Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Mainstream Politics and Economics -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Steve Lokness who wrote (9833)	2/19/2012 8:52:38 PM
From: TimF	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 85487

So separation of church and state is okay - as long as you agree to their terms, but if they go against what I find important, that's my tough luck? What are you talking about? The policy being pushed by the government is the opposite of separation of church and state, its the state imposing on the church. Just because 99% of women use it at some time - that doesn't mean for a second they use it all the time. Few use it for a very short time, there isn't any point to do so, unlike barrier methods, which might reasonable be used once right when its needed, hormonal methods require time to be fully effective, and if your going to generally have them work for you you have to keep them going as a steady thing. If 99 percent of people every use them, and most of that use is for years (with essentially all at least for months), they are pretty widely available thing. Even without that particular sign, its obvious that availability isn't much of a problem (and if it was, we should aim at the biggest availability barrier, the requirement for a prescription). Even the poor can afford contraception (at least if they are people with enough foresight and discipline to have contraception be that effective for them anyway), and if they couldn't pay the regular price, there are all sorts of free or reduced price options available to them. The people here are not even "the poor" (although they would also have cheaper solutions available, its not like Planned Parenthood does a background check on you, and kicks you out the door without any contraception if your above the poverty line), they are people with solid jobs with insurance. They can easily afford contraception. And this isn't even really a benefit to them (at least not much of one) since the premium is part of their compensation. More coverage requirements causes higher premium costs to the company, which overall over time results in lower pay (lower than it otherwise would have been, not necessarily lower in absolute terms, other things might drive pay up.) Seriously who in the US, covered or not, that isn't a minor (and they have access as well) and isn't severely cognitively deficient, doesn't have access to contraception? Essentially no one. Contraception is all over the place and quite affordable. So no one is even getting a benefit from this (except perhaps the benefit of being able to force their ideas on to others, which might prove satisfying).

To: Steve Lokness who wrote (9833)	2/19/2012 9:07:03 PM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 85487

Tuesday, November 15h, 2011 MANY AMERICAN WOMEN USE BIRTH CONTROL PILLS FOR NONCONTRACEPTIVE REASONS One-Third of Teen Users Rely on the Pill Exclusively for These Purposes The most common reason U.S. women use oral contraceptive pills is to prevent pregnancy, but 14% of pill users—1.5 million women—rely on them exclusively for noncontraceptive purposes. The study documenting this finding, “ Beyond Birth Control: The Overlooked Benefits of Oral Contraceptive Pills,” by Rachel K. Jones of the Guttmacher Institute, also found that more than half (58%) of all pill users rely on the method, at least in part, for purposes other than pregnancy prevention—meaning that only 42% use the pill exclusively for contraceptive reasons. The study—based on U.S government data from the National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG)—revealed that after pregnancy prevention (86%), the most common reasons women use the pill include reducing cramps or menstrual pain (31%); menstrual regulation, which for some women may help prevent migraines and other painful “side effects” of menstruation (28%); treatment of acne (14%); and treatment of endometriosis (4%). Additionally, it found that some 762,000 women who have never had sex use the pill, and they do so almost exclusively (99%) for noncontraceptive reasons. Menstrual-related disorders and irregular periods are particularly common during adolescence. Not surprisingly, the study found that teens aged 15–19 who use the pill are more likely to do so for non-contraceptive purposes (82%) than for birth control (67%). Moreover, 33% of teen pill users report using oral contraceptive pills solely for noncontraceptive purposes. “It is well established that oral contraceptives are essential health care because they prevent unintended pregnancies,” said study author Rachel K. Jones. “This study shows that there are other important health reasons why oral contraceptives should be readily available to the millions of women who rely on them each year.” Other hormonal methods such as the ring, patch, implant and IUD offer the same types of noncontraceptive benefits as the pill; however, this analysis was limited to oral contraceptive pills, because the NSFG did not ask about other hormonal methods. Given this limitation, the author suggests that the number of women relying on hormonal contraception for reasons other than pregnancy prevention is almost certainly higher than the 1.5 million estimated in this study. For more information on the noncontraceptive benefits of the pill, click here “ Beyond Birth Control: The Overlooked Benefits of Oral Contraceptive Pills.” guttmacher.org