5 ms·

Apparently both. On this page http://www.readytogroove.com/app/ http://www.readytogroove.com/app/, it explains how you can learn which days you are or are not f

Apparently both. On this page http://www.readytogroove.com/app/ http://www.readytogroove.com/app/, it explains how you can learn which days you are or are not fertile. Is this really a reliable birth control method though?

jaldoretta 13y ago
There haven't been a ton of studies done, but the ones that have been carried out all show a perfect-use effectiveness of over 99%. But that definitely depends on how careful users are.
- ntaso 13y ago
  The sympto-thermal method is researched since the 1950s by an Austrian gynecologist. There have been A TON of studies.
jaldoretta 13y ago
This is one of the most thorough studies that has been done: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17314078 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17314078
nsxwolf 13y ago
This is Fertility Awareness / Natural Family Planning[1], branded in a way that will be more palatable to a secular Silicon Valley audience. My wife and I use NFP. This is actually the slickest app I've ever seen. It's pretty reliable if you want to use it for birth control, provided the woman has at least somewhat regular cycles. Even with irregular cycles, there's useful information that can be gleaned from cervical mucus and basal body temperature. It's probably not for people who absolutely cannot tolerate one or two "surprise" children, but it will at least prevent you from becoming the Duggars if that's not your thing. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_family_planning http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_family_planning
- ntaso 13y ago
  Sorry to say so, but you're wrong about two things: 1. A women doesn't have to have a regular cycle for this method to be safe. Why? Because if the cycle is irregular, the cycle cannot be evaluated / charted and you have to assume fertility. 2. The method is as safe as the pill. The risk for getting "surprise children" is the same as with the pill.
  - nsxwolf 13y ago
    For your objection to (1), you'd be right if we were talking about the rhythm method, but we aren't. There are other signs of impending fertility that can be tracked.
ejstronge 13y ago
I think jaidoretta's comment is a bit too optimistic about fertility-awareness methods. The CDC has an information sheet about the effectiveness of different methods of contraception[1] which cite on the order of 18 pregnancies a year for these methods. Interestingly, newer fertility-awareness methods appear to be more effective than this estimate[2]. [1] http://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/UnintendedPregnancy/PDF/Contraceptive_methods_508.pdf http://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/UnintendedPregnancy/PD... [2] http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0015028204012518 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0015028204...
- jaldoretta 13y ago
  The effectiveness of the sympto-thermal method (STM), like other methods, obviously depends on a number of factors. One of the big problems is that fertility awareness-based methods are a whole category of methods, which also includes the rhythm method and others that are much less effective that STM.

jaldoretta 13y ago

There haven't been a ton of studies done, but the ones that have been carried out all show a perfect-use effectiveness of over 99%. But that definitely depends on how careful users are.

ntaso 13y ago
The sympto-thermal method is researched since the 1950s by an Austrian gynecologist. There have been A TON of studies.

jaldoretta 13y ago

This is one of the most thorough studies that has been done: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17314078 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17314078

nsxwolf 13y ago

This is Fertility Awareness / Natural Family Planning[1], branded in a way that will be more palatable to a secular Silicon Valley audience. My wife and I use NFP. This is actually the slickest app I've ever seen. It's pretty reliable if you want to use it for birth control, provided the woman has at least somewhat regular cycles. Even with irregular cycles, there's useful information that can be gleaned from cervical mucus and basal body temperature. It's probably not for people who absolutely cannot tolerate one or two "surprise" children, but it will at least prevent you from becoming the Duggars if that's not your thing. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_family_planning http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_family_planning

ntaso 13y ago
Sorry to say so, but you're wrong about two things: 1. A women doesn't have to have a regular cycle for this method to be safe. Why? Because if the cycle is irregular, the cycle cannot be evaluated / charted and you have to assume fertility. 2. The method is as safe as the pill. The risk for getting "surprise children" is the same as with the pill.
- nsxwolf 13y ago
  For your objection to (1), you'd be right if we were talking about the rhythm method, but we aren't. There are other signs of impending fertility that can be tracked.

ejstronge 13y ago

I think jaidoretta's comment is a bit too optimistic about fertility-awareness methods. The CDC has an information sheet about the effectiveness of different methods of contraception[1] which cite on the order of 18 pregnancies a year for these methods. Interestingly, newer fertility-awareness methods appear to be more effective than this estimate[2]. [1] http://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/UnintendedPregnancy/PDF/Contraceptive_methods_508.pdf http://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/UnintendedPregnancy/PD... [2] http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0015028204012518 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0015028204...

jaldoretta 13y ago
The effectiveness of the sympto-thermal method (STM), like other methods, obviously depends on a number of factors. One of the big problems is that fertility awareness-based methods are a whole category of methods, which also includes the rhythm method and others that are much less effective that STM.