Talk:Contraception (medical methods)/Draft

New Start

new start Nancy Sculerati 13:42, 3 May 2007 (CDT)

Ive made some major changes. I'd also like to fill in the history section, especially regarding the discovery of The Pill. BTW, N, same problems apply to my other recent starts, I'm working on it, but I could use your help just cleaning the closet, so to speak. Then we can add good content.--Peter A. Lipson 13:43, 3 May 2007 (CDT)

You might want to grab the old content about socio-religious issues and paste into a new article.--Peter A. Lipson 14:35, 3 May 2007 (CDT)

im not so sure that expanding into vet science helps the article, but i suppose we could add it and just break it off later if we want. I like the idea of a human contraception article that people can reference easily.--Peter A. Lipson 14:47, 3 May 2007 (CDT)

Is there somewhere we could include sterilization, as tubal ligation and vasectomy are very commonly used in the U.S.Peter A. Lipson 14:54, 3 May 2007 (CDT)

EDIT CONFLICT I would like to break off sterilization as well, now. I would also like to make it clear, in the article that discusses that Sterilization (surgical), that there are methods of stopping transport of germ cells, (tube tying, vasectomy) as well as removal of testes/ovaries that have larger repercussions. Please realize that by doing it this way we are able to have fair articles that are clear cut -medical/veterinary (health science) and contraception with a precise definition, I split off Control of Contraception, since that is not a health science article. Those people interested in exploring "natural birth control methods" such as abstinence and other means done behaviorally may do so in another article, also not health science - without this article having to try to cover what is already plenty- that being methods of contraception in people and animals, MEDICAL methods. I agree, if it gets to be too much even so, we can split off humans from animals, but let's get there first. Nancy Sculerati 14:56, 3 May 2007 (CDT)

I see your point, however I really think we need to include such common surgical methods here. Included elsewhere, or linked, should be discussions of forced sterilization, eugenics, etc.--Peter A. Lipson 15:00, 3 May 2007 (CDT)

Why do you insist on mixing politics and religion in, instead of giving those their own articles? If you would follow my lead we could have a whold series of articles that each would be neutral and fair. Why do we have to decide NOW what thge article needs to contain? I know I could write it in a way that would be really good, and that we could cover everything to everyone's satisfaction. But I am running out of steam just arguing about it. I'll hold off writing anything on these articles under the circumstances, it's a waste of my time. The surgical methods of sterilization can be mentioned as existing, it cxan be expalined how they differ from the definition of contraception that e are using, and they can be linked. I'm taking a break. This is the sort of stuff that maes me wonder why I even try.Nancy Sculerati 16:25, 3 May 2007 (CDT)

Nancy, I do not understand why surgery, as well as NFP, are not considered "medical methods". Stephen Ewen 16:40, 3 May 2007 (CDT)

Medical methods are just that-medical. They are not behavioral, and they are not surgical. They are medical. Is there not another article that is unqualified to be written called Contraception? Could that article not contain whatever you want to put in it? Could it not be a whole slew of workgroups? THIS article, I had hoped, back when I was busy writing it, would contain MEDICAL methods. It has a theme- normal conception would be described, and how medical methods are likely to either stop ovulation, fertilization, or implantation would be described. The hormonal stuff alone is worth paragraphs. Nancy Sculerati 16:46, 3 May 2007 (CDT)

lets keep on topic

It seems medical methods are not seen as such by some of the authors. May I remind all participants to keep within track of the meaning of this article, and if needed spin-off to another article (possibly create it) to elaborate on side steps. Thank you. Robert Tito |  Talk  17:41, 3 May 2007 (CDT)

Emergency contraception

Mittal S. Introduction of emergency contraception in India. Journal of the Indian Medical Association. 104(9):499-502, 504-5, 2006 Sep. Consortium on National Consensus for Emergency Contraception met in New Delhi in January 2001, to reach a consensus on strategies for introduction of emergency contraception in India.

