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...