Och, Lord, save me from your followers.

[k_crow]

This was something I ran across whilst googling for spermicidal alternatives to N-9:

From the web page of the American Life League:
What is my best option?

Some people may try to convince you that spermicides are totally without risk. Don't believe it! Don't depend on condoms and spermicides. They could be harmful to you.

If you're single, abstinence is always your best choice. It isn't always easy, but it always works. By abstaining from sex, you eliminate the possibility of pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease.

If you are married, be faithful to your spouse, trusting in the Lord and His will.

Be good to yourself. Don't use spermicides.

*sigh* Trust in the Lord and His will, if you are supposed to be pregnant then you'll be pregnant, and Heaven help you if you don't want kids. "Whaddya get married fer in the first place, iffn ya didn't want kids?" "How can you be a woman and not want kids?" Blegh, bring me my high-powered rifle, time to clean up the gene pool.

On a brighter note, found a different spermicide called octoxynol, though it's also a biodetergent, so who knows if I'd have the same reaciton or not. First need to try and find products that use it instead of nonoxynol-9. :P

Comments

[aladriana.livejournal.com]

From personal history (with medications, not spermicides), most things that end the same (ynol in this case) have the same reactions.

I hope this one doesn't. Good luck!!!

Re:

[k-crow.livejournal.com]

Thanks. :) Have to find a product that uses this instead of N-9 first, but we'll see.

[technoshaman.livejournal.com]

I'm with Gwen here, from what little I remember of chemistry looks like you've just got eight oxygens on that soap molocule instead of nine, only diff... which means to me it wouldn't be as effective.

I've heard of a new twist on the IUD, I don't know what stage it's in, but it involves putting little coils in the fallopian tubes instead of one big thing in the uterus.... the idea is that smaller things have less of a tendency to cause the body to reject them...

But, yeah, I'd say a carefully monitored IUD would be the way to go at this point.... that combined with limiting one's fluid partners should keep things to a decent level of risk, no?

For my two cents' worth, I think I'd be looking into changing docs, if that's all the help they're going to be.... Don't know the situation, but I think I'd kinda want the specialist to know more than I did... *sigh* Perhaps more enlightened souls would actually consider more permanent options...

As for cleaning up the gene pool... how about just a good old clue-by-four? I hear the thumps are most satisfying. Hit'em just right up 'side the head, and you get two thumps. One when they hit the floor. *evil grin*


--
A most satisfying thump!
    -- Citizen G'kar

Re:

[k-crow.livejournal.com]

Hmm, more research to check on that alternate IUD. Thanks for mentioning, though. :)

My regular doctor has been very helpful. She sent me to the ob/gyn because she didn't feel she was informed enough on the latest contraception methods. The ob/gyn is new to that office, and I get the impression she's more focused on the childbearing and -birthing side of things than child preventing. I will let my doctor know, however, that I found the ob/gyn's advice to be unhelpful.

*grin* Well now, if I want to clean up the gene pool by preventing idjits from breeding, a clue-by-four could work. I'd just need to apply it in a different location. Then you get the groan/squeak, and then a thump. *evil grin*