Petersen R. Albright JB. Garrett JM. Curtis KM. Acceptance and use of emergency contraception with standardized counseling intervention: results of a randomized controlled trial. [Journal Article. Randomized Controlled Trial. Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't. Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.] Contraception. 75(2):119-25, 2007 Feb. UI: 17241841

Hansen LB. Saseen JJ. Teal SB. Levonorgestrel-only dosing strategies for emergency contraception. [Review] [34 refs] [Journal Article. Review] Pharmacotherapy. 27(2):278-84, 2007 Feb. UI: 17253917 ref added

IUD

Archer DF. Reversible contraception for the woman over 35 years of age. [Review] [23 refs] [Journal Article. Review] Current Opinion in Obstetrics & Gynecology. 4(6):891-6, 1992 Dec. UI: 1450355 ref added to article, if you wish to move it and need help, let me know

Condoms

Flannigan J. Promoting sexual health: practical guidance on male condom use. [Review] [30 refs] [Journal Article. Review] Nursing Standard. 21(19):51-7; quiz 58, 60, 2007 Jan 17-23. UI: 17288318

Gallo MF. Grimes DA. Lopez LM. Schulz KF. Non-latex versus latex male condoms for contraception.[update of Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2003;(2):CD003550; PMID: 12804475]. [Review] [29 refs] [Journal Article. Meta-Analysis. Review] Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. (1):CD003550, 2006. UI: 16437459

Hormonal methods

Liu SL. Lebrun CM. Effect of oral contraceptives and hormone replacement therapy on bone mineral density in premenopausal and perimenopausal women: a systematic review. [Review] [104 refs] [Journal Article. Review] British Journal of Sports Medicine. 40(1):11-24, 2006 Jan. UI: 16371485

Bradley LD. Abnormal uterine bleeding. [Review] [23 refs] [Journal Article. Review] Nurse Practitioner. 30(10):38-42, 45-9; quiz 50-1, 2005 Oct. UI: 16217420

Ehrmann DA. Polycystic ovary syndrome.[see comment]. [Review] [144 refs] [Journal Article. Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't. Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.. Review] New England Journal of Medicine. 352(12):1223-36, 2005 Mar 24. UI: 15788499

Khoury-Collado F. Bombard AT. Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: what the primary care physician should know. [Review] [45 refs] [Journal Article. Review] Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey. 59(7):537-42, 2004 Jul. UI: 15199272

Winkel CA. Evaluation and management of women with endometriosis. [Review] [54 refs] [Journal Article. Review] Obstetrics & Gynecology. 102(2):397-408, 2003 Aug. UI: 12907119

Olive DL. Pritts EA. Treatment of endometriosis. [Review] [94 refs] [Journal Article. Review] New England Journal of Medicine. 345(4):266-75, 2001 Jul 26. UI: 11474666

Moore J. Kennedy S. Prentice A. Modern combined oral contraceptives for pain associated with endometriosis. [Review] [1 refs] [Journal Article. Review] Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. (2):CD001019, 2000. UI: 10796731

DeCherney A. Bone-sparing properties of oral contraceptives. [Review] [25 refs] [Journal Article. Review] American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology. 174(1 Pt 1):15-20, 1996 Jan. UI: 8571999

Iyer V. Farquhar C. Jepson R. Oral contraceptive pills for heavy menstrual bleeding. [Review] [1 refs] [Journal Article. Review] Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. (2):CD000154, 2000. UI: 10796696

Burkman RT. Collins JA. Shulman LP. Williams JK. Current perspectives on oral contraceptive use. [Review] [72 refs] [Journal Article. Review] American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology. 185(2 Suppl):S4-12, 2001 Aug. UI: 11521117

