Photo: jupiterimages

Given that birth control pills have a wide range of well-documented side effects, including bloating, mood changes and sluggishness, all of which can affect your quality of life to varying degrees, it seems reasonable to assume that your daily dose of hormones could also impact your running performance. A study released earlier this year led by researchers at Texas A&M seemed to give credence to the idea that the pill takes a toll on physical performance, finding that women who took birth control pills developed 40 percent less muscle mass than women who did not.

I wondered exactly what role the pill plays in running performance and went to Rebecca Battista, associate professor at Appalachian State University in the Department of Health, Leisure, and Exercise Science. "Most of the literature around the menstrual cycle and performance is all negative," says Battista. "And while there's little agreement on the impact of the pill, it doesn't seem to benefit or hurt performance," she says.

Our male readers likely quit reading after the headline, so fellow females, it should be just us girls in here. And I have a question to ask you: What do you make of the new "no-period" pill Lybrel?

The pill, whose name looks to be a funky phonetic spelling of liberal and is meant to make you think "liberty," is set to be approved by the FDA soon. Traditional birth control pills have women take a 7-day dose of sugar pills after three weeks on the drug, to mimic a women's cycle. Though it seems like you're having a "period," I've read that actually that 7-day break is only there to mimic your cycle and make you feel more comfortable. The period your having has no function at all. That's perhaps why drug makers have been creating drugs that cut back periods more and more. First there were drugs like Yaz that shortened periods to three days or less, then Seasonique cut them back to four times a year. Lybrel promises to eliminate them altogether (although 18% of women in trials reported breakthrough bleeding, so I'm not sure that promise will hold up.)

Source

Females -- are you in a birth control pill? The gamut of reasons for being on the pill run from sapping sex drives to getting rid of the monthly visitor that some women like just as much as the plague. But, there are also quite a few myths about this form of birth control, and most of the "far out" ones are quite untrue.

There is one overriding reason to have that pill -- to prevent and unwanted pregnancy. But, the multitude of other reasons some women are on the pill may not even be valid. So, with that, let's review the 10 myths of being on the pill, according to Health.com:

MYTH: It's risky to stop your period.
MYTH: The pill ups your cancer risks.
MYTH: The pill makes you fat (and frigid).
MYTH: An IUD ruins your fertility.
MYTH: The sponge is as good as the pill.
MYTH: Long-term use of the pill is a no-no.
MYTH: Pill side effects last forever.
MYTH: Taking the pill past age 40 is risky.
MYTH: It's OK to take any medicine with the pill.
MYTH: The pill makes migraines worse.

Source

The plethora of birth control methods leaves nobody out these days -- from pills to devices to chemicals to...well, you get the picture. With the release of quite a few new birth control "pills" on the market in the last few years, there have been some safety concerns on several of these products.

From the possibility of developing blood clots to other complications, and advocacy group is pushing for the banning of birth control products (or renewing a protest, I should say) against birth control products that have these possibly dangerous side effects like twice the risk of blood clots and the like.

The advocacy group also sad that newer contraceptives are no better than older ones that did not show more risks for patients.

Source

Women who used birth control pills in the 1960s would be amazed at the range of options open to women today. There are patches, shots, and even pills that shorten the menstrual cycle.

Recently, the FDA has started taking a closer look at the newer versions of "the pill." While the high-estrogen birth control pills of yesterday allowed only one pregnancy out of a hundred when taken for a year, the newer pills appear to allow two pregnancies. Whether this difference is cause for concern or not is the topic of discussion among a panel of experts at the FDA this week. A decision needs to be made on whether the contraceptive pill industry needs to create higher standards of effectiveness or whether the benefits of lower-estrogen pills outweigh the risks.

Because of their high levels of estrogen, the old fashioned pills carried a higher risk of blood clots and heart damage. The lower estrogen counterparts are thought to be safer, but because of the way testing is completed, it's hard to compare. Modern clinical trials are completed with non-smoking women at a healthy weight, so its difficult to predict how the drug will interact with the general population.

New and innovative contraception products hit pharmacy shelves on a regular basis, so I think a review by the FDA is probably a good thing. What do you think?

Source