Overton&#39;s Baseball

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!

Your professor really needs to do more MODERN research!! As in, getting information that doesn't come from the 1970s!

Yes, there was an IUD manufactured in the 1970s that caused thousands of women many problems. Its design was horribly, horribly flawed, in several different ways. It did not work correctly, and is the source of the IUD's terrible reputation in the United States to this day.

In most other countries, the IUD is the second most popular form of birth control. It has been completely redesigned -- both the problems that caused the Dalkon shield to screw up women are now a thing of the past. The IUD is less likely to cause death in women in their late 20s and early 30s than childbirth or the Pill. It is as completely safe as any method of birth control -- every method has its problems and down-sides.

From:

This was, indeed, the result of the Dalkon shield in the '70s and (I believe) early '80s, before it was pulled from the market and the IUD was redesigned.

It has nothing to do with modern IUDs.

20 years is a long time for medical research. This is one of the devices that has been much-maligned due to a defectively-designed but extremely popular IUD. Most people still carry this image of the IUD with them, even though the modern IUD is safer for many women than hormonal birth control.

From:

I'll answer your questions if you answer mine.
What's eugenics?

Puberty shouldn't matter. A woman's uterus won't change size much from puberty on until/unless pregnancy. They're terribly expensive if paid for out of pocket - $500-700, generally. The Paragard Copper T doesn't have any chemicals or hormones in it, though, so there aren't any side effects beyond heavy periods for he first few months which can result in anemia if she doesn't take iron supplements. Checkups; if there are no symptoms of bigger problems (like abdominal pain, which could indicate a puncture) there's usually just one checkup about a month after getting it "installed" to make sure it's staying in place and isn't migrating. After that, it's good for ten years.
There really isn't any such thing as tolerating an IUD. If you have a uterus, you can have an IUD.

Please note: Lots of people (like the comment above) will tell you lots of horrible things about IUDs. The risks of infertility caused by an IUD are greatly exaggerated because about the same time IUDs became popular, in the 60s, free love and the sexual revolution were also becoming popular. If you get an STD when you have an IUD in, the infection gets complicated and aggravated and you end up with much more scar tissue (which leads to infertility). Everyone knows someone with a horror story about an IUD. In very, very few cases (I don't know the statistic, but it was an acceptable risk to me) the IUD can puncture the uterus. If left untreated, that puncture would can get infected, causing scar tissue, infertility, etc.
I've had two IUDs - my first one punctured. I'm very careful about exposure to STDs and I never had any sort of infection. It was painful enough, though, to have it removed and replaced. My experience with it has been so good (especially compared to other birth control options and their side effects) that I've convinced at least four girls to get them, and they're all thrilled with theirs, too. One girl had hers "drift" and had to have it replaced (she has a tilted uterus).
Um, you know, I could go on about this. Email me if you want more. =)

From:

Hello there! *grins*

I think

9thmoon covered this really, really well. A few other things: after my first monthly checkup I was told that I only needed to come in to have it checked on once a year (which I just realized is what

9thmoon said above, but I misread it). I had no complications or problems with the IUD, other than the normal side effect of horribly heavy and unpleasant periods for several months afterward. This is worlds better than what was going on before, although it might be rather crippling to women in early puberty, which (as far as I know) is when periods are at their worst anyway.

The percentage of women who can't "tolerate" an IUD is quite low. I've heard that some women's bodies reject the IUD and expel it within the first few months, but I'm not 100% sure how many it is. Not many.

As

9thmoon said above, the most significant risks associated with the IUD are having unsafe sex. While this is not as risky as it was with the Dalkon shield (which had a polyfilament string that almost always absorbed bacteria, as opposed to the monofilament string that is designed specifically not to do this), it is still an issue; if you get an STD while you've got an IUD in, it can cause major problems. (Of course, many STDs give you major problems anyway...)

Here's the website for the Copper IUD (http://www.paragardiud.com/about_paragard/paragard.htm). I'm sure someone will tell you that you can't trust it because it's from the manufacturer, but I have much more faith in the manufacturer's up-to-date research than people talking about an IUD that hasn't been manufactured for 20 years. There are loads of other websites on the IUD.

