Late AF but only negative HPT?? - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 32 Old 06-01-2011, 05:34 AM - Thread Starter
 
Mamandefille's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 21
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Hi everyone, I'm new here :).

 

A little background: DH and I are on month #3 of TTC #2, we got pregnant with #1 on the first try and have never had any fertility problems. My normal cycle is 30-33 days, I am not charting right now.

 

Last Friday was day 30, today I am on day 35. If AF doesn't come today, this will be my longest cycle in the 16 cycles I've had since DD was born. I always have the same physical symptoms before getting AF, and I have had none of them this cycle. Honestly, I feel the way I did when I found out I was pregnant with DD - slightly heavier breasts and nothing else. I've taken too many tests to count in the last week, and all have been as negative as they come, not even a squinter in the bunch.

 

I did something dumb yesterday and took and OPK and it was very, very positive. So now I'm completely confused, since I know that OPK tests can detect either the ovulation or the pregnancy hormone. It would be extremely unlikely that I am ovulating now, wouldn't it?? But if I'm pregnant, shouldn't it show up on a more sensitive HPT??

 

Ugh, so confused. What do I do now? Do I just wait and keep taking HPTs? Go to the walk-in clinic and ask them to do a blood test? I got my +ve with DD when AF was a week late (but I hadn't tested at all previously), should I wait until Friday (or after the weekend) to consider it a definitive result??? I know I've heard that if you're not charting, you should wait until 19 days after having unprotected sex to test for a conclusive result, the latest date that gives me is Friday. What is the latest I could realistically expect a positive test??

 

I'd really appreciate advice from anyone who has been here before! TIA :).

Mamandefille is offline  
#2 of 32 Old 06-01-2011, 06:01 AM
 
crunchy_mommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,501
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I would give it a few more days and then test again. I sooo hate the waiting game! BTDT a few too many times.... one time I was 6 days late and had what I thought were only preg. symptoms not AF symptoms... but I ended up just being really, really late (and I was charting too so I did know about when I'd O'ed...) and having the worst AF ever. I do know that some people only test positive a few days after AF is due so you still have a chance. smile.gif

Co-sleeping is really wonderful when your child actually SLEEPS!! familybed1.gif
crunchy_mommy is offline  
#3 of 32 Old 06-01-2011, 06:10 AM
 
parsley's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: in between
Posts: 773
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Hi Mama,

I posted this info last month when I was late but kept getting negative pregnancy tests.  (Turns out I wasn't pregnant). 

Maybe this will help.  Good luck!

 

When in relation to your missed period did your pregnancy test first become positive?
3-4 days before 28 %
1-2 days before 17 %
Same time 11 %
1-2 days after 22 %
3-4 days after 6 %
About a week after 17 %
More than a week after 0 %

http://www.babymed.com/polls/when-did-your-pregnancy-test-become-positive

 

 


Partner to DH and mom to DD1 (3/2008) and DD2 (born 1/2012).
parsley is offline  
#4 of 32 Old 06-01-2011, 06:37 AM - Thread Starter
 
Mamandefille's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 21
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Thanks for posting ladies smile.gif. It's so much better to wait it out when I know that it's happening/has happened to others as well. I'm glad to see that there is still hope, I had no idea that so many people only get their +ve when they are a week late (although they probably aren't the peestickaholic that I think I've become, lol). Either way, I'll wait a little while longer before trying anything else.

 

In the meantime though, I'd love to hear about anyone who didn't get their +ve until AF was a week late, it gives me hope!

Mamandefille is offline  
#5 of 32 Old 06-01-2011, 06:42 AM
 
Jaimee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Seattle, Tucson, Austin, Baltimore. Now: Urbana, IL
Posts: 7,473
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I know it's hard, but I would wait it out.  It's pretty likely you're dealing with delayed ovulation, which would delay AF and when you'd get a BFP.  I was reading up recently on using OPK's as pregnancy tests and it seemed pretty clear that in order for an OPK to give you a BFP you would already be very positive on HPT's.   Since the latter is not the case for you, I would assume the OPK is not telling you anything.  

 

The 19 day rule probably does work well for most people... assuming 5-7 days as the longest the sperm could live and then a 12-14 day LP... but there are still some women that don't get BFP's until after expected AF.  Much depends on how many DPO the embryo implanted as well as how quickly the embryo is increasing your hCG levels.

