Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Contraceptive App Natural Cycles Blamed For String of Unwanted Pregnancies (standard.co.uk)

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the dang dept.

An anonymous reader shares a report: A contraceptive mobile phone app used by tens of thousands of British women has come under fire after reportedly sparking a string of unwanted pregnancies. Swedish birth control app Natural Cycles, which costs $55, tracks body temperature to accurately predict when in the month a woman is more likely to fall pregnant. The period monitor was hailed as a non-mood altering alternative to the pill and, if used perfectly, was found to be 99 per cent effective by researchers. But the app has come under fire after the Sodersjukhuset hospital in Stockholm lodged a complaint with the Swedish Medical Products Agency, the country's government body responsible for regulation of medical devices. It claimed staff at the hospital had recorded 37 women who had fallen pregnant in the last quarter of 2017 after using the app. One midwife said the hospital had a duty to report all side effects.

31 of 423 comments (clear)

  1. 99% effective? by Wulf2k · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So, you'd expect that if at least 3700 women used it. ...Ignoring every other aspect of why it's stupid to count on this if you didn't want to get pregnant, anyway.

    1. Re:99% effective? by AvitarX · · Score: 2

      You'd expect that every year.

      Not every quarter.

      Also, this is only one hospital.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    2. Re:99% effective? by clovis · · Score: 5, Informative

      You realize that this is actually a valid technique that has been used for many years, right? It does work if done properly because the female body does give signs when fertile. The problem is that it should be done with a lot of coaching from someone who knows what they are doing, which tends to be a failure of most apps.

      Here's a web site for people who are hoping to have a baby.
      http://americanpregnancy.org/g...

      Can you get pregnant if you have sex DURING YOUR PERIOD?
      Yes! Surprise! Semen stays on the job for days after the sex occurred. Those hard-working little guys don't give up right away.

      Can I ovulate without having a period?
      Sure! Now figure out how to time ovulation when she's skipping periods.

      Don't women ovulate on the 14th day after the period starts?
      Yes! And also pretty much anytime between the 11th and 21st days.
      Good luck with timing that!
      And keep in mind that the semen lasts for days, so we're really talking about the 5th-22nd day being a viable target.

      Does the likelihood of conception failure increase with the income of the male partner?
      Yes! and it's exponential! (OK, I made that one up)

    3. Re:99% effective? by The+Snowman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You realize that this is actually a valid technique that has been used for many years, right?

      Valid technique, yes. Science does back up the fact that this is a valid technique. However...

      It does work if done properly because the female body does give signs when fertile.

      ...its efficacy is terrible. Yes, the female body does give signs when fertile, or more accurately, when preparing to ovulate. The problem is that said signs are like pissing in the ocean compared to the hundreds of other signs the body gives off on a regular basis. This makes it nearly impossible to use this technique. Even more so if the woman has any health problems. Thyroid slightly out of whack? Oh well, enjoy the next nine months. Sick? Too bad.

      The problem is that it should be done with a lot of coaching from someone who knows what they are doing, which tends to be a failure of most apps.

      The problem is that this technique works in theory, but fails miserably in practice even with "coaching," whatever that means. I am not inviting a coach into my bedroom to tell me when it is safe to fuck my wife and not get her pregnant.

      --
      24 beers in a case, 24 hours in a day. Coincidence? I think not!
    4. Re:99% effective? by B1ackDragon · · Score: 5, Informative

      We gave NFP a shot; I don't get too many opportunities to share my real experience with it, which is a shame. A little over a year ago my wife was sick of her birth control (subdermal implant), and being from a very Catholic family she wanted to at least learn about and try NFP. I reluctantly agreed (we were stable enough that starting our family a bit earlier than planned wouldn't have been a disaster).

      We signed up for a class through SymptoPro through our local church, an organization that provides workshops and materials about it. In summary, I'll the say method is definitely more scientific than old "rhythm" methods, but still leaves a lot to be desired. According to their materials (and duly backed up by studies, as far as I can tell), time between menstruation and ovulation can be quite variable (hence failure of rhythm methods), but time after to the next menstruation is be fairly predictable for a given woman, and further the time of ovulation should be roughly predictable from physical symptoms, and thus also the likely times of fertility, taking into account other factors such as sperm lifetime etc. (the materials are adamant they don't try to predict ovulation per se).

