Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FDA approves first nonprescription daily oral contraceptive

fda.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 395 posts

Re: FDA approves first nonprescription daily oral contraceptive

#371

Post by skissane »

giraffe_lady wrote: post #120
rcstank wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this not a slippery slope fallacy?

It is not. Significant minorities of the anti-abortion movement are also anti-contraceptive. There are articles and even draft legislation published by these groups from 15+ years ago detailing the ultimate goal being bans on contraceptives. You could believe they can't achieve those goals, I guess, but believing they want to is not a fallacy in this context come on.

> It is not. Significant minorities of the anti-abortion movement are also anti-contraceptive.

Many of them want to ban contraceptive methods they view as “abortifacient”. We can argue about whether they are right to give certain methods that label-but there are contraceptive methods nobody calls that, such as condoms. People are ignoring the distinction between “want to ban some methods of contraception” and “want to ban all methods of contraception”-almost nobody belongs to the second category. Few other than conservative Catholics are completely morally opposed to condoms, and very few of those want the state to enforce that particular moral judgement. From the logic of their own beliefs, condoms are a sexual sin but not the taking of innocent life, so there is not the same need for the state to ban it.

Re: FDA approves first nonprescription daily oral contraceptive

#372

Post by giraffe_lady »

skissane wrote: post #371
giraffe_lady wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not. Significant minorities of the anti-abortion movement are also anti-contraceptive. There are articles and even draft legislation published by these groups from 15+ years ago detailing the ultimate goal being bans on contraceptives. You could believe they can't achieve those goals, I guess, but believing they want to is not a fallacy in this context come on.

> It is not. Significant minorities of the anti-abortion movement are also anti-contraceptive. Many of them want to ban contraceptive methods they view as “abortifacient”. We can argue about whether they are right to give certain methods that label-but there are contraceptive methods nobody calls that, such as condoms. People are ignoring the distinction between “want to ban some methods of contraception” and “want t…

Who cares though? It makes no difference to the people whose lives are affected by the banning of contraceptives. This sort of sophisticated model of their interiority is simply not valuable to me. I don't care if they're internally consistent I care what they want to do.

Re: FDA approves first nonprescription daily oral contraceptive

#374

Post by ironcurtain »

lalaithion wrote: post #8

This is amazing, it will help a lot of people have access to a drug that can vastly improve quality of life without being gatekept by their doctor. Just one note about the phrasing of all the headlines: they’re phrased as if the FDA did a good thing, but it’s better to imagine this as the FDA _stopping_ doing a bad thing. The only reason that we haven’t had over the counter oral contraceptive for the last fifty years…

[flagged]

Re: FDA approves first nonprescription daily oral contraceptive

#375

Post by skissane »

giraffe_lady wrote: post #372
skissane wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is not. Significant minorities of the anti-abortion movement are also anti-contraceptive. Many of them want to ban contraceptive methods they view as “abortifacient”. We can argue about whether they are right to give certain methods that label-but there are contraceptive methods nobody calls that, such as condoms. People are ignoring the distinction between “want to ban some methods of contraception” and “want t…

Who cares though? It makes no difference to the people whose lives are affected by the banning of contraceptives. This sort of sophisticated model of their interiority is simply not valuable to me. I don't care if they're internally consistent I care what they want to do .

I think it is important to steelman one’s opponents rather than strawman them, to seek to present their position accurately rather than oversimplifying it. To me that is an important norm of civil discourse, and I care about the norms of civil discourse. That increasingly many people don’t doesn’t bode well for society’s future.

Re: FDA approves first nonprescription daily oral contraceptive

#376

Post by Obscurity4340 »

candiddevmike wrote: post #12
lalaithion wrote: post #8

This is amazing, it will help a lot of people have access to a drug that can vastly improve quality of life without being gatekept by their doctor. Just one note about the phrasing of all the headlines: they’re phrased as if the FDA did a good thing, but it’s better to imagine this as the FDA _stopping_ doing a bad thing. The only reason that we haven’t had over the counter oral contraceptive for the last fifty years…

There's a bit more nuance here. There is certainly a political angle, but there is a non zero risk with taking something like this that should be discussed with a doctor first, IMO. Bypassing a doctor does open up access, but there may be risks, especially if folks don't take the medicine correctly.

