the pill

Birth Control’s Misremembered History

5417 views

“Memory itself is an internal rumour; and when to this hearsay within the mind we add the falsified echoes that reach us from others, we have but a shifting and unseizable basis to build upon. The picture we frame of the past changes continually and grows every day less similar to the original experience which it purports to describe.”

– George Santayana

With each trip we make around the sun, the truth rings louder in Santayana’s hauntingly beautiful depiction of the evolution of memory. Like characters from Kurosawa’s masterpiece, Rashomon, we are destined to misremember motives and details surrounding the events of our lives. Selective perception puts us at a disadvantage from the outset. Add to that “the falsified echoes that reach us from others,” and we need to accept the possibility of inaccuracies, even in our most vivid memories.

If our own personal memories reside on shifting sands and are vulnerable to outside influences, imagine how much more vulnerable are collective memories spun to the media by sources that have proven to be unreliable.

Sketchy Details

While writing my book, In the Name of The Pill, I became interested in the Puerto Rican drug trials that Dr. Gregory Pincus and Dr. John Rock presented to the FDA during the approval process for hormonal birth control. These trials were later mentioned in the Nelson Pill Hearings, which is where I first read about them.

The testimony in those Hearings discussed five young women who died during the trials. The doctors apparently never even considered attributing the deaths of these otherwise healthy young women to the drug they were studying, and each woman was buried without an autopsy. As I began digging through the media for more stories on the Puerto Rican drug trial, I noticed that recent accounts often neglected to mention the women who died, and the ones that did usually stated that only three women died… Merely shifting sands?

Digging Up More Trials

It is frustrating to try to piece together the facts from the birth control trials because so much of the information is incomplete or errant. This may have been by design. After reviewing Dr. Pincus’ notes in the Library of Congress, women’s health author, Barbara Seaman, mused that she was surprised he hadn’t burned the evidence.

The powerful forces and mysterious manipulations that ultimately gave us hormonal birth control have fueled my passion for this subject over the past few years. No matter how much research I do, the rabbit hole always seems to go deeper.

Recently, Abby Epstein, the director of the upcoming documentary, The Business of Birth Control, shared with me a bundle of archived documents they had just unearthed. It was like a treasure trove of forgotten birth control history filled with interesting facts and tidbits. Immediately, I stumbled upon a new mystery. In an article titled, “Population Manipulation” from Off Our Backs magazine, a bi-monthly published by “radical feminists” in the early 70s. Here’s what caught my attention:

“Women have been the guinea pigs for contraception and population control. Poor women are especially vulnerable. The first testing of the pill was on women in Puerto Rico, Haiti and the mountains of Kentucky…”

I have previously seen mentions of trials in Haiti but this was the first time I heard of trials associated with my birth state, Kentucky – another piece of the narrative that has disappeared over time. This piqued my curiosity. After more research, here is my attempt to clear up birth control’s misremembered history.

A Brief History of Hormonal Birth Control Trials

In 1951, Margaret Sanger helped Dr. Gregory Pincus obtain funds to begin testing the effects of synthetic hormones on the reproductive systems of rabbits. A year later she brought the wealthy heiress, Katherine McCormick, to visit his lab in Worcester, Massachusetts. The women dreamed of a “magic pill” that would empower women everywhere to control their fertility. Mrs. McCormick was so impressed with the promise of his studies she agreed to fund Dr. Pincus’ continuing work.

Dr. Pincus teamed up with Dr. John Rock from Harvard, which had a longstanding relationship with Worcester State Hospital. By 1954, the doctors were testing hormones on human mental patients. After giving the patients the prototype for the birth control pill, they “sliced into their uteruses in an effort to understand the drug’s effect on ovulation.”

In reality, this test did little more than allow them to monitor dosage for toxicity and tolerability. Since the patients weren’t having sex, it provided no proof of efficacy as a contraceptive. As was the case with many of his experiments, many in the medical community questioned Dr. Pincus’ ethics. Another example of his lack of scruples came a short time later at the same hospital, when he performed testicular biopsies on schizophrenic men without anesthesia to study their “castration anxiety.”

Ethical or not, Mrs. McCormick was frustrated by the pace of science when it came to her contraceptive investment, she famously lamented to Mrs. Sanger in a letter, “[We need] a cage of ovulating females to experiment with.”

Science as a Shell Game

The imagery is shocking – caged women reduced to objects of fertility. Her phrasing reveals a lot about how the researchers and their financiers viewed the women who would eventually be taking these drugs and their attitudes toward them. They never anticipated that The Pill would be taken by the women with whom they played bridge. These drugs were being designed for a certain kind of woman – “the wrong type [who] seemed to be multiplying at an unprecedented rate.”

The doctors found their first ‘cage’ of ovulating females in the slums of Puerto Rico in 1956. With no informed consent and no warning that this was a trial, the doctors began giving the women Enovid, the first-generation Pill, saying that it ‘ would keep them from having children they couldn’t support.’ As I mentioned previously, five women died during the trial. 65 percent of the patients complained of at least one side effect. Believing their complaints were psychological in nature, Dr. Pincus chalked up the complaints to the “emotional super-activity of Puerto Rican women.”

As the two doctors refused to let anything impede their progress, red flags were being raised, even by their partner drug company, G.D. Searle. Their medical director sent Dr. Rock to explain, “We here have long been disturbed by the casualness with which materials pass from Pincus’s animals to your patients.”

Undaunted by the drug company’s concerns but displeased with how the trials were progressing, Dr. Rock recommended conducting further trials in the Appalachian Mountains of Eastern Kentucky utilizing Frontier Nursing Service (FNS). Before we dive into FNS, I must confess this brief history is most certainly incomplete as well. I have seen mentions of smaller trials in the slums of Los Angeles as well as the previously mentioned trials in Haiti, but have failed to find any details about them. If anyone has information on those offshoots, please contact me.

Kentucky Birth Control Trials

Life magazine had focused national attention on the “chronic baby boom” happening in the Appalachian Mountains of Eastern Kentucky, calling it “a biological joy ride to hell.” Coincidentally, Dr. Rock’s dear family friend, Mary Breckinridge ran FNS, an organization providing nurse-midwifery services to the region. She had become friends with Dr. Rock’s wife while volunteering after World War I.

Beyond serving the ideal demographic, Dr. Rock found FNS appealing because medical research had been one of the founding goals of the organization. Consequently, they boasted a 30-year history of meticulous recordkeeping.

FNS famously promoted their participation in many trials. Their fundraising materials at the time described studies related to a hookworm treatment, nutritional deficiencies, and toxemia of pregnancy. However, the organization remained curiously quiet about their work on the birth control trial. Historians have noted “little more than a few references in meeting minutes to ‘Dr. Rock’s pills.'”

Archived files show that 140 women participated in the trial between 1959 and 1966. Fifty-two women dropped out of the trial, and one woman died from a heart attack. Records indicate the 30-year old woman had no previous heart problems or unusual health conditions. Nonetheless, as was the case in Puerto Rico, it was assumed The Pill had nothing to do with her death, and she too was buried without an autopsy.

Browbeating the FDA

With Enovid being approved as a contraceptive by the FDA in May 1960, it’s doubtful that any data from the FNS trials, which only started a few months prior, made it into the submission. Regardless of which data comprised G.D. Searle’s submission to the FDA, the truly amazing story is that these synthetic hormones were approved for human use only nine years after Dr. Pincus first began his animal studies.

How is it possible that such a groundbreaking new drug – the first drug designed to be taken chronically by healthy patients – could be approved so quickly?

While recording an interview for an oral history of FNS, Dr. Rock explained that he had grown tired of waiting for the FDA to approve The Pill. He and two officials from Searle flew to Washington D.C. to see if they could speed up the process. Here’s how he explains the encounter:

“The fellow who had charge of it was a thirty-year old practitioner or something in Washington. And he came in the office, and he had all the material – a great stack of stuff on his desk – and he hadn’t even look at it. So we talked about it and he said he would go through it as soon as he could. And I can remember I took off my jacket, stood up… and I went over to the desk. [I said] ‘You have no time. You’ll do it now.’ And he said, ‘Oh alright.’ And so he signed the whatdoyoucallit, and that was it. That made a great impression of the Searle people, that I browbeat the government into taking the final step. But we knew it was all right. I mean I was convinced. My conscience was clear about that.”

Framing the Past

Hormonal birth control has been with us for so many decades that most people assume the question of safety was answered long ago. We forget that the FDA of that day was much different than the agency we know today. Framed by Dr. Rock’s memory of how The Pill was ultimately ‘approved,’ the case can be made that we need to re-evaluate The Pill with fresh eyes. And, we can start with this most basic question, “Are women being properly informed about the risks of hormonal birth control BEFORE being prescribed?”

