Reply With Quote
You lost me at "idiot".
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,...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.
You lost me at "idiot".
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?
You had me at o...
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.
I only know this because some dumb 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
But doesn't this make baby Jesus cry?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 .
I have no idea what any of that means.My wife just pops the ol'pill and we use the trusted pull-out method
So true
I used the trusted pull-out and shoot it on her face method (or boobs)(or belly button)
Depends on how far it goes...
Some days you got the power, other days its like the sour cream caulking gun at Taco Bell.....I used the trusted pull-out and shoot it on her face method (or boobs)(or belly button)
Depends on how far it goes...
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.
What's the stats when you combine pull out with BC pills? Anything on that?
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.
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.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.
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)
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.
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.
I thought this was a thread about Rosie O'Donnell...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
