TIME Sex/Relationships

Unintended Pregnancies Decline Across the U.S.

TIME.com stock photos Pregnancy Test
Elizabeth Renstrom for TIME

Though some states are doing better than others

The rates of unintended pregnancies have fallen in most U.S. states since 2006, according to a new report — though rates remained steady in a dozen states.

Between 2006 and 2010, 28 states out of 41 with data available experienced a drop in their unintended pregnancy rate of 5% or more, according to a new report from the Guttmacher Institute. Twelve states’ rates remained unchanged, and one state—West Virginia—had an increase of 5% or more.

MORE: The IUD: Why The Best Form of Birth Control is One No One is Using

The report notes that in 2010, more than half of all pregnancies in 28 states were unintentional and that the minimum rate for any state was 36%.

The states with the highest unintended pregnancy rates were Delaware, Hawaii, and New York, though the South tended to have higher rates in general. New Hampshire had the lowest rates.

“The decline in unintended pregnancy rates in a majority of states since 2006 is a positive development,” study author Kathryn Kost, a senior research associate for Guttmacher said in a statement. “However, rates remain twice as high in some southern and densely-populated states compared with those in other states—a variation that likely reflects differences in demographic characteristics and socioeconomic conditions across states.”

MORE: Why Schools Can’t Teach Sex Ed

There’s been an increased use of the most effective contraceptives, like the intrauterine device (IUD), which has contributed to the drop in pregnancies. The report underlines double-digit drops in unintended pregnancy rates in Colorado, Iowa and Missouri, after conducting campaigns to promote the use of long-acting methods like the IUD and implant.

In 2010, publicly-funded family planning services also helped prevent 2.2. million unintended pregnancies, according to prior Guttmacher research.

TIME Sex

How Birth Control Has Changed Over the Centuries

A history of contraception, in all its many forms

Birth control may still be a hot button issue today in some countries, but men and women have been using contraceptives for thousands of years, albeit with varied results.

In ancient China, a popular remedy involved drinking a cocktail of lead and mercury. In ancient Egypt, a paste made out of honey, sodium carbonate, and crocodile dung was a popular form of contraception.

However, not all historic forms of contraception were based on superstition. A prototype of the cervical cap has been in use since the 18th century, and cave drawings in France appear to show a version of a condom.

For much of the 19th and early 20th centuries women in the U.S. had a hard time getting their hands on effective contraception. Due to anti-obscenity laws, doctors were not allowed to spread information about birth control.

To compensate for the lack of official methods, household products like Lysol and Coca-Cola were often used, as they were believed to kill sperm.

In 1960 modern birth control was born, when the FDA approved the first oral contraceptive pill for women. Within 5 years, millions of American women had prescriptions for the pill. Today, 99% of women of child-bearing age say they have used some form of birth control.

However, universal access to birth control still does not exist worldwide. Some 220 million women from developing countries say they want to use birth control but don’t have access.

TIME Reproductive Health

Birth Control Pill Risks May Now Include Brain Cancer

128897700
Raymond Forbes—Getty Images/age fotostock RM

Certain forms of birth control may promote growth of a rare brain tumor

Taking any drug is a matter of weighing the benefits and risks, and when it comes to birth control, women may now have one more factor to consider.

Dr. David Gaist, a neurologist at Odense University Hospital and the University of Southern Denmark, and his colleagues found that women taking hormonal contraceptives — those containing estrogen, progestin or a combination of both — showed higher rates of a rare brain tumor known as glioma. Their results, published Thursday in the British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, raise questions about the connection between oral contraceptives and brain cancer, but shouldn’t yet be interpreted as a reason to stop taking birth control, says Gaist.

MORE: This Contraceptive Is Linked to a Higher Risk of HIV

Using data from Denmark’s national registries of health records, cancer cases and prescriptions, Gaist zeroed in on the women aged 15 years to 49 years diagnosed with glioma, and then analyzed whether they were prescribed contraceptives and for how long. Overall, women who had used hormonal contraceptives at any point in their lives showed a 50% higher risk of developing the brain tumors compared to those who had not used them. And women who used the birth control for more than five years nearly doubled their risk of the cancer. Still, Gaist says, since gliomas are rare, even a doubling of a rare event is still a small risk.

MORE: Which Birth Control Works Best? (Hint: It’s Not the Pill)

“If you look at women in Denmark aged 15 to 49, about five in 100,000 experience that terrible diagnosis in a year, and that figure includes women on hormonal contraceptives, so it’s a very rare event.”

