Charting to Avoid/Fertility Awareness - July 2010 - Page 5 - Mothering Forums
First ... 3  4  5 6  7  ... Last
Family Planning > Charting to Avoid/Fertility Awareness - July 2010
Smokering's Avatar Smokering 10:12 PM 07-14-2010
Quote:
Smokering ~ FF is considering that one low temp as a fallback rise. I still wouldn't trust it, though, since you don't have enough temps beforehand and you had fertile CF afterward.
Yeah, I don't trust it either. The CF, though, is almost irrelevant - I have fertile-quality cervical fluid practically ALL the time. Maybe a dry day or two at most after AF. It's weird.

None of my other cycles had fallback rises - wouldn't this be the sort of pattern one either always or never has? Usually my temps just go up and stay up until a day or two before AF. Whatever: we'll just keep using condoms until this cycle's over or something more definite happens. I'm sick today as well, which will probably mean my temps for the next few days aren't reliable. (Also, trust me to get sick three days before a wedding, for which I'm making and icing the cake. I'm supposed to be making icing roses right now and I just want to sleeeeeeep!)

MarineWife's Avatar MarineWife 10:31 PM 07-14-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smokering View Post
None of my other cycles had fallback rises - wouldn't this be the sort of pattern one either always or never has?
That's what I thought if I remember what I read in TCOYF. If it's not your usual pattern, I'd assume the higher temp before that was a fluke and not count it as a thermal shift.
BarefootScientist's Avatar BarefootScientist 09:12 AM 07-15-2010
So I didn't get that high temp I wanted. What does anyone think of my chart? Keeping in mind that those crosshairs are four days earlier than my earliest O in the last five years.

Come on body. Do something predictable.

FWIW, I definitely feel post-O.
hippy mum's Avatar hippy mum 09:17 AM 07-15-2010
Bfs & MM-looks like you both O'd to me, or am I missing something? Haven't quite woken up yet this morning

I'm still really wishing I had those missing 3 temps.
http://www.fertilityfriend.com/home/28fb6b
97.5 is always an after O temp for me, and except for last month 97.3 is as well, unless it's in the first week after AF. I haven't had any fluke rises to those temps on a cycle, so we'll have to see what tomorrow temp is. The 97.1 temp is the odd ball-I took my temp an hour earlier than normal, so not sure how much that effects the temp. I can't remember if I noticed a diff when the clocks changed, but then I think FF accounted for that or something.
MarineWife's Avatar MarineWife 09:36 AM 07-15-2010
Both Mel and BBM ~

You both can use the 4 day dry up rule.
BarefootScientist's Avatar BarefootScientist 09:37 AM 07-15-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbrandonsmom View Post
Bfs & MM-looks like you both O'd to me, or am I missing something? Haven't quite woken up yet this morning
It looks like I O'd to me too! It just freaks me the heck out because I have NEVER O'd that early. Also, I had gobs of fertile CF on the day of the temp rise.

Quote:
I'm still really wishing I had those missing 3 temps.
http://www.fertilityfriend.com/home/28fb6b
97.5 is always an after O temp for me, and except for last month 97.3 is as well, unless it's in the first week after AF. I haven't had any fluke rises to those temps on a cycle, so we'll have to see what tomorrow temp is. The 97.1 temp is the odd ball-I took my temp an hour earlier than normal, so not sure how much that effects the temp. I can't remember if I noticed a diff when the clocks changed, but then I think FF accounted for that or something.
Yeah, those temps would help. O looks quite probable to me before CD 17 though. I'd probably wait for another high temp and dry-up day at least. Taking your temp an hour earlier is supposed to decrease it by about .2 degrees. It's .1 for every half hour.
BarefootScientist's Avatar BarefootScientist 10:13 AM 07-15-2010
So here's what my DH suggested. Altitude. We moved (a ~4500 ft. elevation drop) around O time last cycle, and DH thought maybe the shift to a lower altitude caused me to O early this cycle. I don't know, sounds kinda fishy to me, but a pretty interesting theory.

