Conference turris::womannotes-v3

    Actually, I think Carla was exasperated that a non-graffito was
    getting all the milage in the graffiti note.  (Okay, okay, she
    was also peeved that it was that *particular* member of the
    non-graffito class.)
    
    						Ann B.

re: 458.0:
>Carla, your angry response that we shouldn't be discussing condoms in
>    =wn= surprised me.  Even ignoring the alternative uses for condoms
>    mentioned, it still seems to me that BC is a *very* woman-issue - we
>    are the one's who get pregnant!  Can you expand on why you think
>    discussing condoms is out of line?

D!, what I read in Carla's note to be "out of line" was the digression,
IN THE NOTE ON WOMEN'S GRAFFITI, to a discussion of condoms.

I personally also feel at times that any topic about women that gets discussed 
gets men-centered mighty quickly.  I'd bail out of CANINE in a hurry if,
everytime there was a discussion of house-training, someone chimed in with
a "well, why don't you get a cat, then?  They don't need housetraining".

Bobbi "sometimes it might be better for =wn= if we all had bad deadlines" Fox

    
    Diana, what I said is that I think it's inappropriate to carry 
    on a discussion of condoms in the women's graffiti note.
    
    although I, personally, have never used one for anything other 
    than volleyball, I realize that condoms are utilized, by women, 
    for protection against more than just pregnancy.  and I do not 
    feel that men should have sole access to them.
    
    I hope this clarifies ...
    
    Carla
    

    I'm sorry if I ratholed the other topic -- we've been using
    condoms for so many years that I take them for granted, like
    toothbrushes, and forget the political and social aspects of their
    use and non-use.
    
    --bonnie

About 25 years ago, when I first moved to Sweden, a bunch of us, Swedes and
foreigners, were sitting around a table at the Stockholm Student Union,
having an afternoon after-class beer.

One of the Swedish women contributed an interesting aphorism to the
discussion: "The Swedish freedom is the freedom to say 'no.'"

Not that Swedish women say "yes" (they don't), but that they have
the freedom/responsibility to make decisions on their own, not "kiss
on the first date, touch on the second, in bed on the third" (with
local variations for the particular number, such as "date", "engaged",
"married").

In Stockholm, condom machines were not hidden in restaurant restrooms,
but could be found attached to buildings on street corners (as could
cigarette machines and similar).

One cold winter night, a friend (this did *not* happen to me) went back
to a lady's apartment for the night.  When she found out he didn't have
condoms, she sent him out to the vending machine.  He was angry, since
it was freezing cold out, and she was watching out the window to make
sure he didn't just come back and say it was empty.

Martin.

    Bonnie, 
    
    you'll do alright.  However, I have a serious question for the group
    out here.  Does anyone know of an alternative spermicide of the approximate
    effectiveness of nonoxynol9?  A friends partner breaks out from this. 
    If you want a classic story of birthcontrol problems this couple has
    it.  She can't take the pill, (over 35, and blood clotting problems),
    and she has a partially prolapsed uterus,  (more than a few kids).  The
    prolapsed uterus prevents using both of the barrier methods for women
    (diaphram and cap).  IUD's are difficult to get a doctor to insert
    (prolapsed uterus again).
    
    They are currently using condoms, but as anyone who has used them
    knows, they can and will break.  She is looking for a backup spermicide
    that he isn't going to break out from.  Currently they would like to
    have another baby, but not for a while.  
    
    Thanks for any advice,
    
    Meg

    Have the man make a deposit in a sperm bank, and then have a vasectomy.
    
    Bruce

    There used to be several spermicides available, but for the last 5
    or  so  years  it seems that only nonoxyonol-9 has been available.
    That's the bad news.

    The good news is that some people are sensitive to the form of the
    spermicide,  and  not  the spermicide itself. I know one woman who
    had  problems  with  ortho-cream,  but not orth-gynol. They're the
    same  spermicide  in  a  different base. So they might want to try
    different brands, and even different forms from the same brand.

--David

      My first reaction is, with a prolapsed uterus is she sure she
      wants another child?????  But that's her decision.
      
      Have they actually had condoms break, or are they just worried
      about the possibility?
      
