seasonal birth control pill- only 4 periods a year? healthy

BittyBabyGrower, MSN, RN · Aug 3, 2004

My OB told me that you really don't NEED to have a period, unless you are trying to get pregnant. Plus, it can lower your risk of ovarian cancer. You can also back to back your pills to not have a period.

Sounds awfully appealing to me!

dixienurse2be · Aug 3, 2004

I have a problem with even having a period so I have to take meds to make me have one and my Dr. only told me to take it every 3 months...that's all that the body really needs. He figures I shouldn't have to go through more periods/year than really necessary.

FrankieJane · Aug 3, 2004

I have endometriosis and my doctor suggested that I take a low dose birth control pill and only allow myself to have 3 periods per year. This doesn't work with the tri packs, the dosage on the pills must be the same. I personally didn't like this method only because I constantly worried that I could be pregnant (I have a sister that got pregnant while taking the pill). I must say that having fewer periods was nice (especially since my periods were so painful).

veteranRN · Aug 3, 2004

My very simplistic understanding is that a period is the body's method of cleaning itself out after an unfertilized ovulation. Therefor, no ovulation, no period needed. Am I way off base??????

Energizer Bunny · Aug 3, 2004

When I first saw the ads for this, I was wondering too and then I thought hey, if it works......

who cares if my dh had a vasectomy and I don't really HAVE to take it? LOLOL!

NurseeTee · Aug 3, 2004

Yes, that is true that no ovulation and no period with these pills. I don't need the pill either, but I started these just to have less periods!

tiroka03, LPN · Aug 3, 2004

Sounds great to me :)

NewEastCoastRN · Aug 3, 2004

I actually just started on this pill since I was going to have my period during my wedding. I will let you know if there are any problems. So far so good!

Britt381 · Jun 12, 2009

Not having that many periods sounds great but it does make one wonder about the consequences our body will suffer. The thing I would like to emphasize is that your period helps your body get rid of unfertilized eggs. If the pill is stopping ovulation then one would think that a period is not needed. I wonder though...does it really hurt the body? I mean, wouldn't one think that the lining of your cervix and such would increase in thickness and hence make pregnancy and delivery complications? I wonder if the FDA has checked into that?

Spacklehead, MSN, NP · Jun 12, 2009

Actually, my personal opinion is that it is probably better. Reason being, years and years ago women used to give birth and then breastfeed for up to a few years and then would get pregnant again when ovulation would return, so they would literally go several years in a row without experiencing a menses. I personally think it might be more unhealthy for the body to have so many monthly menses year after year - but I could be wrong.

dreamon · Jun 12, 2009

Not having that many periods sounds great but it does make one wonder about the consequences our body will suffer. The thing I would like to emphasize is that your period helps your body get rid of unfertilized eggs. If the pill is stopping ovulation then one would think that a period is not needed. I wonder though...does it really hurt the body? I mean, wouldn't one think that the lining of your cervix and such would increase in thickness and hence make pregnancy and delivery complications? I wonder if the FDA has checked into that?

I wonder about these things also. I'm happy that this option is available for those who have periods that affect their daily lives. I was fortunate enough to have a menstruation cycle that doesn't come with pain, or PMS. I'll bear with my periods until menopause, I don't want to take any risks.