#1
In the Name of The Pill

37 customer reviews

In the Name of The Pill*

by Mike Gaskins

The FDA approved The Pill despite it not being proven safe. Today, it has been linked to everything from blood clots and cancer to lupus and Crohn’s disease — and still has not been proven safe.
This book explores the medical and historical disconnects that brought us to this point.




 Price: $ 17.95

Buy now at Amazon*

Price incl. VAT., Excl. Shipping

Last updated on October 21, 2023 at 9:38 pm – Image source: Amazon Affiliate Program. All statements without guarantee.

We Need Your Help

More people than ever are reading Hormones Matter, a testament to the need for independent voices in health and medicine. We are not funded and accept limited advertising. Unlike many health sites, we don’t force you to purchase a subscription. We believe health information should be open to all. If you read Hormones Matter, like it, please help support it. Contribute now.

Yes, I would like to support Hormones Matter. 

This article was published originally on April 6, 2020. 

Share

Ding, Dong! Hormones at Your Door!

2686 views

The side effects of hormonal birth control are notoriously under-recognized. So much so, that I filmed a documentary about them, entitled, Hormoneously Alone, highlighting the severe lack of research since the 1950s. What I learned was shocking. Because hormonal birth control has been available for over 60 years, everyone, doctors included, presume these drugs are completely safe and have very few, ‘rare’ side effects. I spoke to experts in women’s health who have researched the effects of the pill and other forms of hormonal birth control and, contrary to the general consensus, these drugs do elicit many ill-effects that are detrimental to health. These side effects can develop while on the pill but also upon withdrawal as the body struggles to adapt to the loss of synthetic hormones.

My original post on this website documenting my own experience is what drove me to investigate the side effects of hormonal birth control, and ultimately, make a documentary to inform other women. Over four years, hundreds of women have left comments indicating they had similar experiences with hormonal birth control and even more have reached out to me personally for advice. Research on this website and other case stories concur.

With all of the potentially negative health consequences attributed to hormonal birth control, imagine my surprise when I learned that these drugs can be ordered online, without so much as a physician consultation. Of course, since most physicians do not recognize the side effects, I guess ordering online is no less safe than from a physician who ignores the health or experience of his/her patients.

My goal is that women will research and educate themselves about the risks they are taking when ordering birth control online. I hope my articles and my documentary will encourage them to speak up, and ask questions, but what if that does not happen? At least when these drugs are prescribed by a physician there is a small chance the more serious side effects will be recognized. When ordered online, with no health intake or counseling of any sort, the possibility for potentially dangerous health interactions between the pill and the patient increases. This risk is increased for young girls, who do not have the experience to understand the side effects associated with these drugs.

Ordering Birth Control Pills Online

Anyone can order hormonal birth control online. While doing research for my documentary, I investigated the process.  There are no safety mechanisms in place to determine whether the information one inputs is truthful or not, or whether the individual might have a family medical history that can affect the choice of the type of hormone prescribed. I know this because I tested it. I went online and created a fake profile with fake information and submitted a request for a three month trial. It took me about five minutes from start to finish. I tried multiple vendors, some of the more popular ones, and none of them had any issues with prescribing a pill for me. Surprisingly, none of these vendors asked when my last OBGYN appointment was or if there was a family medical history for any cancers that the birth control pill may help promote or any other health issue that might be exacerbated by the pill. A genetic predisposition may increase one’s risk for certain illnesses and cancers. Breast cancer, for example, may be exacerbated by certain synthetic hormones. Autoimmune disease may also be exacerbated by these hormones.

I wanted to see how far I could push the dial, so I also falsely claimed to smoke cigarettes daily, had high blood pressure and migraines with aura. These are all cases where hormonal birth control is clearly contraindicated because of the elevated risk for blood clots. And yet, even with these risk factors, I was able to order a prescription. There was no dialogue with an online doctor or chat system. It was just me, my mouse, and my keyboard.

I am all for women’s rights and easy access to medications, but as a woman who understands the risks of these drugs, who has experienced some of them, this enraged me. Why are women not told of these risks? Online prescriptions seriously lack the ability to oversee a patient’s full chart and medical history, to understand a patient’s concerns, and to have the foresight to avoid a medication that may catalyze a genetic predisposition. This seems totally careless.

Women’s Rights

In today’s highly politicized landscape, it is difficult to talk about birth control safety and side effects, especially with the current onslaught of attacks against women’s health care options. Recently, over the counter hormonal birth control has been approved by the FDA. This eliminates any and all preliminary precautions and the online ordering has become even easier. Regardless of where we are buying these pills, I think we have to acknowledge that talking about safety and accessibility is not an attack on women’s rights, rather a concern for their well-being. I believe the ability to order medication online is generally a good thing. The accessibility of these online birth control pills not only allows a user to obtain them quickly, but also, discreetly, and inexpensively. It is, for the most part, hassle-free. This works well for the quick-click generation and society that we have evolved into. Women should always be in charge of their bodies, and this new technology affords them that opportunity, which is a really powerful and important idea in and of itself. I do, however, struggle with the idea that we might be missing possible interactions that could result in serious side effects and health issues. These websites do not have a warning anywhere, just, in my opinion, a vague questionnaire. As you will see below, there is little to no health intake when ordering and no counseling regarding side effects.

The Age of Consent

In my research for the documentary, I wondered about the accessibility of online ordering to young girls. As I flipped through the magazines that I once read religiously as a teenager, now, from an adult’s perspective, I see just how targeted the ads can be. In the most common teenage magazines, there are ads almost every 5 pages that push ordering hormonal contraceptives online. These ads are impossible to miss and can be very persuasive to young girls.

Imagine a parent and not knowing what medications your child was on. Imagine a child not understanding the seriousness of the birth control pill and taking too many because they missed a few? Imagine a child taking the pill not knowing why they are feeling poorly, suddenly getting migraines, a possible sign of neurological issues including stroke, or having labored breathing, a sign of pulmonary emboli. These side effects are more common than you would think. Is it smart to have such accessible medications with potentially severe side effects available online without so much as a health warning? Will teenagers read the fine print? Yet, the FDA allows online ordering. It would be easier for a child to click and order rather than having the uncomfortable conversation with their parents or their doctor. A fake profile and credit card is all that is needed.

Since most patients do not ask questions when being prescribed the birth control pill by a physician and, from my experience, most doctors do not offer this information up, what would prompt the conversation online? Is a child who is taking the pill going to read the pamphlet, and if so, will they understand it?

Candy From Strangers

When the package of hormonal birth control came to my door about a week after placing the order, it had some candies and chocolates with it. This felt ironic. “Don’t take candy from strangers,” feels oddly similar to “Don’t take pills from the internet,” or the idea of candy not being healthy for you accompanying the controversial birth control pill. It all felt wrong. Because of the emphasis that providers put on the safety of birth control pills, it seems to negate the impact these pills have on the female body. The pill may be generally safe to take every day, but what are the effects that we are missing under the surface? Are they actually safe even if we do not see the effects immediately? Is the pill for everybody?

It is extremely important that women be in charge of their bodies, but having autonomy means having an understanding of the full picture. Women should absolutely be able to order pills online, but they should also be given adequate information to make that decision and protect themselves against possible harm. Omitting critical health information in favor of accessibility does nothing to serve women’s health interests. Women need to understand the side effects associated with these drugs in order to make an informed decision.

I believe we, as a society, are sacrificing leniency on a topic we truly do not know much about for quick and cheap pill availability. I think we need to revisit the accessibility of these pills and take a step back to understand the potential harm we are causing.

Hormoneously Alone

We Need Your Help

More people than ever are reading Hormones Matter, a testament to the need for independent voices in health and medicine. We are not funded and accept limited advertising. Unlike many health sites, we don’t force you to purchase a subscription. We believe health information should be open to all. If you read Hormones Matter, like it, please help support it. Contribute now.

Yes, I would like to support Hormones Matter. 

Photo by the blowup on Unsplash.

Share

Doctors Say the Darndest Things About Birth Control

4870 views

A while back, a friend of mine shared a story on Facebook about a doctor’s nonchalant response to side effects experienced by a patient on birth control. I commented that this was one of my least favorite among the common phrases doctors use to gaslight women.

That friend was Sara Harris, who is doing amazing work getting the word out about Fertility Awareness Methods and helping women with hormone issues in Australia with her podcast, Follow Your Flow. Sara knew I was wrapping up work on a new, expanded audio version of my book and recommended I visit her podcast again to promote the audiobook and present my ‘Top 10 Least Favorite Things Doctors Say About Birth Control.’ You can listen to the resulting podcast here.

