12% chance of pregnancy in a year's worth of sex.
(Score: 2) by dyingtolive on Thursday December 11 2014, @04:35PM
Okay, that makes it sound much less terrible, but I believe the pill is still about half that. That's still a substantial difference.
Don't blame me, I voted for moose wang!
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 11 2014, @07:37PM
> a year's worth of sex
So twice?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 11 2014, @07:53PM
> a year's worth of sex
So twice?
Naa, Birthday sex is 0 risk, stomach acid is a powerful spermicide. Christmas sex, well, that's the worry, eh?