birth control Archives - Page 5 of 10

Blinded By Side Effects: Vision and Hormonal Birth Control

Published on November 1, 2016

7884 views

I don’t know about you but my vision is pretty important to me. I’m using it right now to type this article. I use it all the time, every waking hour of the day (except maybe when I’m meditating). So when I read the Nelson Pill Hearings and I came across the testimony of Dr. Guttmacher, I was shocked.

“Now, in addition to the danger from thromboembolism which has been described to this committee on several occasions by several witnesses, I think that there are other dangers for the pill… such as high blood pressure, headache, depression, interference with vision, and so on.” (page 6566)

Wait… the birth control pill affects your vision??? How can that be? And how could he just say that in passing? Why did no one on the Senate committee stop him and make him explain that that statement? It turns out, just like diabetes, yeast infections and UTIs, depression, weight gain, and so many other side effects, no one had told me that my vision could be affected by using hormonal birth control.

How Hormonal Birth Control Affects Vision

Hormones affect every system of the body so perhaps it should come as no surprise that they can greatly impact your vision. In fact, it is the fluctuation in hormones that is the primary reason for worsening eyesight with age. So of course, manipulating the body’s natural chemistry by using hormonal birth control can cause a variety of vision problems.

Dry Eye

According to the National Eye Institute (NEI), “Dry eye occurs when the eye does not produce tears properly, or when the tears are not of the correct consistency and evaporate too quickly.” While usually more uncomfortable than dangerous, if dry eye is left untreated it can cause pain, ulcers, scars on the cornea, and in rare cases, some loss of vision.

The NEI also states that it can be temporary or chronic and that one of the causes of dry eye is medications such as birth control. Unfortunately, that means dry eye is often overlooked in young women and teen girls using the pill. As Dr. Reiser of the Cornea Institute at the Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles points out, doctors “may not even think of it, but these drugs are frequently prescribed to treat skin problems and dysmenorrhea. Some [ocular] symptoms can mimic what you see in menopausal women.”

We also see dry eyes as a side effect of women who’ve had hysterectomies. Robin Karr details her experience with it here. It’s obvious that eye health is linked to hormones but the vision problems associated with hormonal birth control don’t stop there. Dry eyes may be the least of our worries.

Glaucoma

Dry eye may be uncomfortable and inconvenient but glaucoma, another eye condition linked to hormonal birth control, can be much more dangerous. Glaucoma causes damage to the optic nerve and can lead to permanent loss of vision. Perhaps the scariest thing about glaucoma is that most patients have no symptoms and are only diagnosed when having an eye exam. A researcher and ophthalmologist from the University of San Francisco found that use of birth control pills for three years or longer doubles the risk of glaucoma.

The fact that glaucoma is the second leading cause of blindness and that there is no cure is very disturbing. The American Optometric Association downplays the findings of this study and calls for more research. Yet, that seems to be the response to all of the research about the dangerous side effects of hormonal contraception. How much more research do we need to show that these medications are dangerous and dangerously over-prescribed? A woman could literally go blind from a medication she’s been prescribed to treat acne.

Retinal Occlusion

As someone who had a stroke while using hormonal birth control, this risk probably shouldn’t have come as a surprise to me. Retinal occlusion is a stroke of the eye caused by a blockage in the blood vessels of your retina. These blockages can be caused by blood clots, a well-researched and documented side effect of hormonal contraception. Like with a stroke of the brain, recovery isn’t guaranteed. Some people who suffer these retinal occlusions will never see again.

In fact, the risk with oral contraceptive use is so substantiated that you can find it in the “Practicing Ophthalmologists Curriculum Core Ophthalmic Knowledge” on the American Academy of Ophthalmologists website.

It should also be said that many of our Real Risk: Birth Control and Blood Clots study participants experienced vision changes before and during their blood clots. This was the case not just in the women who had had strokes but surprisingly also in the women who suffered pulmonary embolisms.

Seeing Clearly

I used birth control pills for 10 years and I never once had a healthcare professional- not my gynecologist, not my general practitioner, not my ophthalmologist- tell me that vision problems were a side effect. That Dr. Guttmacher mentioned it in passing at Nelson Pill Hearings seemed to indicate that the risk was well-known, even back in 1970. Current research supports that hormonal contraceptives adversely affect vision. Where does that leave us? What would you be willing to give up for a medication? Your physical health? Your mental health? Your libido? Your vision? Your life?

What else do we need in order to see that hormonal contraception is not worth it?

Real Risk Study: Birth Control and Blood Clots

Lucine Health Sciences and Hormones Matter are conducting research to investigate the relationship between hormonal birth control and blood clots. If you or a loved one have suffered from a blood clot while using hormonal birth control, please consider participating. We are also looking for participants who have been using hormonal birth control for at least one year and have NOT had a blood clot, as well as women who have NEVER used hormonal birth control. For more information or to participate, click here.

The Real Risk Birth Control Study: Take Charge, Find Answers

by Kerry Gretchen

Published on October 18, 2016

2524 views

I recently read an article about how fewer women are taking birth control pills now. The article claimed:

“The reasons behind the shift are hard to pin down. Study after study has shown the pill is generally safe for most women, and is 99 per cent effective with perfect use. The pill’s safety has only improved since it was introduced in 1960. It is perceptions that are changing.”

This is completely untrue. It wasn’t safe in 1960 and it certainly isn’t any safer now. It’s also not true that study after study has shown it to be safe. At the Nelson Pill Hearings, the 1970 congressional hearings on the safety of the birth control pill, every doctor that testified agreed that more research was necessary. Yet, every modern study I have found (from research on depression, weight gain, diabetes and more) has said that even more research is necessary to make any conclusions. So in the 46 years since, we still don’t adequately understand the risks with hormonal contraceptives. Dr. Paul Meier, who testified at the hearings, spoke about the challenges of conducting said research:

“Of far greater concern to me is the failure of our governmental agencies to exercise their responsibilities in seeing to it that appropriate studies were carried out… Frankly, the required research, although important, is not especially appealing to scientists. It is not fundamental and it is not exciting. It is difficult, it is expensive, and it is fraught with the risk of attack from all sides.
Evidently, for whatever reasons, there is no sound body of scientific studies concerning these possible effects available today, a situation which I regard as scandalous.
If we proceed in the future as we have in the past, we will continue to stumble from one tentative and inadequately supported conclusion to another, always relying on data which come to hand, and which were not designed for the purpose.”

