Datsme:


Dear Oga Doctor,

I think I am hearing this your assertion for the first time in my life and it surprises more as it was coming from a learned person.

Well my understanding has been that the woman body has a way of storing sperms for eventual fertilization and this could occur within three days to ovulation. Truly, Ovulation will last for 24 hours but women can become pregnant as a result of previous intercourse except for the safe days. In all, from my own little understanding, women can become pregnant between 4-5 days in a month if everything is ok.

Thank you for your understanding.

You are right. I talked only from the context of the woman. You are very correct.

JomasisTech:

The chance of getting pregnant isn't pegged within 24 hrs or after ovulation.
You need to understand the fact that sperm can stay alive up to 1-5 days before it dies as the case maybe be. So, if a lady had sex 2 or 3 days to her ovulation, there are chances that the sperm will fertilize the egg when it's released.

I understand this. I only talked within the context of the woman. You are very correct. Thank you.

OceanRed:
not entirely true, sperm cell can live up to seven days in the reproductive canalsof a female!, meaning any unprotected sex before ovuation can result in pregnancy once the egg is released as there will be enough sperm cell waiting ,hence immediate fertilization even if there is no sex after or during ovulation. infact this is why there are so many unwanted pregnancy, girls thinking they are safe not knowing they have storage of sperm in them already.

I understand this. I only talked within the context of the woman. You are very correct. Thank you.

Odoctor:

I understand this. I only talked within the context of the woman. You are very correct. Thank you.

you are welcome

UyaiIncomparabl:


Mr man, ODoctor is right. A woman only has a 24hr period to have sex and get pregnant which is called the "ovulation period". Please, do not mistake this for "fertile window" which lasts for 5-7 days depending on the length of the cycle of a woman and if she has regular periods.

A woman can have sex in her fertile window but wouldn't get pregnant immediately. The sperm can lie waiting in the fallopian tube till the ovulation day when the egg meets the sperm and it fertilizes to form an embryo which in turn becomes a baby. Please ehn, enough Biology for today. ODoctor is right.

Wow this is quite impressive,not many women not to talk of men, understand this simple things about how pregnancy works

Odoctor:


It is a mere chance. In a whole month, you can only get pregnant in ovulation. The egg once ovulated lasts a maximum of 24hrs. If there was no sex then, you can't get pregnant. So out of the 30days in a month, you stand a chance of getting pregnant in a particular "24hrs" , just 1day. If you miss the golden 24hrs, no more pregnancy for that month.

So the chances of getting pregnant is quite low. You need to be having intercourse almost every Day to get pregnant.
So if you are having sex outside the golden "24hrs" and swallowing Beecham, it is a as good as nothing because you won't still be pregnant without taking it.

Pls don't mistake "chance" as efficacy. Beecham does not prevent pregnancy. It's a mere coincidence that you are considering as efficacy.

Thank you

Modified:

Thank you for those that quoted me. I understand the sperm can live up to 5-7days , and if sex happened 5-7days earlier to ovulation, it could meet up and fertilization can occur. That's very correct.

I only talked within the context of the woman, that she can only get pregnant in her ovulation period. And if there's was no sperm available (whether deposited same day or 5 days earlier) there would be no fertilization.

Thank you all for the quotes.

you're wrong. a girl can get pregnant on the 3 to 5 days leading to ovulation with higher chances on the 2 days leading to ovulation and the 24hrs after ovulation. the cervical mucus can preserve sperm for 3 days and pushes the sperm real fast to the egg for fertilization(once the egg is out).

the quality of the sperm and cervical mucus plays an important role here. the more fertile they are the likelier the sperm can last in the body to fertilize the egg. so it's not a 24 hrs thing

princewarri1985:
you dont need to know if the person is infected or not, just take becham apliclox after sex and you will be 100% protected even if the person have infections,

How do you know you are protected if you don't know if the disease is there in the first place

jokerphilics:

How do you know you are protected if you don't know if the disease is there in the first place

you don need to know if the disease is there or not, just protect yourself and thats all because prevention is better than cure!