Tyrer LB. Current controversies and future direction of oral contraception. [Review] [42 refs] [Journal Article. Review] Current Opinion in Obstetrics & Gynecology. 5(6):833-8, 1993 Dec. nice older summary of oral contraceptives after 30 years of use: in 1993-main questions of safety had to do with exogenous estrogen and posible increased risk of cervical and breast cancer. Oral contraceptves began being widely prescribed in about 1960. Reduction of doses of both estrogen and progesterin lowered clinical incidence of cardiovascular complications.The cardiovascular complications associated with OCP are specific:thromboembolic events, stroke, MI.As far as Breast cancer- the consensus in 1993 was that the overall incidence waqs not greater in women who used OCP, but the acceleration of the growth of early breast cancers (rather than their initiation) is a risk. The incidence of endometrial and ovarian cancer, however, is lower in women using birth control pills.Higher dose pills have some significant effects on CHO metabolism, especially in women who are "pre-diabetic" but do not cause diabetes.Health benefits of OCP : decreased iron deficiency anemia, less dysmennorhea, menometrorraghia, taken correctly combination pills about 100% effective in preventing pregnancy. UI: 8286698

Risk populations,complications etc

CARRIE ARMSTRONG:ACOG Releases Guidelines on Hormonal Contraceptives in Women with Coexisting Medical Conditions American Family Physician - Volume 75, Issue 8 (April 2007)

Bushnell, Cheryl D. MD, MHS; Hurn, Patricia PhD; Colton, Carol PhD; Miller, Virginia M. PhD; del Zoppo, Gregory MD, MS; Elkind, Mitchell S.V. MD; Stern, Barney MD; Herrington, David MD; Ford-Lynch, Gwendolyn MD; Gorelick, Philip MD, MPH; James, Andra MD, MPH; Brown, Candice M. PhD; Choi, Emily MD; Bray, Paul MD; Newby, L Kristin MD, MHS; Goldstein, Larry B. MD; Simpkins, James PhD Advancing the Study of Stroke in Women: Summary and Recommendations for Future Research From an NINDS-Sponsored Multidisciplinary Working Group. Stroke. 37(9):2387-2399, September 2006. "Women have poorer outcomes from stroke than men. Women also have risk factors that are unique, including pregnancy and hormone therapy. Hormone therapy for postmenopausal replacement increased the risk of ischemic stroke according to results of the Women’s Health Initiative clinical trials. Based on the current understanding of the mechanisms of action of estrogen, the reasons for this increased risk are uncertain."..."A multidisciplinary workshop was held in August 2005 to summarize the current evidence for estrogen and, more generally, stroke in women, and to provide recommendations for future basic, preclinical, and clinical research studies."

Tozer, Beverly S. MD; Boatwright, Elizabeth A. MD; David, Paru S. MD; Verma, Deepa P. MD; Blair, Janis E. MD; Mayer, Anita P. MD; Files, Julia A. MD Prevention of Migraine in Women Throughout the Life Span. Mayo Clinic Proceedings. 81(8):1086-1092, August 2006. "Migraine is a common disorder in women. The 1-year prevalence of migraine is 18% in women compared with 6% in men. Migraine most commonly occurs during the reproductive years, affecting 27% of women 30 to 49 years of age. " "During the reproductive years, headaches in women are commonly associated with menses, pregnancy, and use of combined oral contraceptives (COCs).".."Oral Contraceptives: Many women with MM also take COCs, which can unpredictably induce, alter, or alleviate migraines. The normal decline in endogenous estradiol concentration in the late luteal phase of the natural menstrual cycle is equivalent to a 20- to 25-µg decline in synthetic ethinyl estradiol (EE).13 Thus, no COC will prevent MM in a woman who has headaches during her natural cycle because even the lowest-dose medication produces a decline equivalent to 20 µg of EE premenstrually. If use of COCs exacerbates migraines throughout the cycle, the initial strategy should be to lower the estrogen content to 20 µg of EE. Persistent headaches despite this intervention may necessitate discontinuing COCs in these patients.20 When a woman experiences prolonged aura, focal neurologic symptoms different from those of her typical aura, or a sudden prolonged headache, use of COCs should be discontinued, and possible secondary causes of headache should be explored.16"

