March 14, 2008
What the hell
Comedy Central keeps running commercials for Mirena, a stick-it-in-you contraceptive that makes it so you can't get knocked up for like 5 years. Sounds awesome. I'm all for that. They even say it's "reversible," which leads me to believe that if you take it out you can start spitting out welfare tickets again. Nice. Yay science.
But then they say "candidates for Mirena are in a stable relationship and have had at least one child." What the hell. Why, if it's reversible, are candidates anything less than "women that don't want to get pregnant now or in the foreseeable future." The only thing I can think of is this caveat is a concession to religious nuts that still think condoms are a sin, and the like. Which, of course, I am not in favor of.
Michelle, you know more about lady parts than we do - you're on your way to being an OB/GYN, right? And most of us have still never seen an actual vagina, correct? Is there something I'm missing in this goofball rule? "No babies ever, unless you choose to reverse it...provided, of course, you are in love with a dude and already have already gne forth and multiplied." Phug.
And that logo totally looks like a vagina and ovaries. Totally.
Posted by Chris at March 14, 2008 05:22 PMI'll ran this by Irma over the phone, so I think I'm more or less right (she's an RN working at a women's clinic, for anybody that doesn't know her).
Mirenas are inserted into the uterus, and basically have strings hanging out that allow you to pull them back out. Between the actual IUD and the threads hanging off of it, they present a place to trap semen, and provide a path for bacteria/viruses to where the Mirena enters the body. So, if you're having unprotected sex, they actually increase your risk of contracting STDs. That's why they want you to be sure that you're in a monogamous relationship.
And on the 1 child requirement, it's because the cervix has already been dilated at some point, making it easier to place the Mirena. Women who haven't been pregnant are more difficult to install the Mirena in, and actually, their bodies tend to expel the IUD. They do place them in women that haven't had children - they're just counseled on the risk of expulsion.
Personally, from what I know about them, I think it should be up to the woman. If you're not in a monogamous relationship, you shouldn't be having unprotected sex, anyway. So I think it should be up to the woman to decide which would be the bigger negative for her - contracting an STD, or having an unwanted pregnancy.
Posted by: Fatboy at March 14, 2008 06:51 PMWell that makes sense. Stop making sense. I want to rant and be indignant. Pfft, you and your logical, informed response. This is America, dammit, we don't have time for reason and sound decision making. The turrrrrists are jealous of our IUDs.
Posted by: McCreary at March 15, 2008 02:38 AMaside from the fact that i'm a family doc and not training to be an ob/gyn, women's health is an interest of mine. fatboy did a good job explaining...i would add a few things though. it's not just that the mirena and it's "strings" that hang out increase the likelihood of getting an STD, it means it makes it more likely that you will get a pelvic infection in the uterus and abdominal cavity that may cause infertility because of scar tissue in the uterus. once scarring has happened, it also predisposes women to ectopic pregnancies later in life. and the only person who can remove the IUD is a trained professional, although the woman is expected to check for the strings once per month because rarely the IUD can get embedded in the uterus. Most women who have never been pregnant will have increased cramping and a slightly increased chance of expelling the IUD. also, the copper T is chosen by some women because that IUD can be left in for 10 years and works in a slightly different way than the Mirena.
Infertility, infection, STDs, pelvic explosion...man, all that sucks.
That's why I only do it with the girl on top, because she can't get pregnant that way.
Posted by: McCreary at March 15, 2008 05:51 PMIt's Uter-us, not Uter-you.
Posted by: Nate at March 17, 2008 12:45 PMYou never know who's going to come checking out the comments. Although, anyone getting this type of information from this site has a lot more trouble than getting their acronyms wrong.
Posted by: Fatboy at March 18, 2008 09:26 AM