Oh, and I'm one of the women who did piles and piles of research after

9thmoon mentioned she had an IUD and decided to get one. It has changed my life radically for the better -- on hormonal birth control, I had more side effects and miseries than you can shake a stick at.

I'm really sorry for ranting all over the place. I know people are just trying to help and protect other people from the "horror and danger" of getting an IUD, but it's spreading terrible misinformation. A lot of legitimate, life-saving medical procedures were once thought of as horrifying and dangerous; this is really more the norm than the exception.

From:

Thank you, Sheepie. =)

From:

ex-petra476.livejournal.com

UIDs are less effective for women who have not had children.

More importantly -- it can lead to infertility.

From:

Please, PLEASE, PLEASE, be more specific about things like this.

The IUD has a small monofilament string that hangs down from the IUD, which is held in the uterus, through the cervix. This string exists so you can check to see whether your IUD has moved within your uterus at all. If you get certain STDs, the monofilament string has a smallish chance of wicking up bacteria into the uterus and causing nasty problems, but that requires you to a.) get an STD in the first place, and b.) be one of the few people to whom this happens. This does not happen every time.

Occasionally (and I mean "occasionally" as in 1 in a few thousand) the IUD slips out of place in the uterus. If left unnoticed and untreated, the IUD has a very small risk of puncturing the uterus, which can cause scar tissue and eventual infertility.

The IUD is NOT, NOT, NOT the Dalkon shield anymore. It is NOT a one-way ticket to infertility. It is NOT unsafe (at least not any more unsafe than childbirth or the pill, especially for some users). And it is NOT an uncommon method of birth control anywhere except the United States.

From:

yes but most hmo's still won't give IUD's to women who have not already had children because of the infection issue. It is very small, comperable to side effects of other methods of birth control, but since infection could lead to infertility they don't do it.

From:

It's not actually the HMO's decision, it's the doctor's decision. Find a beter doctor who'll listen to what you want. HMOs are required to provide health care on an equal opportunity basis.

From:

no, it's the hmo's decition about what they cover in certain situations. In the situation of people who have not yet had kids many hmo's do not cover IUD's.

the doctor can still perscribe whatever they want, but if your insurance won't over it, it's gernally a moot point.

From:

That's appalling.
I'd dare my HMO to try that - I'd have their asses in court so fast!

From:

I really don't think you'd have a leg to stand on in court...as long as the HMO provides the service it's up to them how to do it.

From:

Refusing birth control based on child-free status? That's absurd. As likely they could get away with denying birth control based on marital status.

From:

no, refusing a specific type of birth control. As long as they still offer you birth control it's up to them how they do it.

From:

UIDs are less effective for women who have not had children.
That's not at all accurate. Where did you get this information?

The reason doctors reccommend IUDs for women who've already born at least one children is because of the slight risk of uterus damage leading to infertility.

From:

ex-petra476.livejournal.com

Expulsion
From 1.2 to 7.1 percent of IUDs are partially or completely expelled from the uterus in the first year, especially in the first few months after insertion. If the expulsion is "silent" and the woman does not notice it, she can easily become pregnant. One out of five expulsions goes unnoticed. One-third of the pregnancies that occur during IUD use are due to "silent expulsions." Expulsion is more likely among younger women and women who have never had a baby. Strenuous physical activity, however, does not affect the position of the IUD.

Uterine Puncture
In one to three out of 1,000 insertions, the uterus is accidentally punctured. This is usually discovered and corrected right away. If not, the IUD can "migrate" through the perforation into other parts of the pelvic area. Although "perforation" sounds painful, it usually isn't. Some women discover it has happened only after becoming pregnant. If an IUD "migrates," surgery may be required to remove the IUD. The removal is usually performed with a laparoscope through a tiny incision below the navel.

Infection
Even though the inserter is sterilized before use, it can push bacteria that are naturally found in the vagina into the uterus. Women using IUDs are more likely to develop a pelvic infection during the four months following insertion. After that time, if a woman and her partner have sex only with each other, there is no greater risk of infection than for women not using birth control.

A mild infection usually clears up with antibiotics without having the IUD removed. Once in a while, more serious infection occurs, and the IUD may need to be removed. In rare cases, infection may cause sterility or the need to remove the reproductive organs. Left untreated, such an infection might become fatal.

