The Morning After the Morning After Pill...

Maybe people should try abstinence, seems to me that it's the most proven form of birth control out there...

I'm sad to hear this. I think the morning after pill was a great tool for lessening the need for abortions. Of course, the correct dosage of the birth control pill can accomplish the same thing.

To clear up confusion. The FDA just banned RU-486. It did not ban the Emergency Contraception pills like Preven.

Link

The two are very differrent and have different "windows of usage".

IG

Thanks for the link, InfoGeek. I most definitely had the RU-486 confused with the "morning after" contraceptions (and evidently have had them confused for some time now ). Thanks for clearing that up.

RU-486 isn't 'the morning after pill". The morning after pill does not dispose of a fertilized egg that has attatched itself to the wall of the uterus, where RU-486 will. Oh, InfoGeek already cleared that up...

I know a few people that have used RU-486, and it isn't a pretty sight, by any means. It's brutal and painful, used only as a last resort for some woman, but still less damaging than the other abortion procedure, I think. It's about a three week recovery period if everything goes as expected, but those first 48 hours are intense.

Ok, a double post...
Danny,

Maybe people should try abstinence, seems to me that it's the most proven form of birth control out there...

If you were really being serious, it's not. It fails repeatidly because humans are sexual people. It is especially ineffective now because American people are waiting longer and longer to get married, but entering puberty at earlier and earlier ages. For some people, puberty starts at 10, and marriage comes in their thirties and beyond. That's a 20 year or more window. It isn't neccesarily heathy to repress sexual energy into adulthood. For the record, neither are abortions, but condoms and other birth control work well for these people. The average age of marriage in the US is mid-twenties now. Even the majority of humans have a good decade or so before they marry. Anyway the window where people have a sexual drive and aren't married is widening as a result of social and biological factors. Abstinence isn't effective for these people because it isn't realstic. Abstinence isn't effective for a married couple either, whereas other methods of birth control can be.

ll

To clear up confusion. The FDA just banned RU-486. It did not ban the Emergency Contraception pills like Preven.

RU486 is not banned. Please read the link before commenting. The link is directly to the FDA website. Just to clear up confusion.

(trade name Mifeprex, also known as RU-486). Mifeprex was approved in 2000 for the termination of early pregnancy, defined as 49 days or less.

Sounds like a morning after pill to me.

It's not. Morning after pills need to be taken usually within 48 hours or less of sex depending on the cocktail of drugs used. Unless of course your view of time is such that one of your days lasts 49 days realtime, they're really quite different in scope and purpose.

Heather

Sounds like a morning after pill to me.

It doesn't matter what it sounds like. That doesn't mean anything.

The morning after pill coats the lining of the uterus with a not so sticky lining so that an egg cannot stick to it and begin dividing/growing. Taking the morning after pill does not terminate a pregnancy. If the egg has already stuck to the lining of the uterus, the morning after pill will have no affect.

RU-486 terminates pregnancy. An egg that has stuck to the lining of the uterus and began developing will be flushed out with all the blood that makes up the lining of the uterus when a woman is pregnant.

They are not the same thing.

No offense, Heather, this is in no way directed as a personal attack, but our public health education is not working. This thread is proof of that. Women especially, but everyone, should know these kinds of things.

ll

No offense, Heather, this is in no way directed as a personal attack, but our public health education is not working

Well the only unwanted pregnancy I had was when I was married and became pregnant while faithfully taking the pill.
The only time I never had to worry about getting pregnant is when I was abstinent. I was a virgin when I married at the age of 21.

No offense taken!

isn't homosexuality an alternative to abstinance?  they don't have to worry about pregnancy do they?

isn't homosexuality an alternative to abstinance?

Don't think that is a choice or decision someone can make....

Abstinence isn't effective for these people because it isn't realstic.

I'm not in total disagreement with this statement, but the "these people" is a bit ambiguous. Abstinence programs may actually be working for younger girls, if not the older ones. The Center for Disease Control just released a study, with a possible finding stating thus: "CDC researchers said the drop in births among girls aged 10 to 14 might be a sign that programs emphasizing abstinence and other forms of birth control were having an impact on this high-risk group." Note the word "might." Here's the link to the full story: Link

It isn't neccesarily heathy to repress sexual energy into adulthood.

Any evidence to back this up? If so, I'm gonna go have a talk with my mom, 'cause she lied to me.

I do disagree, however, with the idea that abstinence isn't realistic. There are plenty of people who achieve it. They may incur frustration, but they do wait.

Reply #12 By: imajinit - 11/16/2004 1:57:30 AM isn't homosexuality an alternative to abstinance? they don't have to worry about pregnancy do they?

Finally, an excellent solution!

-A.

(trade name Mifeprex, also known as RU-486). Mifeprex was approved in 2000 for the termination of early pregnancy, defined as 49 days or less. Sounds like a morning after pill to me.

The confusion stems from the fact that when it was being evaluated, it was known as the 'morning after pill' since it could be taken after the fact (vs before with regular birth control).  Sometime in the last 3 years, that title was taken by another pill that is more like the traditional birth control pills.

However, it has not been banned (as iamheather pointed out) yet.

The confusion stems from the fact that when it was being evaluated, it was known as the 'morning after pill' since it could be taken after the fact (vs before with regular birth control). Sometime in the last 3 years, that title was taken by another pill that is more like the traditional birth control pills.

Thank you Dr. Guy. I think now they call RU486 the abortion pill and the other is referred to as the emergency contraceptive. Either way, I still view them both as "the morning after pill."