But he admits he was “a bit surprised” by the results, since previous studies suggested that the sex hormones estrogen and progestin might be protective against the gliomas. But those studies primarily included women past menopause, who self-reported their use of contraceptives. In his study, the women were at the age where they would be taking contraceptives, and the data came directly from medical records and registries and therefore more likely to be accurate.

MORE: Take a Look at History’s Worst Contraceptives for Women

Interestingly, Gaist found that women using progestin-only birth control showed slightly higher risk of developing gliomas. While it’s not clear why, he suspects that obesity may be playing a role. In Denmark, regulations require that doctors avoid prescribing estrogen-based contraceptives to obese women, since estrogen can increase risk of blood clots.

Dr. Santosh Kesari, director of neuro-oncology at University of California San Diego and a member of the American Academy of Neurology, notes that rates of gliomas have not spiked since the introduction of hormonal contraceptives, but agrees that the correlation deserves discussion and more study. “It’s something women should be aware about, but I don’t think there is enough evidence to say don’t use it. But the discussion about this potential risk needs to happen,” he says.

Until more research is done to tease apart how the hormones in contraceptives are influencing cells in the brain, Gaist agrees that there isn’t any reason for women to stop using such birth control methods. “With the present knowledge we have, I would still favor using contraception in eligible women,” he says. “But we need to do more research to get a better handle on the issues.”

TIME Television

The True History Behind Downton Abbey‘s Scandalous Sex Book

Dr Marie Stopes
Marie Stopes (1880 - 1958), who popularized the use of birth control in Britain with her books 'Married Love' and 'Wise Parenthood' Ron Gerelli / Getty Images

Marie Stopes' work made another appearance on the show

Contains spoilers for Season 5 Episode 2 of Downton Abbey

In the episode of Downton Abbey that aired for U.S. audiences on Jan. 11, the name is only mentioned briefly. Lady Mary hands a book to her maid Anna and mentions the author as she sends Anna off on an embarrassing errand — but to a British woman of the early 1920s the implication was clear: the name Marie Stopes meant birth control.

Stopes is famous as the author of the 1918 marriage manual Married Love, which she was inspired to write after her own marriage was annulled. She was a scientist — an expert on plant fossils — and challenged the Victorian idea that it was improper for a woman to enjoy sex. She also wrote about contraception; in fact, she was a proponent of the belief that waiting to conceive a child would result in a stronger relationship between husband and wife. The book was a bestseller in England, though still controversial, and it was banned in the U.S. for obscenity for more than a decade.

Though Married Love made Stopes famous — and got a shout-out on Downton last season — its sequel, Wise Parenthood, published within a year of the first, is more likely to have been the book Mary turned to for help. Stopes wrote in the introduction to the sequel that she had received a deluge of inquiries for more specific information about how to actually obtain and use the contraceptive plans she advocated. In 1921, she went even further, opening the world’s first birth-control clinic, and then following that up with others throughout the country. (The item that Anna ends up buying at the pharmacy, in its nondescript paper bag, is likely to have been a cervical cap.)

Stopes wasn’t always ahead of her time — there was often an undercurrent of eugenics to her ideas on birth control, and when she died in 1958, TIME remarked diplomatically that “she got a few weird ideas” over the years. But her books helped bring women like Lady Mary into a future where their love lives didn’t have to be controlled by the ever-present threat of motherhood, and where there were alternatives to the illegal abortion to which Lady Edith was almost driven last season.

That shift, from past to future, is what Downton is all about — and Marie Stopes, as TIME wrote when she died, was right there with them:

As a Harley Street admirer put it: “In these days of family planning, female emancipation, and ideas of equality in sexual pleasure, it is easy to see Dr. Stopes and say, ‘So what?’ We have to place her in her own age, when such things were quite beyond the pale—and that was not so long ago.” The times had passed her by, but it was because she had done so much to shape them.

Read the full story here in the TIME Vault: Early Crusader

TIME Reproductive Health

The Second Most Popular Form of Birth Control Will Surprise You

102758095
Getty Images

Looks like the pill has some competition

About 62% of U.S. women from ages 15 to 44 use some form of contraception, and predictably, the pill is still the most popular. About 16% of women used it in 2011-2013, finds the latest report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) National Center for Health Statistics.

