Who Remembers The Dalkon Shield?

I may be forced to become a vaccine hater just because of this story convincing me once and for all that most medical reporting isn't worth a warm bucket of hamster spit.

Women overestimate effectiveness of Pill, condoms, Reuters tells us.
Researchers found that of more than 4,100 women who were seeking birth control, about 45 percent overestimated the effectiveness of the Pill and condoms.
They also had too much faith in hormonal birth control patches, vaginal rings and injections, according to findings reported in the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Gee, I wonder why --possibly because the entire media-planned-parenthood juggernaut has "labored" (you should excuse the term) for 40 years to tell us that condoms and the Pill would prevent pregnancy?

Whenever backwards, anti-Science Christians and pro-lifers point out that thanks to contraceptive failure, it's completely obvious that wherever you promote the Pill and condoms you're going to get more out-of-wedlock pregnancy, more abortion and more STDs, they've been laughed out of town.

But now --when a different agenda is afoot-- lo and behold it is suddenly no longer anathema to admit:

With the Pill, the pregnancy rate with "typical use" is about nine percent per year. With condoms, it's between 18 and 21 percent. ...."We need to do a better job of educating the public -- women and men -- on the failure rates with typical use," said Eisenberg, of Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine.
And what is this agenda? The Return of the IUD.
People also need to know, he said, that IUDs and the contraceptive implant are the most effective type of reversible birth control. (Surgical sterilization is also close to 100 percent effective, but it's permanent.)
But it's not only the public that needs more knowledge on contraception, Eisenberg said. Doctors, too, may not be fully informed, or may not be comfortable with inserting an IUD or implant.
A recent survey by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) found that 30 percent of health providers doubted the safety of IUDs for women who'd never given birth.
Brilliant. Anyone remember America's last foray into agressive IUD marketing?  Well now it's back after some tinkering with that little design flaw.

The IUD sometimes works by preventing fertilization; it often works by preventing implantation of embryo, causing spontaneous abortion.

And here are the side-effects (admittedly rarer now that the pesky design flaw is corrected for, but just note how dangerous):

1. Pregnancy:
If intrauterine pregnancy occurs with ParaGard® in place and the string is visible, ParaGard® should be removed because of the risk of spontaneous abortion, premature delivery, sepsis, septic shock, and, rarely, death. Removal may be followed by pregnancy loss.
If the string is not visible, and the woman decides to continue her pregnancy, check if the ParaGard® is in her uterus (for example, by ultrasound). If ParaGard® is in her uterus, warn her that there is an increased risk of spontaneous abortion and sepsis, septic shock, and rarely, death.
2. Ectopic pregnancy (which is life-threatening for the mother)

3. Pelvic infection

Although pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) in women using IUDs is uncommon, IUDs may be associated with an increased relative risk of PID compared to other forms of contraception and to no contraception. The highest incidence of PID occurs within 20 days following insertion. Therefore, the visit following the first post-insertion menstrual period is an opportunity to assess the patient for infection, as well as to check that the IUD is in place. (See INSTRUCTIONS FOR USE, Continuing Care.) Since pelvic infection is most frequently associated with sexually transmitted organisms, IUDs are not recommended for women at high risk for sexual infection. Prophylactic antibiotics at the time of insertion do not appear to lower the incidence of PID.4
PID can have serious consequences, such as tubal damage (leading to ectopic pregnancy or infertility), hysterectomy, sepsis, and, rarely, death. It is therefore important to promptly assess and treat any woman who develops signs or symptoms of PID.
4. Immunocompromise
5. Perforation
Partial or total perforation of the uterine wall or cervix may occur rarely during placement, although it may not be detected until later. Spontaneous migration has also been reported. If perforation does occur, remove ParaGard ® promptly, since the copper can lead to intraperitoneal adhesions. Intestinal penetration, intestinal obstruction, and/or damage to adjacent organs may result if an IUD is left in the peritoneal cavity. Pre-operative imaging followed by laparoscopy or laparotomy is often required to remove an IUD from the peritoneal cavity.
6 . Expulsion (of the IUD)
7 . Copper poisoning.

So there's going to be a big push now to have every menstruating woman fitted with an IUD at a "cost savings" to the tax-paying public. We'll save so much on child-birth we'll have plenty to spend on emergency rooms for women bleeding out from their uteruses being punctured by their contraception -- which, as it will probably lead to emergency sterilization, will be a further savings to the tax-payers!

Well, enough sarcasm. Coincidentally, the feminist website XOJane just ran this beg-to-differ account of how not-wonderful the other brand (the one whose side-effects I'm not bothering to look up here) of IUD is. Read  My IUD Nearly Ruined My Life.
Not too long ago, a co-worker asked me to lunch. She was curious why I had missed three months of work the previous year followed by two months of work early in this year. I told her my story and explained about the IUD. She looked back at me in awe.
"The same thing happened to me," she said. Well, she didn't go bat shit crazy and spend a month in a New Mexico rehab, but she became severely depressed and had suicidal ideation. Then she had the IUD removed and she immediately returned to her pre-IUD happy, productive self.
Convince women to wear a poisonous, hormone-altering, sharp, migratory, abortion-inducing, possibly germ-wicking piece of plastic in their most intimate place for 5-10 years at a time? What could possibly go wrong?

Who the hell cares? It's only women.

P.S. How many women who wear these devices eat organic and wouldn't dream of drinking from a plastic cup, does one suppose?

Curtsy: Bring Sexy Back!

Update: Doesn't this sound better? A blog friend of mine suggested months ago that all those Catholic hospitals suing the government over the HHS mandate should offer to teach Creighton and NaProTechnology to anyone free. I would pay for Sandra Fluke to learn.