[contraception] just the stats, ma'am

Sources used were Bacchus: Smarter Sex, based on the U.S. Planned Parenthood and on Contraception: an Australian clinical practice handbook. (2006), pp 17-18. These were used because they provided charts, as distinct from the others which just yabbered on.

This started as a quiz, believe it or not - which contraceptive method is the most effective , 2nd, 3rd etc. Then two things happened:

1] I realized that many, particularly Catholics, Americans or both, were not going to see the light side of contraception; and

2] I started not to see the light side myself. As I waded through the stats, trying to collate them, I realized just how much effort goes into contraception and how far the reconstitution of society depends on contraception - plus one more thing:

3] When I saw that Planned Parenthood was behind it I baulked. This organization has some allegedly quite shady practices that I've met before and it's my right to personally be circumspect about their agenda, whatever my actual view on abortion and a woman's right to her own body.

Anyway, I'll still publish and be damned [as if you don't know all this already]. In each case, the percentage is the chance of getting pregnant again after use. The results from the two lists are listed separately and repeated so you can compare :

0% Abstinence

0.05% Norplant and Norplant-2

0.1% Etonogestrel implants LNG-IUD Mirena® (Hormonal IUD)

0.1% Etonogestrel implants Implanon™

0.1% Combined (estrogen and progestin)

0.1% LNg

0.15% Male sterilisation

0.15% Male Sterilization

0.3% Injectables Depo-Provera

0.5% Progestin Only

0.5% Tubal ligation (female sterilisation)

0.5% Female Sterilization

0.8% Etonogestrel implants Cu-IUD (Copper IUD)

0. 8% IUD Progesterone T 2 Copper T 380A

0.1-1% Injectables Lunelle

1% Ortho Evra (skin patch)

2% Nuvaring (vaginal ring)

2% Lactational amenorrhoea (LAM) when all three conditions below are met:

a. fully breastfeeding

b. <6>

c. amenorrhoea

3% Ovulation Method

3% Etonogestrel implants Depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA)

5% Pill

8% Combined oral contraceptives (COC)

8% Combined hormonal vaginal ring NuvaRing®

8% Progestogen only pill (POP)

9% Calendar Method

14% Male Condom

15% Condoms - Male

16% Diaphragms (with spermicide)

19% Withdrawal

20% Sponge Women who have never given birth

20% Diaphragm

20% Cap Women who have never given birth

21% Female Condom

21% Condoms - Female

25% Periodic Abstinence

25% Fertility awareness based methods e.g. standard days method, symptothermal method

26% Spermicides

27% Withdrawal

29% Spermicide only

40% Sponge - Women who have given birth

40% Cap - Women who have given birth

85% Leaving it up to chance

Seems to me that the best methods are to either abstain or to have some horrid chemicals and implants inserted in you, bit s of metal or else be surgically operated upon. Ouch.

[super-duper photo quiz] numero uno

Click photo to zoom. Clues below:


All numbering left to right by row. Needed:

1] Real name and chief character;

2] Real name and chief character;

3] Don't mess with who? Co-star in the beach series?

4] Dad and daughter please;

5] Nickname - "ole …." plus this film;

6] Name any two;

7] Name and nickname;

8] Name and busty co-singer on "Islands";

9] Name and what does nobody expect?

10] Name and name one song.

As there are a number of possible answers, I'll just give a typical answer at the end of the link.

[nourishing obscurity] navigation [2]

This isn't a survey and nor is it "navigation" but I like to include a little pic [which represents me] when I talk shop or get onto housekeeping matters like this. Until now I've used the little guy in blue [top left] but I've also used others.

For a long time I was Mr. Badger and would love to revive this.

I even made him a coat of arms which Cleanthes, of The Select, hated.

Possibly my favourite was this little guy but he had mixed reviews.

Another way is to just put in my official logo which I did earlier in the day.

Tomorrow - the Blogfocus is back and I'll also publish the survey results.

[seagulls] where's the party, jon?

In the years I was living in Australia, my parents' house, as distinct from my city apartment, was down on the beach and they had quite a lifestyle. My stepfather, whose birthday would have been tomorrow, was a keen fisherman and a member of the local boating club.

My goodness it was idyllic. We'd go down for barbecues on the patio built over the water out from the beach and the sounds, the smell of the beach, seaweed and salt air and the freshness were bracing.

Fabulous stuff, burnt into my very soul even now.

I myself sailed further down the coast and thus I'd always stop in on the way down and on the way back in the evening, boat on trailer behind the car, with or without my lady.

One little thing we'd always do [more often than not, I was alone] was to go to the best l'il fish'nchip shop, a short hop from the foreshore. They always knew I would visit and the crumbed whiting, chips and dim sims were the best.

But here's the thing - I'd always order too many chips.

Halfway down the hill there was a place you could stop and park and it was a lookout area. Of course the views were panoramic but that wasn't all.

Picture this:

After the first two minutes, the first gull would glide in on an angle and land on your bonnet [hood]. If you didn't mind the mess and scratching, you waited and two or three more would come. Then out came the chips and very gently you'd reach around out of the window and flick chips to them in the air. They'd flap, jump up and catch them in their bills.

There was always one who was left on the roadside and often you'd fling a chip to him but the Ornery Critter always took it so you'd fling one to the Ornery Critter and another immediately to your little friend.

