Europe approves first saliva-based contraceptive – no pill required
thenextweb.com
thenextweb.com
The device tracks progesterone levels via saliva. It's currently possible to track those levels via urine or blood, but saliva is probably the most convenient.
But here's the catch. If you desire to avoid pregnancy, you avoid sexual activity during the fertile window that the device indicates. This is known as a fertility awareness method, and in Catholic circles it's also known as natural family planning.
It is not a contraceptive in the sense that it allows you to have sex during the fertile part of your cycle but not get pregnant.
A: parents
Its also being heavily promoted on social media as "natural" and safe without making people aware of the drawback.
Also forgive my skepticism, there is no money to be made for the contraceptive industry, so of course they will not finance it (unless they sell diapers too).
The existence of free software has never been an insurmountable barrier to selling software.
People sell both hardware and software. From one of the sites another comment replying to me linked to: "Unless you have a health savings account or a flexible spending account, Mira is expensive. A basic starter kit retails at $199, which includes 10 LH and E3G wands, and then a resupply of those wands costs just under $60 per month with a subscription. If you want to go with the “Max” starter kit, which also includes PdG wands, the price goes up to $229 for the kit and $80 per month for the subscription."
Care to cite a source?
Here's a run-down of some modern methods:
> Contemporary, evidence-based methods of natural family planning track the various phases of a woman’s cycle each month via observable biomarkers, such as hormone levels (taken from a urine sample gathered first thing in the morning), basal body temperature (taken by mouth first thing in the morning), patterns of cervical mucus (observed during bathroom visits throughout the day), or a combination thereof. You’ll find the studies that produced the following effectiveness rates linked in the descriptions below.
> The Symptothermal Method (STM) combines basal body temperature (BBT) readings with observations of cervical mucus and sometimes that of the cervix itself. The perfect use rate for this method is 0.4%, and the typical use rate is 1.8%.
> The Billings Ovulation Method uses cervical mucus observations to determine when a woman is fertile and when she is infertile. This universal method has been successfully taught to populations with low literacy rates, little access to technology, and even those who are visually impaired. With perfect use, the failure rate is 1%, and with typical use, it’s 10%.
> The Creighton Model is another method which relies on the categorization of observed cervical mucus. Creighton uses color-coded stickers to interpret a woman’s chart. With perfect use, the method’s failure rate is 0.5%. With typical use, the failure rate is 4%.
> The Marquette Model utilizes a ClearBlue Easy Fertility Monitor to track levels of luteinizing hormone (LH) and estrogen in the urine. Variations on the method use cervical mucus or BBT in conjunction with hormone readings. With perfect use, the failure rate is 0.1%; with typical use, it’s 7%. Marquette Method researchers are currently developing protocols for use of the Mira fertility monitor.
> The Two Day Method is a method in which a woman asks herself if she noticed any cervical secretions today or yesterday. If either answer is “yes,” then she understands herself to be fertile. If both answers are no, she understands herself to be infertile. The perfect use failure rate is 4%, while the typical use rate is 14%. Though this method, in particular, sounds simple (and it is!), it is always best to learn any method from a trained instructor.
https://cks.nice.org.uk/topics/contraception-assessment/back...
The source you cite lacks an independent source for the Marquette model claims, and only single studies (cherry picked?) for the others. A recent Chochrane review states "the comparative efficacy of fertility awareness‐based methods for contraception remains unknown."
https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD...
It was proposed more than once that the pregnancy testing systems could easily be converted to a conception advisor. The lawyers immediately swooped in and feared that people would use it as a birth control system (e.g. go for it on the days it says you're NOT fertile). The liability was too much for them to take.
That doesn't mean anything, 0% is included in “up to 100%”.
> ...100% effective when used perfectly, and 92% effective for typical use.
I promise you, women understand their cycles quite well and absolutely nobody jumps right to IVF (which costs tens of thousands of dollars) without exhausting cheaper options first.
Also the old canard of "just relax and it will happen" is just that: an old wives tale.
I wouldn't dare question the usefulness of this without much more reading, but the first impression I had when seeing the product page reminded me of the overpriced ink subscription for printers.
Hormonal contraceptives are absolutely terrible. None of my long term partners were happy with them—whether it was a hormonal implant, hormonal IUD or pill, the side effects have always been ridiculous.
In addition, WHO classified oral contraceptives as G1 carcinogens. So having a potential alternative is incredibly important.
It is insane to me that as a society, we’re fine asking women to “just take drugs” that mess with their reproductive system, affecting their mood, sleep, weight, libido, and blood pressure (and most likely a lot more I’m not aware of).
So it depends on the person.
I would be super happy to use similarly effective male contraceptives.
Even if male contraceptives existed (in pill form), chances are they wouldn’t be nearly as effective, since the men just aren’t the ones that end up with the child if they’re acting unsafe. You’d be mostly relying on goodwill for your contraception.
They also had to fight for this right like crazy, mostly against men but also other women
Our daughter also asked for contraceptives on her own, and for the same reasons (though the contraceptive part is a nice side-effect in her case).
No society asked either of them for this.
I don’t doubt your partners had bad experiences with contraceptives, but that’s not a universal problem, and it’s also why it’s important to discuss them with the right professional to make the best choice for each person.
But that wasn’t really the discussion I was trying to start. I realise I made my point quite poorly.
I was lamenting the fact that because “female contraceptives” are a “solved problem”, there is basically no research or innovation in male contraceptives. See sibling thread.
I never thought about male contraceptives other than condoms or a vasectomy, so I guess I’m part of the reason for the lack of research. That said, I suspect a contributing factor may be that female contraceptives can be used for other reasons (pain relief, having more predictable periods, etc) so that is also a big driving for research (some female contraceptives can be quite expensive). Of course, those side-effects are also what can make them unsuitable in many cases too.
the same is valid the other way around.
However, keep in mind that with the 'in-use' efficacy rate of 92%, about 1/12 couples using this method will fall pregnant in a year.
I'm not asking my partner (I'm married) to take any hormones while I wouldn't take any myself.
The problem is that much medicine was developed by men for a long time.
Female doctors are a (relatively) recent development and I'm sure they the situation will improve over time (maybe not in trumpet America) in civilised parts of the world.
I have talked about it before, but silodosin prevents ejaculation (but not orgasm) in men, which can be seen as a contraceptive. It is non-hormonal, it is an alpha-blocker. You would have to experiment with it, however.
> Following the regulatory approval, Innie’s birth control is now available for purchase in Germany and Austria, with plans to expand to the UK later this year
You can buy contraceptive devices such as a larger con you press between your knees (just kidding) but they would not be medically approved as contraceptives.
“Inne’s technology uses a lateral flow strip similar to those used in COVID-19 or pregnancy tests. Users place a small amount of saliva on the strip, which contains antibodies that bind to progesterone hormones. The strip is then inserted into a matchbox-sized reading device that takes photos of the strip over 10 minutes, analysing how hormone particles move and develop across the strip.
The reader processes these photos using biochemistry and image processing techniques to determine hormone intensity, which is then synced to a companion mobile app.”
https://giddi.net/posts/a-look-inside-a-digital-pregnancy-te...
So basically an even worse (for the users) form of tracking someone's cycle, in terms of privacy