Why Heather? After all this discussion that obviously points out the differences, why would you still view them as the same? They don't even serve the same purpose, or function in the same way. Refering to them as the same thing will only make knowledge about sexual health more confusing for people. Please, at least in conversation, do not call them the same thing....please...

"CDC researchers said the drop in births among girls aged 10 to 14 might be a sign that programs emphasizing abstinence and other forms of birth control were having an impact on this high-risk group." Note the word "might."

It is a sign of many things, ya know? Here, abstinence is included as a general birth control practice, which it is, but a reduction in births from women age 10-14 doesn't mean it's from abstinence education/practice. for all we know, it could be due to an increased access to abortion. Hopefully not, but you know what I mean.

ll

She would do that because when the controversy over RU486 started in the media, it WAS referred to as "The morning after pill". Now if she doesnt keep up with how nicknames are skirted around with new pills I dont blame her. When something is introduced under a certain label in our media oriented society, its good to pick up on it and maintain the name because thats how language works. Today I know you as Fred, tomorrow your Bob? How the hell am I supposed to talk about you behind your back if you keep changing names? You're arguing semantics over a name, iamheathers original point still stands. TomAto, tomato I say, the damn thing can still kill you.

Here's what I would be interested in: stats comparing the death rate of RU486 comparing it to death rates from abortions (both legal and illegal). Im sure you'd never get straight numbers on that, but it would still be interesting.

Why Heather? After all this discussion that obviously points out the differences, why would you still view them as the same? They don't even serve the same purpose, or function in the same way. Refering to them as the same thing will only make knowledge about sexual health more confusing for people. Please, at least in conversation, do not call them the same thing....please...

 

No offense LL, but when you grow up with one batman, and they switch it on you in mid life, you still think of the original batman as THE batman.  Until a few years ago, RU486 WAS the MA Pill. Now they got a real one (kind of).  Give an old fogey time to adjust to the fact that now they have teflon for the uterus!

besides, it is just semantics.

She would do that because when the controversy over RU486 started in the media, it WAS referred to as "The morning after pill". Now if she doesnt keep up with how nicknames are skirted around with new pills I dont blame her. When something is introduced under a certain label in our media oriented society, its good to pick up on it and maintain the name because thats how language works. Today I know you as Fred, tomorrow your Bob? How the hell am I supposed to talk about you behind your back if you keep changing names? You're arguing semantics over a name, iamheathers original point still stands. TomAto, tomato I say, the damn thing can still kill you. Here's what I would be interested in: stats comparing the death rate of RU486 comparing it to death rates from abortions (both legal and illegal). Im sure you'd never get straight numbers on that, but it would still be interesting.

YOu have a way with words!  Exact and on to the point!  Thank you.

Until a few years ago, RU486 WAS the MA Pill.

I went through sex ed over a decade ago (I know, it's not that long ago) and we were taught the difference. I guess my point is that we shouldn't be calling them the same thing because it only increases misinformation. That's all. I understand the original confusion. But now, since we're all informed, we should really call these two very different drugs by different names. And, yeah, Heather's original statement still stands. Chemicals are bad for us, all around!

Deal? Anyone, anyone?

dad

Today I know you as Fred, tomorrow your Bob? How the hell am I supposed to talk about you behind your back if you keep changing names?

Hey now...*smile*

ll

Any evidence to back this up? If so, I'm gonna go have a talk with my mom, 'cause she lied to me. I do disagree, however, with the idea that abstinence isn't realistic. There are plenty of people who achieve it. They may incur frustration, but they do wait.

There was a medical study not too long ago that said men who were sexually active (i.e. 2 or 3 times per week) were less likely to get prostrate cancer.  I think it was created by a bunch of horny men, but it was reported in the media.  Hey!  Who am I to argue?

I think there is a lot of confusion about RU 486, which was not the first "morning after" pill. Emergency contraception (or the morning after pill) was first introduced in the 1960s, mainly for rape patients. RU 486 wasn't introduced until the 80s and only came into use in the US with the 2000 FDA approval. Therefore, the "morning after pill" that you most likely learned about in school, was in fact, emergency contraception, not RU 486. To use your analogy,if you've been calling me Bob, but you find out my name is actually Fred, wouldn't you start calling me Fred?

Shades, you are spot on with that.  I was taught sex ed about 20 years ago and there was a "morning after" pill that doctors could give you.  Actually, all it amounted to was taking a couple weeks of the pill all at once.  Recently, they put it all into one pill and marketed it like it was something new.  The first time that I heard about RU-486 it was called the "abortion pill" because that is what it is.  If you call your doctor the day after, they are going to give you a high dose of hormones to cause a period so that you don't actually get pregnant. They also have a new drug (which is what was mentioned earlier), that is not as effective, that most think of as "the morning after pill" that doctors will actually prescribe as a form of birth control before the deed happens (college kids are known to take it on spring break with them..ack..). RU 486 is used on women who know that they are pregnant and actually abort the baby.  That is why it is dangerous and was so difficult to get FDA approval for.

The discussion about abstinence not being a viable option saddens me.  Has our society gotten so off track that people can't have self control?  Getting pregnant by accident when you are married is quite different than outside of marriage.  It becomes a matter of convenience when you are married- it is life alternating when you are not.  The way that we treat "unwanted" pregnancy speaks volumes of our society's current moral standing.

Reply By: shadesofgrey

Is this why I am blacklisted?