Elements of the menstrual suppression debate.
In this article I review common arguments and frameworks used by participants in the debate about extended use of combined hormonal contraceptives (CHCs; usually oral contraceptive pills) for menstrual suppression. I examine the way in which menstruation is described and the scope of risks considered. I consider the role of the pharmaceutical industry, personal and clinical experience, and concerns about the contraceptive effectiveness of contraceptive formulations with lower doses. I also address public consequences of the debate, including the possibility of inciting a pill scare, and increasing product awareness and off-label practice.
Hitchcock
Christine L
CL
Centre for Menstrual Cycle and Ovulation Research (CeMCOR), Endocrinology/Medicine, University of British Columbia and Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. chris.hitchcock@ubc.ca
D003268:Contraception Behavior; D003276:Contraceptives, Oral / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000009:adverse effects; D005260:Female; D007722:Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice; D006801:Humans; D008598:Menstruation / Q000523:psychology*; D034445:Ovulation Inhibition / Q000523:psychology*; D016387:Women's Health
D003276:Contraceptives, Oral