Odoctor:

No, if it worked, it means the person wasn't ovulating. So could not also get pregnant even without taking the Beecham. It's a mere chance!

Beecham Ampiclox is not a contraceptive!

Smiles. Let me try and give some explanations sir.
You are right. Very right. But only by the standards of what we know in science about that particular drug so far.
Chloroquine and its derivatives used to be the primary go-to drug for malaria but overtime science discovered it could be dangerous for the health than previously known.
.
Surprisingly, during the height of the pandemic, the same chloroquine became a primary care drug.
.
Many times, scientific findings originates from public assumptions and thesis. Science often discover new drugs by questioning locals or querying the efficacy of drugs used by locals, or trying to establish if local drugs and care are functional or not.
.
If so many people think they are deriving contraceptive benefits from an antibiotic drug, then I think the government, necessary agencies and the scientific community have to study that drug and its production process.
.
You never can tell, what you call antibiotics might contain something else, or perhaps a new discovery awaits us. The production process of beecham ampiclox or whatever it is called might have allowed it to be able to function as something else.

wealthgoddess:

Smiles. Let me try and give some explanations sir.
You are right. Very right. But only by the standards of what we know in science about that particular drug so far.
Chloroquine and its derivatives used to be the primary go-to drug for malaria but overtime science discovered it could be dangerous for the health than previously known.
.
Surprisingly, during the height of the pandemic, the same chloroquine became a primary care drug.
.
Many times, scientific findings originates from public assumptions and thesis. Science often discover new drugs by questioning locals or querying the efficacy of drugs used by locals, or trying to establish if local drugs and care are functional or not.
.
If so many people think they are deriving contraceptive benefits from an antibiotic drug, then I think the government, necessary agencies and the scientific community have to study that drug and its production process.
.
You never can tell, what you call antibiotics might contain something else, or perhaps a new discovery awaits us. The production process of beecham ampiclox or whatever it is called might have allowed it to be able to function as something else.

Well, you may be right, based on the principle of serendipity. Till then, we have to work with the established facts.

The people claiming it worked for them have not convinced us beyond reasonable doubts.

Odoctor:


Well, you may be right, based on the principle of serendipity. Till then, we have to work with the established facts.

The people claiming it worked for them have not convinced us beyond reasonable doubts.

And we do not have any data yet to prove them wrong either. There are no facts, all we know is that antibiotics are a class of drugs produced from microbes (E.g. penicillin class drugs from the fungus; penicillium notatum) with a strong efficacy against other microbes such as bacteria capable of causing diseases. We do not, however know how each pharmaceutical companies make their antibiotics. General assumptions in science are only rigidly enforced within the walls of theoretical learning and research. In the field you must be very flexible. If you are a doctor, you should know how physicians can override standard drug dosages based on symptoms severity or changing symptoms till patients starts responding to treatment. Sometimes patients are even transfused just so, more drugs can be administered.
.
.
Again I am not saying you are wrong, but you are being too unnecessarily rigid with your points. Have you not done a research that requires factoring into considerations, public opinions before? Reading through the comments here and the general assumptions of the public, you can tell that the said drug seem to work almost 70% of the time for what the public uses it for. Because sniper is meant for fumigation doesn't mean it cannot kill a full grown human. We now know this fact too right?
.
We cannot be sure of the contraceptive benefits of the drug as claimed by the public, a lot of factors could be in play, at the same time we can never be sure that it wasn't the drug that gave those benefits. That is why for our hypothesis, we should work with statistics. And if so much people are saying the same thing, it could as well be right.
.
I went through some of your replies. It is very wrong to say a woman can only get pregnant within a 24hours period in a month. Theoretically a woman can become pregnant at any time of the month. Even during her safe days. You see, in medicine we talk in terms of chances not certainty. Her chances are only slimmer on some days, they are not exactly as slim as zero on any day.
.
This is why couples using the Calendar and withdrawal method as a form of family planning still often produce babies. As in people having sex on so called safe days and still avoiding introduction of sperms into the female reproductive canal, somehow still manage to reach fertilizations. Small semen in precum travels all the way and still get eggs fertilized. If such small amount of sperm cells can fertilize eggs on safe days, it tell you that no day is actually safe (in that regards) with certainty. To put a number on it, the effectiveness of birth control based on safe days practice is only about 45%, your chances of still getting pregnant on safe days is more than 50% This is why it is usually combined with pills, withdrawal and other less invasive birth control methods.

