Good God this woman is an idiot.

[easjer]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,480091,00.html?sPage=fnc/health/sexpert

"5. Myth: You Can't Get Pregnant if You Aren't Ovulating

She’s not ovulating so she can’t get pregnant — Not!

Fact: While pregnancy is likeliest to occur during the six days leading up to, and including, ovulation, a female can get pregnant at any point in her menstrual cycle. This includes the week of her period.

Even if couples want to take a chance and avoid unprotected sex around day 14 of her menstrual cycle (when she is most fertile), the fact that many women have irregular cycles makes this a dicey decision. Even women who have regular menstrual cycles may not ovulate on the same day each month."

Uh. That is not true. AT ALL.

If there is no egg, there is no possibility of pregnancy.

It is true that not all women ovulate on or around cycle day 14 (in fact most women don't - that is a myth based on the mean of normal cycle lengths and normal luteal phase lengths). I myself normally ovulate between cd 20 and cd 25, and I have normal cycles. It is in fact possible for a woman to ovulate at an abnormal time - very early in the cycle, very late in the cycle (especially if the cycles are irregular or she is ill or under a lot of physical or emotional stress) and even during a period (however, it's worth noting that isn't actually menstruation, it's anovulatory bleeding).

But no, it's not actually possible to get pregnant without having sex near ovulation.

[J.T.]

You lost me at "idiot".

[I Love Me Some Me]

Doesn't the sperm stay viable inside the woman for a certain period of time? Or am I just making that up or remembering it incorrectly?

[PM5K]

You had me at hello...

[Jekka]

I think that myth is in place to cover the medical profession's collective ass when someone has irregular cycles and goes by the "normal" ovulation time and then gets pregnant anyway. The number of women I know with regular cycles is very, very small - I'd be willing to venture that 75% of women have had problems with it at some point.

It just sounds more credible than, "It's a crap shoot that's completely dependent on your personal cycle that you're probably have no interest in tracking every single day", unless someone is actively trying to conceive or has a personal curiosity with the whole process.

[J.T.]

Doesn't the sperm stay viable inside the woman for a certain period of time? Or am I just making that up or remembering it incorrectly?

I only know this because some dumb bitch at a party said she viewed live sperm under a microscope and this dude either called her bluff or busted her for blowing her lab partner and then checking out his splooge under the 'scope in science class but in open air the sperms die really fast, inside the vag they die in an hour or two, but if they gets into the fallopian tubes then they can last like 4-5 days before dying.

[easjer]

Sure - but just tell people to always use protection if they don't want pregnancy. Say that not all women ovulate on day 14, which is true. Don't say something that is biologically and scientifically impossible - ie, A Woman Can Get Pregnant If She Is Not Ovulating.

Because, no, she can't. What a stupid thing to say. Why not give the actual information, that a woman can ovulate at any point in her cycle and there aren't safe days if you aren't charting your cycles?

And yes, in fertile cervical fluid, sperm can live 3-5 days. In labs tests with fertile fluid, sperm have lived up to 11 days. Mind you, most women produce 1-4 days of fertile cervical fluid just before they ovulate, so you are still talking about a small frame of time. But without fertile fluid, sperm can only survive for hours. So sex 2 weeks before ovulation (or even 5 days before ovulation in most cases) won't get you pregnant.

Bottom line - if you don't want to chance a baby and don't track cycles with FAM or NFP charting - use hormonal bc or a condom every single time you have sex.

[jman3000]

I'm not sure about how long the sperm can last while still having the ability to impregnate... but as long as the sperm is in a moist space, the DNA in the head can last many days in the vag alone.

[jman3000]

This is probably only relevant in the case i saw... which was a girl who had been raped and murdered.

im assuming if youre alive and taking showers it would take less time.

[easjer]

I only know this because some dumb bitch at a party said she viewed live sperm under a microscope and this dude either called her bluff or busted her for blowing her lab partner and then checking out his splooge under the 'scope in science class but in open air the sperms die really fast, inside the vag they die in an hour or two, but if they gets into the fallopian tubes then they can last like 4-5 days before dying.