But the second most popular contraceptive may come as a surprise to many: 15.5% of women—just a hair behind the pill—choose female sterilization. The CDC report shows that nearly one in three women ages 35 to 44 opted for female sterilization. By contrast, fewer than 1% of women between ages 15 to 24 chose it.

The rates of women choosing to undergo the simple, yet irreversible, surgical procedure might seem high, “until you start to peel back the layers and intricacies around forming a family,” says Dr. Vanessa Cullins, vice president of external medical affairs at Planned Parenthood Federation of America, who was not involved with the research. “Consider the fact that the majority of women in this country have had the number of children they want to have by mid-twenties to thirty or so—and they still have the capacity to get pregnant until they are 50 years old.” For a lot of women, that can mean 20 fertile years during which a woman may not want to become pregnant.

Cullins says women who tend to ask about sterilization don’t want to be bothered by other methods, even those that only require intervention every few years. The overall rate is slightly less than previous years, the CDC says, and Cullins says she expects the rate to continue to decline as long-acting contraceptives, especially the intrauterine device (IUD), become more popular and more affordable in the U.S.

But for now, the pill, female sterilization and condoms are more popular than the IUD. Long-acting reversible contraceptives, like the IUD and implant, remained stable from prior years, at 7.2% of women. They were most popular among women aged 25 to 34 and less popular among younger, sexually active women between ages 15 to 24. Women between ages 35 and 44 were the least likely to use them.

Because the IUD is much more convenient than the pill, with a lower failure rate, it may prove to be a bigger birth control contender in the future, some health experts say. And there are signs that with increased affordability and access, young women will opt for it. One recent study showed that when teenage girls were counseled about birth control and given their pick for free, a full 72% of them chose the IUD.

TIME Birth Control

Going Off the Pill Could Affect Who You’re Attracted to, Study Finds

New research shows that going off the pill could affect how attracted you are to your mate

Your birth control pill could affect your relationship, and not just because it halts baby-making. A new study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science followed 118 couples who met while the woman was on hormonal birth control and found that going off the pill could impact how attracted she was to her partner.

Whether a woman’s attraction to her mate shifted post-Pill seemed to be determined by how objectively good-looking he was by evolutionary standards, which means his attractiveness is an indicator of genetic fitness. Some women with partners who were not conventionally attractive reported being less attracted to him after stopping oral contraceptives, whereas a decrease was not seen in women whose partners were conventionally handsome.

“Women who choose a partner when they’re on hormonal contraceptives and then stop taking them will prioritize their husband’s attractiveness more than they would if they were still on it,” says Michelle Russell, the Florida State graduate student who is the lead author on the study. “The effect that it would have on her marital satisfaction would carry more weight.” That means that if your husband is not conventionally attractive and you go off the Pill, his attractiveness might bother you more than before. Conversely, if you’re bored of your foxy husband, going off the Pill might make you more excited about him. Maybe.

Russell says the change may be attributed fluctuating estrogen levels, but says there could be many hormonal reasons for this effect. She also doesn’t suggest that this finding should dissuade women from using oral contraceptives. “This is just one finding,” she says.

Other studies have looked at how the Pill affects female attraction. A 2008 paper published in The Proceedings of the Royal Society B found that while women are usually attracted to the scent of men who are genetically different from them, women on the Pill are attracted to the scent of men who are more genetically similar. This may be because the Pill fools your body into thinking it’s pregnant, and pregnancy can affect attraction. In discussing the 2008 study, Scientific American hypothesized that while non-pregnant women would be more attracted to genetically dissimilar men (to avoid the possibility of incest and maximize immunity of their offspring,) women on the Pill may be more drawn to genetically similar men because pregnant women seek out family members.

Another study of 365 couples published this year in Psychological Science found that women who went on or off the Pill during a relationship were less sexually satisfied than women who were consistently on the Pill or who had never been on it.

While the exact mechanisms for how oral contraceptives affect female attraction aren’t totally clear, there is mounting evidence that hormonal birth control can affect more than just fertility. But scientists are not necessarily advocating that the risks outweigh the benefits. “Any drug that you take, people want to be informed consumers,” Russell says. “This is just one factor women might want to consider when deciding whether or not to use them.”

TIME women

Did We Give the Pill Too Much Power?

birth control pills
Getty Images

Elizabeth Weingarten is the associate editor at New America and the associate director of its Global Gender Parity Initiative.