      In more than ten years of using condoms, we've never had one
      break.  I don't know if we've just been lucky, or if we buy a
      better brand, or what, but it hasn't been a problem. 
      Forgetting, yes.  Breaking, no.
      
      If they have had breakage, it's possible he needs a larger size,
      which isn't generally available in the U.S.  (I have never been
      able to figure out why U.S. condom makers go for one size fits
      all, which isn't even true in socks!)  I think some of the other
      noters have in the past been able to give pointers to sources
      for larger condoms.  
      
      --bonnie

Re: .10 (Bonnie)

  I've had lots of them break on me, although I have no idea why (and will
avoid embarassing speculation as well ;^).

  In general the only time I rely on condoms is with a diaphragm or a sponge,
although then you're back to potential allergic side-effects from the
spermicide.  

    
    in note 440.25, D_Carroll made mention of using a "condom"  as
    a dam to prevent exchange of bodily fluids during oral sex with 
    a woman.  
    
    Question:  Is condom material available in a dispenser like 
               plastic wrap. i.e. *saran* wrap.  12 x 12 inch
               tear off sheets or something like that.  
               With spermicide and chemicals to counter the 
               STD viruses?
              
    
               I'm serious about this. 
    

    
    On the topic of birth control, I heard on Radio 1 (UK) this morning
    that following extensive testing on men with monthly contraceptive
    injections, experts are confident that they will be able to produce a
    "male pill" in the near future.
    
    Apparently during the tests of 300 men, 9 of them got their partner
    pregnant (which is considered to be an acceptable risk).  The pill will
    work by stopping the man's sperm production, and will have only minor
    side-effects (not specified).  The sperm production is supposed to
    return to normal approx nine months after the pill is stopped.
    
    Personally, my husband tends to be a bit forgetful, so I would rather
    take the pill myself! :-)  What do others think of this?
    
    Sam
    

    I think it's a grand idea. Of course, given the "acceptable risk"
    figure (I wonder how acceptable it would be to one of the nine),
    it seems clear that this does not eliminate the desirability of
    using two or more contraceptive methods in conjunction to further
    decrease the chances of failure.
    
    And there's still one problem it doesn't solve: How can the woman
    be guaranteed that her partner is on the Pill?  Seems like the
    bottom line burden is still on the woman to be sure that she won't
    end up pregnant.
    
    --- jerry

    9 out of 300 an acceptable risk???
    That's the weirdest statement about acceptable risk I ever heard.
    Considering that *the* pill is 99.9% safe, where the .1% is generally
    attributed to women forgetting the pill, or due to stomach trouble the
    active substance not being absorbed by the blood, I think there's still
    plenty of research to be done.
    
    Charles

    re:.15
    
    9 out of 300 is 3%, which, I believe, is lower than anything but
    "The Pill". Can you cite a source for your 99.9% success rate for
    The Pill, and for the reasons you give for its .1% failure rate?
    
    --- jerry

    The sources are the documents my previous employer (one of the largest
    manufacturers of "The Pill") filed with the registration authorities
    in various countries when applying for a license to introduce new, low
    level estrogen "Pills".
    
    Charles

    Charles,
    
    I think you may have confused "safe" with "effective".  There are
    only about .1% nasty side effects, but more than 1 pregnancy per
    1,000 woman-years.
    
    General,
    
    There is a new contraceptive method under test.
    
    Three years ago, I heard Jack Cohen speak.  His field is reproductive
    biology, and he said that he was following a trail that had begun
    when he asked himself *why* males produced millions of sperm cells
    at a go.
    
    I heard him speak again at Den Haag.  He said that the first trials
    in Cambodia� (? I forget, Southeast Asia, anyhow) had completed.
    The method is:  The woman is given an injection (of assorted sperm
    antibodies, I'd guess), and ten days later is given another one
    and is tested.  If she tests positive, then, as long as she comes
    in contact with male sperm more frequently than once every six
    months, she will continue to produce sperm antibodies for *all*
    male sperm, and will not conceive.  `All' she need do in order
    to regain her fertility is to *not* come into contact with male
    sperm for over six months.
    