Vaginal ring

Teal SB. Craven WM. Inadvertent vesicular placement of a vaginal contraceptive ring presenting as persistent cystitis. [Case Reports. Journal Article] Obstetrics & Gynecology. 107(2 Pt 2):470-2, 2006 Feb. UI: 16449153

Miller L. Verhoeven CH. Hout J. Extended regimens of the contraceptive vaginal ring: a randomized trial. [Clinical Trial. Comparative Study. Journal Article. Multicenter Study. Randomized Controlled Trial] Obstetrics & Gynecology. 106(3):473-82, 2005 Sep. UI: 16135576:Objective: To compare the bleeding patterns and tolerability of 3 different extended ring regimens with those of the standard 28-day cycle with 21 days of contraceptive vaginal ring use followed by 7 ring-free days.Methods: Following a run-in 28-day ring cycle, women were randomized to 1 of 4 regimens: monthly (28-day cycle), every other month (49-day cycle), every third month (91-day cycle), or continuous (364-day cycle). Treatment duration was 1 year. Daily bleeding diary, interval visit questionnaire, and examination data were collected.Results: A total of 561 women were enrolled, 429 were subsequently randomized, and 289 (67.4%) women completed the entire year. All schedules were well tolerated and acceptable to women, but study completion rates were higher for the shorter cycles. Bleeding days were reduced with postponement of the withdrawal bleeding (ring-free) week, but spotting days increased. For example, women using the continuous or 364-day ring cycle reported a median of zero bleeding days but 10–12 days of spotting during the first 3 months of extended use. Unscheduled bleeding during ring use was the lowest with the traditional 28-day cycle. Adverse events, blood pressure, body weight, and laboratory findings were comparable over the 4 treatment groups.Conclusion: The combination vaginal contraceptive ring can be used for extended cycles to alter the bleeding schedule. Women willing to tolerate some spotting might choose the longer extensions to have fewer menstrual periods.

New start

Nancy and Peter, what is the goal of writing this article as opposed to the more general one on contraception? Where does this new start fit into the big picture? Is abstinance to be a separate article or part of the more general contraception article? Chris Day (talk) 15:28, 4 May 2007 (CDT)

Just looking in here, I think that there is an important role for an article that essentially aims to explain exactly how different methods of contraception work. Such an article can really avoid the moral/religious issues altogether. I think it is important to get across a clear account of the principles underlying hormonal use, in a way that will lead to an understanding of the limits of effectiveness and the potential hazards too. Hormonal contraception in men is also physiologically a very interesting (and illuminating) story.

I guess I see that there are potential problems in having an article that covers both the reproductive cience aspects and the ethical/societal aspects. For the moment it seems a good idea to develop these separately, though perhaps later they can be merged or linked.Gareth Leng 11:55, 5 May 2007 (CDT)

disclaimer font

It may just be my macbook pro, but I can't read the font/type-size/font-color/letter spacing of the disclaimer. Changing just one of those variables would make it easier to read. -Tom Kelly (Talk) 18:17, 5 May 2007 (CDT)

it's your browser settings- make the text bigger. I'll put the font up 1, bit it will probably be too big, It's not a disclaimer- it's a guide. Nancy Sculerati 19:19, 5 May 2007 (CDT)

I think in general it's better to let the user's browser choose the font. Html tags such as <big>, <small> etc. can be used to gently suggest what type of font to use without forcing it on the user. I would just use italics and not make the font smaller. Remember that people might have to read this stuff on various types of devices: devices for blind people; tiny handheld devices with limited screen size and resolution, etc. --Catherine Woodgold 19:30, 7 May 2007 (CDT)

Contraception versus birth control

My understanding of the word "contraception" is that it means methods that prevent conception, and that conception is the joining of egg and sperm. Therefore methods that prevent implantation are not contraception, except euphemistically. If such methods are to be discussed, perhaps "birth control" would be a better name for the article. --Catherine Woodgold 19:25, 7 May 2007 (CDT)

