Libido Problems Linked to the (Contraception) Pill May Be Long-Term

HealthDay News (via Yahoo! News) ^ | 1/3/2006 | Kathleen Doheny

[justshutupandtakeit]

But but don't you know God hates women?

[conservatrice]

;-)

You would think so with some of the responses typical on these types of threads ;)

[conservatrice]

Thanks to you both for your nice responses.

Though, if I had a nickel for everytime someone told me I could adopt.... ;) Seriously though, I'm not ruling it out, but it is an enormous undertaking involving lots of money and risk. It would take years to get me to that point, nevermind my husband, who is against it right now.

[AnAmericanMother]

No, it's that the motive you ascribe to the other poster (while calling him a liar) is equally attributable to you.

I would prefer to think that those who have some knowledge of and interest in a topic would post on a particular thread. In this case, it seems to me that statisticians, physicians, or ladies with personal experience are more qualified (and more likely to post) than somebody with a religious axe to grind.

Which appears to be why this was posted in the first place.

It reminds me of the Shroud fanatics, in a way. Ready to jump on ANY scientific "proof" of faith, no matter how tenuous, challenged, or non-peer-reviewed.

You don't get proof. That's why it's called faith.

[AnAmericanMother]

Adoption can have many heartaches. I would go slow, as you appear to be doing.

[justshutupandtakeit]

Their idea of God is as hatefilled as that of the Islamaniacs.

[r9etb]

No, it's that the motive you ascribe to the other poster (while calling him a liar) is equally attributable to you

I gave grounds for my skepticism on his statement that his reason for an immediate jump to "junk science" was due to something other than honesty.

In this case, it seems to me that statisticians, physicians, or ladies with personal experience are more qualified (and more likely to post) than somebody with a religious axe to grind.

I have an MS in statistics, and no religious axe to grind on this topic. Does that qualify?

Which appears to be why this was posted in the first place.

The science of it, however, appears to be sound, and the investigators are appropriately guarded in their conclusions. The religious angle (or its obverse) does, however, suggest a possible alternative for those who would automatically deride the research as "junk science."

[brytlea]

The real cause is being married to the same wrong person for too long.

:)

susie

[Coleus]

In principle, when a person gets sick they take medicine to cure their diseased organ to be restored to health. When one takes contraception it's just the opposite, they take madicine to harm a healthy organ and makes it sick, in this case to end ovulation. This brings about ill health instead of health.

Notice to all the feminists, abortionists and neo-pagans out there -- I just love the way oral contraception was going to end abortion. Since it hasn't I want to know what's your next excuse? Oh, and try to explain away the millions infected with STD's many viral (HIV, Herpes, HPV) that can not be cured.

[Aquinasfan]

When one takes contraception it's just the opposite, they take madicine to harm a healthy organ and makes it sick, in this case to end ovulation. This brings about ill health instead of health.

Other examples are tubal ligation and vasectomy. The most notorious example is abortion.

These so-called medical practices have established, in principle, that doctors may first do harm.

[linda_22003]

Good edit! ;-D

[LIConFem]

" What say you?"

Not tonight, dear...

;o)

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

Based on the results, Spark said, he doesn't think women should be concerned.

Some sense of humor!