      The rules are very complex, but the basic "intro setup" is this: Each day the woman should take her basal body temperature. This must be done in the morning right after waking (ideally still in bed) to avoid noise from other activity. [Work swing shift? Have an over- or under- active immune system? Good luck with that.] Each day she should evaluate her vaginal discharge (character and amount), and for extra accuracy also her cervical opening (yup, you read that right). Each cycle, the last day of these fertile "signs" is taken to be "peak day" (I presume correlated with ovulation, but they don't come out and say it directly). After this peak day is met, she looks for three temperature readings all higher than the previous six; if the third is 0.4 degrees F higher than the highest of the 6, then you're good to sex it up that evening (assuming avoiding pregnancy). There are special cases involved if the third day doesn't reach the 0.4 above level, etc. There are also more advanced, less conservative rules available once 6 to 12 months of individual data have been gathered. It's really the kind of thing that should be handled by software, because it's so difficult to remember and apply. (I could also see it being fertile ground for software bugs. Pun intended.)

      Is it scientific, and is it effective? I'll say "kinda" to the first, and "mostly" to the second. There have indeed been studies on pregnancy rates, and results seem comparable to condoms (though condoms have come a long way; high-90s% is about what is claimed by symptopro for perfect use; results vary across studies, YMMV, etc.) What bothers me is that I have yet to identify any science behind the rulesets themselves. Why three days after six, and where does this 0.4 degrees magic number come from? I'd love to be proven wrong, but I think these are essentially someone's hunch.

      As to effectiveness, I think it's reasonably effective primarily because it's so conservative. According to the rules, we got on average maybe 6 days per month we *could* have sex and avoid pregnancy (aside from menstruation days); a couple of months we had 0 available days. We ended up using condoms quite a bit anyway. On the plus side, via all this charting we learned that this isn't quite normal: many women get closer to 10 days/cycle of infertile time (even with the basic ruleset), and my wife may have a mild "luteal phase defect." Now that we're actively trying to start our family, we'll be talking to a doctor about it.

      In the end, I'd say it's not a terrible program and it's nice to have options. But, more research is needed, and it's far from the easy, one-size-fits-all solution NFP proponents tout.

      --
      The snow doesn't give a soft white damn whom it touches. -- ee cummings
    5. Re:99% effective? by dcollins117 · · Score: 2

      It is, it's called "the rhythm method".

      I still call my first daughter "rhythm method". Her mother calls her "Jennifer" but I am more correct.

  2. Rhythm Method by Gunnery+Sgt.+Hartman · · Score: 5, Funny

    Do you know what they call couples that use the rhythm method for birth control?
    .
    .
    Parents

    --
    [ ]
    1. Re:Rhythm Method by Thud457 · · Score: 2

      93% of the time it's 100% effective!

      Geeze, was this app written by the Catholic church?!

      --

      the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    2. Re:Rhythm Method by tlhIngan · · Score: 2

      Funny enough, but there was a similar app on iOS a few years ago (right when the App Store was new and novel on iOS).

      At the time, piracy on iOS was big, and easily detected by apps who could see their application XML file was modified (it required an extra line to tell iOS it was unsigned, so apps would check for the element).

      One developer of such an add simply offset the calendar 14 days in "pirated" mode. If you bought it, it gave correct dates. If you pirated it, you got erroneous dates.

  3. Unfortunate side effect by Major_Disorder · · Score: 4, Insightful

    is that this results in stupid people having babies.
    Idocracy was not supposed to be a documentary.

    --
    First law of people: People are generally stupid.
  4. That's not where the phone goes by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 5, Funny

    >> contraceptive mobile phone app...has come under fire after reportedly sparking a string of unwanted pregnancies.

    Really, that's not where the phone goes, ladies.

  5. Special name for that by Necron69 · · Score: 5, Funny

    There's a special, scientific term for women who use the rhythm method of birth control. They're called 'mothers'.

    - Necron69

  6. Re:Swedes try product because of marketing by xpiotr · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Who would have thought an unverifiable, exceptional claim of 99% efficacy

    You good sir might want to Reread The Friendly Article. The article clearly states that at an average the success rate is estimated to 93%.
    7% of the women report getting pregnant, so the number seems to fit very well
    93% is also stated on their home page : https://www.naturalcycles.com/
    (99% was a number stated if the app was used in strict compliance, but they know it isn't.)

  7. Re:Side effects may or may not include... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    You're right. Abstinence didn't work for Mary the mother of Jesus.

  8. Re: Swedes try product because of marketing by c6gunner · · Score: 5, Funny

    You know, it's pretty sad that as a race, we decide to abort our mistakes.

    Agreed. It would be WAY cooler if we would just eat them after they're born, the way other races do!