The answer to why we are still struggling with reproductive rights in this country may have to do with our original—and perhaps unrealistic—expectations of how much the pill could change things in the first place

This pill came with a promise: help extinguish sexism from public life by removing a key roadblock for women. If women could plan when and whether they became pregnant, they should be better able to develop careers and livelihoods, avoid a life of economic dependence on men, and form identities outside of motherhood.

In many ways, the birth control pill kept that promise by enabling women to enter the workforce, improving their health by helping them to space out pregnancies, and allowing them to have sex for pleasure. But more than 50 years after the pill first came to market, its promise of access and equality remains unfulfilled for millions of other women.

Think about the Hobby Lobby decision, which ruled that certain businesses can deny employees coverage for contraception on the basis of religious beliefs. The fact that many insurance plans still don’t cover contraception or infertility treatments. “Time passes and yet we’re still kind of stuck when it comes to reproductive rights,” said New York Times Health reporter Catherine Saint Louis at a recent New America NYC event. Cost and culture still prevent millions of low-income women here and abroad from obtaining the pill.

“The things we’re talking about [today] are the same things [Margaret Sanger, one of the pill’s bankrollers and the founder of Planned Parenthood] was talking about in 1914,” said Jonathan Eig, the author of the book, “The Birth of the Pill.” “I honestly believe she thought once the pill got out there, the genie would be out of the bottle, women would have all the power they needed and everything would be fine after that… I really think she’d be stunned.”

So how did we get here?

At least in part, the answer may lie in the scope of our expectations; we have asked a lot of one medical invention. After all, said Eig, the idea that the role of a woman is to be a vessel for a child is rooted in thousands of years of history. This biological difference is the foundation of gender inequality – the thing that for centuries kept them out of economic and professional competition with men, noted New Republic Senior Editor Rebecca Traister.

That’s a powerful dynamic and hard to reverse. The pill turned into a silver bullet, that single technological innovation that would allow us to avoid confronting the deeper, more impactful social structures that sustain gender discrimination. We can’t ask the pill and its users to fix a problem the rest of us choose to ignore.

Here in the U.S., the pill put “all of the onus and responsibility [of pregnancy] on individual women without a sense of accountability of community and government to support whole and healthy lives,” explained Tiloma Jayasinghe, the executive director of the anti-violence against women organization Sakhi for South Asian Women. But “we’re not in this by ourselves.”

It also sidelined men, taking their responsibility out of the equation and separating them from the reality of reproduction, Traister said. “That’s how you get Rush Limbaugh talking about, ‘how much sex are these women having that they have to pay this amount per pill?’ What it has done is further made reproduction ‘women’s territory’ in certain ways.”

“It was a double-edged sword,” said Eig.

Even when companies clumsily try to give agency to women, it illustrates how much society has put women in an untenable situation. Facebook and Apple announced recently that they would begin offering egg freezing as part of their healthcare benefit plans. Critics accused the tech companies of putting pressure on women to sacrifice life for work, and decried the use of egg freezing as dangerous. But that criticism is misguided, argued Traister. Rather than blame Facebook and Apple, why not fault a “system that repeatedly puts new possibilities on offer and keeps them from people who need them”? Everyone, not just tech companies, should offer these types of benefits because they’re part of women’s health, she said.

Improving women’s health is a major benefit of the pill. Before the pill, birth control was inefficient, inaccessible, and often completely controlled by men. Consequently, women were having more children than they wanted – often faster than their bodies could handle them. In many cases, this led to maternal and infant death, or economic instability and famine.

That’s still the case overseas, where Silver Bullet laziness may also be a factor. Though the pill has led to many health benefits, including a reduction in infant and maternal deaths around the world, its effects have been uneven and limited in certain developing countries. “The WHO and other organizations are promoting the use of the pill to space pregnancies, and yet they are doing so in countries where women don’t always have control of their bodies or access to the pill,” Jayasinghe said. She suggested that the pill’s success may lead to complacency in those regions: “We have it now, our work is done. But it’s not done.”

So how do we change the system here and abroad?

For many countries, harnessing the power of the pill will require a major culture shift. It needs to become okay for mothers to talk to daughters and fathers to talk to sons about contraception, which won’t be an easy fix, Jayasinghe said. (And critically, contraception is much more than just the pill. There are other forms of more reliable contraception – like IUD and hormonal implants – that in some cases are even preferred by women, but may be pricier or harder to access).