 

Are you using a sensitive test like First Response or another brand that only requires an hCG level of 25?

 

Good luck and keep us updated!!! 


Mama to Avalon 1/07 waterbirth.jpg, Austin 1/10 in between uc.jpgand Avery 12/11  h20homebirth.gif
fambedsingle1.gif   femalesling.GIF   winner.jpg   cd.gif     ecbaby2.gif  novaxnocirc.gif   goorganic.jpg  

Jaimee is offline  
#6 of 32 Old 06-01-2011, 07:09 AM - Thread Starter
 
Mamandefille's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 21
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaimee View Post

 

Are you using a sensitive test like First Response or another brand that only requires an hCG level of 25?

 

I'm using some cheapies, not the internet ones, but ones that are sold in a baby/parenting store here for $1.00 each. They are the ones that just have the test strip, no plastic case. I've got a First Response test and a ClearBlue digital waiting at home also. The First Response one doesn't say "Early Result",  but it does say it's good up to 5 days before your expected period. (Not sure if they are named/marketed differently in Canada?)

Mamandefille is offline  
#7 of 32 Old 06-01-2011, 11:22 AM
 
Jaimee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Seattle, Tucson, Austin, Baltimore. Now: Urbana, IL
Posts: 7,473
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Check out this site for info on  HPT sensitivity: http://www.peeonastick.com/hpts.html

 

First Response (not early response) needs a level of 100.   Clear Blue Easy Digital has a sensitivity of 50.  Do you know the sensitivity of your $1 tests?   Just a regular CVS test has a sensitivity of 25.  Do you have those in Canada?


Mama to Avalon 1/07 waterbirth.jpg, Austin 1/10 in between uc.jpgand Avery 12/11  h20homebirth.gif
fambedsingle1.gif   femalesling.GIF   winner.jpg   cd.gif     ecbaby2.gif  novaxnocirc.gif   goorganic.jpg  

Jaimee is offline  
#8 of 32 Old 06-01-2011, 12:03 PM - Thread Starter
 
Mamandefille's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 21
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaimee View Post

Check out this site for info on  HPT sensitivity: http://www.peeonastick.com/hpts.html

 

First Response (not early response) needs a level of 100.   Clear Blue Easy Digital has a sensitivity of 50.  Do you know the sensitivity of your $1 tests?   Just a regular CVS test has a sensitivity of 25.  Do you have those in Canada?



Thanks for the site. I've looked at it before, but it doesn't help that much since there are quite a few of those brands that we can't get in Canada. I didn't realize the FR test needed such a high level though. I have no idea what the sensitivity is of my cheapie tests, I have a feeling that the store that sells them orders them online in bulk and then separates them in to packs of 10 in baggies, so there is no information that comes with them. Maybe I'll pick up a couple of "real" $ store tests on my way home today. We don't have CVS in Canada, but some of the drugstores here produce their own brands of tests. I've never seen the sensitivity listed on them though. Is that normally included in the information sheet that comes with the test or would I have to call/e-mail the company to get that information?

 

Mamandefille is offline  
#9 of 32 Old 06-02-2011, 12:57 PM
 
Dov'sMom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 1,728
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I don't know about statistics, but with my #s 2 and 3, I got my first positive at least three weeks after ovulating (two full weeks after implantation bleeding) and 28 days after ovulating, respectively. With #2 I tested every day after the weird bleeding started (no PP period); with #3, I tested the day my period was due, one full week after my period was due, and again two full weeks after my period was due. I didn't check in between because obviously I couldn't be pregnant with a stark white negative a full week after my period was due, right? But I was positive about my ovulation date, so I knew I had to start bleeding sometime -- but I didn't, and he's now a beautiful 15 month old.