Lack of Respect

Obviously, I took her up on the offer, burning a lot of energy to get my Top 10 in the proper order – only to change that order and change it again the more I contemplated each phrase. Ultimately, I felt like I could have just as easily said they were in no particular order because each dismissive phrase poses its own set of disturbing problems.

For the purpose of this article, I want to focus on three of these statements, which are particularly egregious in their lack of respect for the potent drugs delivered by hormonal birth control and the detrimental impact they have on women’s health.

And so, here are those three statements… this time, in no particular order.

Localized Hormones

“This birth control option is safer because the hormones are localized.”

Doctors tend to offer this falsehood when speaking about either NuvaRing or the hormonal IUD. It is frequently used to sell a young woman on using the device, but it’s also used later to dismiss questions she may have about side effects she develops after insertion.

I have trouble believing that a medical doctor actually believes that these hormones camp out in the uterus and just manage fertility. Hormones are systemic. By their very nature, they travel throughout the body attaching to hormone receptors that reside on every cell in our bodies.

Now, here’s the kicker – not only are these drugs not localized, but they have the potential to be even more dangerous than hormones that are taken by mouth. Oral contraceptives (as with any drug taken orally) are processed through the digestive system in what is known as first-pass metabolism. This process reduces the concentration of active drug prior to being introduced into the blood stream.

Consequently, drugs distributed via the uterus bypass this first-pass metabolism thereby reaching the bloodstream more quickly and in a more potent state.

It shouldn’t be surprising then that a recent Danish study found that women on NuvaRing were six times more likely to develop a deep vein thrombosis than women not taking birth control, and twice as likely as women taking a combination pill.

Psychotropic Candy

“Don’t worry. I’ll just prescribe an antidepressant to go with your birth control.”

Many doctors seem to think antidepressants can be used to accommodate just about any symptom manifested as a result of birth control. In my book, In the Name of The Pill, I shared the story of a young woman with lupus.

After quitting hormonal birth control, her lupus symptoms became surprisingly manageable. This continued for a few years, until she decided to try a different formulation of birth control. Shortly after starting The Pill again, her lupus symptoms came roaring back. But, when she told her doctor about it, he didn’t think the birth control had anything to do with her flare-ups.

He advised her to keep taking it and prescribed her an antidepressant to ‘help her rest better.’

I believe doctors who pull stunts like this have lost any sense of respect for the potency of the drugs they are doling out. This goes for any drug – not just birth control. As one of the doctors Barbara Seaman quoted in her landmark book, A Doctors’ Case Against the Pill, warned, “It needs to be emphasized that if you give a patient one drug and counteract it with another, there is a rising curve of adverse reactions.”

In my opinion, this warning should be doubled where birth control is concerned because the powerful drug is essentially being used to treat pregnancy rather than some life-threatening disease. As Mayo-trained, Dr. Philip Ball put it at the Nelson Pill Hearings, “I believe that we physicians are so used to administering very potent medications to very serious disease problems, we have not really yet learned, it is a totally different circumstance to administer powerful but nonessential drugs chronically to healthy young women.”

You can read more about specific concerns related to the mixture of psychotropic drugs and hormonal birth control here.

Suddenly Supplements

The third comment deals exclusively with the Depo injection and needs a little setup. The FDA requires a black box warning on this drug’s information pamphlet. A warning in big, bold letters accentuated by a thick, black frame states:

“WARNING: LOSS OF BONE MINERAL DENSITY”

The warning goes on to explain that your bone loss will be greater the longer you take the product and these changes may be irreversible. It reinforces these concerns by stating that Depo should not be used as a long-term birth control solution, even capping its recommended use at no more than two years.

That seems pretty clear and absolute, but many women who have asked their doctors about this warning have been told:

“Just take a calcium supplement, and you’ll be fine.”

Mind you, the FDA warning says nothing about taking a supplement to offset the affects. In fact, it doesn’t suggest there are any measures you could take to avoid the potential consequences.

The FDA is a slow-moving, bureaucratic government agency. It takes a lot of evidence to overcome the inertia associated with issuing such a dramatic black box warning. For a doctor to ignore or deny such a warning and suggest the solution is as easy as taking a calcium supplement is borderline criminal.

Health as a Business

If your doctor ever uses any of these three lines, you should seriously question his/her motivation. Do they care about your health or do they see your healthcare as a business?

One of the things I frequently tell women is to trust your questions more than the answers. If you mention a side effect that concerns you, and your doctor seems more interested in convincing you The Pill had nothing to do with it, don’t assume you’re crazy or you’re the only one experiencing this. Your body is sending you this warning sign for a reason. Keep questioning.

I once had an Ob/Gyn tell me that it’s difficult to get anyone from her specialty to say anything bad about hormonal contraceptives because it represents about a third of their business.

However, if you are a medical professional who recognizes that birth control is much more dangerous than women are being led to believe, be proactive in sharing that information, even if you aren’t an Ob/Gyn.

Women need to hear it. Many feel isolated. They’re afraid to discuss their side effects because they think they’re the only ones having a bad experience. Or worse, they wonder if they may be going crazy.

An eye surgeon recently reached out to me and shared what’s been happening at her practice after she read my book. She said she always takes a complete medical history, part of which includes the patient’s use of hormonal contraceptives. Lately, even though she doesn’t deal directly with menstrual issues, when a woman reports certain ‘mysterious, undiagnosable symptoms,’ this doctor has started recommending they stop taking their birth control. She said a few patients have already contacted the office to thank her because their symptoms have improved dramatically.

I hope more physicians will hop on board and fearlessly tell women about the myriad side effects of birth control. We still have a ways to go, but maybe someday I will be able to compile a list of my Top 10 Favorite Things Doctors Say About Birth Control.

#1
In the Name of The Pill

37 customer reviews

In the Name of The Pill*

by Mike Gaskins

The FDA approved The Pill despite it not being proven safe. Today, it has been linked to everything from blood clots and cancer to lupus and Crohn’s disease — and still has not been proven safe.
This book explores the medical and historical disconnects that brought us to this point.




 Price: $ 17.95

Buy now at Amazon*

Price incl. VAT., Excl. Shipping

Last updated on October 21, 2023 at 9:38 pm – Image source: Amazon Affiliate Program. All statements without guarantee.

We Need Your Help

More people than ever are reading Hormones Matter, a testament to the need for independent voices in health and medicine. We are not funded and accept limited advertising. Unlike many health sites, we don’t force you to purchase a subscription. We believe health information should be open to all. If you read Hormones Matter, like it, please help support it. Contribute now.

Yes, I would like to support Hormones Matter.

This article was published originally on December 13, 2021. 

Share

Banging My Head Against the Wall: Questioning Birth Control Safety

4445 views

My position as a women’s health advocate is frequently challenged merely because I am a man. I’m okay with that because it’s a valid point. I will never experience firsthand many of the issues that concern me. However, I don’t believe that means I should be forced to remain silent on matters related to women’s health. My passion for the cause is nurtured by a dear love for my wife and daughters, as well as for my sisters and nieces, not to mention fond memories of a loving mother who lost her life to estrogen-sensitive breast cancer. It is with them in mind that I would like to issue a challenge of my own:

If you truly care about the health of women, take a moment to consider where you stand on birth control and think critically about why you stand there.

Visions of Utopia

I celebrated the recent news that a jury awarded Dewayne Johnson $289 million in his lawsuit against Monsanto. The former school groundskeeper sued the makers of Roundup for not being forthcoming with customers about the dangers of their product. He believed the glyphosate in Roundup caused his non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, and the jury agreed.

I was ecstatic to see the subsequent momentum—the number of lawsuits against Monsanto jumped to about 8,000, and Vietnam actually demanded Monsanto pay victims of Agent Orange, another Monsanto product and a chemical cousin of glyphosate.

People were finally paying attention to the horrible consequences of using this toxic chemical. For a moment, I thought this might translate to hormonal contraceptives. (I’m not sure how I made that leap, but Utopian visions aren’t generally known for being bound by rational thought.) At any rate, I was sure people would start turning on birth control just as they were with Roundup.

Suing for Side Effects

Then, reality set in. Those 8,000 lawsuits will probably settle and soon be forgotten. Before we know it, people will freely be spraying Roundup again, and Monsanto will be off the hook because they will do so knowing the risks.