In any case, if I did indeed O CD 13, how worried do ya'll think I should be about the BD on CD 9?
MovingMomma's Avatar MovingMomma 10:45 AM 07-15-2010
BFS & BBM: What MW said: 4 day dry up... BFS, I think your temps look like you've probably O'd, but they are kinda weird. BBM, there's just not enough data to know.

BFS: If you O'd CD 13, then BD CD 9 could certainly result in pg.
MarineWife's Avatar MarineWife 12:42 PM 07-15-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovingMomma View Post
BFS: If you O'd CD 13, then BD CD 9 could certainly result in pg.


What was your CF like on cd9?

My seems to have been very short this time. Usually, it lasts 6-7 days with at least 4 heavy/medium days. I'm only on cd4 and it appears to be tapering off already. Man, it would be nice if my shortened like that.
BarefootScientist's Avatar BarefootScientist 12:49 PM 07-15-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarineWife View Post


What was your CF like on cd9?

My seems to have been very short this time. Usually, it lasts 6-7 days with at least 4 heavy/medium days. I'm only on cd4 and it appears to be tapering off already. Man, it would be nice if my shortened like that.
I don't really check CF. I just notice it. That's why it's blank, as opposed to actually saying dry. So I certainly could have had a little bit of sticky or even creamy that day and not noticed it. I did actually check it on CDs 12 and 13, but when I saw true, honest-to-goodness EW I stopped checking. I was using the Doering rule to consider myself safe regardless of CF up to CD 11 based on not having a thermal shift before CD 18 in the last 12 cycles. We are going to stop avoiding next cycle anyway so if it happens for us a cycle early, not a super big deal. But I feel like I was doing things right, so I hope I don't get pregnant, just so DH and I can continue to trust this method!

Yay for shorter AF! I love it when I have a shorter/lighter month.
BarefootScientist's Avatar BarefootScientist 12:56 PM 07-15-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by BarefootScientist View Post
We are going to stop avoiding next cycle anyway so if it happens for us a cycle early, not a super big deal. But I feel like I was doing things right, so I hope I don't get pregnant, just so DH and I can continue to trust this method!
I just want to clarify what I said here as far as method vs. user failures. According to TCOYF and TaoNFP, I should have been checking my CF on CD 9, and the fact that I didn't makes this a user failure should I get pregnant. I could call it a Doering method failure if I wanted to. But yeah, if I got pregnant, I couldn't technically blame the method here as I wasn't following the rules as closely as I should have been.
MarineWife's Avatar MarineWife 02:12 PM 07-15-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by BarefootScientist View Post
I could call it a Doering method failure if I wanted to.
Yeah, you could call it a Doering method failure as long as you were following all the rules for that correctly. I'd think that method would have a higher failure rate than FAM or NFP anyway. Maybe not by much but still higher.
annie2186's Avatar annie2186 02:36 PM 07-15-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarineWife View Post
Yeah, you could call it a Doering method failure as long as you were following all the rules for that correctly. I'd think that method would have a higher failure rate than FAM or NFP anyway. Maybe not by much but still higher.
With the Doering method you ARE supposed to be paying attention to CM. The exact rules for pre-o are something like:

You can DTD up to 7 days before your earliest O if there is no mucus present.........that is why I always kind of wondered why anyone would actually do the Doering method if you had to pay attention to CM anyway.

I guess it could make you more comfortable to DTD later in the pre-o phase - but you ARE supposed to be paying attention to CM.
BarefootScientist's Avatar BarefootScientist 02:42 PM 07-15-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by annie2186 View Post
With the Doering method you ARE supposed to be paying attention to CM. The exact rules for pre-o are something like:

You can DTD up to 7 days before your earliest O if there is no mucus present.........that is why I always kind of wondered why anyone would actually do the Doering method if you had to pay attention to CM anyway.

I guess it could make you more comfortable to DTD later in the pre-o phase - but you ARE supposed to be paying attention to CM.
Actually, I am pretty sure the NFP people added the "if there is no mucus" part. The original study on the Doering method was in the absence of paying any attention at all to CF. I think that the more signs you incorporate in your method the more reliable it will be, but I think this study showed that the going just by temperature in this way was pretty darn effective.

I think I'll go look for my TaoNFP book and actually look it up. It's still packed.
BarefootScientist's Avatar BarefootScientist 03:03 PM 07-15-2010
Ok my book wasn't too hard to find.

