News

SASKATCHEWAN, July 9, 2003 (LifeSiteNews.com)  Scientists and ovulation experts have expressed surprise at glowing worldwide media coverage trumpeting the ovulation findings of researchers at the University of Saskatchewan as a ‘scientific breakthrough.’ The Saskatchewan researchers, led by Dr. Roger Pierson, claimed that their ‘discovery’ that women have waves of developing follicles during each cycle, all of which could result in ovulation, proves that natural family planning techniques will often be ineffective. The study was published in the journal Fertility and Sterility.

Pierson, and the media which aided him in the task, demonstrated gross ignorance of modern Natural Family Planning methods by referring to the outdated rhythm method rather than the Billings Ovulation Method, the currently accepted method for Natural Family Planning practitioners. Unlike the rhythm method, the Billings method does not depend on a stable menstrual cycle. Numerous independent trials have confirmed the 99% success rate of the Billings Method, including a recent study following thousands of women for more than a year. If any further proof is needed, the method has been regularly used up to date by over 2,686,400 fertile couples in China for avoiding pregnancy with an overall success rate of approximately 99%.  See the rest of this LifeSite Special Report at:  https://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2003/jul/030709a.html

Comments

Commenting Guidelines

LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.