Catholicism, Christianity, Christian teaching, Catholic teaching, ethics, virtue, vice, sin, freedom, issues, homeschool, home education

October 22, 2008 | In: Abortion, Chastity, Culture of Life, New Birth Technology, NFP, Society

Real Woman’s Health

What is woman’s health? The general assumption is that “Woman’s health” is defined by the triad of abortion, contraception and invitro fertilization. However, I have yet to hear exactly how killing babies and shutting down a woman’s fertility system can be considered “health.” Abortion, contraception and invitro fertilization do nothing to heal women or to keep them healthy. In fact, our cultural acceptance of our current definition of “woman’s health” has kept us from doing effective research into true methods of healing.

There is one group thinking outside of the box (to borrow a cliche). This past weekend my wife and I attended a conference on NaPro TECHNOLOGY put on by Dr. Thomas Hilgers. While I was already aware of NaPro TECHNOLOGY and the Pope Paul VI institute, Dr. Hilgers opened our eyes to the difference between our culture’s twisted view of woman’s health and what true science can do for women.

For example, popular “scientific wisdom” claims that natural progesterone does nothing to help women suffering from PMS, post-partum depression or pre-menopause symptoms. The studies that led to this conclusion treated all of the women in the experimental group as if their cycles were the same length. Treating all women’s cycles the same resulted in an indiscriminate administration of progesterone. If progesterone is introduced into a woman who does not need it at this point in her cycle, the result is to negate the effect of all progesterone in her cycle, perhaps making her symptoms even worse.

The Pope Paul VI institute performed a study that targeted the administration of progesterone to each woman’s individual cycle. They found that supplementing the woman’s own progesterone production resulted in marked improvements in symptoms for PMS, post-partum depression and pre-menopause. I find it ironic that natural family planning used to be criticized for assuming that all women had similar cycles. Now natural family planning is the only woman’s health movement that treats women as individuals.

Another example of the lack of woman’s health in accepted medical practice is the difference in reported cases of endometriosis. In vitro fertilization clinics report that about five percent of women seeking fertility treatments have endometriosis. However, scientific surveys found that around 80% of women suffering from infertility had endometriosis. Why the great difference? In vitro fertilization clinics don’t even screen for endometriosis. In fact, most causes of infertility go undiagnosed because Ob-Gyn doctors prefer to offer hyper-ovulation drugs or refer their patients to in vitro fertilization clinics. After all, in vitro fertilization makes identifying and treating actual problems in the fertility system unnecessary. This is not woman’s health. It is circumventing true health for the sake of a quick solution.

The pill is often given for “medical reasons.” However, there have been only two scientific studies on the use of the pill to treat problems in a woman’s cycle. Therapeutic use of the pill is all “off-label.” Typically the therapeutic value of chemical contraception comes from shutting down the fertility system, which gets rid of the symptoms but does nothing to address the underlying problem. Again, this is not woman’s health but circumventing true health for the sake of a convenient quick fix.

Contraception and abortion are considered by “accepted medical practice” as woman’s health because they prevent the birth of a child. Preventing childbirth has nothing to do with health. In fact, it is contrary to the natural and healthy function of the fertility system. Natural family planning is able to help women plan their families without doing damage to fertility or to human life. It is also helps trained medical professionals to diagnose possible causes of infertility and recommend a course of treatment, ranging from simple hormone supplements to reconstructive surgery. These treatments have success rates over 80%, resulting in actual reproductive health. In contrast, in vitro fertilization and hyper-ovulation drugs have success rates under 25% – much lower even than success rates of unrefined treatments used before 1970.

Pharmacists that won’t dispense contraception and doctors that refuse to perform abortions are accused of denying reproductive health to women. Actually, our culture’s obsession with sex without consequences is the true culprit.


[ad#seasonal]

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

1 Response to Real Woman’s Health

Avatar

ACOG Proves the Point | Gaudium Veritatis

November 10th, 2008 at 11:32 am

[...] how human life begins. The change in the definition of pregnancy was a purely political change. In fact, the categorization of contraception as “women’s health” is also “ac… Setting the record straight on psychological and physical risks. The ban’s claim that an abortion [...]

Comment Form

Spread the Joy!

Subscribe

About Me

Jeff Arrowood

Jeff Arrowood is a freelance Catholic educator and entrepreneur. He works out of his central Wisconsin home as a stay-home dad. Jeff offers educational services including curriculum writing, online classes, educational articles, live educational programs, and Catholic books & media -- all for the purpose of promoting Catholic literacy and leading Catholics to the Joy of the Truth.