Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site ihu1e.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!ihnp4!ihu1e!mjv From: mjv@ihu1e.UUCP (Vlach) Newsgroups: net.abortion Subject: Re: BULLPUKEY Message-ID: <483@ihu1e.UUCP> Date: Thu, 11-Jul-85 13:07:48 EDT Article-I.D.: ihu1e.483 Posted: Thu Jul 11 13:07:48 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 13-Jul-85 08:11:23 EDT References: <149@pyuxii.UUCP> Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Lines: 15 > One of you folk posted a rejiooinder to the 99.9% effective > argument that a woman has a 1 in 6 posibility of becoming > pregnant inside a year even if she is using contraceptives. > Bull pucky. Your argument is as flawed as a government > contract. You are assuming that a woman is fertile 100% > of the time. Wrong bucko. Go back to square one and start > over. You would be closer if you said 1 in 6000. Tell me > T. C. Wheeler Please note that the statistical chance of an "average" woman becoming pregnant in a year is close to 1 in 20, given the ~95% effectiveness rate of the pill and IUDs. It would seem 1 in 20 is a lot closer to 1 in 6 than 1 in 6000, so why don't you investigate the facts before you start shouting BULL PUCKEY all the time...