We can see that what Dr. Meier warned against is exactly what has happened. Experts testified in 1970 that the pill was linked to depression and possibly suicide. They warned that the pill should not be given to women with a history of depression. Yet, in 2004 when I was depressed after switching my brand of pill, my doctor told me that wasn’t a side effect. It wasn’t until last month that a European study on hormonal contraception said what no American study has dared. The pill is irrefutably linked to depression.

Unfortunately, depression is only ONE of the side effects of hormonal birth control. Obviously, blood clots are one of the most dangerous and why we are looking at them with this research study. Other side effects that were warned about at the Nelson Pill Hearings but for which the current research claims even more research is necessary include: diabetes, weight gain, cancer, loss of libido, urinary tract and yeast infections, lupus, infertility, hypertension. So no, studies do not actually show that “the pill is generally safe.” What studies show is that there STILL needs to be more research. Well, if they haven’t done it in the past 46 years, when are they going to do it?

As for the pill’s safety improving, just look the increased risk with newer formulations. Third and fourth generation pills have significantly higher risk for deadly blood clots.

“The problems with Yaz and its sister pills stem from drospirenone, a fourth-generation progestin.
After years of blood clot reports, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), reviewed studies on oral contraceptives and found that an estimated 10 in 10,000 women on newer pills will experience a blood clot versus 6 in 10,000 with older pills.
Another study conducted by the French National Agency for the Safety of Drugs and Health Products (ANSM) found that birth control pills were linked to more than 2,500 cases of blood clots annually between 2000 and 2011. But third- and fourth-generation pills were responsible for twice as many deaths as earlier pills.
Two studies appeared in the British Medical Journal in 2011 and indicated newer pills were two to three times more likely to cause blood clots.”

Why would the pharmaceutical industry make newer birth control pills that are less safe? Maybe because once the patent runs out on medication they don’t make as much profit. So they change the formula and market it as a new and better pill. As history has shown though, there never seems to be enough research done before these products are approved. And women are paying the price. Dr. Ball warned of this at the Nelson Pill Hearings when he said (page 6500):

“Each time we change the dose or the chemical, you have a whole new ball game statistically, and then a long period of time has to go by for evaluation. Again, is it going to be just this unscientific, hand-out-the-pills-and-see-who-gets-sick business, which I say is wrong and which has been done. Each time there is a new pill, there is a new problem.”

Alas, that’s exactly the business that’s been taking place. Throw in the fact that doctors often dismiss the complaints from women as psychosomatic and you have a recipe for a completely misrepresented medication.

I don’t know about you but I’m tired of being a rube for the pharmaceutical industry. If we want to know what’s really going on with hormonal contraception, we’re going to have to start looking at it ourselves. We can’t wait for the government or the pharmaceutical industry to provide us with perfectly funded, unbiased research. They haven’t done that in the near 50 years since the Nelson Pill Hearings and there’s little indication they are going to start now. That’s why we’re conducting this research ourselves. We need information to help women assess what their REAL RISK is for taking a medication. Not what their doctors are telling them based on studies conducted by the pharmaceutical industry. The aim of this study is not to take away contraceptive options but to provide more accurate information about which women may have more risk for serious side effects like blood clots and which forms of hormonal contraception may be more dangerous than others.

It’s time to take charge of our health and find our own answers. That’s exactly what this research hopes to do but we need your help to do it. Please participate. And please share our study with those you know who might be willing to help. Thank you.

Take Charge: Participate in the Birth Control and Blood Clots Study

Lucine Health Sciences and Hormones Matter are conducting research to investigate the relationship between hormonal birth control and blood clots. If you or a loved one have suffered from a blood clot while using hormonal birth control, please consider participating. We are also looking for participants who have been using hormonal birth control for at least one year and have NOT had a blood clot, as well as women who have NEVER used hormonal birth control. For more information or to participate, click here.

Birth Control and Breast Cancer: A Classic Cover-up

by Mike Gaskins

Published on October 12, 2016

2978 views

“Estrogen is to cancer as fertilizer is to the wheat crop.”

It was the first headline-grabbing quote from the Nelson Pill Hearings, and it threw birth control proponents into a tizzy. They complained vociferously that the hearings were alarming women everywhere, and causing them to stop taking The Pill. Senator Nelson’s reply was simple, if women had been warned about the side effects before being prescribed, they wouldn’t be alarmed hearing it now.

That one little quote about synthetic estrogens catalyzing cancer and the uproarious reaction it inspired epitomize the beauty of the hearings. It was one of the few times in recent history that the pharmaceutical industry had almost no control of the message.

Hormonal Birth Control: Fertilizer for Breast Cancer

Prior to the hearings, Big Pharma managed to suppress knowledge of their product’s link to certain cancers, particularly breast cancer. However, in the hearings, those connections came to light, and stunned viewers as they tuned into the nightly news. (Perhaps I should inform my younger readers that this was a time when our country only had three networks, none of which featured a 24-hour news cycle. Consequently, the nightly news was still a pretty big deal).

Here’s a breakdown of some key facts presented by leading physicians in those hearings:

The American Cancer Society recognized the possible risk of breast cancer as a side effect of hormonal contraceptives as early as 1961. – Dr. Max Cutler, Page 6664
It’s imprudent to prescribe oral contraceptives to a woman with a family history of breast cancer. – Dr. Max Cutler, Page 6666
There was statistical evidence that breast cancer associated with pill takers in the FDA files had been dramatically underreported. – James Duffy, Page 6069
All human carcinogens are latent. And, it could take 10 to 20 years of patient history to determine the cancer impact. – Dr. Victor Wynn, Page 6309
Not only had the synthetic hormones used in The Pill been proven to cause breast cancer in all five species of animals that had been injected with it, but it also caused the very rare condition of breast cancer in human males. – Dr. Hugh Davis, Page 5927
There should be no chronic use of The Pill. It is a cancer time bomb with a fuse that could be 15 to 20 years. – Dr. Max Cutler, Page 6669

The most important statement as it relates to us today came from Dr. Hugh Davis:

“Now, there are some 75 to 80,000 women in this country per year who are developing diagnosed carcinoma of the breast. If the chronic taking of steroid hormones eventually increased this by only 10 percent, we would have a very, very hazardous situation on our hands…” (Monopoly Subcommittee, Page 5931)

I know how easily our eyes can glaze over when someone starts quoting statistics, but please pay attention to these numbers. In 1970, 1 out of every 20 women developed breast cancer sometime during her life (Dr. Max Cutler, Page 6666). You just read that Dr. Davis said it would be ‘a very, very hazardous situation’ if we saw a long-term increase of 10% over the 75 to 80,000 diagnoses each year.