    Jack said that their success rate was 90% -- meaning that 10% of
    the women in the trial continued to produce the antibodies after
    six months.  (Biologists have non-obvious methods of rating
    "success", don't they?)  He didn't say how many women didn't
    `catch' from the initial injections, but I gather it is easily
    tested for.
    
    						Ann B.
    
    � He explained the reasons for testing there; I can go into them
    if requested.

    I hate playing know it all, but controlled studies (the ones carried
    out in order to get your preparation registered) show pregnancy in 0.1%
    of the women in the test.
    This number is indeed somewhat higher in studies carried out while the
    product is actually on the market.
    
    Charles

    Every pamphlet I've ever seen on the pill says that they're approximately
    99% effective when correctly taken.  However missing a pill, or being
    on penicilline/tetracycline, or being on various
    decongestants/antihistamines, or having nausea or diarrhea, or having
    midmonth spotting and not getting your prescription checked to see if
    the pill you're on is still effective, can all reduce this
    effectiveness to a practical 95-97% for the entire population that is
    on the pill in the U.S.
    
    -Jody
    

    Bonnie,
    
    A slightly prolapsed uterus isn't a problem.  We aren't talking about
    falling out of the vagina, but it is in a poor position to get a
    diaphram to stay in place.  Many people with more than one pregancy
    behind them have prolapses of varying degrees.  I'm fortunate in that I
    at least have enough cervix for a cap to hold.
    
    Indeed they have had a condom break.  I don't know how to phrase this
    politely, but he is approximate 6'7" tall and everything else is to
    proportion.  I am asking a friend in Japan of all places to see if he
    can send us a box of a brand that has worked well for him.  (he is also
    a very tall person).  Currently my friends are using magnums.
    
    I'll leave my opinions of how many children anyone should have out of
    this, (I have two  well spaced girls, 11 1/2 years apart), but being
    prochoice includes allowing other people the freedom to make their own
    reproductive decisions.  I'm just looking for a better alternative than
    seaspnges soaked in vinegar as a backup.  (My great grandmothers bc
    technology)

    I was home sick last week and caught a bit of the Donahue (blush,
    blush, I don't watch trash shows usually! but there's only so much
    reading and sleeping even I can do when sick!) show where the male
    birth control pill was discussed.  The doc who developed it was there,
    as were 2 or 3 young, vivacious couples who had used it for test
    purposes.
    
    The pill is testosterone-based, and works this way (as explained on the
    show, for an EXTREMELY NON-TECHNICAL audience).  A man's body makes
    sperm as part of the same cascade of physiological processes in which
    testosterone is produced.  So the one goes with the other.  The pill
    supplies the man with testosterone, artificially maintaining his normal
    level of that hormone.  So, his pituitary is fooled, thus: "oh! I
    already have enough testosterone!  stop testosterone production
    please."  And when you shut down one production line, the other shuts
    down also.
    
    The man's testosterone level is not changed, so there is (in theory) no
    effect on secondary male characteristics.  This point received much
    emphasis on the Donahue show!  The contraceptive effectiveness is very
    good.  The men seem to have little or no trouble restarting sperm and
    testosterone production -- one of the couples on the show had their
    second child 13 or 14 months after stopping the male pill.

    Just a mention --  a while back my gyn cautioned me against using
    the Sponge.  She says that at a bc conference she had attended a
    discussion on clinical evidence suggests it is not nearly as effective
    as the packaging indicates.
    
    Also, some back -- dental dams,  problem with chemicals on them
    for disease prevention, the plastic/rubber usually tastes pretty
    neutral but chemicals can taste very nasty indeed.  Non-9 feels
    like it can burn your tongue off. Yikes!
    
      Margaret 

    The Sponge has been known to slip inside, and even flip over upside
    down while in use.  This doesn't sound highly protective to me.  And
    leaving anything polyurethanely and spongy in a warm place like that 
    for 24 hours could be conducive to yeast infections.  However, it's
    very important to have alternatives because people's bodies and needs
    differ, especially if couples use two methods they are comfortable with
    in combination.....
    