Dov'sMom is offline  
#10 of 32 Old 06-02-2011, 01:57 PM
 
Jaimee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Seattle, Tucson, Austin, Baltimore. Now: Urbana, IL
Posts: 7,473
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mamandefille View Post


Thanks for the site. I've looked at it before, but it doesn't help that much since there are quite a few of those brands that we can't get in Canada. I didn't realize the FR test needed such a high level though. I have no idea what the sensitivity is of my cheapie tests, I have a feeling that the store that sells them orders them online in bulk and then separates them in to packs of 10 in baggies, so there is no information that comes with them. Maybe I'll pick up a couple of "real" $ store tests on my way home today. We don't have CVS in Canada, but some of the drugstores here produce their own brands of tests. I've never seen the sensitivity listed on them though. Is that normally included in the information sheet that comes with the test or would I have to call/e-mail the company to get that information?

 

Maybe take a look at this site, too and see if there are more tests listed that are available in Canada: http://www.fertilityplus.org/faq/hpt.html.   I believe the sensitivity is listed in the fine print inside the test.  You might also be able to ask a pharmacist, though I'm not sure... maybe they would open the box for you to look?  Otherwise, yes, you can call the company and ask.
 

 


Mama to Avalon 1/07 waterbirth.jpg, Austin 1/10 in between uc.jpgand Avery 12/11  h20homebirth.gif
fambedsingle1.gif   femalesling.GIF   winner.jpg   cd.gif     ecbaby2.gif  novaxnocirc.gif   goorganic.jpg  

Jaimee is offline  
#11 of 32 Old 06-03-2011, 04:42 AM - Thread Starter
 
Mamandefille's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 21
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Okay, so I've checked the tests that I'm using and as best I can tell, the most sensitive of them should detect 20 miU and the cheap digital I tried yesterday should detect 25 miU. Tested again this morning and still nada.

 

I've taken a couple more OPKs since Tuesday though and none of them came up nearly as positive. I'm wondering if maybe I've just ovulated reeeeeeeaaaaaaaalllllllly late and I caught that surge on Tues when my OPK came up dark and very positive? I'm a full week late now (if I was going to have a 30 day cycle) - on CD 37 - so I think I'll give up on testing for a while. If I really did ovulate on CD 34 (Tuesday), then I shouldn't get AF for another couple of weeks anyway, right?

 

Sigh, I hate having to set the alarm to wake up on the weekend, but maybe it's time to start charting again....

Mamandefille is offline  
#12 of 32 Old 06-03-2011, 06:28 AM
 
cygknit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 401
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I hope it's all figured and and that gives you some peace. It is so frustrating when your body refuses to do what you want it to. It makes no sense why we can't control it.

 

KUP on what's going on. Fingers crossed for a BFP soon.


Mama to two June bugs, ages 3 and 5, and a m/c at 8wks on 8/11/11.Rainbow Girl rainbow1284.gif 7/25/12

cygknit is offline  
#13 of 32 Old 06-03-2011, 12:04 PM
 
Jaimee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Seattle, Tucson, Austin, Baltimore. Now: Urbana, IL
Posts: 7,473
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mamandefille View Post

Okay, so I've checked the tests that I'm using and as best I can tell, the most sensitive of them should detect 20 miU and the cheap digital I tried yesterday should detect 25 miU. Tested again this morning and still nada.

 

I've taken a couple more OPKs since Tuesday though and none of them came up nearly as positive. I'm wondering if maybe I've just ovulated reeeeeeeaaaaaaaalllllllly late and I caught that surge on Tues when my OPK came up dark and very positive? I'm a full week late now (if I was going to have a 30 day cycle) - on CD 37 - so I think I'll give up on testing for a while. If I really did ovulate on CD 34 (Tuesday), then I shouldn't get AF for another couple of weeks anyway, right?

 

Sigh, I hate having to set the alarm to wake up on the weekend, but maybe it's time to start charting again....


Certainly could be.   I agree that charting is the way to go! 

 


Mama to Avalon 1/07 waterbirth.jpg, Austin 1/10 in between uc.jpgand Avery 12/11  h20homebirth.gif
fambedsingle1.gif   femalesling.GIF   winner.jpg   cd.gif     ecbaby2.gif  novaxnocirc.gif   goorganic.jpg  

Jaimee is offline  
#14 of 32 Old 06-20-2011, 05:38 AM - Thread Starter
 
Mamandefille's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 21
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Just wanted to update this thread - I've been taking periodic tests once a week or so and getting nothing, until I got a BFP this morning (faint line on a cheapy dip-strip and positive on a digital) joy.gif. The digital says "1-2 weeks" pregnant, so I'm guessing I'm due in early March.