Today, we have witnessed a 210% increase; 1 in every 8 women will develop breast cancer in her life. Over 246,000 cases of breast cancer will be diagnosed this year. If the vastly underestimated 10% was considered very hazardous, then our reality hit a level of hazard that defies description.

Message Control

The hearings also pulled back the curtain on how the pharmaceutical industry manipulated the message to the media and the medical community.

In 1967, Child & Family Quarterly started a section called, “Recent Setbacks in Medicine,” which seemed to be largely inspired by the introduction of hormonal birth control. Here’s what they had to say:

The Pill quickly became big business, so that drug manufacturers began to manipulate professional opinion at an early date, stressing the wonders of the Pill and minimizing its dangers.

Speaking to this point, Sen. Nelson pointed out the conflicting statements of Dr. Louis Hellman, who chaired the FDA’s study on The Pill. He said:

I doubt whether there is one person, one doctor in a thousand in this country who is aware that [Dr. Hellman] said, “Now, in discussing the chairman’s report, the right statement has to be made. We cannot just hide behind rhetoric. We are going to have to say something, and we have an opinion; that these are not safe, and the Commissioner might have to take them off the market if he believes this. We can say these are safe and our scientific data did not really permit that kind of statement.”

The FDA committee’s official statement ended up being that hormonal contraceptives were “Safe within the intent of the legislation.” This strangely mitigated reference to Kefauver-Harris legislation was all the pharmaceutical industry needed because it contained the word ‘safe.’ Despite admitting they were of the opinion that The Pill wasn’t safe, Dr. Hellman then hit the media circuit to reassure women everywhere that it was.

Further evidence that Big Pharma was seizing control came in the testimony of Dr. Edmond Kassouf. He read the Senators an unnerving conclusion to a New York Times review of Barbara Seaman’s book, A Doctor’s Case Against the Pill. Reviewer, Christorpher Lehman-Haupt wrote, “One wonders why the drug companies have been so exercised about it. In a way, their attempts to warn book reviewers against it are more disturbing than the book itself.” To which, Dr. Kassouf responded:

Mr. Lehman-Haupt has performed a public service in exposing the drug companies’ attempts.

Cures Not Causes

At Big Pharma, manipulation is the modus operandi, but no example is more disgusting and deplorable than Breast Cancer Awareness Month. Yes, that is what I meant to say. Let me explain by first asking you a question. If an organization started promoting Lung Cancer Awareness Month but they never mentioned smoking, would you think there was something fishy in the air?

For all this search for the cure, there is no talk of avoiding the cause. There’s a good reason for that. Jim Hightower festoons the irony amusingly in his book, There’s Nothing in the Middle of the Road but Yellow Stripes and Dead Armadillos.

Breast Cancer Awareness Month is a front that was conceived, funded, and launched in 1985 by a British conglomerate with a name that could come straight out of a Batman comic book: Imperial Chemical Industries. But the $14-billion-a-year multinational behemoth is all too real. It is among the world’s largest makers of pesticides, plastics, pharmaceuticals, and paper. “Organochlorines R Us” could legitimately be its slogan, though “Pollution R Us” would also fit – one of its Canadian paint subsidiaries, for example, has been held responsible for a third of the toxic chemicals dumped into the St. Lawrence River.

In 1993, Monte Paulsen of the Detroit Metro Times wrote, “ICI has been the sole financial sponsor of BCAM since the event’s inception. Altogether, the company has spent ‘several million dollars’ on the project, according to a spokeswoman. In return, ICI has been allowed to approve – or veto – every poster, pamphlet and advertisement BCAM uses.”

ICI’s pharmaceutical division, Zeneca Group PLC later split off to become AstraZeneca, taking Breast Cancer Awareness Month with them. Kudos to Mr. Paulsen for digging into this. Most journalists who know about AZ’s ‘ownership’ of BCAM see the move as philanthropic. AstraZeneca can’t lose. They actually strategized a way to make breast cancer a win-win situation for their shareholders.

Jim Hightower continues:

It gets gooier. Zeneca’s pharmaceutical arm is also the maker of Nolvadex, the leading drug used in breast cancer treatment. Nolvadex is a highly controversial drug – it does not cure existing breast cancer, but it can help stop it from spreading in some women who are diagnosed early; however, it can also cause blood clots, uterine cancer, and liver cancer in those who take it… What a racket this company has going! It make billions selling industrial organochlorines linked to breast cancer, it finances its BCAM front to divert public attention from cancer causes to cancer detection, then it sells Nolvadex to those who are detected.

Industrial waste and toxic chemicals may be responsible for the spike in breast cancer; and synthetic estrogens may be the fertilizer that feeds it, but, ultimately, it’s Big Pharma that’s spreading the manure.

#1

37 customer reviews

Books

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.

The Feminist, the Crusty Old Reporter, and the 102-Year Old Man: Antiheroes of the Pill

by Mike Gaskins

Published on August 18, 2016

4399 views

After a well-known physician unwittingly sparked my interest in birth control, I dived into the rabbit hole of hormonal contraceptive research. The number of diseases linked to The Pill shocked me. What’s more, some of these associations dated back over 50 years.

There’s a tendency to discount early research on The Pill because we’re told the first generation pills were completely different. They contained very high doses of estrogen, but today’s pills are safe because of the lower dosage. At least, that’s how the story goes. It’s a faulty premise I will discuss in future posts. Even if it were true and today’s pill was 100% safe, it would still be important to remember the pioneers who fought for a safer pill.

The Pill met virtually no resistance on its path to FDA approval thanks to impeccable timing. The sexual revolution had just crossed paths with fears of a looming population explosion. People across the political spectrum were excited about the promises of this little miracle pill. Consequently, all eyes focused on The Pill’s efficacy. Safety didn’t even register as an afterthought until three courageous people turned the spotlight on the growing chasm that separated The Pill’s promises from its reality.

The Antiheroes of Birth Control

Barbara Seaman was a feminist and a tenacious journalist whose groundbreaking book, A Doctor’s Case Against The Pill, inspired the Nelson Pill Hearings. These congressional hearings, called by Senator Gaylord Nelson, examined whether The Pill had been proven sufficiently safe before being released to the masses. Another author who covered The Pill extensively and was frequently cited at the hearings was Morton Mintz, medical reporter for the Washington Post.

