FDA approves first nonprescription daily oral contraceptive • Hacker News Board

Re: FDA approves first nonprescription daily oral contraceptive

#331

Post by lotsofpulp » Thu, Jul 13, 2023, 6:45 PM UTC

bamfly wrote: post #315

lotsofpulp wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really, as a woman’s pregnancy affects her body and life quite a bit more drastically than it affects a man. Ideally, men would be equal in this regard, but nature does not work like that so we have to work with what we have. If you can come up with a better solution that does not violate a woman’s autonomy over their body and also does not let men off the hook for providing for their kids, I am all ears (or eyes…

Oh, I agree it's complex and there are meaningful differences in how the whole pregnancy thing is experienced, and that the needs of kids maybe should override weird selfish libertarian-adjacent "pft, totally unfair to make me pay for any of this!" attitudes (cases of actual fraud being... another matter, potentially). I was just caught off guard by that particular argument being employed in that way. "Well it's easy…

> even when the context is entirely about consensual sex.

I thought this context was about ensuring women have access to over the counter birth control, which can be a benefit in the case of consensual and non consensual sexual. Especially in non consensual sex.

Re: FDA approves first nonprescription daily oral contraceptive

#332

Post by basisword » Thu, Jul 13, 2023, 6:45 PM UTC

tiny_ta wrote: post #330

basisword wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you’re an addict you’re not taking alcohol/drugs/cough syrup on a daily basis though. From my reading of this comment thread in general the issue really seems to be that you can’t see a doctor for free (at the point of use) in the US. Anecdotally I know a few people who have had difficult side effects on the pill, or medical issues which preclude them from using specific types. Speaking to a doctor once to get…

You're absolutely right that, ideally, this would be a conversation with a professional, non-moralizing doctor. But there could be many scenarios where one doesn't have access to such care - think of the uninsured, think of teenage girls who don't want their parents to know, think of women in abusive relationships who don't want to get pregnant, the list goes on. If you were on your partner's/parent's plan, there is…

Very interesting. It sounds like the issue is the healthcare system. When I was a teenager I could make a doctors appointment without my family knowing and without paying anyone or leaving a trace. It’s a side of the US system I hadn’t considered before (lack of privacy) so thanks for explaining it. Great that this will help some people but fixing the system seems much more important than letting people buy medicine OTC without advice and a review of their history.

Re: FDA approves first nonprescription daily oral contraceptive

#333

Post by keenmaster » Thu, Jul 13, 2023, 6:52 PM UTC

giantg2 wrote: post #310

keenmaster wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Empirically, how much does visiting a doctor change people’s understanding of “once daily”? Measured in percentage terms. Because that’s the important question here.

They have some data in the links in the article. There could be some bias there (pharma likes to guide subject answers, and they dont provide the methodology details), so we would probably need real world data. But based on that limited data it appears to be no different. In theory, the longer the pill is in use and the more people who use it, then the more likely it is that people in society understand that it's one…

So literally a vibrating pill box that stays lit and sends smart reminders until someone takes their pill would be 10,000x more effective and cost vastly less than the appointments+opportunity cost+lifestyle cost forced on women by profiteers. Or one of those special purpose reminder apps. Or Google Calendar…

An app can deliver periodic reminders about the potential negative effects of birth control pills. It can have a conversational interface for when someone is having issues with a particular pill, thinking about starting a new pill or type of contraceptive, etc…

Re: FDA approves first nonprescription daily oral contraceptive

#334

Post by telotortium » Thu, Jul 13, 2023, 7:06 PM UTC

fzeroracer wrote: post #220

CivBase wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know where this is coming from. I'm aware that a significant portion of conservatives are very religious and some religious people object to contraception. But I'm not aware of any concerted effort by Republicans to ban or restrict pre-pregnancy contraceptives in my lifetime. And while I have plenty of thoughts about Trump, I'm not aware of him ever suggesting an interest in restricting access to contraceptiv…

> But I'm not aware of any concerted effort by Republicans to ban or restrict pre-pregnancy contraceptives in my lifetime. Really? Because Texas has been marching in that direction for some time now. There was a recent ruling that when it comes to contraceptives that agencies cannot protect minor confidentiality from their parents. Multiple republican think tanks push the idea that contraceptives kill babies and shou…

Most contraceptive pills have some risk of causing abortion, at least if you count stopping implantation - is that factually incorrect?

Re: FDA approves first nonprescription daily oral contraceptive

#335

Post by CivBase » Thu, Jul 13, 2023, 7:07 PM UTC

robertoandred wrote: post #222

CivBase wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know where this is coming from. I'm aware that a significant portion of conservatives are very religious and some religious people object to contraception. But I'm not aware of any concerted effort by Republicans to ban or restrict pre-pregnancy contraceptives in my lifetime. And while I have plenty of thoughts about Trump, I'm not aware of him ever suggesting an interest in restricting access to contraceptiv…

You shouldn't trust Republicans to not start new efforts. They brought down abortion, do you really think they'll stop there?