Mamandefille is offline  
#15 of 32 Old 06-20-2011, 06:03 AM
 
Jaimee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Seattle, Tucson, Austin, Baltimore. Now: Urbana, IL
Posts: 7,473
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Wow!  Congrats!!!  So you've been taking tests periodically since you posted on June 1st?  Certainly you could have had very delayed ovulation, but I wouldn't at all trust the test that you're 1-2 weeks pregnant. Remember that 1-2 weeks pregnant is considered the time prior to ovulation and right after ovulation. Three weeks pregnant is what you're considered around the time of your missed period.  So that timing probably makes very little sense... They go by the hCG level detected in your urine, which highly highly varies woman to woman and pregnancy to pregnancy.  The only way to find out at this point would be to wait until you know you're past 6 weeks and go in and get a dating ultrasound.  Prior to 6 weeks it is difficult to tell exactly what is there- sometimes you can see a sac, fetal pole, and heart beat, but at 6 weeks and beyond a heart beat should be detectable (though it is slower than usual right at 6 weeks b/c it has just started beating).  Keep us updated!!!


Mama to Avalon 1/07 waterbirth.jpg, Austin 1/10 in between uc.jpgand Avery 12/11  h20homebirth.gif
fambedsingle1.gif   femalesling.GIF   winner.jpg   cd.gif     ecbaby2.gif  novaxnocirc.gif   goorganic.jpg  

Jaimee is offline  
#16 of 32 Old 06-20-2011, 06:28 AM
JMJ
 
JMJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,301
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Congratulations!

 

It sounds like you ovulated really late this cycle.  If you're 1-2 weeks now, you're actually 3-4 weeks gestation because you get 2 free weeks.  You're probably pretty close to 4 weeks since it's hard to get a BFP much before 4 weeks.

 

When you're talking about the positive OPK's that you had, you said that the one you had on May 31 was really positive and the others were not nearly as positive.  When you're talking about them being positive, is the line darker than the control line, or are you just talking about having a line there?  OPK's are not considered to be positive unless the test line is darker than the control line.  You can have a pretty dark line without it being positive.  I'm asking because I'm wondering if you did actually catch you ovulation on the OPK and then not get a positive test until almost 3 weeks later or if you ovulated even later.

 

Either way, I'm happy to tell you that you do not have to be pregnant all the way until May next year.  Your due date is in late February or early March.

JMJ is offline  
#17 of 32 Old 06-20-2011, 06:36 AM
 
Inspired007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: somewhere countin' my chickens
Posts: 1,591
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Congratulations!! That's wonderful news!!

 

I was always an early ovulator so my BFP's showed up quickly!  Glad you finally saw the result you wanted!


 


Ph.D. Mama to Anaiah born 10/06/07 and Mathias born 11/14/09 and Wife to my cocoa puff DH.
My Cup Runs Over Daily!

www.becomingamommy.com

Inspired007 is offline  
#18 of 32 Old 06-20-2011, 06:37 AM - Thread Starter
 
Mamandefille's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 21
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Yes, I've been taking tests periodically since late May. The one I took last Thursday (Friday? can't remember) was negative, this was the first positive I've gotten. According to the digital test, "1-2 weeks" is actually the time since conception, so 1-2 weeks on the test means 3-4 weeks pregnant. That makes a little more sense since my OPK was positive on May 31st, which was about 4 weeks ago.

Mamandefille is offline  
#19 of 32 Old 06-20-2011, 06:56 AM
JMJ
 
JMJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,301
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Jaimee, I cross-posted with you.

 

OP, if you want to do a dating ultrasound, go for it.  It's the most accurate way of knowing your due date at this point.  If not, we can guess at a date pretty well and be at least as accurate as the LMP method that most OB's use, and in this case, not far behind the ultrasound.  If you assume that you ovulated when you had the positive OPK, you can count 38 weeks after that to February 21 for your due date.  If you wanted to use a modified Prem Rule (First day of temperature rise minus 7 days plus 9 months), that would put you at about February 25.  If you want to assume that you conceived 2 weeks ago (that you're 4 weeks gestation), that would put your due date at February 27, and if you're not quite 2 weeks yet (though I don't think that is very likely, it wouldn't be more than a couple days after that.

