Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Robert Townshend's avatar

Well put. Thank you.

Chemical self-mutilation has affected more people than know it. Probably it has seriously affected all of us in one way or another. Symptom removal can be described as many things, but not as healing or medicine.

Through most of my now long life a prescribed pill, organ removal or device has been regarded as routine, no more controversial than smoking in the 1960s. They knew in the 60's about the catastrophic effects of smoking and they knew what the pill would do to women globally. Not hard to work it out, even if you are not a doctor. Commonsense only required. To render chemically infertile must involve grave unwanted consequences, not to be trivialised by the description "side effect". Still they prescribed and sold it.

I want, like anyone, to trust. I can't trust. There are not grounds for trust. It's too bad.

STH's avatar

Wish I knew all this a million years ago. But to characterize IUDs as a safe alternative is not correct. They have just as many problems. Copper poisoning, uterine perforation, ectopic pregnancy. IUDs are risky enough to fertility that many doctors will not place them in women who have never had children. I have a young 36yo friend who just had to have her IUD surgically removed as it “disappeared” inside of her. She is probably infertile now.

10 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?