It describes the Doering system under "Temperature-Only Systems" on page 378 of my edition. It says:

Quote:
The Doering System

End of Phase I: Earliest first day of thermal shift (in previous cycles) minus 7 yields the last day of Phase I.

Start of Phase III: The evening of the third day of full thermal shift is the start of Phase III.
That's pretty much what I've been doing, only I've been using the TCOYF rules, not the TaoNFP rules, to determine my thermal shift. So maybe I should be subtracting more days...I don't know. But I also do pay at least some attention to my CF.

Anyway, then on the next page it talks about the modifications that the CCL has added to this method to make their "Doering rule" and so forth. This is where they add the "provided that day is still a dry day." They also say you can use it with less fertile mucus, it all depends on how seriously you are avoiding, but that they don't recommend using it with more fertile mucus. Sorry, there are too many words to quote.

As far as the effectiveness, I found that on page 149 in the chapter on effectiveness. I'm going to quote a few relevant parts of that...

Quote:
The 1967 study of Dr. G.K. Doering is the only one to report on temperature-only rules for both Phase I and Phase III. Some couples had relations only in Phase III; others used Phase I, too...

Phase I plus Phase III was used by 689 couples for 48,214 cycles. They experienced 125 unplanned pregnancies, yielding a user-effectiveness Pearl index of 3.1...13 conceived toward the end of the 'safe' postmenstrual period, 56 were patient errors, and 38 had kept incomplete records...

...it is not clear that all the couples using Phase I regularly used it to the limits of the Doering rule.
So it does sound like that is probably a bit less effective than FAM or NFP would be, but I am pretty comfortable with those stats.
MarineWife's Avatar MarineWife 03:10 PM 07-15-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by BarefootScientist View Post
Actually, I am pretty sure the NFP people added the "if there is no mucus" part. The original study on the Doering method was in the absence of paying any attention at all to CF.
Yeah, we got into all of that a while back for my benefit. I guess it's hard to know the true method failure rate if all the stats are lumped together. Wouldn't we need to know exactly how many of those couples followed the rules perfectly rather than just the total # that were studied?
BarefootScientist's Avatar BarefootScientist 03:14 PM 07-15-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarineWife View Post
Yeah, we got into all of that a while back for my benefit. I guess it's hard to know the true method failure rate if all the stats are lumped together. Wouldn't we need to know exactly how many of those couples followed the rules perfectly rather than just the total # that were studied?
We'd also need to know exactly what day they stopped having sex. Not everyone has sex every day so, even if the Doering rule said they were safe until day 8 for example, they might not have had sex beyond day 6 in most cycles just by chance...or whatever.

Yeah, I don't really see how the true effectiveness of rules like this can ever be studied.
RaraAvis's Avatar RaraAvis 03:26 PM 07-15-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by BarefootScientist View Post
Yeah, I don't really see how the true effectiveness of rules like this can ever be studied.
Some of them are pretty neat though, like that doctor who had hundreds of women-years with his patients, who seemed to stick with him for their adult lives. Different time, I guess. But he probably had a good idea of what they did. . .

MM: I don't know if it was CD 24 or 28, but it looks like your fer sure safe now!

I just got back from vacation, which was NUTS. My parents' dog got his EYE popped out in a fight with another dog

AFM: waiting for O, my temps are a little spotty from the trip, so we'll have to see how it goes.
hippy mum's Avatar hippy mum 04:21 PM 07-15-2010
Altitude-I guess anything's possible?

Gosh what would my failure method be, it's not like we aren't following the rules, though dh does not keep tabs on my chart. He always w/d unless I say it's ok, but I didn't have a chance to this time. Bd was d16, but since it was so very early, in my head I count it as d17 and made a mark on my paper chart.
annie2186's Avatar annie2186 04:42 PM 07-15-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaraAvis View Post
I just got back from vacation, which was NUTS. My parents' dog got his EYE popped out in a fight with another dog
:Puke


BFS - that actually makes more sense to me, that "as long as its a dry day" was added to the Doering method.............because otherwise it is not really a very "cool" method!!