That's mostly right - but it's worth noting that without fertile cervical fluid, the vagina and cervix are extremely inhospitable to sperm and most sperm die before they can navigate the cervix because of the pH balance of the vagina. Non-fertile cervical fluid (ie, sticky fluid) actually prevents sperm from swimming, it catches them up and sort of twists them around. Creamy is less hostile, but still is hard for sperm to navigate and doesn't support the sperm like egg-white or watery cervical fluid does.

Additionally, the cervix opens some near ovulation to allow sperm to swim inside more easily. During non-fertile phases of the cycle, the cervix is hard and the opening is closed, also making it more difficult for sperm to enter the cervix.

[romad_20]

Bottom line - if you don't want to chance a baby and don't track cycles with FAM or NFP charting - use hormonal bc or a condom every single time you have sex.

But doesn't this make baby Jesus cry? :depressed

[easjer]

Well, you can successfully use NFP (natural family planning) to avoid the fertile window and have safe unprotected sex. Many of my Catholic friends successfully used it for years and SFIE and I used FAM (which is NFP but utilizes barrier methods of bc during fertile windows, though to be extra cautious, we avoided sex entirely very near ovulation). That doesn't make the baby Jesus cry, according to the Catholic church.

[Jekka]

I think a lot of doctors don't trust patients to understand how everything works - and really, a woman's cycle if you really study it is pretty complicated. I wouldn't trust a lot of people to take the time to learn it well enough to use it to avoid conception either. I know a little more than the basics, but I don't keep track of things.

Any time I've ever heard the "you can get pregnant at any time" spiel, it's been geared towards pubescent girls in those Tampax-sponsored seminars at public school. The other times I've seen it is on the internet, which is probably accessed most by those same girls googling it to make sure they're "covered".

I agree that the best thing to do is use some sort of BC if you want to avoid conception to begin with, but there is an alarming number of people out there that just don't care enough to use it all the time.


This is probably only relevant in the case i saw... which was a girl who had been raped and murdered.

im assuming if youre alive and taking showers it would take less time.

Actually, the traces last longer than you think they would - they've taken samples off sexual assault survivors 72 hours or more afterward and still had valid evidence. Saliva lasts even longer - forensic scientists and nurses have taken samples off bodies found in rivers, etc.

[romad_20]

Well, you can successfully use NFP (natural family planning) to avoid the fertile window and have safe unprotected sex. Many of my Catholic friends successfully used it for years and SFIE and I used FAM (which is NFP but utilizes barrier methods of bc during fertile windows, though to be extra cautious, we avoided sex entirely very near ovulation). That doesn't make the baby Jesus cry, according to the Catholic church.

Might be successful for those who actually keep up with it but most people can't even keep a budget much less track their cycles each month.

[easjer]

I expect that's true, but I just don't understand it. Taking my temp every morning and writing it down/entering it in fertilityfriend and checking the toilet paper/checking cm internally have never been a big deal to me. It's not that hard, to me anyway.

But my budget, well, that's shit.

[romad_20]

I expect that's true, but I just don't understand it. Taking my temp every morning and writing it down/entering it in fertilityfriend and checking the toilet paper/checking cm internally have never been a big deal to me. It's not that hard, to me anyway.

I have no idea what any of that means. :lol My wife just pops the ol'pill and we use the trusted pull-out method


But my budget, well, that's shit.

So true :lol

[PM5K]

I used the trusted pull-out and shoot it on her face method (or boobs)(or belly button)

Depends on how far it goes...



:lol

[romad_20]

I used the trusted pull-out and shoot it on her face method (or boobs)(or belly button)

Depends on how far it goes...



:lol

Some days you got the power, other days its like the sour cream caulking gun at Taco Bell.....

