Hacker News Reader

Comment by scott_s | Hacker News Reader

Interesting idea, but I think most mutations that would so severely change how a woman responds to hormones would also be debilitating to the point that she wouldn't be able to have children.

View on HN

That's a good point. Perhpaps it could be a very indirect effect then. For example I heard some antibiotics lower the effectiveness of birth control, so perhaps a mutation that makes you get strep throat more often? Just a hypothetical example..

But that makes me wonder, whatever mechanism antibiotics use to lessen the effectiveness, couldn't a small mutation use the same mechanism?

There are already lots of fertile girls who have adverse reactions to hormonal contraceptives.

But then they know the pill doesn't work, and will likely use a different form of birth control. In order for the mutation to spread, it would need to make the pill not work silently. And even that would be difficult, because women should realize the pill is not working because they're still menstruating.

women on the pill still menstruate

Only if they do the 3 weeks on, 1 week off cycle that is commonly prescribed. Women who continue to take the hormone pills can skip menstruation.

Related to the current discussion, women would quickly realize that their menstrual cycle is not lining up with the week of non-hormone pills.

The problem is that other forms of birth control all suck in one way or another. Your chances of successfully preventing pregnancy go down if you can't use hormonal contraceptives. That's why they were a big deal when they were invented.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com