---

That understanding is not a physician's understanding, and one reason that certain articles, including this one have been broken off from the main article Contraception is exactly to prevent conflicts in approaches and understanding from rendering all the articles useless. For example, for some religious views- contraception does not include prevention of implantation, but only of conception- but that is not a health science view:

According to the Medline-Mirriam Webster on line Medical dictionary:Main Entry: con·tra·cep·tion Pronunciation: kän-tr-sep-shn Function: noun

deliberate prevention of conception or impregnation

- con·tra·cep·tive /-sep-tiv/ adjective or noun

Contraception includes the deliberate prevention of pregnancy. This is also how the topic is treated in every OB-GYN textbook I have ever read, and all the ones that are referenced here. However, it would be absolutely inaccurate to use this definition for groups who are not health scientists and do not agree with it, and we will strive to make this health science definition clearer in the article.

Since it makes a great deal of difference to many patients EXACTLY how contraceptives work, that information is being provided in this article- to the best of the current health science information.

A discussion of contraception from a different perspective than health sciences, as well as health sciences, is the main focus of Contraception, an article that needs authors. The different ways contraception are defined and the implications seem to belong there, as a full an unabbreviated discussion. Nancy Sculerati 11:16, 8 May 2007 (CDT)

Comments on the introduction

Re link to natural family planning: "abstinence methods" is too narrow; for example, the withdrawal method is also a method of natural family planning (depending on the definition of natural family planning). How about "natural methods"? Re "failure rate": I prefer the term "pregnancy rate" for two reasons. For one thing, "failure rate" can be interpreted to mean a number of things, such as the rate of breakage of condoms, for example, whether or not anyone becomes pregnant as a result. (When something other than pregnancy rate is actually meant, some other less ambiguous term can be used.) For another thing, "pregnancy rate" is more polite, in my opinion, especially when the article is read by a person who knows that their own existence resulted even though their parents were using a birth control method. Re of the group of women who were supposedly using it. I suggest changing to "group of women" to "couples" to avoid seeming to support the idea that contraception is women's sole responsibility. Other methods have a rate of effectiveness that is independent of compliance. They can't be completely independent of compliance, or else the people could be not using the method at all and still achieve the effectiveness. (Unless possibly you mean something like the lactation amennhorea method.) Oh, wait, it could be getting shots every few months. Still, one has to comply insofar as getting the shot in the first place. I haven't thought of a better wording yet, though. --Catherine Woodgold 20:05, 5 May 2007 (CDT)

In this health science article the rate of pregnancy is referred to in the standard manner as in the published medical literature- when discussing any method of contraception, the "failure rate" is ordinarily reported as as the percentage of women in a group that reports using a particular contraceptive method that become pregnant in the course of one year. Because of how the statistics are done for large studies, individuals placed in a group- such as "condoms" are counted in that group's results- EVEN if they are admittedly non-compliant most (or all) of the time. Similarly, if a woman had an IUD placed, and the IUD came out the next day (expelled) her one-year results would be reported in the IUD results, generally speaking. That's where the "supposedly" comes from- and it will have have more development. The "withdrawal method" is NOT a recognized form of medical contraception, nor a recognized "health science" method of effective birth control, but instead is a "traditional" or "alternative medical" method that is sometimes used as a control when reporting health science statistics. In fact, the use of condoms in a medically advised manner (see article here) unequivically states that the condom must be applied before contact such that it contains any pre-ejaculate. Should you wish to discuss traditional or alternative medical methods of reducing or influencing the pregnancy rate , there are other articles to do so Natural Family Planning, and Contraception- including any new articles that you (or others) might like to start. This article legitimately focuses on medical methods only. Nancy Sculerati 11:24, 8 May 2007 (CDT)

The note about the link to the natural family planning article need not use medical terminology. I see no reason not to change the wording "abstinence methods" to "natural methods" in that note at the top of the page. The withdrawal method is not the only problem with the phrase "abstinence methods". Another problem is that some people consider "abstinence" to mean abstinence from sexual activity (not just abstinence from vaginal intercourse); and some people consider "abstinence" to mean abstinence all month, not periodic abstinence.

