The Pope drew attention to natural family planning methods when he suggested there are ways for Catholic women to limit the number of children they have without violating the Church’s teachings on contraception. But just how do these methods work? And how good are they?
This week, the FDA warns of real Viagra in supposedly all natural supplements, a survey finds less than half of adults polled in Japan had sex in the last month, and we theorize about what method of contraception was available to the ladies of Downton Abbey.
Intrauterine devices were popular until the ’70s, when one model caused infertility and even death in some women. Though the new generation of IUDs are safe and effective, it has been a slow climb back to their previous rates of acceptance.
On Friday, Melissa White, the CEO of an online condom retailer, attacked the findings of a study that found a small number of the condoms she sells on her website contain a chemical carcinogen called nitrosamines. In doing so, she misrepresents both our report and its conclusions.
A new petition calls on the FDA to “Get Carcinogens Out of Condoms.” But there is no scientific evidence linking condoms to cancer—and to claim otherwise has the potential to unravel decades of committed work focused on saving lives through encouraging condom use and education.
Thanks to restrictive laws and limited health-care options, halting the spread of HIV and hepatitis C is often a losing battle—one that puts women substance users in particularly high danger.
Many women know more about the risks of birth control than about how the right contraceptive might improve their lives.
For women in countries and communities with limited contraceptive choices and high rates of HIV, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa, a shortage of funding for the ECHO (Evidence for Contraceptive Options and HIV Outcomes) trial is an unacceptable development.
The lawsuits challenging the contraception benefit in the Affordable Care Act are less about birth control and more about a larger strategy to use the First Amendment to challenge government regulatory power.
The legal landscape after the Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby decision is taking shape, and it’s a mess.