[LMB] OT: real world implants

quietann quietann at gmail.com
Tue Sep 10 19:18:12 BST 2013


On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Heather Harper <harpingheather at gmail.com>wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Peter Granzeau <pgranzeau at cox.net>
> wrote:
>
> > At 01:36 PM 9/9/2013, you wrote:
> >
> >> "The flaws in the Dalkon Shield were specific to its unique design, not
> >>> applicable to IUD?s in general, which are on average among the safest
> >>> and most effective reversible contraceptives available. But by the mid
> >>> 1980?s, IUDs largely disappeared from the US market, and an entire
> >>> generation of American women who wanted modern contraception was forced
> >>> to depend on methods with more downside, including unwanted
> >>> pregnancies."
> >>>
> >>
> >> The Dalkon shield nearly killed me, I spent 7 days in the hospital on IV
> >> antibiotics, and they told me I was probably sterile.  (It was ten years
> >> before I got pregnant).  Even before the pelvic infection, it was
> >> incredibly painful.
> >>
> >
> > You are ignoring the point of the OP.
>
>
> I think you're not accounting for human nature.  If I had had (or someone I
> knew had had) such an experience, no way would I try any other IUD.
>  Presumably the flaws of the Dalkon Shield weren't known until they showed
> up; who is going to risk being the "lucky" one to discover the next one's
> flaws?  Now there's more solid data to work from and better techniques so
> it's a better risk but that "entire generation of American women" were most
> likely choosing to depend on methods that didn't put them in the hospital.


So... what is your point?  That IUDs are too risky? That other methods have
less risk?  That women should be abstinent unless they want kids? Or what?

The Dalkon Shield had terribly inadequate clinical trials (which were not
required for "medical devices" back then.) It was taken off the US market
in 1974, and my guess is that most women who would have been old enough to
get one are now post-menopausal.  I think most if not all other IUDs of
that era were also pulled off the market.

The oldest women who have "new generation" IUDs now were children at the
time of the Dalkon Shield debacle.  One nice thing about the new IUDs is
that there are ones with hormones and ones without hormones.  For those
women who cannot use hormonal contraception, a non-hormonal IUD is a good
option.

Ann


-- 
quietann at gmail.com

aka "The Accidental Jewess"


More information about the Lois-Bujold mailing list