Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-crg!rutgers!ll-xn!adelie!axiom!linus!philabs!aecom!werner
From: werner@aecom.UUCP (Craig Werner)
Newsgroups: sci.med,soc.women
Subject: Re: Cervical Caps - A Bit of History (& oral Estrogens)
Message-ID: <581@aecom.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 5-Nov-86 01:34:22 EST
Article-I.D.: aecom.581
Posted: Wed Nov  5 01:34:22 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 6-Nov-86 21:56:51 EST
References: <1406@kitty.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: Albert Einstein Coll. of Med., NY
Lines: 21
Xref: mnetor sci.med:182 soc.women:530

> 
> 	I don't believe that cervical caps were originally intended as a
> contraceptive device, although that "side-effect" was rather quickly
> discovered :-). 
> 	Contraception was somewhat of a "hush-hush" topic during the 1800's.
> I happen to be rather interested in medical history, and have a collection
> of old medical books and catalogues from the 1800's.  Some catalogues have
> over 50 different styles of pessaries and cervical caps, however NO WHERE
> does it mention the intention for contraception. 

	History does repeat itself in subtle ways. In the late 1950s,
Oral Estrogens were not yet approved for contraception, but were 
approved for dysmenorrhea -- yet had to bear the warning that they would
inhibit ovulation (as a side effect).  As I mentioned once before in
these newsgroups, over a period of a year or two, the incidence of
dysmenorrhea "increased" about 20-fold.
-- 
			      Craig Werner (MD/PhD '91)
				!philabs!aecom!werner
              (1935-14E Eastchester Rd., Bronx NY 10461, 212-931-2517)
           "Man posesses limited intelligence, but alas, unlimited stupidity."