    -Jody
    
    

    
    I recently visited my ob/gyn for the yearly "inspection" and during
    the visit was told about a new BC product, called "Vagi-film".  What this
    is is a very thin film of saran-wrap looking material that's about 3"
    square and is inserted just prior to intercourse.   It's a spermicide
    but it is a lot less messier than the traditional foams and jellies and
    the film disolves and provides protection.  I haven't personally tried
    this out but have seen the product in my local CVS and will probably
    try the product, should the need arise (no pun intended).  
    
    Of course the nurse practitioner recommended using condoms as well to
    protect against STD's, but I thought this was an exciting new
    alternative.  

    re: .22
    
    Of course your friend has the right to choose to have more
    children, and I didn't mean to imply otherwise.  But my
    grandmother basically wore herself into an early grave with
    repeated miscarriages and stillbirths trying to have another child
    after she developed severe prolapsed uterus, so my first reaction
    was concern about your friend's long term health, not with the
    number of kids.  If she had developed it after only one child, I'd
    have had the same concern.
    
    re: the antibodies against sperm.
    
    I dunno -- refraining from contacting one's spouse's sperm for six
    months in order to conceive sounds like a serious drawback to me. 
    Though it would work well after completing a family if you didn't
    want to do anything as intrusive as sterilization for either
    party. 
    
    --bonnie

    Bonnie,
    
    Nah, she just goes back to using condoms.
    
    						Ann B.

    I heard an ad on the radio the other day for a new larger-sized Trojan
    condom.  No need to shop in Japan.
    
    Do your Kegels, ladies, and help prevent a prolapsed uterus and
    incontinence.  I think there was a discussion of these elsewhere in 
    =wn= but I don't remember there being any specific instructions.  I 
    do remember there being comments about having orgasms strictly using 
    Kegels, though. ;-)
    
    Kegels are exercises for the pelvic floor muscles.  If you don't know 
    how to do them, start by trying to stop the urine flow when peeing.  
    It's easy to feel the muscles that way.  One effective exercise is the
    elevator.  Contract the muscles in stages, as if they were going up
    from the first to the second to third floors.  Hold 5-10 seconds at the
    top and release slowly.  Do 4 or 5 at a time (these muscles tire
    easily) for a total of 50-100 a day.  Or so they say.  I've been able
    to remember to do about 20 on a good day.  Sex-ercise is probably the
    most fun one!  Intercourse is not required, but if you have a male
    partner, he can tell you how well you're doing with the elevator or
    with single contractions.  And he'll definitely enjoy it!
    
    Gosh, and you can do your Kegels anywhere at any time and no one will
    know!  I'm doing mine now...can you tell?!
    
    Nancy_who's_doing_hers_in_hopes_of_not_needing_an_episiotomy_when_junior_
          arrives_in_December    

    >I  do remember there being comments about having orgasms strictly
    >using  Kegels, though. ;-)
    
    >Gosh, and you can do your Kegels anywhere at any time and no one
    >will know!  I'm doing mine now...can you tell?!
    
    My OB recommended doing them while I'm driving, since that's
    usually time when you don't have anything else to do.  But I can't
    do them when I'm driving.  The reason should be obvious.
    
    --bonnie
    

    re: condom breakage.
    
    If your condoms are breaking there could be a few reasons...
    
    Are you letting them get dried out?  Condoms stretch when they are put
    on, and they need to be kept reasonably moist or they weaken.  So make
    sure you wait to put the condom on till, uh, very shortly before you,
    er, begin.
    
    Similarly, vigorous intercourse if the condom (and woman) are no
    properly, ah, lubricated can cause breakage.  KY is handy for this.
    
    re: the sponge
    
    Careful!  I used to the sponge.  It had a habit of getting turned over,
    so that the string was pressed against my cervix.  At first this wasn't
    a problem, since I have long fingers, but it turned out that the string
    was *abrading* my cervix, which in turn caused a SERIOUSLY nasty
    infection.  Not a yeast infection, but a genuine open-skin wound type
    infection.  Needless to say, the penicillin prescribed then caused a
    yeast infection.  Yucko.
    
    D!

    RE: .26  Kinda brings new meaning to the cathcphrase, "Film at 11."
    
