H/T to Bearing for posting this. Here is the website for the study, if you are interested in participating.
Here is the entry at clinicaltrials.gov to see if you qualify. (Scroll down on the U.Utah page to the bottom if this last link doesn’t work. There’s a link there.) The point is to find a bunch of people using the Creighton Model, and follow them to see how effective a method it is.
(The hypothesis is a 1% method-failure unexpected pregnancy rate. I think that sounds ballpark to me, wouldn’t be surprised if study confirmed that.)
FYI’s for the uninitiated: “Natural Family Planning” means learning to read your body’s natural fertility signs, and then you either engage or avoid in intercourse depending on what results you would like. Men are crazy easy to read — barring a medical problem, they’re fertile all the time. Women are on-and-off: You cannot actually get pregnant any day of the cycle, but there’s a real trick in figuring out which days are the baby days, and which are not.
The Creighton Model is a very effective and obsessively scientific type of NFP. Trust me your instructor will not tolerating any ‘winging it’. If you wish to understand cervical mucus, there is no better way. No better.
[But, but. You will have to toss that thermometer. No thermometers for CM, nosireebob. Back awaaaay from the thermometer. Handy in the wilderness, yes.]
Check it out if you are a Creighton user, or have always wanted to be one. Now’s your big chance.
***
FYI The Creighton Model can also be used for achieving pregnancy. As a first line for trying to solve an infertility problem, this is where you want to be. Catholic or not. Creighton has the corner on “We Help You Figure Out What Is Going Wrong So You Can Get Pregnant”. And bunch of options for treatment that are not one-size-fits-all expensive dangerous craziness. Top notch work there. Worth a look if you are trying to conceive and not having much luck.
Hathaway NFP effectiveness study.
Effectiveness of Sympto Thermal:
We know exactly when Alexandra, Little Lew, Gianna came around
Effectiveness of Billings:
We have no idea how Josef and Clara got here.
Effectiveness of Marquette Model:
Clara’s been our youngest child for 3 years.
Hehe.
(FTR, and this is to the spectators not to you John, Creigton is like Billings in the hands of the most obsessive-compulsive possible cross between a laboratory analyst and an accountant.)
I love love love my thermometer, and STM as taught by CCL, but think Creighton teaches the mucus component better than anyone in the known universe. I’d be very happy to see a method-merger there. Think we’re not the only couple around to have taken two methods and sandwiched them together to get what we need.
Yes, the “methods” need to get over themselves.
Marquette Model is anything using test strips. Marquette doesn’t care if you use mucous or temps or anything else for greater precision.
That’s good to know. I had sort of dismissed Marquette in the past (for myself), but with more technique thrown in, there’s some potential there.