 

Due dates have very little to do with when a child is actually born and more to do with how you are treated when the child is actually born.  If a child is born long before or after your suspected due date, your care provider may be more concerned about health risks, and there may be restrictions on how your baby is born.  For example, many places, a midwife may not be allowed to assist you in a homebirth that happens before 37 weeks or after 42.  If you give birth in a hospital, you may be under pressure to induce if they think that you are late, even if you are not.  In general, there is less of an issue with the baby coming slightly earlier than expected unless the baby is indeed really early and needs medical care.

 

I would tend toward a later due date for myself to be on the safe side because my family has a history of late births (I was 16 days late, my daughter was 6 days late from my late estimate due date).  I'm more concerned about naturally going over the 42 week "limit" than I am being more than 3 weeks early.  I'd rather have my EDD be late by a week than early by a week because if my baby came a little earlier than I expected, that just means that I don't have to be pregnant as long as I was planning.  Isn't everybody "done" by about 39 weeks?

 

If your previous child was early or late, you may wish to estimate your EDD accordingly.  Again, if you want an early US, go for it.  I just want to give you some options in case you were hoping to avoid an early US (or US in general), as some people here are.

JMJ is offline  
#20 of 32 Old 06-20-2011, 07:03 AM
JMJ
 
JMJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,301
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mamandefille View Post

Yes, I've been taking tests periodically since late May. The one I took last Thursday (Friday? can't remember) was negative, this was the first positive I've gotten. According to the digital test, "1-2 weeks" is actually the time since conception, so 1-2 weeks on the test means 3-4 weeks pregnant. That makes a little more sense since my OPK was positive on May 31st, which was about 4 weeks ago.



May 31 was almost 3 weeks ago.  Ovulation and conception happen at pretty much the same time.  The egg can only live for 24 hours, and often only 12, so we know that conception probably occurred the same day as ovulation.  If you ovulated on May 31, you'll be 3 weeks since conception (5 weeks gestation with the 2 free weeks) tomorrow.  If you are 1-2 weeks since conception now, you ovulated a little later than May 31.

JMJ is offline  
#21 of 32 Old 06-20-2011, 08:20 AM
 
Jaimee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Seattle, Tucson, Austin, Baltimore. Now: Urbana, IL
Posts: 7,473
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Oh I didn't realize the tests didn't state the gestational timing- that seems odd to me since the entire obstetric world seems to rely on the 40 week system.  Hmmm... are we sure about that? Does it state on the test "weeks since conception?"  I was making the assumption that your hCG  levels are just lower than the averages built into the test.  Please note that a single hCG level means virtually nothing by itself b/c of the great variability- including when implantation actually occurred.  It is the doubling time that matters. 

 

At any rate if you do want to avoid an early u/s then you could put conception 24-36 hours after that OPK+ (doesn't seem stupid now does it? lol.gif ) which would be June 1st or 2nd making you 19 or 20 DPO today.  By standard 40 week calculations, that would make you 4 weeks and 4 or 5 days pregnant today and give you a due date of February 22nd or 23rd.  I agree with JMJ- I like the latest due date I can get so I personally would opt for the early u/s to avoid worse (IMO) interventions later (like induction) just in case O occurred later- accounting for the BFN you got just a few days ago. Most woman would test positive by 15 or 16 DPO so I would not be surprised  if you did O later than June 1st or 2nd.  With this information, you should be able to make a good case for needing an early us/ and you could schedule it for 2-3 weeks from now to be safe- to avoid the need for a repeat u/s if you went in too early. 
 


Mama to Avalon 1/07 waterbirth.jpg, Austin 1/10 in between uc.jpgand Avery 12/11  h20homebirth.gif
fambedsingle1.gif   femalesling.GIF   winner.jpg   cd.gif     ecbaby2.gif  novaxnocirc.gif   goorganic.jpg  

Jaimee is offline  
#22 of 32 Old 06-20-2011, 11:41 AM
 
jen6163's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 36
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Congrats on your BFP!!!  Yay!  I just posted a very similar post to yours!  My cycle is so regular at 28-30 days and I'm now on CD35 with no AF & all BFNs!  It's very frustrating... no clue what is going on.  

jen6163 is offline  
#23 of 32 Old 06-20-2011, 12:45 PM
JMJ
 
JMJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,301
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaimee View Post

Oh I didn't realize the tests didn't state the gestational timing- that seems odd to me since the entire obstetric world seems to rely on the 40 week system.
 