:lol

[easjer]

:lol

Pull'n'pray isn't actually a method of birth control. You all know that right? It's 80% effective. You know what's funny about that statistic? In each individual cycle, given healthy partners and good timing with sexual intercourse, there is only (roughly) a 20% chance of conception.

Interesting how those two numbers fit together, isn't it?

As for the stuff I listed - that is the basis of NFP/FAM (the sympto-thermal method of birth control). The basics work like this: the hormones that control a woman's menstrual cycle fluctuate in a certain pattern. Estrogen and lh increase fertility so that certain signs can be seen (and recorded) prior to ovulation. This is especially true of cervical fluid - it becomes more abundant and fertile quality fluid resembles lube or egg whites - it's compositionally similar to semen to nourish sperm. The cervix also thins out and moves up and open some to allow easier passage for sperm (and once you start recording this data on the chart, many women begin to notice secondary signs of fertility, like mood swings, breast tenderness, ovulatory pain they did not notice before or did not link with ovulation). Once a woman ovulates, progesterone becomes the dominant hormone and estrogen subsides - that is important because estrogen suppresses body temprature and progesterone doesn't. So there is a minute increase in body temperature when estrogen drops off and progesterone increases - it's tenths of a degree, but if you chart the basal/waking temperature every day, you can see when the increase happens - it's usually a clear bi-phasic pattern. That generally indicates ovulation has occurred. Because the egg only lives so long (about 12-24 hours), you can be certain that if there is a sustained temperature shift, ovulation occurred and you can safely have unprotected intercourse with no risk of pregnancy.

So if you chart - you take your temp everyday and monitor your cervical fluid everyday and record it on a chart. This can be used to either prevent pregnancy or assist in acheiving pregnancy - you simply change when you are having unprotected sex. A lot of people - even a lot of doctors - think it's too stressful or complicated for most women to do, but a lot of women use FAM or NFP (for either use - most of my friends charted to get pregnant).

It can be useful if you can't take hormonal birth control or if you are like me and ovulate later in your menstrual cycle than expected. And it's really cost-effective - a thermometer and that's about it.

[romad_20]

What's the stats when you combine pull out with BC pills? Anything on that?

[easjer]

If bc pills are at an appropriate dosage (they probably are) and are taken faithfully (every day and at the same time, if so specified in the directions) they are over 99% effective at preventing pregnancy. They usually work in three ways - the obvious is in preventing ovulation, but a lot of pills also thin the uterine lining/slow the growth of the uterine lining (which is why it's recommended for women with endometriosis who are not actively ttc). A blastocyst has trouble attaching and sustaining pregnancy/growth if the lining is too thin. BC pills can also thicken cervical fluid, which makes it less nourishing and sustaining for sperm and harder for them to swim in.

So usually the pill is enough on it's own. Combined with withdrawal, you're probably covered. :tu

The problems with withdrawal as a bc method are that pre-ejaculate frequently contains sperm and the first rush of ejaculate contains the most the sperm per sqmm - so if you don't pull out in time (before any ejaculation - though you still have pre-ejaculate to be concerned with), you can be screwed. As lame as it is (especially if you are having trouble ttc with male factor infertility), it really does only require one sperm to penetrate an egg to result in pregnancy.

(but you personally should still be covered)

[romad_20]

If bc pills are at an appropriate dosage (they probably are) and are taken faithfully (every day and at the same time, if so specified in the directions) they are over 99% effective at preventing pregnancy. They usually work in three ways - the obvious is in preventing ovulation, but a lot of pills also thin the uterine lining/slow the growth of the uterine lining (which is why it's recommended for women with endometriosis who are not actively ttc). A blastocyst has trouble attaching and sustaining pregnancy/growth if the lining is too thin. BC pills can also thicken cervical fluid, which makes it less nourishing and sustaining for sperm and harder for them to swim in.