Barbara Seaman: The Feminist

Barbara Seaman’s passionate investigation of synthetic estrogens began as a young woman after her Aunt Sally died of uterine cancer at the age of 49, presumably from taking Premarin. The doctor warned the women in her family that they should never take such drugs. The warning inspired her to build a career fighting synthetic hormones and the “Don’t worry your pretty little head” mentality that prevailed in the medical industry. She continued the mission until her death in 2008. Along the way, she learned that there were many prominent physicians who shared her concerns about The Pill.

As her classic book went to press in 1969, Ms. Seaman wrote a letter to Sen. Nelson. She suspected he would be interested because he was the chairman of a committee currently investigating the drug industry. Her letter can be seen in full at the Jewish Women’s Archive linked above, but here are some key excerpts:

“Never before in history have so many millions of people taken such a powerful and unnecessary drug.”
“You cannot long knock any natural system out of balance without doing some harm, – whether it shows up immediately or years later. Furthermore, many of these pill-caused metabolic disturbances are progressive. The longer a woman stays on the pill the more her laboratory tests are altered.”
“I believe that many of the women using the pill would switch to alternative methods if they knew the extent of the already-documented body pollution the pill is causing.”
Why has the suggestive evidence about the two most frightening possibilities – cancer and genetic damage, been generally withheld from the public, including physicians?

She bolstered her argument with quotes from revered physicians like Dr. Harry Rudel, one of the developers of The Pill, who admitted: “The pill is something we entered into with the best of faith, something we truly believed affected only ovulation and fertility. It was a relatively small dose of a drug, and it appeared that it was not affecting anything except fertility. Then as we began to look, we began to see that we are influencing many systems in the body.”

She carried things a step further with a quote from Dr. Philip Corfman of the National Institutes of Health, who said, “There is no organ or system of the body which, upon examination, has not been found to be affected by the pill.”

Morton Mintz: The Reporter

As medical reporter for the Washington Post, Morton Mintz won many prestigious awards for his 1962 reports on birth defects caused by Thalidomide. In 1965, he turned his attention to The Pill. Many of his stories were referenced and can be found in the appendixes of the Nelson Pill Hearings. His dispassionate, ‘Just the facts, ma’am’ approach provides the perfect counterbalance to Ms. Seaman’s style.

When I first contacted Mr. Mintz, he began the conversation with a caveat. “I’m 93 and have forgotten mountains of stuff.”

However, the mountains of stuff he did remember were fascinating. He said that, as a reporter, he had no opinion of whether The Pill was safe or unsafe. “What concerned me was the stunning inadequacy of the evidence of safety that the FDA had in hand when it approved the pill.”

In fact, he famously called it a “scientific scandal” in one of his Post columns. When he presented the facts of the approval to the new FDA Commissioner Robert Goddard on Face the Nation in 1967, the commissioner admitted that the evidence had been insufficient, and that he couldn’t say whether he would have made the same decision. This was a stunning admission that Mr. Mintz recalled fondly, “I was invited on such shows to challenge the likes of the Commissioner of the FDA and the chairman of Philip Morris with, I egoistically thought, wonderful results… Now all we get is Newt Gingrich and the like.”

Long after the television lights faded and the headlines about the Nelson Pill Hearings disappeared, Mr. Mintz was the only major press member to stay on the story. His pill coverage continued until 1977, when he was moved back to the Supreme Court. He learned later, from a friend at the New York Times, that he had been reassigned because a well-connected woman at the Post had gone to the editor and said she was “sick and tired” of his stories on The Pill, “…she and her friends used it and knew it was safe.” Her anecdotal ‘proof’ was enough to have the final committed journalist taken off the beat.

The authenticity of Mr. Mintz’s work resulted from a true desire to be able to say The Pill had been proven safe. In the introduction to his book, The Pill: An Alarming Report, Mr. Mintz explains that he and his wife are members of Planned Parenthood, and,

“Nothing could have pleased me more than to have found that The Pill was free of hazards. However, the answers made it overwhelmingly clear that safety had not been established.”

I’m grateful to Mr. Mintz, not only for his enduring work, but for putting me in touch with Ben Gordon. As he passed along the contact information, he told me that Mr. Gordon was the lead staffer for Senator Nelson, and had put together the pill hearings. He added, “Ben’s 102-years old, but still sharp as a tack.”

Ben Gordon: Lead Staffer for Senator Nelson

Senator Gaylord Nelson inherited Ben Gordon along with the Subcommittee on Monopoly from Senator Russell Long. Mr. Gordon had spent ten years on Capitol Hill prior to working with Senator Nelson, and the senator trusted him implicitly.

Mr. Gordon assembled the roster of doctors to testify at the hearings, wrote the opening statements, and generally did all the legwork behind the scenes. Throughout the proceedings, he sat at the table next to Chairman Nelson, and frequently chimed in with questions and comments. With Senator Nelson passing away in 2005, Mr. Gordon is one of the few living people who can give a first-person account of the inner workings of the hearings.

He told me about his first meeting with Ms. Seaman after they received her letter, and how he had thought he would call her to testify. Upon reading her book, he decided it would be better to go with the doctors whose studies she cited. He said he has always had a policy to avoid indirect testimony because it is too easily picked apart.

If you’ve followed Kerry Gretchen’s posts on the hearings, the excerpts read like a who’s who of Ms. Seaman’s favorite doctors. Even with ‘direct testimony,’ Senator Bob Dole eagerly tore into physicians who suggested The Pill had safety issues. According to Mr. Gordon,

“Dole was on our committee, and when he came, there was no question he was representing the industry.”

Taking Up the Torch

As a result of the hearings, The Pill became the first medication ever required to include an information booklet for patients. Unfortunately, the oft-ignored booklet also meets informed consent requirements, and may explain why so few doctors take the time to personally warn patients about side effects.

In the aftermath of the hearings, drug manufacturers also rolled out new, lower-dose versions of The Pill, and claimed they were safer. Again, these statements were made without adequate testing, but this time, the claims went unchecked.

As proud as he is of the hearings, Mr. Gordon admits he is surprised that no other politician has ‘taken up the torch.’ When I asked Mr. Mintz whether he thought today’s journalists shared his sense of duty to protect citizens, he replied,

“Have you ever seen an editorial condemning corporate misconduct other than financial shenanigans? I can’t recall any.”

Perhaps you’re thinking, “It’s been 50 years! Surely, today’s pill has been proven safe.”

That’s a reasonable assumption. However, it’s dead wrong. The maker of today’s most popular brand of birth control pill paid out $1.69 BILLION to settle over 8,000 lawsuits as of February 2014. You needn’t go any further than the personal stories shared on this site to know the number of injuries and deaths continues to grow.