But women know that they weren't pregnant 3-4 weeks ago.  They know that they can test for a pregnancy just a couple weeks after conceiving.  Yes, it just adds to the confusion.  However, the test would obviously be negative for the first two weeks of gestation since there is no pregnancy.  The earliest positive would be at about 4 weeks gestation, so the fact that there is a positive pregnancy test, and it thinks the OP is 1-2 weeks pregnant means that it has to be testing from conception, because it couldn't be testing gestational age.

JMJ is offline  
#24 of 32 Old 06-20-2011, 12:55 PM
 
Jaimee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Seattle, Tucson, Austin, Baltimore. Now: Urbana, IL
Posts: 7,473
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Yeah, I know, I totally get what you're saying.  It's just very strange to me.  Why wouldn't they have the test adjust and just say 3-4 weeks instead?  That would be easy enough.  Not to mention that there is all this confusion about pregnancy week-timing anyway.   It's seems quite odd and definitely confusing to consumers especially when a single hCG level does very little to predict how far along you are.  I would  imagine they would get a lot of complaints from women who were not as far or farther along than their test indicated.  I'm super curious how far along it would have said I was when I tested at 4-5 weeks since I tend to have wildly high hCG levels.


Mama to Avalon 1/07 waterbirth.jpg, Austin 1/10 in between uc.jpgand Avery 12/11  h20homebirth.gif
fambedsingle1.gif   femalesling.GIF   winner.jpg   cd.gif     ecbaby2.gif  novaxnocirc.gif   goorganic.jpg  

Jaimee is offline  
#25 of 32 Old 06-20-2011, 01:39 PM
JMJ
 
JMJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,301
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

It's like so many books and information on fetal development that start at the moment of conception and chronicle embryonic development in time since conception, and some time around the start of the 2nd trimester, they switch to talking about gestational age.  It's really funny because the 9 month marker is about half way between the gestational time and the time since conception.

 

Then you've got people like me who would just like to judge the start of pregnancy from conception, not from LMP (If you need to use it, add 2 weeks instead of making the rest of us subtract) or an arbitrary moment 2 weeks before I ovulate, but I'm just one of those abnormal people who never ovulates on time.  It's CD 31 for me, and I'm hoping to ovulate sometime in the next week (fingers crossed), and if I conceive on this cycle, nobody would be doing me a service to consider me to be 4.5 weeks pregnant right now.  It would be illegal for my LDEM to attend my birth if I wasn't at least a week early (if I do indeed ovulate in the next few days).

JMJ is offline  
#26 of 32 Old 06-20-2011, 02:28 PM
 
Jaimee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Seattle, Tucson, Austin, Baltimore. Now: Urbana, IL
Posts: 7,473
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by JMJ View Post
if I conceive on this cycle, nobody would be doing me a service to consider me to be 4.5 weeks pregnant right now.  It would be illegal for my LDEM to attend my birth if I wasn't at least a week early (if I do indeed ovulate in the next few days).


Oh sure... I think maybe our points are crossing somehow.  I'm a late ovulator as well so my LMP due dates are always off and I always have to argue that I know my date of conception.  That's not the point I'm making. What I'm saying is how does a single test even claim to know that you're 1-2 weeks along when hCG levels vary so widely in the first place?  For example, at 23 DPO my levels were at a staggering 22,800 whereas others that far along could be in the hundreds still. With my second pregnancy they thought I was likely a month farther along than LMP indicated- of course an u/s confirmed the conception date I got from my chart and he showed up just 2 days shy of that date.  My levels just tend to be well above average for the DPO, so how far along would that test think I am?  That's my main point.  My other point is if the test is going to claim it knows how far along your are it might as well just convert that to gestation age for the masses that rely on that.  But all this is really just musings on this particular product.  winky.gif

 