Personally - I think the Doering method is kinda scary for those of us (aka me) who have long/irregular cycle's, because we can ALWAYS O on a MUCH earlier day (but still normal for alot of women).

I remember a few 30 day cycles I had at a younger age before I started charting. If they weren't annovulatory and I had my LP phase that I have now, that would have me Oing on like day 15-17 and in the last 7 cycles I have only O'd on day 20 as the earliest..............
MarineWife's Avatar MarineWife 06:39 PM 07-15-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by annie2186 View Post
Personally - I think the Doering method is kinda scary for those of us (aka me) who have long/irregular cycle's, because we can ALWAYS O on a MUCH earlier day (but still normal for alot of women).


That's why I didn't like it. My average O day used to be around cd27. In the last year or so it had moved to cd23. However, I have Oed as early as cd11. That would leave basically my entire cycle unsafe. I'd rather go by CF and maybe get as much as 2 weeks of being safe in my pre-O phase.
Smokering's Avatar Smokering 08:55 PM 07-15-2010
Er, I hate to ask, but did the dog's eye get put back in?

Thermal shift this morning, but I'm sick so I don't trust it. This is my oddest cycle yet. Oh well - I feel like death, so if I pass on pregnancy won't be an issue....
Smokering's Avatar Smokering 02:00 AM 07-16-2010
At least, I hope it's a fever I have. It just occurred to me that it could be the start of a triphasic... thingy. Which would be bad. I was shivering and headachey all night though, so I'll assume it's a fever - right?
BarefootScientist's Avatar BarefootScientist 08:18 AM 07-16-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smokering View Post
At least, I hope it's a fever I have. It just occurred to me that it could be the start of a triphasic... thingy. Which would be bad. I was shivering and headachey all night though, so I'll assume it's a fever - right?
I would guess. And even if it is triphasic, that doesn't necessarily mean anything. I quite often have triphasic charts.

My temp is higher today. So apparently I did O. I guess time and more temps will tell whether it was CD 13 or CD 16. The temps really make it look like CD 13 though.
hippy mum's Avatar hippy mum 09:23 AM 07-16-2010
BFS-that looks right to me.

Smokering-how are you feeling today? It's prob a cold.

Well, FF gave me cross hairs http://www.fertilityfriend.com/home/28fb6b but I'm still going to wait. I kept looking at my chart this morning and wondering why it wasn't matching up with FF. It really helps if the person who makes the chart inputs the days correctly , so I'm only missing 2 days pre O, but that still makes a diff to me, since I looked back over my charts and have plenty of cycles with a fall back temp.
BarefootScientist's Avatar BarefootScientist 09:38 AM 07-16-2010
BBM, I would put your crosshairs on CD 18 with a Cl of 97.4 and wait one more day. That agrees with your CF as well.
MarineWife's Avatar MarineWife 12:10 PM 07-16-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by BarefootScientist View Post
BBM, I would put your crosshairs on CD 18 with a Cl of 97.4 and wait one more day. That agrees with your CF as well.


Mel ~ I'd go with cd16 at this point because you don't have 6 consecutive pre-O temps and you have ewcf after cd13. Even with the huge temp spike on cd14, that doesn't necessarily indicate O. If I remember correctly, the rules say the O temp spike is at least 0.2 degrees and usually 0.4 degrees above the temp from the previous day but that's not definitive. There are times when one's temp can dip and/or spike without O. That's just my take on things.

My picked up again. So much for a shorter one.
BarefootScientist's Avatar BarefootScientist 02:10 PM 07-16-2010
MW, poo for longer AF.
Toolip's Avatar Toolip 02:48 PM 07-16-2010
I've gotten two higher temps now so I'm thinking it was more of a cd14 O... definitely has a high/soft/open cervix around then too.

http://www.fertilityfriend.com/home/2b6757
MarineWife's Avatar MarineWife 04:06 PM 07-16-2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toolip View Post
I've gotten two higher temps now so I'm thinking it was more of a cd14 O... definitely has a high/soft/open cervix around then too.

http://www.fertilityfriend.com/home/2b6757
Wow! Yeah, that's a major temp hike. I'd say one more high temp like that and you can call it for cd14.
First ... 3  4  5 6  7  ... Last

Up