So usually the pill is enough on it's own. Combined with withdrawal, you're probably covered. :tu

The problems with withdrawal as a bc method are that pre-ejaculate frequently contains sperm and the first rush of ejaculate contains the most the sperm per sqmm - so if you don't pull out in time (before any ejaculation - though you still have pre-ejaculate to be concerned with), you can be screwed. As lame as it is (especially if you are having trouble ttc with male factor infertility), it really does only require one sperm to penetrate an egg to result in pregnancy.

(but you personally should still be covered)

Thanks, although that question really wasn't for my own piece of mind. I'm damn safe. Too young for kids, my friend. Just thought it would be interesting to compare how effective the pill was vs. the other methods.

[easjer]

Responsibility is a good thing. I don't know that there are stats on combined methods - though I know condoms and pills combined are usually pretty effective. But the pill itself, if taken correctly is extremely effective.

Charting worked well for us (I won't take hormonal bc), both trying to avoid pregnancy and trying to acheive pregnancy. If we could get a pregnancy to stick, that would be even better, sigh.

[easjer]

You can find charts of b/c methods with both method rating and user rating percentages via google. The user ratings are interesting to see - nearly always several points lower than the method rating. Birth control is only as reliable as the users involved, of course.

[AlamoSpursFan]

I thought this was a thread about Rosie O'Donnell...

:lol

[The Reckoning]

heard of natural family planning?

[Ginofan]

Easjer, since you seem to know your stuff, how different do the patch and nuva ring effect the cycle? Do they still work the same way as the pill? I've always wondered, just never asked :)

[Jekka]

Easjer, since you seem to know your stuff, how different do the patch and nuva ring effect the cycle? Do they still work the same way as the pill? I've always wondered, just never asked :)

I'm not easjer, but because the patch and Nuva Ring are both hormonal birth control (just in different vehicles), it should work similarly to the pill. They are typically lower dosage, though, so it's not a great option if you require something with a middle- to higher-range hormone level. I've been on HBC since I was 16 because my cycles were so bad I was anemic, and every time I've tried something with a lower dosage I've had issues - so my doctors over the years ruled the patch and ring out for me.

[MiamiHeat]

ok

so all I read was

Woman 1 : blah blah myth is false

easjer : omg wtf u r an idiot! you can't get pregnant. i ovulate on x day, menstrual cycle relies on x, but you cant get pregnant!!

easjer, you need to work on your debate skills. you provided no facts and your whole post amounted to "ur wrong cuz i say so"

[Obstructed_View]

Just because a woman isn't ovulating doesn't mean there isn't an egg, and the cycle lengths and early/late possibilities overlap. There are a dozen articles, including a study by the US National Institute of Health that confirm what the article says.

The scary part is that now people are asking you questions like you're an expert.

[Smackie Chan]

I wonder how long can sperm survive in someones ass, RuffNReady? Buddy Holly?

[romad_20]

I wonder how long can sperm survive in someones ass, RuffNReady? Buddy Holly?

:lol:rollin

[easjer]

Just because a woman isn't ovulating doesn't mean there isn't an egg, and the cycle lengths and early/late possibilities overlap. There are a dozen articles, including a study by the US National Institute of Health that confirm what the article says.

The scary part is that now people are asking you questions like you're an expert.

Do you know what ovulation is? It is the release of an ovum from the follicle in the ovary.

Ovulation can occur at any point in a woman's cycle (particularly if you base 'a woman's cycle' on the arbitrary and wholly inaccurate myth of 28 days, with ovulation on cd 14 and a 14 day luteal phase). Ovulation does not occur if an egg is not released, as that is what ovulation is (the release of the ovum from the ovary). End of story.

Is it possible to lead up to ovulation and not release an egg? Yes. Is it possible for an egg to release without ovulating? No. Can ovulation occur spontaneously? Yes - and to that extent the article is correct. Ovulation can occur on cd 9, it can occur on cd 32. It can occur during breakthrough bleedig during an anovulatory cycle, that without charting cycles would be considered a period. If you have unprotected intercourse during that time, then pregnancy is distinctly possible.