The connection between Roundup and hormonal contraceptives is actually much stronger than it may first seem. Monsanto’s parent company, Bayer, also manufactures other toxic chemicals, which represent the most popular birth control brands in the world – and these brands have legal issues of their own. Yaz/Yasmin paid out $2.04 billion to settle over 10,000 blood-clot lawsuits as of January 2016. They paid another $57 million to heart attack and stroke victims, and $21.5 million for gallbladder damage. Those numbers have likely increased, as several thousand cases remain unsettled and more suits are being filed each day.

It Begins with One

The Roundup avalanche began with one person. At least for a day or two, everyone knew who Dewayne Johnson was. His case focused a lot of attention on the risks of Roundup and the manufacturer’s willingness to overlook those dangers for the sake of profits.

There are innumerable heartbreaking stories of young women who have been maimed or killed by their birth control. Any one of these could have been ‘the One’ that launched an avalanche against hormonal birth control. These stories fill the internet. Let’s pick one.

In 2011, the Canadian Broadcast Company (CBC) ran a story about a mother who was suing Bayer Healthcare for the death of her daughter. A healthy 18-year old, Miranda Scott went to the gym after 5-weeks on Yasmin. She collapsed while on the elliptical machine unable to breathe. An autopsy revealed she died from pulmonary emboli, blood clots in the lungs. It was only after her death that her mother began researching Yasmin, and discovered it was the likely cause of her blood clots and very early death.

At this point, Bayer had already paid out over $1 billion in blood clot related settlements. But, here’s how they responded to the lawsuit in a statement to the CBC:

“We are very disappointed in Justice Crane’s decision to certify a class in Ontario in an ongoing lawsuit regarding Yaz and Yasmin. No decision has been made on the merits of the case. We have filed a request with the Court for leave to appeal the decision and are evaluating our legal options… At Bayer patient safety comes first and we fully stand behind, Yaz and Yasmin.”

Seven years have passed since Miranda Scott’s death, and Bayer has paid out another billion-plus dollars in settlements. I understand why Bayer still stands behind their product – it’s a moneymaker, which honestly probably ranks a little higher than patient safety in their eyes. What I can’t understand is why women’s health advocates still stand behind hormonal birth control.

The Birth Control Ideology

The narrative has been defined in such a way that ‘birth control’ equals ‘The Pill’ equals ‘Women’s Rights.’ This is incredibly fortunate for the pharmaceutical companies because any ‘attack’ on their product can be spun as an attack on Women’s Rights.

So, here’s where I challenge you to rethink your stance on birth control as it relates to hormonal contraceptives in three quick steps:

1) Research the Risks of Birth Control

Go to your favorite search engine and type, “Oral Contraceptives + [pick a disease/side effect/complication]” and scroll through the results. You don’t even have to invest a lot of time; just read the headlines and synopses to get a feel for what’s out there. Do this with 3 or 4 different complications that seem really diverse.

One of the enduring statements from the Nelson Pill Hearings was that these potent little pills leave no tissue unaffected. For me, this exercise drove home that point. It’s pretty incredible to contemplate the breadth of the myriad complications. Just consider some of the ones I’ve written about on this website – depression, hair loss, lupus, multiple sclerosis, migraines, infertility, and irritable bowel disease.

2) Why Just The Pill?

These days, hormonal contraceptives can be delivered via rings, patches, injectables, or IUDs. The vehicle doesn’t really matter. They’ve all been shown to have their own inherent risks. So, why are they usually considered the only choice when it comes to family planning?

When The Pill first came out, Dr. David Clark, a world-renowned neurologist mused that it had been granted a sort of “diplomatic immunity” because of irrational fears of overpopulation. Today, that diplomatic immunity has been galvanized by its equally irrational alignment with Women’s Rights.

Why irrational? Consider this. Holly Grigg-Spall wrote Sweetening The Pill, a wonderful book on the dangers of The Pill, its addictive qualities, and the corporate motivations behind its promotion. Hollywood producers approached her about developing a documentary on the same topic. She wrote about the disheartening experience for Hormones Matter. After investing a lot of herself into the project, she received an email from one of the other women working on the project expressing her thought that

“…there was always a small concern in the back of my mind about unintentionally aiding the right-wing agenda.”

I felt Holly’s pain as I read the article. I know what it’s like to pour yourself into a project, only to have it grind to a halt. But on a deeper level, I felt her frustration with the ‘system’ (for lack of a better word.) Whenever I hear something like this, I think of a quote often attributed to Golda Mier, “We will only have peace with the Arabs when they love their children more than they hate us.”

To paraphrase, we will only be able to prioritize women’s health (and rights) when we care more about exposing the risks of birth control than we worry about giving ammunition to our political rivals.

3) Are There Birth Control Options?

In her enlightening book, Reproductive Rights and Wrongs, Betsy Hartmann breaks down the fallacy of overpopulation in the Third World and demonstrates how population control policies influenced the current look of birth control here in the US. She writes:

“Married to population control, family planning has been divorced from the concern for women’s health and well-being that inspired the first feminist crusaders for birth control…A family planning program designed to improve health and to expand women’s control over reproduction looks very different indeed from one whose main concern is to reduce birth rates as fast as possible.”

She suggests that if a contraceptive policy was truly concerned with women’s health, it would do more to promote barrier methods that also protect against sexually transmitted diseases, or natural methods that allow for child spacing without introducing internal pollutants to the woman’s body.

In fact, natural forms of fertility awareness have enjoyed growing popularity among young women in recent years. This shouldn’t be confused with the highly ineffective rhythm method. Nor is it exclusive to religious-based ‘natural family planning.’ While the Creighton Model and Billings Method have begun to appeal to women outside the Roman Catholic faith, there are also successful secular versions of fertility awareness available from sources like the Red Tent Sisters.

Planned Parenthood claims that fertility awareness methods are only about 80% effective. However, a report published in the Osteopathic Journal of Medicine in 2013 found the overall effectiveness of fertility awareness methods when used correctly to be greater than 95% (Creighton 99.5%; Billings 97%). Another study of poor urban women in Delhi found the Billings Method to be 99.86% effective. These numbers are comparable to The Pill, but without all the risks.

Take Aways

For a deeper dig into this topic, I highly recommend the two eye-opening books previously referenced: Reproductive Rights and Wrongs and Sweetening The Pill.

#1
In the Name of The Pill

37 customer reviews

In the Name of The Pill*

by Mike Gaskins

The FDA approved The Pill despite it not being proven safe. Today, it has been linked to everything from blood clots and cancer to lupus and Crohn’s disease — and still has not been proven safe.
This book explores the medical and historical disconnects that brought us to this point.




 Price: $ 17.95

Buy now at Amazon*

Price incl. VAT., Excl. Shipping

Last updated on October 21, 2023 at 9:38 pm – Image source: Amazon Affiliate Program. All statements without guarantee.

We Need Your Help

More people than ever are reading Hormones Matter, a testament to the need for independent voices in health and medicine. We are not funded and accept limited advertising. Unlike many health sites, we don’t force you to purchase a subscription. We believe health information should be open to all. If you read Hormones Matter, like it, please help support it. Contribute now.

Yes, I would like to support Hormones Matter.

This article was published originally on September 27, 2018. 

Share

The Spin Doctor’s Prescription for Birth Control

4177 views

The term ‘Spin Doctor’ wouldn’t be coined until much later, but it was already clear by the time of the Nelson Pill Hearings that some prominent physicians were willing to twist statistics, incorporate doublespeak, and create confusion in any way they could to defend hormonal birth control. They were Spin Doctors in the truest sense. Fortunately, within the context of Senate Hearings, their ‘spin’ was frequently challenged.

Let the Spin Begin

Dr. Robert Kistner from Harvard couldn’t find a bad thing to say about The Pill if his daughter’s life depended on it. However, simple challenges to his testimony made several of his statements seem comical. Consider this exchange with Ben Gordon from Senator Nelson’s staff, when Dr. Kistner compared pill deaths with those of cigarettes:

Dr. Kistner: For every pill-induced death in Britain there are at least 1,500 cigarette induced deaths; based on the total sales of the two products during 1967 one cigarette is three time as dangerous to life as one pill.

Mr. Gordon: Dr. Kistner, may I interrupt for just one moment? Since you compared the risks of smoking with that of the pill, do you know of any cases where smoking three packages of cigarettes has caused either serious illness or death? Three packages?

Dr. Kistner: Smoking three packages?

Mr. Gordon: Right.

Dr. Kistner: Obviously the answer to that question is no.

Mr. Gordon: I have here the proceedings of a conference held… at the headquarters of the American Medical Association… there are case reports, several reports where people have either died or have become seriously injured taking the pill for only 3 months, in other words, three packages of pills.