Here in the U.S., “we need to broaden our discussions to beyond fighting about abortion to a fuller scope of what do rights mean – the full scope of contraception,” Jayasinghe said. Abortion is just one issue in a women’s life – and making it a nitpicky focal point of reproductive conversations is limiting, she suggested. Ideally, legislators would introduce – and pass – some kind of comprehensive women’s reproductive rights and healthcare bill. That also means recognizing infertility as a real health problem, Saint Louis noted. Right now – in many circles – it’s an “I’m so sorry you waited until you were 35 [to have kids] problem, rather than recognizing that it affects 19-year-olds.”

It’s also critical to include men in conversations – both personal and public – around reproductive issues. Research shows that when men and women are required to take sexual education classes together, for example, birth rates drop dramatically, Eig pointed out. And after all, the scientific mastermind behind the pill was a man – Gregory (Goody) Pincus.

“There’s still a long way to go,” Eig said. “If there were more people like Goody [Pincus] fighting today, we’d see more innovation and more attention still being brought to this cause.”

This piece was originally published in New America’s digital magazine, The Weekly Wonk. Sign up to get it delivered to your inbox each Thursday here, and follow @New America on Twitter.

TIME Ideas hosts the world's leading voices, providing commentary and expertise on the most compelling events in news, society, and culture. We welcome outside contributions. To submit a piece, email ideas@time.com.

TIME reproductive rights

Dear Fellow Conservatives: Want Fewer Abortions? Tolerate Birth Control

Right for a Reason
Right for a Reason

Amy Jo Clark and Miriam Weaver are the authors of Right for a Reason: Life Liberty and a Crapload of Common Sense.

We are pro-life, but we know that science, the law and reason mean we need to support contraception

Remember back in the Clinton years when the goal was to make abortions “safe, legal, and rare”? Over time, pro-choice progressives have shifted the messaging to make abortions as easy, accessible, and convenient as possible. As pro-life conservatives, we want to see as few abortions as possible. We understand and even accept that it’s legal for women to have abortions, but conservatives are right to insist that women be fully educated on what the procedure actually is before they have it. It’s right to believe that legislation requiring a woman to have an ultrasound before aborting her baby is appropriate. It’s right to require women to go through at least minimal counseling about alternatives to abortion before they go through with it. Abortions shouldn’t be easy and convenient. But if our ultimate goal is to drastically reduce the number of abortions that occur every single year, we must exercise some flexibility in our tolerance of contraception (and even emergency contraception). That’s why we support the use of birth control pills and even Plan B.

If you’re a conservative and you’re about to call us RINOs and just dismiss us because we’re not pro-life enough now, just hear us out…. Contraception has become a tricky topic for pro-life folks. Birth control pills, which have been widely used by thousands of women in the United States for decades, are now the subject of hot debate in many religious circles. And when emergency contraception like Plan B is thrown into the conversation, the debate gets even hotter.

Our research into contraception taught us three critical pieces of information: First, only about forty percent of fertilized eggs ever implant into the uterus naturally. Second, in the medical and legal communities, a pregnancy does not begin until a fertilized egg implants into the uterus. Finally, birth control pills (and Plan B) have the primary function of stopping an egg from being released by the ovaries and a secondary function of preventing fertilization of a released egg. The most recent research and studies indicate that neither birth control pills nor Plan B prevent the implantation of a fertilized egg into the uterine wall. And even if they did, they would not be considered abortifacients, because abortifacients, by definition, terminate pregnancies (which, again, do not begin until a fertilized egg implants). Contraception prevents pregnancies. This distinction is important.

The immediate reaction to this by the staunchest of pro-lifers is typically, “But life begins at conception!” We don’t disagree. But in order for that life to develop, a pregnancy must occur as defined above. If you are opposed to all forms of synthetic hormone contraception or IUDs because of the very unlikely possibility that those forms of birth control might prevent a fertilized egg from implanting into the uterus, we congratulate you on your purism, but would also ask you how exactly that purism helps the cause to reduce the number of abortions? If you’re expecting that every American woman is going to limit her contraception method to either condoms or the practice of “natural family planning,” and you also expect that this thinking is somehow going to result in a decrease in abortion, then with all due respect, you are high.