    Keagle exercises can also be wonderful when your partner is (shall
    we say) involved.  Once you've gotten good at them and can do many
    repetitions, a male partner can find great enjoyment if you practice
    around him.  The trick is you both stay still but for the contractions.
    
    Keageling alone ain't bad either.   :^)

Couple of points here.

First - the new results reported for use of testosterone as a male contraceptive
involved injected testosterone. I believe the protocol was one shot a week for
four weeks then one a month after that? Not sure about the frequency, but
certain that this wasn't a "pill" (yet). The whole thing looks very promising
though.

Second - effectiveness of contraception is measured in pregnancies per 100 woman
months. Many times this gets translated into a percentage, but percentages
per-se are meaningless. (percentage of what? times you have intercourse? times
you are fertile?) I realize this is something of a nit, but this subject is
one I tend to be somewhat fanatical about...

Last - news about Ru486. The French manufacturer has withdrawn permission for
clinical trials in the U.S. and the trials, scheduled to begin later this year,
have been cancelled. They say, and I believe, that the issue is NOT one of
pressure from anti-abortionists, but rather fear of litigation and exposure
to large financial risks from the litigitious climate in the U.S. It is too
easy to sue a drug manufacturer in the U.S. and win and they aren't willing to
take the risk. Sigh. I can't really blame them, but it pisses me off.

	-- Charles

NFP, despite any disclaimers *is* "a" rhythm method. It is very much more
effective than the "old" rhythm method which relied mostly on a calendar.
Basal temperature plus cervical mucous CAN tell you when you ovulate. However
some women do not show the classic changes when they ovulate, and taking basal
temperature and monitoring cervical mucous is not a trivial process and is
subject to error. Even among people who are conscientious about it, NFP is less
effective than barrier methods (condoms, diaphrams, or cervical caps), which,
in turn, are less effective than "the pill". ANY form of birth control is
highly dependent on how consistently and correctly you are about using it, but
NFP is much more so.

NFP proponents, like any birth control advocates, will tout the benefits of
their method and tell you that it's "just as effective". It *is* fairly
effective, but it is also labor intensive and NOT suitable for "casual" or
"occasional" birth control. In the context of a long term relationship it might
be the method of choice for a particular couple, because it *is* almost
completely non-invasive, and doesn't involve any "artificial" methods. It has
its advantages, but it is too risky for our taste. People who use NFP are
usually advised to either abstain during the woman's fertile period, or use
some other form of birth control (usually a barrier method). Likewise, if you
miss a temperature you are usually advised to use a barrier method.

	-- Charles

As far as abstinence methods go - there is such a thing as sex without 
intercourse. Being creative can go a long way towards providing fun during
"dangerous" times. ;*) liesl

Sorry Dick, I wasn't trying to start a fight with you. If you got the impression
that I was disputing what you said, please accept my apologies. I was trying
to present "the other side". As I said, NFP may indeed be the best form of
birth control for some people, sounds like your friends are some of those
people. I can even think of people to whom I would suggest it. The single point
I *was* disagreeing with is the claim that it is just as effective as other
forms of birth control, in particular barriers (with spermicide) or "the pill.
When properly used it is effective, but it is not "as reliable as any other
method short of sterlilzation."

	-- Charles

     .21 ,  I agree.   Shortly after we had our 2 kids, I got a vasectomy.
    
    And I was 23 yrs old at the time !!!   I'm 37 now with no regrets.
    
    Yes, there's always adoption or reversal...  But I wouldn't do either
    I figure.
    
    Jack
    

    Consumer Reports did an evaluation of condoms which indicated that the
    natural skin condoms are less likely to break than latex.  Although
    they cautioned that the skin condoms are not effective protection
    against STD.  They are as effective as latex in preventing pregnancy. 
    
    I've been using them for several years, have never had one break and
    have never gotten pregnant while using one, but they are expensive.
    
    Mary

          The following article includes a description of 6 birth control
          methods currently under development or test (besides Norplant).
          I have not heard too much about 5 of them, so I thought this
          might be of interest to others as well.

                                                       nancy b.