My issue with the article is her perpetuation of the 28 day cycle myth and her poor choice of words. If the woman is not ovulating, there is no egg and hence no pregnancy. I assure you of the truth of that statement - ask any woman on Clomid, on FSH or Follistim or taking a trigger shot. If they do not ovulate - release an egg - there is no potential for pregnancy in that cycle. Any RE will tell you the same thing, which is why figuring out whether or not a woman is ovulating is so important to the treatment path for infertility. Rather than claim that a woman can get pregnant when she is not ovulating, which is patently false, she should accurately state that ovulation can occur at various points in a cycle and simply avoiding unprotected sex on cd 14 is not good enough if you wish to avoid pregnancy.

But you can't get pregnant if there is no ovulation - unless you are involved in assisted reproduction, in which case there is something similar, called an egg retrieval.

As for my sources - you are welcome to start here: Taking Charge of Your Fertility by Toni Weschler. There is a handy appendix in the back citing her sources and various studies, many of which I have read.

An expert? No, and I don't claim to be. But I know a whole hell of a lot about reproduction, particularly as it relates to women's health. Women's health is something of a hobby of mine, particularly reproduction. And there is nothing inaccurate in what I've said, rather it's pretty much common sense - always use protection if you don't want a child. Period.

Ginofan - Jekka nailed it. The ring and the patch are lower-dose. You should discuss that with your doctor, particularly if you are overweight at all (being overweight can lower the efficacy of hormonal birth control). If your doc has no concerns, you should be fine - but use back-up protection, at least until your body has adjusted to the change in hormones.

[easjer]

Here is an excellent resource for beginning to understand ovulation:
http://www.americanpregnancy.org/gettingpregnant/understandingovulation.html

And another, FAQ of questions about ovulation:
http://www.americanpregnancy.org/gettingpregnant/ovulationfaq.htm

Both from the American Pregnancy Association, if you are not inclined to take my word for how the menstrual cycle works.

[Obstructed_View]

Do you know what ovulation is? It is the release of an ovum from the follicle in the ovary.
It's more than that, as it also includes the walls of the uterus thickening to accept a fertilized egg, but yes.

You said this:


If there is no egg, there is no possibility of pregnancy

As you've mentioned, any number of things can happen during a cycle. For instance, two eggs can drop from the previous cycle's ovulation, and one of those can be fertilized at virtually any point, even if ovulation is not occurring, so for any fertile woman to EVER assume that there is "no egg" is foolish.


So to summarize, here is the following statement by you:


it's not actually possible to get pregnant without having sex near ovulation

Here's the myth from the article:


You Can't Get Pregnant if You Aren't Ovulating

So basically, your statement is EXACTLY the type of thing that the article was trying to debunk, because you can't really know for sure when you're "ovulating" and you don't know for sure whether there's an egg in there. What's funny is that you seem to understand this, but you still make the same stupid statements.

You might try not to allow your reading comprehension problems to lead you to making absurd statements on a public forum, if for no other reason than not to give someone a false sense of security.

[Ginofan]

Ginofan - Jekka nailed it. The ring and the patch are lower-dose. You should discuss that with your doctor, particularly if you are overweight at all (being overweight can lower the efficacy of hormonal birth control). If your doc has no concerns, you should be fine - but use back-up protection, at least until your body has adjusted to the change in hormones.

Thanks (and to Jekka too). I'm not thinking of getting on either one, just curious. My co-worker had a lot of problems with the patch including hair loss and weight gain, and I have heard that it's a lot more probable to get pregnant while you are using the ring.

[IX_Equilibrium]

http://ridingabuttertub.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/preggos.jpg

[ploto]

...SFIE and I used FAM (which is NFP but utilizes barrier methods of bc during fertile windows, though to be extra cautious, we avoided sex entirely very near ovulation). That doesn't make the baby Jesus cry, according to the Catholic church.