Since pregnancy doesn’t actually begin until a fertilized egg implants into the womb (which, again, happens less than 50 percent of the time naturally), mourning the loss of thousands of unimplanted fertilized eggs seems completely counterproductive considering that thousands of fully formed fetuses with beating hearts are killed via abortion every single day. If your definition of abortion includes every instance of a fertilized egg failing to implant in the uterus, then you’re essentially suggesting that millions of women are murderers without even realizing it. You’re suggesting that birth control pills and IUDs are every bit as immoral as the act we normally think of when we mention the word “abortion.” We think that’s pretty unreasonable.

Women should be responsible enough that if they intend to have sex, and do not want to become pregnant, they should make sure that they are protected. But as realists, we understand that people don’t always make good decisions. Since we don’t live in an ideal world, shouldn’t we exercise some tolerance about contraceptive solutions in order to ensure women don’t get abortions well into their established pregnancies? When faced with the choice of seeing a woman getting Plan B the morning after she has unprotected sex or seeing her abort a baby later in gestation, wouldn’t we all prefer the former? Wouldn’t every pro-life person prefer that?

We must recognize and accept that abortion is legal. There is no indication that this is going to change. Put simply, outrage about abortions won’t stop abortions. And neither will opposition to forms of contraception that, in all likelihood, prevent a huge number of abortions. We believe conservatives should focus on areas where we can make some actual headway on this issue. While we love the idea of simply teaching our kids abstinence and promoting sex within the confines of a committed marriage, that’s not necessarily realistic. We believe that what can realistically help abortions become more rare (which is what all of us want) is balanced encouragement of birth control options and a broader tolerance of emergency contraception, particularly if it will prevent later-term abortions.

Conservatives are right to value and protect life, but we’re also right to avoid damaging our own causes with impossibly unrealistic goals. And we’re right to make strides in this movement in the best, most realistic ways that we possibly can.

 

Amy Jo Clark and Miriam Weaver are the authors of Right for a Reason: Life Liberty and a Crapload of Common Sense. They write the popular Chicks on the Right blog as well as a regular column in The Indianapolis Star, and host a daily drive-time radio show on WIBC in Indianapolis. Clark was previously a medical writer and communications consultant; Weaver previously worked in human resources. They live outside Indianapolis with their husbands and children.

TIME Ideas hosts the world's leading voices, providing commentary and expertise on the most compelling events in news, society, and culture. We welcome outside contributions. To submit a piece, email ideas@time.com.

TIME Research

A Lot of Men Got Vasectomies During the Recession

vasectomy
Getty Images

Up to an additional 150,000 to 180,000 per year between 2007 and 2009

The recession was accompanied by a sharp increase in the number of American men who underwent vasectomies, according to research presented Monday, though it’s unclear if economic woes actually led to more procedures.

Researchers from Weill Cornell Medical College looked at survey data from the National Survey for Family Growth, which interviewed more than 10,000 men between 2006 and 2010, according to the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. They wanted to get a sense of how the economic downturn from 2007 to 2009 affected men’s decisions about having kids.

Before the recession, 3.9% of men reported having a vasectomy, but 4.4% reported having one afterward, which the researchers calculated to mean an additional 150,000 to 180,000 vasectomies during each year of the recession.

The researchers also found after the recession that men were less likely to be employed full-time, and more likely to have lower incomes and be without health insurance. Nothing changed when it came to men’s desire to have children, but those who were interviewed after the recession were more likely to want fewer children.

It’s important to note that the study, which is being presented at the American Society for Reproductive Medicine’s 70th Annual Meeting, does not prove causation, meaning it’s unclear whether men were undergoing surgery for financial reasons. Though the researchers do conclude that their findings suggest Americans may be factoring economics into family planning—which is not necessarily a new trend.

TIME sexuality

Take a Look at History’s Worst Contraceptives for Women

This video was made to raise awareness of family planning

lost-at-e-minor_logo

This article originally appeared on Lost at E Minor.

While the pill has been around for over 50 years, it took quite a long time to come up with a fuss-free method of contraception. Before the pill’s creation, there were some really awful ways to prevent pregnancy, and non-profit organization EngenderHealth has come up with a video to show us of all those methods. We’re talking crocodile dung mixed with honey, beaver testicles with moonshine, pig intestines, and even glass bottles.

The video was made to raise awareness of family planning through EngenderHealth’s WTFP?! initiative, which aims to give a voice to the more than 220 million women around the world who don’t have access to contraception.

(via Design Taxi)

Your browser, Internet Explorer 8 or below, is out of date. It has known security flaws and may not display all features of this and other websites.

Learn how to update your browser