Devices & Diagnostics

Guys: Rachel Maddow has bad news about your sperm

Rachel Maddow felt the need to kick back, pop open a non-alcoholic beer and head […]


Rachel Maddow felt the need to kick back, pop open a non-alcoholic beer and head to the “man cave” Wednesday to address the issue of IUDs (intrauterine devices) and why they shouldn’t be considered “an abortifacient,” despite what Colorado Republican gubernatorial candidate Bob Beauprez has to say about it.

“Sperm are easily dissuaded from their noble task,” says Maddow. Sorry guys.

In an effort to get back to basics, elementary school-level reproductive health lessons, Maddow gets input from Dr. Stephanie Teal, a specialist in obstetrics and gynecology at University of Colorado Hospital. It looks like Beauprez might be misunderstanding the subject.

“Turns out, Bob Beauprez is not supported on the science in that assertion,” Maddow said. “Politics meets science, it’s almost never an even match.”

Teal explains that even though IUDs were originally targeted for older women who maybe already have a couple of kids, it’s not a better solution for younger demographics in order to avoid unwanted pregnancy instead of relying on a daily task like pill-form birth control.

Because of the complex lives young people live, part-time jobs, school, maybe moving around frequently, the failure rate of more traditional birth control is twice is high in women under 21. “Try to take a pill at the same time everyday, forget about it,” says Teal.

Despite decreasing the teen birthrate by 40 percent in Colorado, the issue has become political with upcoming elections, and many are arguing that IUDs go against anti-abortion efforts.

“There’s not really any argument about it in the medical community,” said Teal. “It’s not an abortion clinic in your body.”

[Maddow photo from flickr user JD Lasica]

 

Shares0
Shares0