Not to turn this into another religion debate, but if you are using any barrier methods of BC, you are in opposition to the teaching of the Catholic Church.

[Obstructed_View]

Not to turn this into another religion debate, but if you are using any barrier methods of BC, you are in opposition to the teaching of the Catholic Church.

Then your personality is going to hell.

[ploto]

Then your personality is going to hell.

OK- I was simply pointing out that what she had written was untrue. Whether she or anyone else cares about following the practices of the Church is their business, but the statement of hers that I quoted was indeed false and spreads misinformation.

[easjer]

Not to turn this into another religion debate, but if you are using any barrier methods of BC, you are in opposition to the teaching of the Catholic Church.

We are not Catholic. I was trying to point out the differences in FAM and NFP, ie, barrier methods allowed during the fertile period.

[easjer]

It's more than that, as it also includes the walls of the uterus thickening to accept a fertilized egg, but yes.

No, that is part of the ovulatory cycle, but it is not ovulation. Ovulation is the act of the egg departing from the ovary. Period.




As you've mentioned, any number of things can happen during a cycle. For instance, two eggs can drop from the previous cycle's ovulation, and one of those can be fertilized at virtually any point, even if ovulation is not occurring, so for any fertile woman to EVER assume that there is "no egg" is foolish.

Er, no, actually that isn't true. Yes, 2 or more eggs can be released within the same fertile window, but that is within a specific time frame. The period of ovulation only happens once during the menstrual cycle.

Additionally, eggs only live for 12-24 hours.

So, at most, you have the chance for pregnancy at a specific point in the cycle - when ovulation occurs. If you would like to be technical, you can use FAM rules to say the following - because sperm can live in fertile quality cervical fluid, any act of sexual intercourse during the fertile time preceeding ovulation and for about 24 hours after ovulation occurs can result in pregnancy.

Eggs have a very short lifespan. They don't hang out for days waiting for the sperm to show up. So, no, actually your statement that two eggs can drop and be fertilized at any point is biologically inaccurate.




So basically, your statement is EXACTLY the type of thing that the article was trying to debunk, because you can't really know for sure when you're "ovulating" and you don't know for sure whether there's an egg in there. What's funny is that you seem to understand this, but you still make the same stupid statements.

You might try not to allow your reading comprehension problems to lead you to making absurd statements on a public forum, if for no other reason than not to give someone a false sense of security.

Actually, there are a plethora of ways in which you can know whether you are fertile or ovulating. Most of the population doesn't use them, which is why I said that one should always use birth control if one does not wish to acheive pregnancy.

I said, more than once, that the intent of the article was correct in that a woman can ovulate at any point in a cycle. However, the myth itself is incorrect - without ovulation, there is no potential for pregnancy. This is basic biology. Seriously, what don't you get about that? The article's implication that women ovulate on cd 14 is based on a myth. Some women do, but most don't. To say that she can get pregnant when she is not ovulating is false. I take issue with the article's presentation of the facts. Had the article said that pregnancy is potentially possible at any point because ovulation is potentially possible at any point, we would not be having this discussion.

Did you look at the links I provided? They say the same things I've said. It's not about reading comprehension - it's about factual representation, which the article was lacking.

[DarkReign]

http://ridingabuttertub.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/preggos.jpg


Rarely, RARELY do I actually "laugh out loud".

This....this has succeeded.

[Obstructed_View]

To say that she can get pregnant when she is not ovulating is false.

That's not at all what the article says. It's only two sentences; you'd think you could grasp it. The first two lines are the myth, which is the oversimplified incorrect statement, and everything after the word "fact" seems to be true. The worst part is that you are guilty of repeating the original myth almost verbatim. It's amazing how you seem to have a lot of correct information that leads you to a dizzyingly incorrect conclusion.

At least you got the thread title correct.:lol

[easjer]

First, NONE of my information is incorrect. You, on the other hand seem to have a distinct misunderstanding of biology.

You are utterly ridiculous.