The truth behind Dr. Corfman’s statement remains,

“There is no organ or system of the body which, upon examination, has not been found to be affected by the pill.”

Yet, our politicians and journalists are no longer interested in the conversation. Sadly, neither are the feminists or even the women who take The Pill. It seems as though we have forgotten that these are in fact very strong medications – synthetic chemicals with serious side effects.

We clearly can’t count on our ‘thought leaders’ to lead on this topic. The only way they will care again is if we, the people, reignite their interest. I’m just a single voice on a small stage (a man no less), but I’ve decided to do my part to take up the torch. And that begins with these posts on Hormones Matter.

Next, I will look at a forgotten history of synthetic estrogen that should have warned us The Pill is unsafe at any dose.

#1

37 customer reviews

Books

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.

See page for author, CC BY 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons; Wellcome Images.

Why Am I Here? Thoughts on Survivor’s Guilt

by Kerry Gretchen

Published on July 25, 2016

2230 views

“I’m so glad to see you. I didn’t think you were going to make it.”

If you’ve read my story, you may remember that is what the emergency room doctor said to me a few weeks after I had a stroke. I had only been out of the hospital for a week when I developed a rash from the seizure medication I was taking. Because it was a Friday night, my neurologist told me I needed to go to the emergency room. I cried as my in-laws drove into the parking lot of the little local hospital. It was the very same hospital that had sent me home twice before finally discovering, days later, that I had blood clots and was bleeding into my brain.

“You’re a miracle.”

One of the advantages of having a stroke at 28 is that when you return to the ER, they finally take you seriously. I was ushered into an examination room within 5 minutes of checking in. As I waited to be seen by the doctor, a nurse came in. She was very excited and a little emotional.

“Hi,” she said. “Don’t you remember me?” I did not. “I sat with you for hours when you were in here a few weeks ago.”

I immediately began to feel very guilty for not remembering this lovely woman who so obviously cared about me. She took my hand in hers. “You’re a miracle,” she said reverently.

Confused about what the appropriate response to that was, I smiled meekly and said, “Thank you?” When she left the room, I could hear her talking to people up and down the hall. “The miracle girl is here!” she said over and over.

Later, I would lay in bed, or sit on the couch, or ride in the car and wonder, “If I’m such a miracle, why am I here?” What was an enthusiastic and loving sentiment from that nurse turned into a real mindf*@k (pardon the language but there was really no phrase that worked as appropriately here) as my poor, broken brain puzzled over why I had survived.

What is Survivor’s Guilt?

Trying to understand your purpose in this world is a tough enough task. Nevermind trying do it while you’re struggling to just tie your shoes and feed yourself. I wanted to put it out of my mind and just take things one day at a time. But it was hard to do that. There is so much uncertainty during and after a health crisis like a stroke. What will my life look like now? Will it ever look like my life before? Do I want it to look like my old life? Of what kind of life am I even capable?

At the time, I wouldn’t have called it survivor’s guilt, but that may have been what I was dealing with. Survivor guilt (or survivor’s guilt; also called survivor syndrome or survivor’s syndrome) is a mental condition that occurs when a person perceives themselves to have done wrong by surviving a traumatic event when others did not.

Though more common, or perhaps more noted, in survivors of combat and natural disasters, it can also occur in patients who have overcome a health crisis (cancer survivors, HIV/AIDs patients, etc.). It was originally identified in the 1960s in survivors of the Holocaust and since been re-categorized as a symptom of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder.

Treating the Whole Patient

Because we don’t usually think of health crises as causing PTSD, the guilt and other mental health conditions that accompany these situations are often left untreated. I was treated for my stroke physically, but not really mentally, except in the capacity that it affected my actual cognitive abilities. I was sent home from the hospital with prescriptions for blood thinners, seizure medication, and a whole host of other drugs to counteract the side effect of the other two (despite the fact that I had not exhibited any of those side effects). Yet no one asked how I was dealing with the emotional side of what happened to me.

And it’s not just stroke survivors that have trouble processing what happened to them.

“Depression is 3 times more common in patients after a heart attack than in the general population, with 15% to 20% of heart attack victims qualifying for a diagnosis of major depressive disorder, and a far greater proportion experiencing increased levels of depressive symptoms.”

According to the Lung Cancer Alliance, 63.9% of lung cancer survivors have experienced feelings of survivor guilt.

“While survivorship is often portrayed as an over-the-moon, happy feeling that all people battling cancer set as their goal, many lung cancer survivors feel burdened by it, experiencing emotions of guilt, anxiety and stress.”

Yet it seems that once the physical body is out of danger, many patients, myself included, are left on their own to unravel the emotional impact—to make sense of the new and unfamiliar life in which they find themselves. Often this process can take years.

For example, this project I’m working on is a staggering reminder that I have survived while so many haven’t. Though my stroke was 10 years ago, it is difficult to read the stories and interact with the families of the women who were killed by hormonal birth control. It brings me face to face with questions I thought I had long ago answered. Why me? Why did I live while so many others did not? And am I doing what I’m supposed to with this life?

“I really needed you.”

About a year after my stroke, I told my dear friend Jamie about what the nurse said. I told her how much it weighed on me, about the pressure I was putting on myself. Her response was beautiful and simple and a good reminder for us all. “What if you’re here because I really needed you not to die?” Mind blown. Maybe some survivors are supposed to achieve great things and change the world. Or just maybe our purpose is as subtle and as profound as being there for someone else.

That message was enough for me for a long time. But when I was contacted about working on this project, I knew there was a reason. This work is important. Women need to understand the side effects of hormonal birth control, the symptoms of a blood clot, and that their options are not just the pill or pregnancy. We need to start asking why life-threatening blood clots, emotional issues, loss of libido, weight gain, as well as many other side effects are considered “acceptable.” We need to hold the pharmaceutical companies to a higher standard. We need to value human life above corporate profit. We need to take women seriously when they discuss their medical concerns. We need to fully research women’s health issues. The entire paradigm of women’s health care and contraception needs to change. The conversation has been started. And I think I may be here to add another voice to it. The voice of a survivor.

Real Risk Study: Birth Control and Blood Clots

Lucine Health Sciences and Hormones Matter are conducting research to investigate the relationship between hormonal birth control and blood clots. If you or a loved one have suffered from a blood clot while using hormonal birth control, please consider participating. We are also looking for participants who have been using hormonal birth control for at least one year and have NOT had a blood clot, as well as women who have NEVER used hormonal birth control. For more information or to participate, click here.