Dr. Kistner: Is there a cause and effect relationship demonstrated or proved?

Mr. Gordon: Well, it just says “Case reports: Thrombosis and embolism in patients taking the pill.”

Dr. Kistner: There is no cause and effect relationship so far as I can understand.

Mr. Gordon: They said the same thing about tobacco.

Then, there’s this exchange when Senator McIntyre tries to clear up which side effects Dr. Kistner thinks should be shared with women:

Sen. McIntyre: Well, Doctor, there is one thing that occurs to me, could you distinguish for me the difference between a side effect and a complication?

Dr. Kistner: Yes. A side effect of a drug is one that is generally accepted as occurring in some individuals as an undesirable effect other than that for which the drug is given. If one takes estrogen, one frequently becomes nauseated, estrogen “pulls in” sodium and some women don’t excrete the excess fluid and they become edematous and “blow up.” These are side effects: but if a woman takes estrogen and gets a blood clot and dies that is a complication.

Sen. McIntyre: That is more than a complication.

[Laughter]

Dr. Kistner: Well, that is the difference. I think if you asked me to explain the difference, I did.

Today, the spin is just as silly, but the humor is missing. No longer are the distortions challenged. What used to be a laughable punch line is now presented as a valid counterpoint.

Strokes Linked to Hormonal Birth Control

In 2012, the New England Journal of Medicine published the results of an extensive Danish study showing that women on birth control pills or other hormonal contraceptives are up to twice as likely to have a stroke or heart attack than non-users, but a funny thing happened to the story on its way to the press. Industry experts analyzed, mitigated, and diluted it beyond recognition.

ABC News offered the most balanced report. Their story begins with a young woman, a ‘former smoker and birth control pill user’ who suffered a stroke. However, after sharing some of the details of the study, they downplayed the results with the aid of a Spin Doctor, a gynecologist, to be exact, who said, “…pregnancy is far more likely to cause an MI or stroke than hormonal contraception.” Whenever someone dismisses a comprehensive 15-year, peer-reviewed study with a statement like this, they should be required to provide supporting evidence at least as comprehensive as the study itself. In this case, the doctor is repeating an old fallacy – a misinterpretation of statistics that has been around since the beginning of birth control.

Don’t Question Birth Control

One could argue that it is good journalism to seek out a dissenting voice – to effectively present both sides of the story. In this case, I disagree. It’s dangerous. And I have to admit, reading the responses from ‘expert’ physicians frequently brings out my snarky side. Consider the dissenting voices from these spin doctors in articles related to the same Danish study:

Huffington Post interviewed Dr. Diana Petitti, who told them:

“The amount of attention paid to these miniscule risks…detracts attention from more salient issues, like preventing unwanted pregnancy.”

Miniscule risks?! I’m not sure, but I think Dr. Petitti is saying she would rather double her daughter’s chance of having a stroke than risk her getting pregnant.

Later in the same article, Dr. Kathy Hoeger explained:

“The risk might be as much as two times greater, but when you know that the rates are 1 in 10,000, you’re just bringing it up to 2 to 4 in 10,000.”

Those numbers sound so cute, but when you think about an estimated 18 million women in the U.S. currently use hormonal birth control; we could be subjecting an additional 5,400 women per year to strokes and heart attacks.

My favorite may be Dr. Isaac Schiff, who told Boston.com:

“I would say in many ways, this is a good news story. This is a lengthy, large study that helps to confirm that the birth control pill is relatively safe, recognizing that no drug is 100 percent safe.”

He’s ecstatic that hormonal birth control only doubles the risk! He probably turned somersaults when he read that women on The Pill also have a 30% higher risk of developing Multiple Sclerosis, a 50% higher risk of developing Lupus, and could triple their chances of having Crohn’s Disease! (I will talk more about The Pill and the rise of Autoimmune Disease in future posts.)

Dissenting Voices

So, why is it dangerous to present these dissenting voices? Imagine you’re a young woman who’s just been diagnosed with a chronic disease. You begin puzzling the pieces together, and recall that your first symptoms appeared within weeks or months of starting The Pill. You take your suspicions to Google, and stumble upon an article that confirms your fears… or does it?

So, you click on another article. For example, this lupus article that tells you, “The risk was greatest during the first three months after starting “the Pill” — when there was a 2.5-fold increased risk.” You think you’re on to something, but then a prominent doctor from Johns Hopkins is quoted, “One shouldn’t oversell this. Women taking oral contraceptives need to weigh the risk/benefit of unexpected pregnancy versus a very small increase in lupus.” We can’t blame the reader for concluding her diagnosis probably didn’t have to do with The Pill after all.

The Risks versus The Optical Illusions

Optical Illusion - birth control spin

You probably saw this image floating around the internet not too long ago. It reveals a lot about how our brains process information. Our eyes take in all the curves, lighting, and shadows that define Blocks A and B, allowing our brains to analyze the difference in colors. However, when you cover the middle of the image, you discover the blocks are actually the exact same shade.

Only by covering the embellishment do you see the reality.

Media reports on epidemiological studies associated with The Pill often work like this illusion in reverse. They first give us the reality of the image – sharing some of the alarming facts or statistics from the new study. Just as the reader grows concerned that The Pill may be too dangerous, the author bevels the edges, moves the light source, and casts a different shadow.

As laypeople, we tend to assume they know more than us. They minimize the importance of the findings, and we — well, we start to look at it in an entirely different light. We walk away thinking it must not have been as bad as it originally sounded.

We can no longer afford to let reality be obscured by these tactics. Rather than having blind faith in a doctor quoted in some article, we need to consider that we could be dealing with a Spin Doctor. We’ve seen examples of some of these above, but here are five red flags that should make you think twice about the motivation of the speaker:

1) “Those Statistics Aren’t Really That Bad”

Pill proponents will attempt to re-frame numbers so that they seem insignificant. We saw a stereotypical example earlier in this article – “…you’re just bringing it up to 2 to 4 in 10,000.”

Another form of statistical acrobatics seen less frequently today is the attempt to convince us that nature is more dangerous than The Pill. You will recall the gynecologist mentioned early in this article: “…pregnancy is far more likely to cause an MI or stroke than hormonal contraception.”

I believe this method has lost some steam over the years because the mathematical contortions are so easily untangled. Consider this historical example: in his testimony at the Nelson Pill Hearings, Dr. Alan Guttmacher, President of Planned Parenthood/World Population, gave statistics suggesting pregnancy was more dangerous than The Pill (Competitive Problems in the Drug Industry, Ninety-First Congress, Second Session, Page 6565). This was a common argument at the time, but it was refuted beautifully by world-renowned neurologist, Dr. David Clark, speaking to the American Academy of Neurology,

The woman who takes oral contraceptives is, in effect, pregnant and delivering every month. In the normal course of her life, the average American woman has 3.6 pregnancies. She is fertile for approximately 30 years. If she takes oral contraceptives, she will be pregnant and delivering 360 times in that span of time. Expressed differently, she has 90 times more chance of showing the complications of pregnancy.” (Barbara Seaman, A Doctors’ Case Against the Pill, Page 26)

2) “Old Smokers Beware”

Media reports frequently stress that the risk is greatest for women who smoke or are over 35. This is a true statement, but the slight-of-hand comes in the implied message, ‘If you’re young and don’t smoke, you have nothing to worry about,’ which couldn’t be further from the truth.

Sure, they may try to convince you that you have better odds of winning the Publisher’s Clearinghouse than developing a deadly disease, but you don’t want to be on the backside of this one, saying, “That’s what I used to think.”

3) “There is No Proof of an Association”

The US tobacco industry played the ‘Proof versus Evidence’ game masterfully for decades. In 1954, they responded to early lung cancer studies by releasing the ‘Frank Statement to Cigarette Smokers.’ In part, it said:

Distinguished authorities point out…that there is no proof that cigarette smoking is one of the causes.”

As recently as 1998, John Carlisle of the Tobacco Manufacturers Association said:

“There is no such thing as conclusive evidence when you are talking about such a vast subject.”

The subsequent public release of internal communications from the tobacco industry revealed exactly what they knew, and how they strategized to maintain credibility while continuing to deny the overwhelming evidence. While we can’t assume Big Pharma has been consciously playing the same game, there are signs dating back to the early days of The Pill that eerily parallel the tobacco industry’s stance:

  • Complete denial of the association to cancer and strokes
  • Maintain credibility by admitting danger to a ‘small number’ of consumers
  • Agree to include a warning of the dangers with the product

By 1965, Morton Mintz, in the Columbia Journalism Review, expressed dismay at the ‘significant volume of reporting’ in medical journals that attempted to cast doubt on studies by using the argument that The Pill had not been proven unsafe. This was a 180-degree paradigm shift. The FDA had never been required to prove a drug unsafe. The onus was/is on the manufacturer to prove the drug safe. Clearly irritated by the ‘parroting’ in the press, Mintz wrote:

“…there was no acknowledgement that more was required – a disclosure as to specifically what weight of evidence of harm, in the eyes of the advocates, would add up to proof. Also missing was a recognition that for scientists there is no proof in the black-and-white sense, that all that can be had is evidence in one or another shade of gray.”

