Pull Out Method Has 4% Failure Rate

[Bote]

Originally Posted by Brandye

This thread has served to make an excellent point: There are strident believers in many things physical, especially sexual, who go to great lengths to prove or find studies that prove their irrational belief. Believing that the pullout method is nearly as effective as hormonal or, even, condoms is irrational. For every finding such as this article, there are a dozen finding the opposite. Do not have faith in everything.

Virtually all textbooks and all marketing literature give the success rates of various forms of contraception that are much higher than actually experienced in practice. These things are used by people and we are sometimes careless. It takes only one slip up to end up pregnant.

The pullout method is more subject to error than most systems are.

There's a difference between stumbling across something that was found on a non- sex, public forum and going "to great lengths". It is interesting that those who claim to be in the medical field are so quick to slam studies or articles (or the poster) that are contrary to what is preached ad nauseum on sex websites such as this one. Somethings presented on these sites by those who should know better are patently false. There are agendas to be maintained. Caveat emptor prevails. When presented when the facts, it is like, uh, well, ok, yeah, that it true, but overall it false, without presenting the facts to the contrary.

Nobody is saying the withdrawal method is a 100% effective. Neither is a condom; neither is a pill. If pregnancy is not acceptable, then more than one method should be employed.

From what one reads on sites like this by those that claim to be in the medical field, withdrawal is tantamount to doing nothing. Presented with the facts, it becomes, well, it IS better than doing nothing.

It can't even be rationally debated. The article delves into the reasons why. Now I understand. Thank you.

[Brandye]

Hold on, Bote. If you want a fight, you can usually find one. You have quoted a journalists version of what was published in Contraception 79 (2009) pp. 407-410. Go read the article. Rachel Jones, whom I know, is Senior Researcher at the Guttmacher Institute. This Institute is a spinoff from Planned Parenthood and is an excellent research facility working in support of the WHO.

The little article you cite is very selective in what was taken from the original article. For instance, the two percent theoretical failure of the condom is shown as 17 percent in actual use. And the four percent failure of withdrawal is shown as nearly five times that IN MOTIVATED and trained couples. The article goes on to explain that there is some difficulty in studying the effectiveness of withdrawal because most couples use it in conjunction with other methods. Jones' conclusion is that it is more widely used method than most researchers believe with better effectiveness than many give credit in couples who are self-limiting their conception.

For practical purposes, withdrawal for teens who really do not know what they are doing, withdrawal is nearly useless.

Before you get all worked up over being abused, you should check original citations rather than some blogger (or semi-journalist) who does not know how to read scientific literature. You will find that Rachel uses some of the same words I did in qualifying how withdrawal can be successful. Trained, motivated.

In third world countries where nothing else is conveniently available, teaching the population how to use withdrawal can be effective. I have done it. That does not mean I am willing to recommend to a bunch of people who "have done it twice"" (quote from a post today) that they depend upon it.

You did not go to great lengths but the "journalists" went to some lengths to twist Rachel's findings.

[maupassant]

Well, as an amateur, I feel there as so many variables in the equation and anyone with the basic research knowledge must realise that even the best reliable and valid research is vulnerable to criticism. There is a lot of advice out there on all manner of things from cigarettes to alcoholism. A professional can only give the details; whether you want to conform, consent (see BMA paper on the subject, June 2008) or ignore is up to the individual.
But I do recall a rugby song with the line "Till coitus interruptus f***ed us"
Apologies for the naughty word.

[Brandye]

Look up the citation given on line and see how warped the secondary source is. Contraception is a respected journal in the field and the precis originally cited misses major elements.