Birth Control and Blood Clots Study Final Week: Add Your Data Now

by Philippa Bridge-Cook, PhD

Published on July 18, 2016

1926 views

A few months ago, Lucine Health Sciences and Hormones Matter began a pilot study looking at risk factors and warning signs/symptoms in women who have developed blood clots while using hormonal contraception. This study consists of a survey questionnaire, and a personal story/case report, which is shared on Hormones Matter with the study participant’s permission. We would like to thank all of the women who took the time to complete our survey and who courageously shared their stories to help inform our research.

This phase of the study will close on July 25, and we will then perform a full data analysis on all of the results. In the mean time, we have already written about some of our early results here and here. What we have learned so far from our survey results suggests that some information that is commonly accepted about the risks for blood clots on hormonal birth control may not be true, and that the risk information is not communicated to women in a realistic and truthful way.

What We’ve Learned So Far

Early Survey Results

Many blood clots develop after years of use. Although it is thought that the risk for developing a blood clot is highest in the first year after starting or restarting hormonal contraception, our data to date show that 75% of women developed clots after the first year on the medication, and only 25% developed clots within the first year. Many women developed clots even after significant lengths of time on the medication, in some cases, even after up to 21 to 30 years.

Smoking is a risk but not THE risk. Many women are led to believe, by information provided to them by pharmaceutical companies and their doctors, that they are only at risk of a blood clot if they are over 35 years old, and smoke. However, 94% of women in our study were not smoking at the time of the blood clot, and 78% had never been smokers. Smoking does increase the risk, but the idea that you are only at risk of you are a smoker is false.

Clotting disorders are not identified. We also discovered that women are not being tested for blood clotting disorders that significantly increase their risk of developing a blood clot while on hormonal contraception. Fully 89% of the women in our study did not have such testing prior to starting hormonal contraception, and a further 9% did not know if they had any testing. Only 2% of the women were able to state with certainty that they had been tested.

These results, as well as additional results, will be explored further when the study is complete. We will be looking at women’s ages when they developed blood clots, warning signs and symptoms, other side effects from hormonal birth control, additional risk factors, and more.

Personal Story Findings

At Hormones Matter, we believe strongly in the power of the personal story. Like case reports, they give us a breadth and depth of information that cannot be captured as well in the more quantitative results. As part of this project, we have been collecting and publishing these stories. In addition to the trends emerging from the survey results, we’re seeing several disturbing trends regarding whether and how risks for blood clots are communicated, tested for and/or identified. In most cases, there appears to be a significant disconnect regarding these risks.

Risks for blood clots are not communicated. What do these stories have in common? The women who developed clots were not aware that these serious complications could develop as a result of hormonal contraception. Laura Buccellato, whose daughter Theresa died at age 16 from a pulmonary embolism, said in her story

“Our doctor did not go over any of the side effects with us or what to look for if something were to go wrong. I trusted my OBGYN because I have been with her for most of my life and she had four children so I never felt she would put Theresa in any kind of harm.”

If women are taking a medication with the possibility for serious injury or death, they should certainly be informed of risks. They should also be educated about early warning signs and symptoms of blood clots.

Signs of blood clots are not recognized by physicians. Another common and disturbing trend has emerged from the personal stories: in the early stages, and sometimes even in the later stages of the blood clot event, blood clots are not considered in the differential diagnosis. More often than not, when women approach their physicians with signs pointing to blood clots, they are dismissed. The possibility of having a blood clot is not investigated or even considered, and most doctors do not even ask the patient about their use of hormonal birth control. For example, Kerry Gretchen was suffering from the symptoms of a blood clot in her brain for a month, and was sent home from the emergency room twice and told that her symptoms were due to a migraine. This resulted in even more severe effects from her stroke. Susan Eklund McKenzie had taken her daughter Marit to the doctor twice for symptoms related to a pulmonary embolism, but unfortunately this was never investigated, and Marit died at age 18.

Blood clots are devastating. Another commonality is just how catastrophic these blood clots can be. The women who have had strokes (stories are here, here and here) all had to relearn how to perform the daily functions of life, such as walking, writing, showering and dressing themselves, and some of the women have lasting disabilities.

It is known that pulmonary embolism has a high mortality rate, and the women whose stories we have shared who suffered from a pulmonary embolism, all died as a result (stories are here, here and here). Brittany Malone had a massive blood clot in her leg, and as a result suffered pulmonary hemorrhage, respiratory failure, heart attack, irreversible brain damage, and death.

We would all like to think that this could never happen to us, but as Detrease Harrison said, in her story of having a stroke after 23 years on the birth control pill:

“I used to tell people I had no risk factors for having a blood clot, but almost everyone has some kind of risk factor.”

Participate In The Birth Control and Blood Clots Study

There are two weeks left in this phase of our study, and then the survey will be taken down and to analyze the results fully.

If you are a woman who has suffered from a blood clot while using hormonal birth control, we urge you to participate in our study to help us learn more about this important women’s health issue.

Because of the severity of some blood clots, including death or serious disability, we allow parents, family members, or partners to take the survey for the affected individual.

If you know someone who might like to participate, please share this article with them.

If you have begun the survey and haven’t yet completed it, please do so in order to enable us to use your data. We cannot use your data, if the survey is not complete.

If you’ve completed your survey but haven’t yet sent us your story, please do so.

We will be continuing to share women’s stories over the next few months, so please continue to follow the study on the Hormones Matter website, on our Facebook page, and on Twitter.

5 Surprising Reasons Not to Use Hormonal Birth Control

by Kerry Gretchen

Published on June 29, 2016

10182 views

The following is a list of some the health factors that increase your risk of side effects from taking hormonal birth control. It is by no means a complete list of contraindications but you may find some of these surprising. I know I did.

Five Reasons You May Want to Reconsider Hormonal Birth Control

Reason 1: Smoking and Age

You are probably familiar with these warnings. You may have heard them on television commercials or seen them on magazine advertisements. Or maybe you read my article about risk communication and saw them there. The problem with these warnings is that the wording makes it seem like you are only at risk if you are over 35 and a smoker. But the truth is that these two risk factors stand independent of each other. You are at increased risk if you are over 35 years of age. You are at increased risk if you are a smoker of any age. And if you are a smoker who is over 35, you have an exponentially higher risk for blood clots when using hormonal birth control.