4) “It Could Have Been Something Else”

This is essentially a nebulous tangent of the ‘Proof vs. Evidence’ game. Despite the fact that criteria for publishing a study are extremely stringent, naysayers will attempt to cast doubt by questioning other variables that could have influenced the study. I recall one doctor actually asking, “How do we know it wasn’t the breakfast cereal the women had been eating that was causing these strokes?”

I suggest to you very few studies get published if they don’t eliminate Cocoa Puffs as a variable.

5) “The Benefits Still Outweigh the Risks”

Then there is the ubiquitous, “The benefits still outweigh the risks.” This phrase, more than any other, makes my head want to explode.

What kind of scale are they using to measure the benefits and risks? Are they looking at the isolated risk in a vacuum, and forgetting about all of the other associated risks? How do you compare a decreased chance of pregnancy with an increased risk of a deadly disease, regardless of percentages on either side, and determine that the benefits outweigh the risks?

Even if there were no other fertility control options available, I cannot grasp the idea of a healthcare professional saying, “Take this pill. It will greatly reduce the likelihood of you getting pregnant, but it doubles your risk of having a stroke…Did I mention that it will help clear your skin?”

Take Your Thumb Off the Scale

Clearly, when weighing the benefits to risks, someone has their thumb on the scale. The result is that there are many prominent physicians willing to perpetuate a pattern of denial and obfuscation anytime a new study is published. We have already seen how medical dogma can trump scientific evidence. So, whenever you read about a new study linking birth control to a deadly disease, remember that the media has run it through a decades-old filter of dogma and distortion. Isolate the Spin Doctor quotes, and take them with a grain of salt. Then, focus on the findings of the study itself. In other words, remove the embellishments and see the reality.

#1
In the Name of The Pill

37 customer reviews

In the Name of The Pill*

by Mike Gaskins

The FDA approved The Pill despite it not being proven safe. Today, it has been linked to everything from blood clots and cancer to lupus and Crohn’s disease — and still has not been proven safe.
This book explores the medical and historical disconnects that brought us to this point.




 Price: $ 17.95

Buy now at Amazon*

Price incl. VAT., Excl. Shipping

Last updated on October 21, 2023 at 9:38 pm – Image source: Amazon Affiliate Program. All statements without guarantee.

We Need Your Help

More people than ever are reading Hormones Matter, a testament to the need for independent voices in health and medicine. We are not funded and accept limited advertising. Unlike many health sites, we don’t force you to purchase a subscription. We believe health information should be open to all. If you read Hormones Matter, like it, please help support it. Contribute now.

Yes, I would like to support Hormones Matter. 

This article was first published on September 13, 2016. 

Share

Birth Control’s Most Important Forgotten Anniversary

3551 views

Fifty years ago this month, a vibrant group of young women put on their best dresses and placed themselves strategically around the senate gallery. They were eager to disrupt and ready to make some noise but had no idea the impact they were about to make on the course of history. They were attending the opening statements of a controversial look at hormonal birth control that would later became known as the Nelson Pill Hearings.

In 1970, hormonal birth control had been on the market for almost a decade. Although 8.5 million women were already taking The Pill, serious questions about its safety were just coming to the surface. Senator Gaylord Nelson chaired an explosive Congressional committee that set out to answer two simple questions:

  • Has the safety of hormonal contraceptives been established?
  • Are women being given sufficient information about the verified risks?

Questioning Birth Control

The hearings remain relevant today because much of the testimony about potential consequences has proven prophetic, and many of the questions raised about side effects continue to be unresolved.

This dive into the subject of oral contraceptives lasted a few months and represented only a small sample of the overall hearings entitled Competitive Problems in the Drug Industry. By the time they concluded, this comprehensive investigation would become the longest running hearings in Congressional history. The committee examined a vast range of issues in the drug industry (most of which are ripe for revisiting today), including questionable pricing practices, deceptive advertising, safety and efficacy of over-the-counter products, generics versus name brands, and a lack of regulation on medical devices. Ultimately, the hearings would fill thirty-three volumes in the Congressional Library. However, nothing in the ten-plus years of hearings came close to matching the energy and excitement of those first few months in 1970.

It all began when feminist writer, Barbara Seaman released her book, The Doctors’ Case Against the Pill. She had expected the book to spark a national outrage but was disappointed by the lack of attention it received. Aware of the drug industry hearings, she saw the symbiotic possibilities and penned a six-page letter to Sen. Nelson outlining some of her gravest concerns.

She had more in common with the senator than she imagined. They both believed they had uncovered some seriously unscrupulous problems with the pharmaceutical industry, and that these critical discoveries had gone largely unnoticed by the public. Sen. Nelson knew he needed a hot-button topic if his hearings were going to generate appropriate publicity, and Ms. Seaman’s letter seemed to deliver exactly what he needed.

Sen. Nelson passed the letter along to his lead staffer, Ben Gordon, and asked him to look into making it part of their hearings. Mr. Gordon worked on Capitol Hill for ten years before joining Sen. Nelson’s staff, and the senator trusted him implicitly. While most Congressional Hearings are coordinated and managed by a large team, Mr. Gordon had a staff of one. He did all the extensive behind-the-scenes legwork on the drug hearings himself. He assembled the roster of experts to testify, wrote the opening statements, and throughout the proceedings, sat next to Chairman Nelson, frequently chiming in with questions and comments of his own. Consequently, it may have been every bit as important that the letter resonate with Mr. Gordon as it had with the senator. It did, and Mr. Gordon eagerly set up a meeting with Ms. Seaman.

Mr. Gordon passed away last July at the age of 105. I was fortunate enough to become friends with him over the last few years of his life and was amazed by his lucidity until the end. He told me that he had first thought he would call Ms. Seaman to testify but, after reading her book, decided to call on the expert physicians she had interviewed. He said he always avoided indirect testimony because it was too easily picked apart. With this decision, Mr. Gordon may have inadvertently set into motion the events that would propel the hearings to headline status above the fold in most of the nation’s major newspapers.

Boston Tea Party for Women’s Health

January 14, 1970, the first day of The Pill hearings, was a typically cold winter morning in Washington D.C. As Sen. Nelson and Mr. Gordon walked to Capitol Hill, they were confronted by protesters. Groups of women walked alongside them yelling their disapproval. Their breath rose visibly through the air, creating the impression they were literally venting steam, but this was only the beginning. A progressive group of young feminists known as D.C. Women’s Liberation, led by Alice Wolfson, had heard that an all-male committee of senators was going to be hearing testimony from all-male doctors about women’s reproductive health. Unbeknownst to the senators, a small group of these women sat waiting in the gallery.

Those in attendance heard the results of new British studies that left Pill proponents in a panic, but they weren’t the only ones growing uncomfortable. Testimony linked The Pill to alarming side effects like breast cancer, depression, heart attacks, and strokes. Fear and uncertainty spread across the women in the senate chambers and would soon blanket the country. Ms. Wolfson and her companions had heard enough. The first of many interruptions came during the testimony of Dr. Philip Corfman from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The nightly news eagerly covered their outrage as the women jumped up and shouted questions like ‘Why isn’t there a pill for men?’ and ‘Why are no women testifying?’ With these outbursts, Ms. Wolfson soon became the face of the hearings.

Mr. Gordon later recalled that most of the early protesters were upset because they felt the senators might have a hidden agenda for going after birth control. However, as the hearings progressed and leading physicians shared their concerns about The Pill’s safety, the outcry from protesters shifted. Suddenly, they began to question why they were being used as guinea pigs by the drug companies in some sort of mass population experiment.

Reflecting upon the events, Ms. Seaman wrote that the Nelson Pill Hearings brought the ‘uptown’ and ‘downtown’ feminists together on the issue of women’s health. Ms. Wolfson and she met for the first time at the hearings and began a lifelong friendship. They went on to co-found the National Women’s Health Network along with three other women. Surprisingly, Dr. Corfman and his wife, Eunice, also became lifelong allies to their cause. Ultimately, the actions and alliances born out of this brief exploration into birth control safety would lead to the hearings later being dubbed “The Boston Tea Party of the Women’s Health Movement.”