Infertility
Because untreated infections associated with IUDs may make it difficult or impossible to become pregnant, IUDs are generally not recommended for:

young women who haven't had any children
women who want more children
women who have had trouble conceiving in the past.
However, some women without children choose to use the IUD anyway, because it is so highly effective.

That would be from Planned Parenthood.

The most serious problems you might have with an IUD are infection, tubal pregnancy, and perforation of the uterine wall. These and other complications cause 1 in about every 100 to 300 IUD users to be hospitalized for intensive antibiotic treatment or surgery every year.

From:

Interesting. I did, in fact, experience a puncture. I can't imagine how anyone would not feel that.
Regardless, for someone who is monogamous and/or exceedingly careful about infection risks, the IUD is the best non-hormonal alternative.

From:

ex-petra476.livejournal.com

Oh I agree. Though if you're not planning to have children I'd take it a step further with sterilization.

I'd like to see more nonhormonal means of birth control because I dislike the side effects of those.

From:

For expulsion, I would point out that your doctor will urge you to 'check the string' to make sure this has not happened to you after *every* period. Takes five minutes, and that's a lot easier than, say, having to wonder if the antibiotics you're taking might be negating your birth control pills. Not that I'm espousing any one method of bc over any other - everyone has different needs. I'm just saying there are risks to all of them.

From:

urbanape.livejournal.com

My wife was on Norplant for ten years. Six inserts every five years is a remarkably painless (for me, heh) way to go about birth control.

From:

tupelo.livejournal.com

I think a lot of the IUD horror stories are from before advances were made in IUDs. I know people who have them now and are quite happy with them.

From:

Bless you.

From:

I swear, I will give you a better answer for this when my head stops spinning. As a very loyal IUD-user, I get absolutely livid when people spread misinformation about the IUD. It's like hearing people tell you in no uncertain terms that the best cure for cancer involves leeches.

From:

ex-nostradom25.livejournal.com

I didn't think they still had those! How barbaric. There are so many other alternatives now that cost a hell of a lot less. Anyway...

They recommend you be 25.

"Unless she has had a child, a young woman's uterus may be too small to hold an IUD.

IUD users who get certain sexually transmitted infections can develop pelvic inflammatory disease and become unable to have children. Teenagers are at very high risk for these infections. One out of four teenagers has a least one of these infections."

From here (http://www.plannedparenthood.org/TEENISSUES/BCCHOICES/BCCHOICES.HTML#iud).

From:

I didn't think they still had those! How barbaric. There are so many other alternatives now that cost a hell of a lot less. Anyway...

Trying not to pick a fight here, but maybe you have information I don't that would be useful to me.

I'm 28, no children, no pregnancies. I am allergic to latex and spermicide and psychotic (and fat) on artificial hormones. Do you know of any better birth control options than the IUD?
Because I love my IUD.

From:

ex-nostradom25.livejournal.com

That's totally fine. Everyone is entitled to their own reproductive choices. I personally think the IUD is barbaric, and would never even CONSIDER doing that. But then again, a lot of people wouldn't do things that I do, so we're even I guess. I'm sure people are happy with their IUD's. Get down with it if that's the case! :)

Lots of people are allergic to latex. I'm not surprised.

I personally found the DepoProvera shot to be just ducky. I LOVED it. I have a high testosterone count that no rikey the high levels of estrogen found in most pills, and I wasn't sure about taking hormones because of the issue you stated here with them. But the shot was totally different for me. Not only was I able to think more clearly, but I didn't have the estrogen competing with my testosterone. It was explained to me that I have a high testosterone count because I'm naturally muscular.

Some people are now turning to NuvaRing (http://www.nuvaring.com).

I say if you love your IUD there's no reason to switch, but I'm just answering your question.

BTW it's very very hard to pick a fight with me. Until I become the focus of an ad hominem, I'm really not very likely to get fired up enough over an issue to harm another LJ user's feelings or to stir them up by arguing with them in an ad hominem way. People are here to exchange ideas with, and I have some strange skill of allowing everyone their own cup of tea even if it disagrees with mine! :)

From:

I am intensely curious what it is you think the IUD does that is barbaric. There are a lot of people out there with the mistaken idea that the IUD scrapes implanted, fetilized embryos off the sides of the uterus, for some reason - maybe that's what the Dalcon Shield did - is that what you think?
The way mine works (the Paragard Copper T) is that the whole thing (about the size of a US quarter) is wrapped in copper wire; the copper disolves in the uterus and the copper molocules attach to the tails of sperm, rendering them unable to swim, unable to penetrate or fertilize an egg. The shape of the IUD (the "T") is to keep it firmly in place in the uterus. If it scrapes, there's a problem.