Reason 2: Migraines

According to a 2010 article in the Reviews in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 43% of women in the United States suffer from migraines. That’s a huge number of women. Also, according to the same article, 43% of women using birth control are using hormonal contraception (the pill, rings, shots, implants, etc.). I’m not a statistician but I’m guessing there is some overlap between the women that suffer migraines and the ones using hormonal birth control. This is problematic for two reasons:

A great deal of evidence suggests that migraine, particularly migraine with aura, is associated with an increased risk of ischemic stroke, and that this risk may be further elevated with the use of hormonal birth control. But if you don’t believe me, both the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the World Health Organization advise that women who suffer migraines with aura should not use hormonal contraception.
Reevaluation or discontinuation of combination hormonal contraception is advised for women who develop escalating severity/frequency of headaches, new-onset migraine with aura, or nonmigrainous headaches persisting beyond 3 months of use.

A 2016 meta-analysis of seven research studies demonstrated “a two- to fourfold increased risk of stroke among women with migraine who use combined oral contraceptives (COCs) compared with nonusers.” But once again, like so many other things about hormonal birth control, the authors of the study report that research is lacking in this area and more studies need to be done.

Reason 3: Family Clotting Disorders

Many people have a clotting disorder and simply don’t know it. When I had my stroke while on birth control pills, I had no idea that I had the fairly common clotting disorder Factor V Leiden (FVL affects between 3-8% of people). But what I did know was that my grandmother had had two strokes. And my aunts and uncle had all had blood clots.

Unfortunately, women are not systematically tested for clotting disorders before they begin using hormonal birth control. This is very dangerous and why it’s so important to give your doctor a thorough family history; something I know I wouldn’t have considered that vital when I was 18 years old.

A lot of health professionals don’t take the time to review your family history, making it even more important that you mention your family history of blood clots and your concerns about hormonal contraception. You might even insist on being tested for clotting disorders before increasing your risk of a dangerous and sometimes deadly blood clot.

Reason 4: Depression and Mental Health

I explore this further in this article but the basics are:

Hormonal contraceptives can cause mental health issues
Women who suffer from mental health issues are much more likely to suffer from increased symptoms when on hormonal contraception
Often the longer hormonal contraception is used, the greater the symptoms
Discontinuation of hormonal contraception can usually alleviate mental health symptoms

Reason 5: Diabetes

Dr. Hugh J. Davis, the first doctor to testify at the Nelson Pill Hearings said the following (page 5930):

“A woman, for example, who has a history of diabetes or even a woman with a strong family history of diabetes is not an ideal candidate for using oral contraceptives… [they] produce changes in carbohydrate metabolism which tends to aggravate existing diabetes and can make it difficult to manage.”

Hormonal birth control elevates blood glucose levels, can increase blood pressure, increases triglycerides and cholesterol, and accelerates the hardening of the arteries, among other things. They knew this in 1970. But what about the research now? Well, if you’ve read any of my other articles it probably won’t surprise you that the current research is… wait for it… you guessed it… INCONCLUSIVE! Here’s a look at what I’ve found:

“Cardiovascular disease is a major concern, and for women with diabetes who have macrovascular or microvascular complications, nonhormonal methods are recommended.
There is little evidence of best practice for the follow-up of women with diabetes prescribed hormonal contraception. It is generally agreed that blood pressure, weight, and body mass index measurements should be ascertained, and blood glucose levels and baseline lipid profiles assessed as relevant. Research on hormonal contraception has been carried out in healthy populations; more studies are needed in women with diabetes and women who have increased risks of cardiovascular disease.”

And:

“The four included randomised controlled trials in this systematic review provided insufficient evidence to assess whether progestogen-only and combined contraceptives differ from non-hormonal contraceptives in diabetes control, lipid metabolism and complications. Three of the four studies were of limited methodological quality, sponsored by pharmaceutical companies and described surrogate outcomes. Ideally, an adequately reported, high-quality randomised controlled trial analysing both intermediate outcomes (i.e. glucose and lipid metabolism) and true clinical endpoints (micro- and macrovascular disease) in users of combined, progestogen-only and non-hormonal contraceptives should be conducted.
Not enough evidence is available to prove that hormonal contraceptives do not influence glucose and fat metabolism in women with diabetes mellitus.”

As a side note, a recent study demonstrated a link between hormonal contraceptives and gestational diabetes.

Contraception is a very personal choice. I believe all women should research the risks associated with using hormonal contraception, but especially if you experience any of the health conditions above. Should you weigh the risks and benefits of using hormonal birth control and decide it’s still the right choice for you, please take a moment to review the symptoms of the blood clot and seek help immediately if you notice any of these.

Real Risk Study: Birth Control and Blood Clots

Lucine Health Sciences and Hormones Matter are conducting research to investigate the relationship between hormonal birth control and blood clots. If you or a loved one have suffered from a blood clot while using hormonal birth control, please consider participating. We are also looking for participants who have been using hormonal birth control for at least one year and have NOT had a blood clot, as well as women who have NEVER used hormonal birth control. For more information or to participate, click here.

Weight Gain and Hormonal Contraceptives

by Kerry Gretchen

Published on June 8, 2016

4299 views

Once upon a time, a 26-year-old woman went to her doctor and asked to be put on the new birth control pill that allowed women to only have four periods a year. She had seen it advertised on television. Four months later, 15 pounds heavier and suffering from mild depression, she returned to the doctor feeling miserable. The doctor told her the weight gain and depression were not from the pill because those were not side effects of hormonal birth control. This left the young woman feeling like it was her fault she had gained weight. Needless to say, that didn’t help with the depression. But she switched back to her original birth control pill and lived happily (but heavily) ever after. Well, until it gave her a stroke two years later.

I’ve written a lot about my stroke and about blood clots and birth control pills, but there are many other side effects from hormonal birth control. More often than not, we are told that these side effects do not exist; that they are all in our heads. Are they? Or are we simply being ignored and lied to?

What Does The Research Show?

When researching my thesis, I was interested in finding out what women knew about the risks associated with birth control pills. I created a survey based on a published study by researchers in this field. The original study outlined which side effects were and were not associated with birth control pills. The survey used in my thesis demonstrated the following:

“When the women were asked to select which risk factors were associated with birth control pills, most women, 76.7% of the 313 who answered the question, selected blood clots. Weight gain, which is not considered a health risk or even a side effect of birth control pills, was the selection most chosen (79.9%).”

The number one answer most women chose was weight gain, yet all the research I read said that weight gain was not a side effect of birth control pills. My own doctor had told me it wasn’t a side effect when I stood before her 15 pounds heavier after switching pills. Even as I wrote my thesis, I wondered how we could all be so wrong. Well, it turns out we weren’t. The pill can cause weight gain. And they knew it could, even back in 1970. The following is testimony from the Nelson Pill Hearings.