Birth Control Hearings Still Relevant

The committee answered a lot of the questions surrounding hormonal contraceptives. Probably the most notable result of the hearings was that The Pill became the first drug ever required to have an information pamphlet in each package, not for doctors, but for the patient. Unfortunately, those pamphlets are clunky, verbose, incomprehensible, and astoundingly incomplete. Their glaring omissions raise new questions about informed consent, as do the deaths of many young women from birth control related blood clots.

Proof that the hearings aren’t merely ancient history to be forgotten came in 2011, when the FDA commissioned a study and found that new, fourth generation formulations, which include bestsellers Yaz and Yasmin, doubled the risk of blood clots over the already elevated risk found with other hormonal contraceptives. They assembled an advisory panel of 26 experts to discuss possible action. After much debate, 15 of the experts voted that the benefits still outweighed the risks. However, 21 of the 26 voted that these formulations should contain stronger warnings for patients.

As of January 2016, the drug companies had paid out over $2 billion to settle more than 10,000 blood clot lawsuits brought against these newest formulations, and the number of injuries, deaths, and lawsuits continues to rise.

On this 50th anniversary of the Nelson Pill Hearings, perhaps the greatest lesson we can take away is that the battle has just begun. Our country’s independence wasn’t won in 1773 at The Boston Tea Party. Rather, it was the start of a movement. It is incumbent upon all of us who care about women’s health to take up the torch of those protesters from the hearings fifty years ago. We need to demand answers. And, it all begins with two simple questions:

  • Has the safety of hormonal contraceptives been established?
  • Are women being given sufficient information about the verified risks?

Thank you

Alice Wolfson is now a retired attorney living in San Francisco. That’s her featured in the photo above. You can see actual footage from the protests here. I would like to thank her for taking the time to visit with me and for offering her guidance and perspective on this article. Alice, your energy is infectious. May it continue to inspire those of us devoted to women’s health.

For more information about the history of hormonal birth control:

#1
In the Name of The Pill

37 customer reviews

In the Name of The Pill*

by Mike Gaskins

The FDA approved The Pill despite it not being proven safe. Today, it has been linked to everything from blood clots and cancer to lupus and Crohn’s disease — and still has not been proven safe.
This book explores the medical and historical disconnects that brought us to this point.




 Price: $ 17.95

Buy now at Amazon*

Price incl. VAT., Excl. Shipping

Last updated on October 21, 2023 at 9:38 pm – Image source: Amazon Affiliate Program. All statements without guarantee.

We Need Your Help

More people than ever are reading Hormones Matter, a testament to the need for independent voices in health and medicine. We are not funded and accept limited advertising. Unlike many health sites, we don’t force you to purchase a subscription. We believe health information should be open to all. If you read Hormones Matter, like it, please help support it. Contribute now.

Yes, I would like to support Hormones Matter. 

Share

New Birth Control Warnings

2903 views

The FDA just received a Citizen’s Petition submitted by a group of physicians, scientists, and women’s health advocates regarding side effects caused by hormonal birth control. After a comprehensive review of literature, the petitioners believe there is enough compelling evidence to warrant new and more forceful warnings for all hormonal birth control products. I am humbled to have been invited to collaborate during the final stages of this project.

If approved, new black box warnings would specifically advise women of increased risks associated with breast cancer, cervical cancer, inflammatory bowel disease, systemic lupus erythematosus, venous thrombosis, cardiovascular events, depression, and suicide. The petition also requests that additional information be provided to patients regarding birth control’s link to multiple sclerosis, interstitial cystitis, bone fractures, as well as its effect on body mass. Finally, the petitioners request that Depo Provera be removed from the market “based on conclusive evidence that it facilitates the transmission of HIV from men to women.”

The Consequences of Birth Control

Adjunct Professor of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Deacon William V. Williams M.D. began reviewing contraceptive studies for an article he was going to write for the 50th anniversary of the papal encyclical letter titled, Humanae Vitae. The letter came out in 1968 at a time when the Catholic Church was under enormous pressure to change its teachings on contraceptives. The rest of the world, including other Christian denominations, had embraced birth control. Many anticipated the letter would be Pope Paul VI’s official capitulation. Instead, he boldly explained why the Church would never accept contraception and offered numerous warnings that have proven to be quite prophetic.

As the editor of the Linacre Quarterly, the official, peer-reviewed academic journal of the Catholic Medical Association, Dr. Williams felt a golden-anniversary nod was fitting for this important papal document. Along with some of his colleagues, he began to review scientific literature related to some of the effects of hormonal contraceptives. As the overwhelming evidence began to mount, the group cross-referenced prescribing information for several birth control products and realized many of these side effects weren’t listed – even though there was a pretty large set of peer-reviewed data available.

That’s when the group realized that this called for action beyond the originally planned article. The shocking amount of empirical data being withheld from hormonal contraceptive users represented a serious women’s health issue. They invited others to collaborate and decided a petition to the FDA was in order.

Double Standards

Kathleen Raviele, M.D., an Atlanta-area Ob/Gyn was on the team that assembled the petition. She points out that drugs with fewer risks, such as Vioxx, have been removed from the market because they affected both men and women. She says, “Women deserve respect and certainly deserve to know the risks they are exposed to with going on any hormonal contraceptive. An article in Vanity Fair in February 2014 detailed three women who lost their lives or nearly so using the NuvaRing and this should have prompted a recall of the product, but instead the company continues to tout it as: ‘The birth control ring (AKA NuvaRing) is a safe, simple, and affordable birth control method that you wear inside your vagina.’”

However, she adds that the blame doesn’t just lie at the feet of the drug companies. She explains, “Providing contraception represents one-third of an Ob-Gyn’s practice, and in the back of their minds they think this will hurt the number of patients coming to see them. However, even for medical problems often treated with hormonal contraceptives, there is always a better, safer way to manage the problem that gets to the cause rather than acting as a cover-up.”

Mrs. Information

Aside from asking the FDA to include new warnings, the petition also requests that current warnings be modified for clarity. For example, there is significant evidence dating back to the late 1960s that suggests hormonal birth control contributes to a higher risk of stroke and heart attack for any woman taking it. That already elevated risk rises even higher for women who are over 35 and smoke.

The warning on some formulations currently reads, “WARNING: CIGARETTE SMOKING AND SERIOUS CARDIOVASCULAR EVENTS.” In fact, the warnings in many formulations are worded in a way that renders them completely ineffective. An argument is made in the petition that, “This is misleading and has shown to be misinterpreted by many women who infer that the increased risk only occurs with cigarette smoking and/or with being over 35 years of age.”

The petition also contends that it should be required that these warnings be included in all direct-to-consumer advertising.

Was It Really Consensual?

Despite the misleading and missing information withheld from the current patient information pamphlets, there are still a lot of unsavory side effects that are listed. However, with the complicated text printed in an unreadable, tiny font, it isn’t surprising that so few women know what they’re getting into when they start taking birth control. What is surprising is how few doctors seem to recognize the dangers. Many still proclaim that the benefits outweigh the risks.

Speaking to this apparent disconnect, Dr. Williams said, “Doctors who say the benefits of hormonal birth control still outweigh the risks are victims of the groupthink mentality in the medical profession right now. It goes something like this – people are going to have sex, and because they are going to have sex, we need to make sure they don’t suffer the consequences. Therefore, we need to prescribe The Pill to prevent pregnancy. That’s just the way doctors are trained to think. They’re not trained to think that in front of me is an individual who can make their own choices for better or for worse, who has a free will, and who, rightly informed, can make the right choices.”

The mentality Dr. Williams describes in today’s medical industry sounds eerily similar to Plato’s description of doctors of slaves versus the doctor of free people. The slave’s doctor visits the patient in a hurry with a lack of compassion. He “neither gives a servant any rational account of his complaint, nor asks him for any; he gives an order based on empirical belief with the air of exact knowledge, in the insolent manner of a tyrant, then jumps off to the next ailing servant.”

Ultimately, the goal of this petition is to pave the way to a better conversation – one more akin to what should be expected as free people. Plato described this approach as the doctor entering into a discourse with the patient. Through this discourse, the doctor is at once gathering information and instructing the patient to make the best choices for his/her health.

Putting the goal of the petition in its simplest terms, Dr. Williams explained, “We’re trying to make sure that when patients give informed consent to use this stuff that it’s actually informed. It’s not just consent.”