The slippery slope you're presenting doesn't hold water. There's a pretty clear difference between abortion and pre-pregnancy contraception. Republicans' stance on the former is not a strong indication of their stance on the later.

Re: FDA approves first nonprescription daily oral contraceptive

#336

Post by mathisfun123 » Thu, Jul 13, 2023, 7:07 PM UTC

mcpackieh wrote: post #323

mathisfun123 wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

everything in this reply espouses ideas and positions that are literal antitheses of a liberal society.

In liberal democracies, people have a right to get to have their say (on a soap box and at the ballot box) in matters that don't rationally concern them.

have a say but not dictate. so my point isn't that the response says things but that it advocates for policy/governance.

Re: FDA approves first nonprescription daily oral contraceptive

#337

Post by CivBase » Thu, Jul 13, 2023, 7:16 PM UTC

fzeroracer wrote: post #220

CivBase wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know where this is coming from. I'm aware that a significant portion of conservatives are very religious and some religious people object to contraception. But I'm not aware of any concerted effort by Republicans to ban or restrict pre-pregnancy contraceptives in my lifetime. And while I have plenty of thoughts about Trump, I'm not aware of him ever suggesting an interest in restricting access to contraceptiv…

> But I'm not aware of any concerted effort by Republicans to ban or restrict pre-pregnancy contraceptives in my lifetime. Really? Because Texas has been marching in that direction for some time now. There was a recent ruling that when it comes to contraceptives that agencies cannot protect minor confidentiality from their parents. Multiple republican think tanks push the idea that contraceptives kill babies and shou…

> There was a recent ruling that when it comes to contraceptives that agencies cannot protect minor confidentiality from their parents.

That issue is about whether parents should have access to private information about their children, not restrictions to contraceptives.

I already acknowledged there are groups who are opposed to contraception. The Catholic Medical Association and Students for Life of America are examples of such groups. And there are undoubtably Republicans who try to appeal to those groups.

But you have not provided compelling evidence of a concerted effort by the GOP to restrict access to pre-pregnancy contraceptives.

It's like claiming the Republican party wants to restore segregation because many Republicans oppose affirmative action and there are racist groups who vote for them.

Re: FDA approves first nonprescription daily oral contraceptive

#338

Post by tiny_ta » Thu, Jul 13, 2023, 7:17 PM UTC

basisword wrote: post #332

tiny_ta wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're absolutely right that, ideally, this would be a conversation with a professional, non-moralizing doctor. But there could be many scenarios where one doesn't have access to such care - think of the uninsured, think of teenage girls who don't want their parents to know, think of women in abusive relationships who don't want to get pregnant, the list goes on. If you were on your partner's/parent's plan, there is…

Very interesting. It sounds like the issue is the healthcare system. When I was a teenager I could make a doctors appointment without my family knowing and without paying anyone or leaving a trace. It’s a side of the US system I hadn’t considered before (lack of privacy) so thanks for explaining it. Great that this will help some people but fixing the system seems much more important than letting people buy medicine…

I couldn't agree more! :)

Re: FDA approves first nonprescription daily oral contraceptive

#339

Post by maerF0x0 » Thu, Jul 13, 2023, 7:20 PM UTC

xyzzy_plugh wrote: post #238

maerF0x0 wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's often funny to me how there will be such a massive gnashing of teeth about whether or not something is prescription or OTC available to women, when Men essentially have no contraceptive choice and have 100% liability the moment it leaves our body, potentially including in cases of paternity fraud. It'd be like if we told women they had to have the baby the moment their egg accepts a sperm, regardless of the reas…

> It'd be like if we told women they had to have the baby the moment their egg accepts a sperm, regardless of the reasons it ended up there. I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not here, but that is pretty much what exactly is happening in much of the USA. It's sad, disappointing and, frankly, irrational, at least from the perspective you present.

I agree. What I'm pointing at is that it's sufficiently similar that it's unfair to do the same to a man.

Re: FDA approves first nonprescription daily oral contraceptive

#340

Post by jjkeddo199 » Thu, Jul 13, 2023, 7:22 PM UTC

ssnistfajen wrote: post #326

jjkeddo199 wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problems you mentioned are real, but I am not convinced they are the root cause for low birthrates. Do you think that Sweden, Norway, and Finland are hostile to parenthood?

For career-oriented people, yes. Those countries operate on the same market economy principles as every other industrialized nation. Extensive welfare and benefits coverage not reversing the birthrate decline only further reinforces my argument that the root cause lies deep within how our society functions.

Are you saying that a free market economy is incompatible with high birth rates? How did even less generous free market nations have high birth rates in the past? Don't you think being forced to choose between having a free market and having high birth rates an even more extreme idea than the one in my OP?