Dr. Francis Kane (page 6453): [In a Swedish study of 344 women] Of the 138 women who stopped using the medication, weight gain and emotional disturbances were the most frequently reported, 26.1 percent and 23.9 percent.

Dr. Louis Hellman (page 6203): My private patients… come off the pill because of a host of minor reactions. The most prevalent one is weight gain. The modern American girl just does not want to gain 5 or 10 pounds if she can help it.

What About Today’s Birth Control Pills?

I took another look at what I could find out about weight gain and hormonal contraception now. According to WebMD:

“When birth control pills were first sold in the early 1960s, they had very high levels of estrogen and progestin. Estrogen in high doses can cause weight gain due to increased appetite and fluid retention. So, 50 years ago they may indeed have caused weight gain in some women. Current birth control pills have much lower amounts of hormones. So weight gain is not likely to be a problem.”

Maybe larger doses of hormones cause more weight gain. But I don’t think that means that smaller doses cause none. And what about taking that smaller dose for a decade or more?

Most current medical information dismisses weight gain completely. On the Mayo Clinic website’s FAQ page for birth control pills it says:

“Do birth control pills cause weight gain? Many women think so. But studies have shown that the effect of the birth control pill on weight is small — if it exists at all.”

That’s right, ladies. Just like your menstrual cramps, weight gain on the pill probably doesn’t exist. But wait, the Mayo Clinic says there are studies that show hormonal contraceptives don’t cause weight gain. Where are these studies?

Inconclusive? Or Incorrect?

A recent meta-analysis (2014) conducted by Cochrane (an independent group that reviews randomized controlled trials and organizes medical research information) found the following:

Available evidence was insufficient to determine the effect of combination contraceptives on weight, but no large effect was evident. Trials to evaluate the link between combination contraceptives and weight change require a placebo or non-hormonal group to control for other factors, including changes in weight over time.

You mean to tell me in the 40+ years since the Nelson Pill Hearings we haven’t been able to conduct one conclusive study to determine how hormonal contraception affects weight? Perhaps it’s time to start asking why. All those studies that provided insufficient evidence, who funded them and who might stand to lose if they were conclusive? I don’t know for sure but I do know that one of the few things women fear as much as an unintended pregnancy is weight gain. Even the staunchest feminists among us often fret over our figures.

According to Naomi Wolfe’s The Beauty Myth, “thirty-three thousand American women told researchers that they would rather lose ten to fifteen pounds than achieve any other goal.” Setting aside how disturbing that is, we can easily see how the fact that hormonal birth control can cause weight gain might adversely affect the pharmaceutical industry’s bottom line (pardon the pun).

At the Nelson Pill Hearings, there were at least a half dozen experts–doctors specifically chosen to testify before Congress–that mentioned weight gain as a side effect of the birth control pill. Including ones who admittedly worked for the pharmaceutical industry. But now, nearly five decades later, the research is inconclusive. Doctors are telling patients that hormonal contraceptives are not responsible for weight gain, yet 80% of women surveyed thought that weight gain was a side effect. Like so much surrounding the pharmaceutical industry, something doesn’t add up here. And who is paying the difference? Women. Yet again we are being told that it’s all in our heads. Have you had experience gaining weight on hormonal birth control?

Further Testimony on Weight Gain

This testimony from the Nelson Pill Hearings just scratches the surface of the side effects caused by hormonal contraceptives. I’ll be expanding more on a lot of this testimony in future articles. But perhaps Dr. Victor Wynn explained most succinctly how these side effects manifest when he testified (page 6303):

When I say these changes occur, I mean they occur in everybody, more in some than in others, but no person entirely escapes from the metabolic influence of these compounds. It is merely that some manifest the changes more obviously than others.

Dr. Robert Kistner (page 6082): I tell her about the side effects plus a weight gain edema and I may even give her a prescription for this.

Dr. John Laragh (page 6165): We do not have any firm clues. But it does look as though those who accumulate salt and water and gain weight on the oral contraceptives might be especially vulnerable [to increased hypertension].

Dr. Francis Kane (page 6449): Complaints of moodiness, being cross and tired, alterations in sexual drive, weight gain, edema, and insomnia were commonest in the group using the estrogen-progestin group.

At the hearings, Dr. Herbert Ratner (page 6737) was asked by James Duffy, minority council:

Mr. Duffy: You use the word “disease” here. Disease to me seems to be a pretty strong word and I am just curious why you would consider weight change to be a disease?

Dr. Ratner: You realize that obesity is one of our major problems in this country.

Real Risk Study: Birth Control and Blood Clots

Lucine Health Sciences and Hormones Matter are conducting research to investigate the relationship between hormonal birth control and blood clots. If you or a loved one have suffered from a blood clot while using hormonal birth control, please consider participating. We are also looking for participants who have been using hormonal birth control for at least one year and have NOT had a blood clot, as well as women who have NEVER used hormonal birth control. For more information or to participate, click here.

birth control - Page 5

How Hormonal Birth Control Affects Vision

Dry Eye

Glaucoma

Retinal Occlusion

Seeing Clearly

Real Risk Study: Birth Control and Blood Clots

Related posts:

You might be interested in

Take Charge: Participate in the Birth Control and Blood Clots Study

Related posts:

You might be interested in

Hormonal Birth Control: Fertilizer for Breast Cancer

Message Control

Cures Not Causes

We Need Your Help

Related posts:

You might be interested in

The Antiheroes of Birth Control

Barbara Seaman: The Feminist

Morton Mintz: The Reporter

Ben Gordon: Lead Staffer for Senator Nelson

Taking Up the Torch

We Need Your Help

Related posts:

You might be interested in

“You’re a miracle.”

What is Survivor’s Guilt?

Treating the Whole Patient

“I really needed you.”

Real Risk Study: Birth Control and Blood Clots

Related posts:

You might be interested in

What We’ve Learned So Far

Early Survey Results

Personal Story Findings

Participate In The Birth Control and Blood Clots Study

Related posts:

You might be interested in

Five Reasons You May Want to Reconsider Hormonal Birth Control

Reason 1: Smoking and Age

Reason 2: Migraines

Reason 3: Family Clotting Disorders

Reason 4: Depression and Mental Health

Reason 5: Diabetes

Real Risk Study: Birth Control and Blood Clots

Related posts:

You might be interested in

What Does The Research Show?

What About Today’s Birth Control Pills?

Inconclusive? Or Incorrect?

Further Testimony on Weight Gain

Real Risk Study: Birth Control and Blood Clots

Related posts:

You might be interested in