wealthgoddess:

And we do not have any data yet to prove them wrong either. There are no facts, all we know is that antibiotics are a class of drugs produced from microbes (E.g. penicillin class drugs from the fungus; penicillium notatum) with a strong efficacy against other microbes such as bacteria capable of causing diseases. We do not, however know how each pharmaceutical companies make their antibiotics. General assumptions in science are only rigidly enforced within the walls of theoretical learning and research. In the field you must be very flexible. If you are a doctor, you should know how physicians can override standard drug dosages based on symptoms severity or changing symptoms till patients starts responding to treatment. Sometimes patients are even transfused just so, more drugs can be administered.
.
.
Again I am not saying you are wrong, but you are being too unnecessarily rigid with your points. Have you not done a research that requires factoring into considerations, public opinions before? Reading through the comments here and the general assumptions of the public, you can tell that the said drug seem to work almost 70% of the time for what the public uses it for. Because sniper is meant for fumigation doesn't mean it cannot kill a full grown human. We now know this fact too right?
.
We cannot be sure of the contraceptive benefits of the drug as claimed by the public, a lot of factors could be in play, at the same time we can never be sure that it wasn't the drug that gave those benefits. That is why for our hypothesis, we should work with statistics. And if so much people are saying the same thing, it could as well be right.
.
I went through some of your replies. It is very wrong to say a woman can only get pregnant within a 24hours period in a month. Theoretically a woman can become pregnant at any time of the month. Even during her safe days. You see, in medicine we talk in terms of chances not certainty. Her chances are only slimmer on some days, they are not exactly as slim as zero on any day.
.
This is why couples using the Calendar and withdrawal method as a form of family planning still often produce babies. As in people having sex on so called safe days and still avoiding introduction of sperms into the female reproductive canal, somehow still manage to reach fertilizations. Small semen in precum travels all the way and still get eggs fertilized. If such small amount of sperm cells can fertilize eggs on safe days, it tell you that no day is actually safe (in that regards) with certainty. To put a number on it, the effectiveness of birth control based on safe days practice is only about 45%, your chances of still getting pregnant on safe days is more than 50% This is why it is usually combined with pills, withdrawal and other less invasive birth control methods.

I get your points. Duly noted.

When I say a woman gets pregnant only within 24hrs of ovulation, I didn't mean that the ovulation must occur on a certain day. Getting pregnant means there was a egg fertilized by the sperm. If a woman gets pregnant anytime, it means that was when she ovulated. You cannot get pregnant with ovulation. But ovulation is not static, the human body is not mathematical that 1+1 will always give 2. The reason why the calendar and withdrawal method fail is also due to this fact. "Safe period" is simply mathematical. When she's done doing the calculation, a little alteration can change the whole configuration and make her ovulate even when she's in "safe period", and boom, she's pregnant. So yes, you can only get pregnant during ovulation. But ovulation is not static . It can come any time in the menstrual cycle. And it can even come multiple times too. But you cannot get pregnant outside ovulation, and the egg once once ovulated does not last beyond 24hours (at least from the available data).

All the same, thank you for taking me deeper into this.

Odoctor:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_sa-aoyMis


https://odoctor.ng/beecham-ampiclox-effects-on-pregnancy/

Thanks