  9. Re:This may come as a surprise by freak0fnature · · Score: 2

    That's like saying you used a condom but didn't stop to put it on.

  10. Re:Swedes try product because of marketing by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes, let's be consistent about it. So what's your stance on childcare, school lunch, medical examinations for children and other aids for the mom?

    Until you're born we'll fight for your life but after you ARE actually alive, you're on your own.

    Face it, you're not pro life. You're anti-fucking. You want the woman to suffer from having "sinned", and you can't really say it that way because everyone would instantly consider it what it is: A bullshit reason. So it's the "sanctity of life". Bullshit. Life isn't sacred. Twice so if you believe in the invisible sky daddy who kills people according to his own advertising brochure left and right with impunity because he didn't like the cut of their jib or some other bullshit reason.

    Sanctity of life, my ass...

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  11. Re:Swedes try product because of marketing by LeftCoastThinker · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As a society, we have this thing called adoption for irresponsible parents (it takes two) who get pregnant but are not equipped emotionally, mentally, financially, etc. There are a lot of responsible adults waiting to take these "unwanted" children.

    You are proposing a false dichotomy. It is not either murder the baby or have a nanny state care for the mother and child in perpetuity. There is a third option, called adoption, so please get your facts straight.

    Your argument, my ass...

    And no, pro life people are not anti sex. There are literally dozens of effective birth control methods (the pill, condoms, tubal ligation, etc.) and once you get married, you get to have more sex safely in the right context than any single person ever will have and hopefully experience the joy of having children (the actual purpose of sex)...

    --
    If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
  12. Re:Swedes try product because of marketing by Blymie · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't see the issue. Human life isn't any more magical than .. life.

    I get mice in the house, I kill them. And before you get all weepy eyed, and city-dweller outraged, read up on the hantavirus... and it is 100% confirmed in this area. Live capture and release would make me a monster, anyone with the hantavirus has more than a 50% chance of death.

    My point? I kill mice. And an unborn fetus has fewer neurons, less brain power, is less 'aware' than a mouse for many, many months after conception.

    Lots of people eat meat, too.. you may or may not, but my point is that if I'm going to kill a cow to eat, why should I care about someone killing a baby that won't be cared for properly?

    All of this pro-life.. ALL of it, every single bit, is founded on the concept that "human babies are special". I kill the babies of other animals all the time, I kill things to eat, and so there is zero difference killing a fetus.

    The only way you can logically deviate from this argument, is if you somehow assign 'specialness' to a human fetus.

    So, what's so special? A soul? A divine prerogative? It's cuter? You don't like people fucking and making mistakes?

    I'll give you a counter here. Let's say you close down all abortion. That means that the people that are least able to control themselves? Are going to have more kids, with less self-control.

    Yet, if you allow abortion? People with zero self control no longer multiply without abandon. Meaning, the species may have a hope in hell of having restraint.

  13. Re:Swedes try product because of marketing by Cederic · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The apple does not fall far from the tree.

    You're from the same fucking tree.

    wear a damn condom. Contraceptives exist and they work

    The irony. From multiple sources:

    If you use condoms perfectly every single time you have sex, they're 98% effective at preventing pregnancy.

    So, less effective than this app. Of course, they're also not used perfectly. Frankly the only time you can guarantee avoiding pregnancy while using a condom is if you're having gay sex with another man.

    My whore sister

    If your sister has sex for money, didn't use contraceptives and only has three children then she's actually doing pretty well.

  14. Re:Swedes try product because of marketing by bjdevil66 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What a self-righteous load of BS.

    Yes, people should have to deal with their choices, but they should also use their God-given brains and technology to do just that - deal with their choices in the best way for them.

    Or should they have to live with that choice forever? Or can they rectify the mistake and move on? In other cases in life, it's the latter, isn't it. If someone steals a car, do they have to keep the car forever? No - they can give it back and confess, sell it and move on, etc. If someone is cruel to another at some point in time, can't they apologize later? Robbery, lying, cheating, etc. People need to be able to move on after their sins, right?

    You may think this is different because "another life" is involved. Fine; Let's put aside the fact that there's no scientific evidence that a fetus has a conscious spirit in there that's independent of the mother at the point of conception. Let's just talk religion (Christian dogma). Consider the following: If there IS a spirit in that fetus that is slain in an abortion, God will either just 1) give them another body to come down to this Earth to live out their life again somewhere else, or 2) take that spirit right up into Heaven to live with Him forever - and eventually be resurrected with their own bodies. There is no third option. In either scenario, the baby is ultimately BETTER off, aren't they? Isn't either scenario better than if they're born into this world as an unwanted nuisance (or worse).