Citizendium articles are supposed to be written from a neutral point of view, not divided into one article on contraception written from a medical point of view using medical terminology in a way that is in conflict with common understanding, and another article on the same topic written in common terms in a way that is in conflict with medical understanding. This article may be about medical methods of contraception, but it must present them with a neutral point of view. See CZ:Neutrality Policy. --Catherine Woodgold 15:55, 13 May 2007 (CDT)

minor formatting point

Editors may wish to paraphrase quotes, unless the particular quote is of such uniqueness that it should be left intact. Just a suggestion.--Peter A. Lipson 08:38, 10 May 2007 (CDT)

One reason that I like to quote is because it leads readers to the references. But that's short quotes- some of the long ones are sort of placeholders here, that way we can develop the sections, know the references. Nancy Sculerati 12:04, 10 May 2007 (CDT)

Effectiveness of condoms

We probably should mention the compliance rate, i.e., in what percentage of sexual encounters in which the partners intend to use condoms, do they actually remember to do so before it's "too late"?

With 'the pill', the crucial moment is a matter of routine. Every day the girl takes a pill (or recalls that it's a "no pill" day), and probably always at the some time - like after getting up or before going to bed.

With condoms, the crucial moment is typically part of a sexual encounter. It requires additional discipline to interrupt foreplay, for example. It's easier for the girl to remember to take a pill in the bathroom by herself every day, than to remember to say, "No glove, no love" at just the right moment. (Not to mention issues of self-esteem, will he/she reject me, etc.) --Ed Poor 11:36, 10 May 2007 (CDT)

I agree with you. This is really in a rough draft form, and the whole compliance issue has to be well written. It isn't now- I've ben reading the medical literature, and taking notes, and working on the various articles that relate to the references as I can. That's one reason that I started Contraception (veterinary), oddly enough, because I cam across these papers in the talk page there as I was researching various methods. Anyway- I'm continuing to work, and happy to have help. The hormonal stuff- from a physiological point of view, is another area that is really unfinished, and Ovulatory cycle is getting written, too. Nancy Sculerati 12:02, 10 May 2007 (CDT)

The main advantage of latex condoms is not their utility in pregnancy prophylaxis, although the stats could be better, could be worse, but currently they are the only method of having sex while being protected against STDs. A little hard to figure out how to make the point, but I prefer to do it here on the discussion page and see how others integrate it. I think Ed already knows how I feel about this one : ) Peter A. Lipson 17:35, 10 May 2007 (CDT)

That point is already made in the text, but the other point -not yet made- is that, like for contraception, these devices are NOT 100% effective, even when remembered to be placed before any actual contact. The other point not yet made, is that the very group of people who are most at risk for HIV etc, generally, promiscuous, impulsive younger people- are the very people who have the worst stats in using these effectively for birth control. Nancy Sculerati 17:41, 10 May 2007 (CDT)

The point almost leads into a point about HPV vaccine, but I'll leave that for later. Thanks, Nancy.Peter A. Lipson 17:44, 10 May 2007 (CDT)

Nancy, that's a good point: impulsiveness is a risk factor in itself. It's not just a medical issue, but a social (sociological?) one. --Ed Poor 18:03, 10 May 2007 (CDT)

It's a medical issue in that every OB-GYN article and textbook chapter- when discussing contraception, talks about: a sort of "best match" strategy of patient ("client") and method. So, the obese woman who is hypertensive is likely to do best with something that is not going to further raise her blood pressure, the person at high risk for catching a STD is better off (in one sense) with latex condoms incorporated into the method- and worst off with an IUD. etc. There are several published references discussing the fact that latex condoms are fairly ineffective in preventing pregnancy in young women, and much more effective in older women. That reason- impulsiveness greater in young people, is implied as one of the underlying issues. Also -female condoms, that I don't know much about- I'm just reading about them now, may offer protection, some protection anyway, against sexually transmitted disease as well as male condoms. I feel strongly that these articles have to be factual, encyclopedic articles that do not push a political or religious view. On the other hand, all health science articles should be "doctorly" in that they are a service to the public that give clear information in a kind and helpful manner. That's sort of an extension of "family friendly", human friendly, in other words, humane. Anyway- there's a long way to go here, yet- but progress is being made. Nancy Sculerati 18:20, 10 May 2007 (CDT)