Mama to Avalon 1/07 waterbirth.jpg, Austin 1/10 in between uc.jpgand Avery 12/11  h20homebirth.gif
fambedsingle1.gif   femalesling.GIF   winner.jpg   cd.gif     ecbaby2.gif  novaxnocirc.gif   goorganic.jpg  

Jaimee is offline  
#27 of 32 Old 06-20-2011, 06:31 PM - Thread Starter
 
Mamandefille's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 21
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Thanks for all the advice/suggestions. I spoke to the midwifery clinic this morning and they agreed to put down my due date as March 1st. I'm fairly sure that's a few days later than it is in reality (by my calculations, it's more like Feb. 27), but that has the added benefit of putting me first on the list of March clients and virtually guarantees that I get a midwife. If they add me to the February list, I'll be way down near the bottom and they might not have room for me, so I'll take the March 1st date for now and then we can change it later. I completely agree about erring on the side of "later" with my due date, especially since DD was born at 42 weeks, and even that was based on the latest of the 4 different due dates I had been given. (And for the record, those dates were June 6 based on unadjusted LMP, June 8 based on dating ultrasound at 8.5 weeks, June 9 based on my calculations and June 13 based on LMP, adjusted for my 32 day cycle. DD was born on June 27).

 

Just to clarify about the digital test that estimates how far along you are - it's the Clearblue digital pregnancy test with conception indicator. The instructions have 3 steps - 1) do the test 2) wait and 3) interpret the result. In the "interpret the result" area, it has a little chart that has columns labeled: "result", "time since conception" and "how your doctor will date your pregnancy" .

 

The table reads:

 

Result        Time since conception          How your doctor will date your pregnancy (based on a 28 day cycle)         

 

1-2            1-2 weeks                                          3-4 weeks

2-3            2-3 weeks                                          4-5 weeks

3+             3+ weeks                                           5+ weeks

 

I'm surprised that nobody else seems to have used this test before. It's rare that we have anything in Canada that isn't available widely in the States, lol. Is this test just not commonly used or is it hard to find?? It seems to be in all of our pharmacies here, although I have to actually see a FRER in any of those stores.

Mamandefille is offline  
#28 of 32 Old 06-21-2011, 08:49 AM
 
Jaimee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Seattle, Tucson, Austin, Baltimore. Now: Urbana, IL
Posts: 7,473
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Thanks for posting the details Mamandefille!   That's great news that they gave you a March 1st due date so you could get in with a midwife!   I  know it can be difficult in Canada.   Will you post again if you get a dating u/s to let us know the answer to the mystery?  smile.gif


Mama to Avalon 1/07 waterbirth.jpg, Austin 1/10 in between uc.jpgand Avery 12/11  h20homebirth.gif
fambedsingle1.gif   femalesling.GIF   winner.jpg   cd.gif     ecbaby2.gif  novaxnocirc.gif   goorganic.jpg  

Jaimee is offline  
#29 of 32 Old 06-23-2011, 04:27 AM - Thread Starter
 
Mamandefille's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 21
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Okay, one last update here, and not such a happy one. After 3 positive pregnancy tests Monday, I started spotting Monday evening, brown at first and then bright red. It was full-blown bleeding by Tuesday morning, so I went to the doctor. He had me take another pregnancy test and it was negative. He told me that what had most likely happened was that I had never had a fertilized egg to begin with, but my body had kind of fooled itself into thinking that it did and produced *just* enough hcg to trigger a positive pregnancy test (like in the 50-100 miU range). Because the level is so low though, it can drop to zero in a matter of hours (overnight, in my case) and you can have a negative test just hours after having a positive one. He called it an "empty pole". It's not considered a miscarriage since there was never a fertilized egg to begin with, but I did have very heavy bleeding and very painful cramping Tuesday and yesterday, which I don't usually get with a normal period.

 

We are sad, but glad that at least this long, confusing cycle is finally over, and we can start again with a clean slate.

Mamandefille is offline  
#30 of 32 Old 06-23-2011, 04:34 AM
 
Logan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 651
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

So sorry to hear that mama- take care of yourself. I didn't want to say anything before, but my first sign (before miscarrying) that something was off was the bizarre way the HcG and tests manifested in the beginning so I was a little worried about how long the HcG had taken for your tests to show as well. I hope you get another positive very soon :)

Logan is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off