If you’re wondering why your doctor might not take you seriously when you question taking the pill to abolish your periods, you might want to look at this piece of advice.
I had a look at the Clinical Advisor magazine information – it looks like they pay for articles, help to massage them into shape, but as far as I can tell the articles are not peer-reviewed, and the editorial staff do not have any credentials after their names, so they look like non-medical people. But it is freely available on the web, and apparently gets sent to many practicing physicians and nurses. And it’s a lot more readable than other sources of medical education.
The article is framed as a doctor-to-doctor question:
What can I do to overcome patient resistance to continuous use of oral contraceptives (OCs)? So many women say it’s not natural.—SHERRY HILL, ARNP, Bothell, Wash.
And, the answer? Explain the physiology, explain that there is no build up of old blood, that menstrual flow doesn’t have any effect on infections or toxins. And, for talking points, use the educational materials about cycle-stopping contraceptives on the Association of Reproductive Health Professionals web page (coincidentally funded with unrestricted educational funds from companies who happen to make cycle-stopping contraceptive products). And use Malcolm Gladwell’s 2000 article, John Rock’s Error, to reframe monthly menstrual flow as a historic anomaly (“you don’t need that old-fashioned thing”) and help women to see their regular menstrual flow as unnatural, so that the synthetic drugs you are suggesting will seem less unnatural by comparison.
But, ultimately, “if a patient feels that a monthly withdrawal bleed suits her best, many OCs containing 21 active pills and seven inert pills are available.”
I guess the option of using non-hormonal contraception just won’t come up.