Question

I am still perplexed at why NFP would be barred from inclusion on an article about "medical methods of contraception", especially when condoms are included (how is a condom "medical" and NFP not??). The AMA medical encyclopedias I have make no distinction and consider the topic of NFP as within the purvey of the field of medicine and medical practitioners within a "best match" strategy. Stephen Ewen 20:02, 13 May 2007 (CDT)

Good point! Having one article that talks about almost all the methods and then a different article for the natural methods gives a certain impression -- it gives the impression to doctors and patients, for example, not to expect discussion of natural methods in the doctor's office, which is unfortunate. --Catherine Woodgold 21:02, 13 May 2007 (CDT)

Well, IMHO, I do think a unified contraception article should include all methods, including the abysmal success rates of certain methods, like withdrawal, rhythm, etc. Peter A. Lipson 21:31, 13 May 2007 (CDT)

Why don't you all write one? Contraception remains blank. Nancy Sculerati 21:45, 13 May 2007 (CDT)

Nancy, I am not trying to be difficult here, please understand. Contraception, as I understand it, would include a brief history of contraception and coverage of key social issues such as ethics, population control, women's rights, etc. In Contraception (medical methods), this article, it seems to me, and in medical encyclopedias, it seems that they all have a "natural methods" section. I cannot understand why condoms would be considered a medical method while NFP would not be. Can you, or someone, kindly explain the rationale that would differentiate these two?

Also, I have a question. What about Essure? Would that be considered any more surgical than IUD placement?

Stephen Ewen 22:25, 13 May 2007 (CDT)

An IUD placement is not a surgical procedure. An IUD is a medical device, which is why you'll find it in this article. Ths article, by the way, is already fairly robust and yet it does not yet include the different types of IUDs, and does not yet give a proper description of the medical complications of hormonal contraceptives. This is an additional reason why I, personally, have no interest in expanding the topic for this article to include birth control in general. To do even minimal justice to the medical methods of contraception it's going to be long as it is. If you have read it and still think an IUD is placed surgically, it may be because I did not describe how IUDs are placed, and-come to think of it- that really should be in here. I haven't written the fallopian tube obstruction part of Sterilization (surgical), but glancing quickly at the site you reference, Essure is a non-reversible surgical sterilization procedure which is some variation of that. Thanks for the reference. I'll check it out as I slowly continue doing the library research, and may inc orporate it in the sterilization article. I myself stick to medical textbooks and peer reviewed articles in medical journals, and I'll see what I can find. Give me time, please. Nancy Sculerati 22:36, 13 May 2007 (CDT)

Sorry-this article has simply collected the various medical devices and drugs that are used for contraception as medical methods. NFP does not use drugs or devices, it's strictly behavioral. It is not routinely mentioned as a contraceptive, but it conceivably (sorry for that pun) could be - and for that matter, tube tying and vasectomy might be mentioned as well, even though they are not ordinarily reversible and are not really contraceptives but are sterilization procedures. Still, various "medical" books and articles might mention all these birth control methods in the same breath. That doesn't mean that they are all "medical contraceptives". I don't "own"these articles but I am committed to writing well referenced prose that completely covers all the topics. NFP is missing a lot of stuff- the recent work on temperature, for example, and the explanation for why lactation inhibits ovulation, as well as other things I am aware of. The sterilization article is barely started. I urge you to write or work with someone to write an overall article on Birth Control. I have a very clear idea iof what I am doing and all I can say is that I can demonstrate it better than justify it in advance. I assure you, by all our precedents of acceptable lengths of articles, I cannot cover these topics in proper detail and expand the topics. I would like to continue working, and learning. I'll help you with a general article on Birth Control, but I myself am not interested in starting it at this time. Start it, work on it- I'll fill in where I know something.Nancy Sculerati 22:54, 13 May 2007 (CDT)