Weighing Outcomes

For her part, Dr. Raviele doesn’t have much faith that this scholarly petition will be taken seriously by the FDA. However, she does see another way it could ultimately serve its purpose. She described what she sees as the more practical possibility, “What this petition may do is give lawyers more ammunition for suing the drug companies over the harmful effects of these hormones on women and girls. These companies will not take them off the market voluntarily. It will only be through multiple lawsuits.”

To read and sign the petition, click here.

We Need Your Help

More people than ever are reading Hormones Matter, a testament to the need for independent voices in health and medicine. We are not funded and accept limited advertising. Unlike many health sites, we don’t force you to purchase a subscription. We believe health information should be open to all. If you read Hormones Matter, like it, please help support it. Contribute now.

Yes, I would like to support Hormones Matter.

Read more about birth control’s vast problems in my new book, In the Name of The Pill.

#1
In the Name of The Pill

37 customer reviews

In the Name of The Pill*

by Mike Gaskins

The FDA approved The Pill despite it not being proven safe. Today, it has been linked to everything from blood clots and cancer to lupus and Crohn’s disease — and still has not been proven safe.
This book explores the medical and historical disconnects that brought us to this point.




 Price: $ 17.95

Buy now at Amazon*

Price incl. VAT., Excl. Shipping

Last updated on October 21, 2023 at 9:38 pm – Image source: Amazon Affiliate Program. All statements without guarantee.

Share

Hormoneously Alone: Pill Withdrawal Syndrome from Hell

48572 views

It was two months since I had stopped taking The Pill.  Might I add, I hate how culturally grammatical we have to be when we write, “The Pill”.  THE Pill is how I read it. It’s 2019, and it all still seems so covertly retro. Anyway, it is hard to go back in time because the thoughts of what transpired the year I came off The Pill still overwhelm me. I had never really agreed with the notion of loading ourselves with synthetic hormone, and in fact, for 70% of my sexually active life, I used other very successful methods. Regardless, I was in my early 20’s, and like most, decided to hop on the Pill for a couple more years until I knew I had found the guy of my dreams. Well, the time came, I was in a great relationship, I felt safe and comfortable emotionally, as well as financially, and I made the choice to come off.  I popped the last little pink pill on January 19th, 2017. Fast forward to March 10th, 2017 and here is where it all started.

Peripheral Nerve Symptoms

I woke up with severe, I can’t stress the word “severe” enough, pins and needles in my hands and feet. That feeling you get when you lay too long on a limb, numb it out, and then feel the tingling- that feeling. So, I thought I had slept weird, and continued on with my day, but by night, the severity hadn’t changed. I woke up the next morning, still feeling this tingling but it was now accompanied by extreme feelings of weakness in my arms and legs. The strange part was that I wasn’t actually weak. I was able to lift heavy items like normal, it was just the feeling of weakness. Did I have a stroke? This is where the anxiety started to kick in. I have struggled with anxiety my whole life but over the next 3 months, I had never experienced such an extreme form of anxiety and depression like this. I was in the prime of my life, 25 years old, and I had never felt worse. I had this intense tingling in my hands and feet, weakness throughout my arms and legs, and an unremitting dismal and gloomy cloud following me. I started to research, and although mistakenly started to self-diagnose with brain tumors, Multiple Sclerosis, Lupus, Autoimmune, I ultimately thought I was deficient in electrolytes or vitamins, and bought a Gatorade. Well, that didn’t help either.

Brain Fog and Depersonalization

I decided to take a few days off from work, get a massage and do a few yoga classes. It was a week since these feelings started, and the brain fog was coming in strong. If anyone has ever had this brain fog symptom, I would almost say it’s more debilitating than depression itself.  The cloud of depression that hangs over your head is now in your head. Brain fog is like depersonalization, you’re really not sure if you’re even here on this earth, you feel so distant and detached from life, it’s scary. The massage helped me feel a bit better, not so tense, I was able to take a few deep breaths and have a few seconds of peace. When I went into the yoga classes, I would sit in the back. My goal was just to breathe and relax my body and my mind.  Well, the second the teacher started, I had waterfalls of tears flowing out of my eyes. Until this day, I couldn’t tell you why that was happening in each class but if that’s not a major sign of depression, I don’t know what is.

Buzzing Bees in My Spine and Brain

The tingling and weakness wasn’t going away. It was now the end of April and my period was two weeks late. I then started to wake up in the middle of the night with a feeling of buzzing bees up my spine and in my brain. The feeling was so off-putting and disturbing, I couldn’t fall back asleep. I would get hot flashes- peri-menopause? At 25? No way. My eyes would randomly hurt. My teeth would randomly hurt. I would have crazy sinus issues. There were times where I was so tired I would take the day off because I couldn’t move. I felt debilitated. I was not myself. I even thought about going on disability.

Could it be the Pill? Absolutely Not, Says Every Doctor.

All my life healthy, I was a kickboxing instructor, an everyday gym goer, something was just not right. It was time to go to the doctor. Getting an urgent appointment with the Gyno is nearly a battle in itself, especially when you call and say, “Something weird is going on in my body, I’m not sure what it is”.  Next appointment, 3 weeks away. So I went to the walk in clinic near my house, blood pressure: 150/110. I had never seen such high numbers. Diagnoses – anxiety, solution-anti depressants. No thank you. Something more was going on inside. I have been getting my period almost to the day since I was 12 years old, that’s 13 years of consistency. I’m not pregnant and 2 weeks late? No, something is wrong hormonally. I went to my primary care physician. They did blood work, checked me up and down – nothing. Again, my blood pressure read: 145/108, diagnoses-anxiety, solution-relax. I went to the Gyno, and was told “there’s no way these symptoms are from coming off The Pill.”  Shocked, I asked why it couldn’t be, she replied, “The Pill is something that needs to be taken every day because it gets metabolized within 24 hours, so if you haven’t taken a pill since January, it’s no longer in your system. You should get other testing done.”  I know that, I did that, but trying to convince someone with a much higher education in this field, an expert in fact, was going nowhere. I knew it was up to me to do my own research and trust what my body was telling me.

Women Know Better

I hopped back online and googled, “hormonal imbalance symptoms”, “after the pill reactions”, “what birth control really does to you”- the list goes on. It had been four months since these symptoms started. I finally came across an amazing blog post where there were 10 pages of women expressing the same symptoms as me after coming off the Pill. It was the most comforting moment of my life. I knew I wasn’t making these symptoms up. This wasn’t all anxiety. This was real; for me, for them, for everyone who had come off the Pill and felt a huge difference in their body. In my adult years, I shied away from publicly posting my feelings and connecting with people virtually, but, I felt like if I didn’t participate, if I didn’t help, that would just be immoral and unethical.

What was interesting to me was that we all initially thought MS or brain tumor. All of our symptoms happened about two months after we took the last pill and all of the symptoms lasted on average 8-9 months. Almost all of us had blood work, CT scans, MRI’s, and all of us came back negative on every test. We exchanged advice about best foods, herbs, and practices that were helping us, and consoled each other in this grueling sea of unknown. Every one of us were told that it wasn’t due to coming off The Pill, and every one of us didn’t believe it. It was from The Pill, it is from The Pill.

Ultimately, this takes time, a healthy lifestyle and patience. Some doctors will say, go back on the Pill to help it, but that seems counter-intuitive to me. When this reaction becomes so real and tormenting, the Pill is the most frightening thing and the furthest from the cure or the answer. I’ve researched endlessly for the past two years, and only recently see the term coined, “Post Birth Control Syndrome”.  It’s catchy, for sure, but the description isn’t quite as accurate.  There are weirder, stranger symptoms that happen than just the irregular periods, acne, and weight change; that to me seems like it skims the surface, that’s easy stuff comparably.

I’m happy to report that I feel back to normal, but this experience will never leave my mind. Through it all, I feel the injustices for women are brought about because of a terrible patient care system with limited time and awareness in an ever turning patient revolving door. I produced a documentary entitled, “Hormoneously Alone,” now out on YouTube, to shed light on these issues among others involving The Pill.

 

We’re all in this together, but with the lack of education, awareness and openness, we all may as well be alone.

If you or someone you know has had similar experiences coming off of the Pill, or if you would like to share your story, message me here, I would love to hear from you.

In Health,

Raquel Latona

We Need Your Help

More people than ever are reading Hormones Matter, a testament to the need for independent voices in health and medicine. We are not funded and accept limited advertising. Unlike many health sites, we don’t force you to purchase a subscription. We believe health information should be open to all. If you read Hormones Matter, like it, please help support it. Contribute now.

Yes, I would like to support Hormones Matter. 

If you would like to publish your experience with hormonal birth control on Hormones Matter, send us a note here.

Image created using Canva AI.

Share
1 2 3 5