This weeks entry perhaps has less volatility and more accountability than last week’s foray into unfriendly territory. My next focus is the Mayo Clinic web site, particularly their section on Birth Control. It’s not entirely incorrect, but I will invite you to invite them to THINK AGAIN about who can use NFP.
The good news: The “Rhythm Method” is not equated with modern natural family planning. They do make the distinction, but still use the NFP tag with the RM.
The bad news: In an attempt to make their site user friendly, they have these pro/ con charts. Here’s the NFP pro/con chart:
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| It provides a “natural” method for couples who prefer not to use contraceptive devices. | It may inhibit sexual spontaneity and requires extensive periods of abstinence when used as the sole means of birth control. |
| There are no medical side effects. | It’s less effective for women with irregular menstrual cycles. |
| It’s immediately reversible. | It offers no protection against STDs, including HIV. |
| It’s inexpensive and doesn’t require a prescription or follow-up medical visits. |
Did you spot it the glaring error? Right. Exactly, “It’s less effective for women with irregular menstrual cycles.” WRONG! WRONG! WRONG! Why do doctors who even acknowledge the legitimacy of NFP still think this?! Uggh. As all NFPers know, NFP is an observation of one’s fertility on an hour by hour, day by day basis to determine where you’re at in your cycle and whether or not you’re fertile. It’s NOT a calculation of days, predicting when ovulation will or won’t be. I can’t tell you how many “NFP” forums I’ve been on that still refer to calculations thinking this is NFP. It’s not!
Last week we got Rachel to change her incorrect blog entry that hellaciously commented on NFP. This week, let’s write into the Mayo Clinic Web site editors to get them to change their misleading information on NFP. Health professionals–your comments, emails and support is especially appreciated because you have a certain credibility with your titles, especially to the Mayo Clinic.
I’m having trouble finding contact information for the webmaster or web site editor, but I found a blog entry on the Medical Editor’s Blog that’s pertinent to our complaint, and could use some comments, “Accurate Information Your Best Bet for Health Issues.”
Also, I found the Contact Us form on the site. Be prepared (like the Jay Leno contact us form) to be required to keep it under a certain number of characters.
I’d suggest making it short and to the point, something like:
[Salutation of your choice],
I was reading your Guide to Birth Control, and noticed that you include natural methods of family planning (NFP) in your resources. I’m very happy to see this, since NFP has been a medically based, scientifically effective method of family planning for decades, and is now getting some of the respect it deserves.
However, there’s a mistake on your Pros/Cons list that I want to point out. One of the cons is listed as “It’s less effective for women with irregular menstrual cycles.” This is more old wives’ tale than actual science. Because of the methodology of modern NFP (not Rhythm), any woman with any type of cycle may use NFP with a high level of accuracy. You may wish to examine this journal article from the Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine:
http://www.jabfm.org/cgi/content/full/22/2/147
For a clinical web site with information on one of several modern NFP methods with a medical imprimatur, see www.fertilitycare.org.
I hope you change this part of the web site, because I would hate to see perfectly good candidates for NFP turned away because they think their “irregular” cycles disqualify them.
Very Sincerely,
[Name & title], contact information optional
on 
on 
on 
on 
on
I’d also disagree with their claim it could inhibit sexual spontaneity..though that is not as much something to write in and complain about I suppose..
My husband and I have been married 3 years and I’ve been pregnant for 4 months.. we thought we’d really enjoy sex being an anytime thing during pregnancy but turns out our sex life was a lot more exciting when we were waiting for it every month… nfp is just great! (Do say a quick prayer for us as we try to broach the subject with my engaged brother-in-law and his fiancée as we’d love to see them using it…)
Loving the feature so far Jess
ps- Merry Christmas!
Thanks so much for your comment Clare. I agree about the claim against sexual spontaneity, but that’s more of an anecdotal claim than a clinical one.
Prayers for your family…
And Merry Christmas to you!
Glad to find your new site and appreciate you taking on Mayo and their notion that it
doesn’t work for us irregulars because I think there is a place for NFP.
I also noticed on their overall chart “Birth control guide” (http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/birth-control/BI99999/PAGE=BI00051) that they list the STM as being 80-87% effective, but in their article on it they (correctly) state that it’s 98% effective. It seems to me that they should split up the different types of NFP they list on the guide (just as they do the types of barrier methods, for example), as that cell in the chart is really confusing. I would also contend that it doesn’t “require sophisticated knowledge of reproduction” – if you’re wet, it’s go time or no time, depending on your intention! What more do you need to know?
And can that really be qualified as a “risk/side effect?”
Thanks for linking to Rachel’s blog. She’s totally right! This may as well be rhythm/pull out and pray/just hope your body cooperates. Good luck, you’ll need that, too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Clearly you have no idea about what you’re talking about, Joanie. Here’s to hoping you develop an open mind…