Now they were everywhere and the word had gone out that the party was going down on the car. The braver tried to waddle onto the side mirror and some on the roof tried peering down through the window but would fall off and flutter away. The screeching was unbelievable. The drumming of their feet on the roof was like light rainfall, except for the scratching.

It genuinely was a party. Even passing children would stop, watch, gesticulate and smile.

Then the chips would run out.

Oh that was sad 'cause I knew that only the most loyal [or greedy] would now remain and eventually they too would head for the next party.

That's why, when I read the following, there was a real nostalgic twinge:

A seagull has turned shoplifter by wandering into a shop and helping itself to chips. The bird walks into a newsagents in Aberdeen when the door is open and makes off with cheese-flavoured corn chips. The seagull, nicknamed Sam, has now become so popular that locals have started paying for the chips.

For sure. Absolutely. I'd buy a dozen serves to watch that.

[cattle class] how much will you put up with

In September, 2006, I ran a piece on "cattle class" in aeroplanes.

While ostensibly a discussion of the problems for tall passengers and a new device to stop the person in front putting his seatback back on you, it soon descended to an entertaining bitching session about airlines in general, for example:

Weight, height, overhead luggage compartment space, shoes removal, toilet queues, "overtaken spaces", reclined seats, "gases", sweat and smells … [they] annoy me even more than seat recliners ...

Bill Bryson's take on the shoddy Northwest Airlines followed and I commented at the time:

If Bryson can be believed on this, it’s a staggering indictment of the attitudes of airlines towards the paying customer.

Iceland Review girl Sara has now chipped in with this comment about cheap flights:

A four-hour chorus of crying babies? Sure, I’ll take it if the flight only puts me back ISK 35,000 (USD 587, EUR 424) to get to North America.

[K]eep in mind that the most common buzzword when talking about Heimsferdir is “budget.” Which it is—you have to pay for drinks, sandwiches, cans of Pringles aboard the plane—but the flight itself is a bargain.

If you can occupy yourself for five hours of noise and semi-chaotic conditions, then this is the way to go if you’re a starving student or an airline price shopper. But when I mean noise, I mean noise—screaming babies in front, behind and beside you for more than Four Straight Hours.

When I say filth I mean watching the girl next to me spread cheese on her cracker with her finger and then wipe that dirty finger on the chair. Not to mention her kid who stepped on potato chips all over the floor.

Borderline hilarious/maddening. I have no idea which movie was screened because it was too loud for me to hear through the speakers.

And what of the other end of the spectrum? Charlie Brooker at The Guardian [via the Age] flew First Class and commented:

There are three classes of air travel - misery, misery lite and slightly comfortable.

In first class, I had a seat that reclined far enough to become a flat bed. I drank champagne and ate smoked salmon from a china plate with weighty silverware, while watching a flat-screen TV.

When I got bored with that, there were a couple of framed pictures on the wall. That was the weirdest, most needless touch.

"If a terrorist shoe-bombs a hole in the fuselage right now," I thought, "and the plane corkscrews towards the ocean at 1000kmh, I'm going to fix my gaze on that gilt-framed photograph and remind myself that I'm dying in the lap of luxury."

The way airlines really think about all this is of great interest to me and was partly revealed via Via magazine:

Klaus Brauer, who surveys 90,000 passengers every year as Boeing’s resident expert on passenger comfort, is quoted in Air Transport World as saying:

“We’ve always known intuitively—and it’s correct—that if we increase pitch [he means seat angle here], we make people more comfortable and if we reduce pitch, we make people less comfortable. Seat pitch is the ‘throttle’ by which airlines can increase or decrease comfort.”

However, according to Boeing spokesman Sean Griffin, the real indicator of passenger comfort is neither seat width nor pitch.

First, it is on-time departure and arrival. According to this theory, if the plane is late departing, the passenger who is worried about making a connection or arriving on time will be tense and there is not much the carrier can do to make the flight pleasant.

Second, and perhaps most important to creature comfort, Griffin says, is sitting next to an empty seat. That has the effect of adding up to an extra 41/4 inches in seat width, according to the Boeing experts, as well as a feeling of privacy.

For me, flight duration is perhaps the biggest factor. It's going to be a messy day anyway so "on time" doesn't mean as much as it does on a train, for me. If it's a shorthaul flight, I don't care - I go into Dr. Who mode and shut eveything out, we land, it's all over. Cheapest seats possible on a reputable airline please.

On a longhaul - oh what a different matter. Now all the factors mentioned above come into it, plus safety.

[nourishing obscurity] navigation [1]

First in a small series to let you know about changes. The results of the survey will come tomorrow on the blog birthday.

Header

This is seasonal - I have four altogether in the old Blogger [classic] style. The template doesn't accept new blogger pics. Next change in late August.

Navigation bars

# The Blogger bar remains what it is.
# My top [golden bar] is fairly static although profile often changes and testimonials sometimes.
# Lower [golden bar] changes constantly and is well worth checking out each time you visit.

Blogroll

Also constantly changing, thanks to Blogrollingdotcom, it depends on traffic, interaction and how I'm placed with other bloggers. A friend who goes away for a week will drop down then return again. Some less active older sites are there on sheer loyalty.

More explanations tomorrow.