          From the Cox News Service:

                            _A New Day for Birth Control_
                      [New contraceptives waiting in the wings]

          New birth control techniques are like sperm making their perilous
          journey toward an egg -- many are offered, but few are chosen.
          From imaginative proposals that would turn a woman's organs into
          a hostile environment for sperm to little gadgets that
          temporarily plug up a man's reproductive processes, new ideas for
          managing human fertility are constantly appearing.

          In the Unites States, most remain just that -- ideas.

          A gauntlet of regulatory obstacles and manufacturers' fears of
          product-liability lawsuits have hindered the development of new
          contraceptives, according to a committee of the National Academy
          of Sciences.

          However, with recent appproval by the Food and Drug
          Administration of Norplant, which provides pregnancy-preventing
          hormones for up to five years when implanted in a woman's upper
          arm, there are signs that a contraceptive log-jam may be about to
          break up.

          Experts say that within the next five or ten years, a wide
          variety of new birth control measures will be available to
          Americans.

          "I think it's beginning to look a little better said Dr. Joseph
          Speidel, president of the Population Crisis Committee, a group
          that advocates greater accessibility to family planning measures.

          Norplant, which became the first new contraceptive to be approved
          in this country since the 1960s, is licensed by the Population
          Council in New York, which receives royalties on its sales
          worldwide.

          The council, one of a number of private groups that have moved
          into contraceptive research and development because drug
          companies have been unwilling to, uses the royalties for research
          on other birth control systems.

          The FDA's decision this month that Norplant was safe and
          effective came six years after the World Health Organization
          reached the same conclusion.  Women in 16 countries, from France
          to India, were using the system.

          Although the government has been criticized over the FDA's slow
          approval of birth control techniques, the same federal government
          -- through a different agency -- is the largest single supporter
          of the science of birth control in the world.

          The Agency for International Development, America's foreign aid
          office,  spends more than the $250 million a year on family
          planning services and research.  For example, AID financed most
          of the clinical trials of Norplant, both in the United States and
          abroad.

          In addition to Norplant, several other systems for long term
          delivery of progestin into the blood stream are being tested.
          And, with support from WHO, AID, the United Nations Population
          Fund and several large foundations, other new contraceptives are
          under development.  They include improvements on existing
          contraceptives.

          Other approaches include:

          o  A vaginal ring that would release progestin, or a progestin-
          estrogen mixture, to eliminate ovulation much the same way the
          pill does.  The progestin-only rings which are about two inches
          in diameter could be worn continuously for three months.  They
          many be available worldwide in the next three or four years.

          o  The Filshie clip, which causes female tubal sterilization and
          is under clinical trials in the United Kingdom.  The device shows
          promise of being more easily reversed than other tubal
          sterilization systems.

          o  Timed-release injections of hormones now taken in oral
          contraceptives are being tested in Latin America, New Zealand and
          China.  They are effective for up to six months.

          o  A "male pill", now in clinical trial in the United States and
          elsewhere, would temporarily inhibit testosterone and sperm
          production.  Some men have said the pill lowers their sex drive.
          The system could be available in a decade.

          o  "Shug," a pair of small plugs which, inserted in a man's
          scrotal cords, block transport of sperm.  In primate tests,
          animals resumed producing healthy sperm as soon as the device was
          removed.

          o  "Morning-after" pills, including RU-486, are being tested but
          are controversial because they terminate pregnancy, which is
          regarded by many as abortion.

    The January issue of McCall's has a brief article about a vaginal
    condom that will probably be on the market by the end of this year.
    It is supposed to be thicker (and therefore more secure) and is held
    in place with some type of ring.  In it's initial trial, somewhere
    between 58 and 80% of both men and women found it more pleasurable
    than the "traditional" model.  I believe they said the cost will
    be up to $2 each.
    
    Barb

    
    Yes - I've heard good reports on these things, and seen some photos of
    them.
    I've also heard that they *may* be available in the UK by April...
    
    As far as I could see, it's a tube of condom-like material with one
    end closed. At each end of the tube there is a flexible ring - one
    (at the closed end, obviously) to position over the cervix (like a
    diaphragm) and the other ring to secure the end of the tube at the
    entrance to the vagina and ensure that it doesn't "ride up with use"...
    
    This info is over 18 months old - I guess it could have been redesigned
    in the meanwhile.
    'gail