    In this world, freedom of choice trumps life. It was God's plan to give us choice - along with the ability to repent of our sins and move on. Abortion allows some people to move on, and until we know better about whether a baby has its own spirit or not at conception (if it does have a spirit, that changes things, IMO), it is the compromise that we should live with in modern society.

    Disclaimer: I personally abhor abortion. I've given up a child for adoption to give them a better life than I could've ever given them back then as an irresponsible teenager. (And living with that is tough at times today, almost 30 years later - just like an abortion would be for some, never knowing "what if").

  15. Re:Swedes try product because of marketing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Let me get this straight:

    1) Conception to birth - Must not kill / Ok to die from lack of health care / food / shelter
    2) Birth to 18 - Should not kill / Ok to die from lack of health care / food / shelter
    3) 18 to Death - Kill at will / Ok to die from lack of health care / food / shelter

    As far as I can tell this about sums up the US view on life and death for a human being.

  16. Re:Swedes try product because of marketing by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Studies have shown that women are more attractive to men when they're ovulating

    Indeed. Strippers earn 30% more in tips when they are ovulating.

  17. Re: Swedes try product because of marketing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    adopt them into loving families

    How many kids can we sign you up for then, two maybe three?

    People who think adoption is THE ONLY ANSWER, are rarely the ones willing to open their homes and hearts to the kids needing adoption.

  18. Re:You need to do some soul searching by dahlellama · · Score: 2

    My belief is that pro-life means taking care of children from conception to adulthood. Not just to make sure it is born. If you want a baby born but not a baby clothed, fed, and cared for, you are anti-abortion not pro-life. Even though I hate abortion and think it is immoral and wrong, banning it, punishing the women that go through with it or even punishing the doctors that perform it, will never stop it. Abortions happened before Roe vs Wade and they will continue to happen even if they are outlawed. It is better to have it happen in hospitals where at least the mother can survive. Leaving abortion as legal is also helpful in gaining information on why people do it. If you can eliminate the reason(s) people have for abortion, you can get really close to eliminating it without banning it.

  19. Re: Swedes try product because of marketing by Immerman · · Score: 4, Informative

    >we are not actually wild animals and have empathy, love and altruism...

    Actually, all of those things are commonly observed in wild animals as well. Humans are extremely smart, but are otherwise basically tool-using animals in every respect.

    --
    --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
  20. Re: Swedes try product because of marketing by bjdevil66 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Point of clarification: In Mormon dogma (subset of Christianity), the idea that babies all go to hell without baptism is an abomination. That would make getting into heaven kind of a lottery (were you born at the wrong time in the wrong place? Your mom had an abortion? Tough beans...), vs. grace + repentance.

    Moroni 8 (from the Book of Mormon) covers this idea in more detail, but in short God takes all unbaptized children that die under a certain age (where you start to know right from wrong) straight up into heaven. But that's another religious topic entirely...

  21. Re: Swedes try product because of marketing by butchersong · · Score: 2

    There isn't a dearth of families wanting infants to adopt. It is the older kids and the handicapped infants young ones that tend to get stuck in the system.

  22. Re:Swedes try product because of marketing by MightyYar · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "Killing through inaction"? First of all, that's a very different thing than deliberate killing. Second, you are painting with an awfully broad brush. I know that plenty of religious people spend an enormous amount of time and money on the charitable aspects of their religion. It would be pretty straightforward to argue that they are even more moral than people who force others to be charitable unwillingly through taxes. I could play the same strawman game as you and paint pro-choice people as selfish people who want to take other people's money and funnel it to their own causes. That gets us nowhere. I think you should take a step back and realize that, when it comes to general welfare, people have pretty much the same goals with different ideas of how to get there. Demonization might win you some quick political points, but hurts everyone in the long run.

    --
    W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  23. Re: Swedes try product because of marketing by cyber-vandal · · Score: 2

    Free as in your first thought isn't whether you can cover the copay.

  24. Re: Swedes try product because of marketing by c6gunner · · Score: 2

    What a 13 year old would choose has no bearing on what a foetus would choose. Or a newborn, for that matter. As much as I dislike the inequality between the sexes which have been created by easy access to abortion, I would much rather see 20 million abortions than 20 million children desperately praying that some kind couple will adopt them.

    Failing the abortion thing, I still think the "eating them" solution has a lot going for it.