Steve, you seem to have your hands on some medical encyclopedias. Maybe you could explain in more detail the title of the article in an encyclopedia (this matters quite a bit), how abstinence is covered, and whether and to what extent this is treated as a "medical method" like others. --Larry Sanger 23:30, 13 May 2007 (CDT)

By the way, can't this problem above be finessed by having strictly medical methods in the present article, and other methods (along with medical ones) listed in birth control? We should have an article called "birth control," shouldn't we? If not, why not? --Larry Sanger 23:32, 13 May 2007 (CDT)

Reply

Here's a synopsis from American Medical Association Home Medical Encyclopedia (in two volumes), Random House, 1989.

Birth control

Just a two paragraph entry. Defines it simply, then says it can refer to what it calls "the narrow area" of both "natural or artificial" means to prevent pregnancy and then the "broader" areas of "family planning" and "population control". It uses "birth control" as an umbrella term for 1) family planning; 2) contraception (defined as the means for #1); 3) Elective abortion; 4) Sterilization; and, 5) population control. It mentions human rights issues when States pressure citizenries in population control efforts.

Contraception

Total coverage is several pages long. It includes an Intro that briefly discusses all methods, from "avoidance of intercourse" (a nicely neutral term for the politically charged "abstinence", don't you think?) to sterilization. Discusses effectiveness measuring; risks of usage; and, future possibilities, e.g., vaccines.

It then gives detailed separate entries for barrier (mechanical and chemical), hormonal, periodic abstinence (temp, mucous, symptothermal), and postcoital methods.

Sterilization

Has a brief intro article and then separate ones for male and female.

This is, of course, simply how they chose to do it.

Stephen Ewen 00:31, 14 May 2007 (CDT)

"Contraception"--what does it mean?

I was asked to comment here. I don't want to do so in any greater detail without getting the matter more study and thought, which I don't have time to do. But I would like to say something. Suppose, first, that in fact medical doctors, in conceptualizing what they call contraception, consider only active methods of preventing impregnation after sex. IF that is the case, then it is not, strictly speaking, biased at all to omit discussion of abstinence. Speaking for myself, and bear in mind that I am very far from being an expert on this, I always thought "contraception" meant "methods of preventing sex from resulting in a pregnancy," and so by definition excludes abstinence, whereas "birth control" was a broader term that could of course include abstinence. It wouldn't surprise me if this is what doctors understood by the term. If so, then there is no need to mention abstinence in the article titled "contraception." Granted, there would be a systematic professional bias against abstinence as a method of birth control if we only had an article titled "contraception," and it did not mention abstinence; but we should have a broader article, something like birth control, that lays out all the options, including abstinence. These two articles will have overlapping content, no doubt, but I suppose that's all right. Besides, the "birth control" article could cover ethical and religious aspects, which it would be strictly inappropriate to include in an article that is focused on medical practices. (I hope it is not controversial to say the latter. Obviously, some people do, on ethical or religious grounds, advocate against certain medical practices. But surely it is useful knowledge to such people to have a clear explanation of the exact practices they are advocating against. That's what the present article is for, as I understand it.)

I think it would be worthwhile cataloging the different related concepts here, and deciding explicitly which we want to have articles about:

• Contraception
• Birth control
• Family planning
• Others?

I ask the disputants here whether, perhaps, it would be more productive to use birth control as a locus for all the different methods of preventing pregnancy (which methods may or may not actually involve sex).

I don't mean to hand down a decision, here. I'm just on all points stating my opinion here, and I think that the relevant decisions here belong in the hands of the Health Science Workgroup. --Larry Sanger 21:47, 13 May 2007 (CDT)