There are a lot of OTC meds that are literally more dangerous or side effect heavy or have objectively worse risks, or are more damaging with long-term use than their superior prescription-only counterparts. Even within prescription medications, it is ironic that they often schedule more leniently based on the potential toxicity+lack of abuse potential (stick+ lack of carrot).

Re: FDA approves first nonprescription daily oral contraceptive

#377

Post by Obscurity4340 »

noodlenotes wrote: post #182
elijaht wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of that ends up being bureaucratic wastes of time though. My partner was on birth control for years and had to jump through so many hoops - Had to go to yearly appointments to continue receiving it - Could not pick up more than a month at a time, which created logistical issues since they HAD to take it daily - Had to get the prescription renewed every three months or so, which often led to delays filling it It…

You can add to that list - Have to get pap smears before being granted a prescription Doctors will withhold birth control to coerce women to get regular pap smears, just because it's a lever they have available, not because it's related to the prescription. I have to take both ADHD meds and birth control, and while it is much easier to get prescribed birth control, it's a similar level of stress of making sure my med…

Do you use a smaller pharmacy or a chain? Would highly recommend getting setup with a smaller pharmacy that will value the endless recurring business and work with you to iron out all the seams. It should not be such a big deal to handle these basic things. Some even offer home delivery so you don't even have to lift a finger...

Re: FDA approves first nonprescription daily oral contraceptive

#378

Post by Obscurity4340 »

mustacheemperor wrote: post #74
elijaht wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of that ends up being bureaucratic wastes of time though. My partner was on birth control for years and had to jump through so many hoops - Had to go to yearly appointments to continue receiving it - Could not pick up more than a month at a time, which created logistical issues since they HAD to take it daily - Had to get the prescription renewed every three months or so, which often led to delays filling it It…

You are the first commenter to relate anything like even a secondhand real life experience with oral birth control. This thread (edit: at the time I am posting this) is full of men with little real knowledge of this drug insisting on why it’s reasonable it took 50 years for this to be available OTC. I don’t think the contents of their explanations are likely to be accurate, but I think they still explain why it took…

Just in general, people on the whole are idiots about drug culture and history. Most people have no idea their drug scheduling system makes no sense, that they have a bunch of dumb cops (DEA) that came up with and maintain that system rather than actual medical experts, that there were racist and economic interests at the root of all this nonsense rather than genuine concern for their well-being, etc. Also the idea that you can use control of a drug as a proxy to control and disempower various marginalized demographics.

Re: FDA approves first nonprescription daily oral contraceptive

#379

Post by PraetorianGourd »

Levitz wrote: post #356
PraetorianGourd wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A majority of Americans still have access to abortion that is _less_ restrictive than most EU countries. The Supreme Court did not outlaw abortion. In my state, abortions can be legally performed right up until birth.

Telling this to other Europeans who comment stuff like "I can't believe they outlawed abortion in the US" just doesn't get old. From "Damned brutal patriarchy" to "Damned children murderers" in less than 5 seconds.

I always wonder why the truth gets buried. What I said was accurate, but it does go against several popular narratives. Nobody wants nuance, but these things are entirely comprised of nuance.

Re: FDA approves first nonprescription daily oral contraceptive

#380

Post by deprecative »

neuronerdgirl wrote: post #252
giantg2 wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Likely much more if you consider the actual cost of the medication.

Last time i had to pay out of pocket (because insurance won't cover more than 3 months at a time and I was going out of the country for 6) my GENERIC BC was 89.99 per month. The brand name is something like $189. I can't take cheaper forms because they have negative interactions with my brain chemistry that make me suicidal. BC is offensively expensive and needlessly difficult to obtain. As an aside, the amount of pa…

One of the routine problems I see around this place is how the folks who flock to "intellectual" spaces are both the intellectual and the ignorant who fancy themselves the former's equal.

I'm terribly sorry to have read your experience. I empathize deeply, though my situation is different (migraine medication vs birth control), in my experiences in having dealt with doctors and insurance companies to get both the medication I need and in an amount that will get me through.

I hope this change and others like it help bring you comfort and safe, affordable access to medicine you need.

Post reply on HN