I have an extremely high testoserone level myself. (I'm german, what can I say?) I gained 50lbs my first year on Depo and was an emotional wreck the whole time I was on it. I would go from wanting to kill anything that moved to the next day crying my eyes out and the day after just wanting to sleep all day. I felt like I had permanent brain fog, my performance at work crumpled, my sex drive became non-existant. The only thing I liked about it was not having periods, and it wasn't a fair trade-off. For me.

From:

ex-nostradom25.livejournal.com

Sounds like the right choice for you then. That certainly does not sound like an enjoyable contraceptive experience for you. That must have sucked.

I just do not agree with sticking things in there, for myself. I find the practice of douching and tamponing and IUDs to be barbaric in general. I don't have any specific reason why I would never choose an IUD, outside of the fact that I'm not comfortable putting something in there and leaving it there, let alone the copper dissolving, or the costs, or any of that. I have a motto - "If it ain't skin, it ain't goin' in." But that's just me. I view the uterus as sort of a... well, not to sound insulting to the uterus, because I don't have the impression of it being anything but great and cool, but I view it as kind of like a wound that needs to shed and flow and do its thing. That's just me though.

Many people wouldn't consider getting tattoos or piercings, and it's just kind of the same thing. It's individual. If it works for you, do it. :)

From:

I can't imagine you're serious, but if you are,

9thmoon and

sheeplass seem to have covered things. Like them, I did a LOT of research before deciding to get one, and I'm open to questions.

From:

so um...you're staring a eugenics program ~giggles~ iiiiiinterseting.

From:

jette.livejournal.com

I don't have time to fully slog through those other comments, but to concur, "they" usually don't provide IUDs for women who are neither monogamous or multiparous, for a variety of reasons.

Norplant combined with Malthusian drills around condom use seems the way to go.

From:

chutzpahgirl.livejournal.com

I just read a great book recently released called "Devices and Desires" all about the mechanical (as opposed to political) history of contraceptive devices. There's a whole chapter in there about the Dalkon Shield, which as others have pointed out, is largely responsible for the bad reputation of IUDs. There's a picture in the book of many varieties of today's IUDs.

From:

This whole big debate on IUDs and only one person has said, "uh, a eugenics program?"

This was either an incredibly cunning troll (kudos to you!) or, well, one of those Net "thangs." Anyway, I'm laughing. Tell us more about the eugenics! :)

I'd take Sheep and 9thmoon's words on IUD safety over any professor, and most doctors.

From:

I think it was absolutely a cunning troll. :) He was trying to Start Something. Only I think the Wrong Thing got Started. :p

From:

I think he threw it out there to see if people would really pass up eugenics to rail about IUDs. That's almost depravedly devious! :)

From:

I'm still trying to figure out what the hell a "eugenics" is, and this context isn't helping me at all!

From:

Engineering people. Hitler's attempt to create "the perfect race" by "breeding" people was one example. It can be anything from restricting who can have children and who can't (which is what I think

crasch was alluding to, in eliminating teen pregnancies) to genetically engineering babies to be more "perfect." It usually has negative connotations.

From:

Ahhhh. Okay, this post makes a lot more sense now.
Hmmm, if he only put the IUDs in teens he didn't want breeding and then let them sleep around and get STDs, problem solved!

From:

slackananda.livejournal.com

Teledildonics for primary amusement, IUDs as a backup....

Teledildonics: devices to allow a remote operator to control sexual stimulation across computer networks. That's my understanding. I don't mean it as authoritative or comprehensive.

S.

From:

"Eugenics" is the pseudoscience of improving the human race through selective breeding. Think Hitler and the blond Aryans, or sterilizing mental defectives. Big deal and sort of a "trendy" idea during the 1920s and 30s, and it kind of fed the whole Nazi übermenschen thing.

From:

All the sudden I have this little song in my head. It goes I've been around the world and found that only stupid people are breeding...

From: