From Choice Words
Eco-minded individuals face similar conundrums on a daily basis: when it seems that all available options impact the planet in a negative way, how does one choose what to do? Recently Slate tackled that dilemma regarding contraception. When condoms wind up in landfills but traces of oral contraception are found in water (are are feminizing male fish as a result), what is a sexually active, environmentally conscious individual to do?
In the end, condoms won:
Given that the condoms represent only about 0.001 percent of the 152 million tons of trash American households produce annually—and that we still need a lot of research into the precise effects that pharmaceuticals are having on our water supply—condoms seem to be the greener choice. This is especially true when you factor in all the packaging that typically comes with American pharmaceuticals—the plastic dispensers, the printed instruction leaflets, and so on.
As this article pointed out, any form of birth control is going to have less of a negative impact on the environment than an additional human being, which is precisely why I always use two forms of contraception (condoms and the ring, since you were wondering. I like to think that Nuva Ring results in less estrogen being released into water, since the hormones are so handily centralized, but I haven’t conducted any research to back that up). Anyway, the important thing to keep in mind is that family planning is in itself a green act.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Contraception: What is the greenest of them all? .
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/12410
Nice to know, but sorry to say that I will probably be helping the environment in other, more effective ways rather than trading in my oral contraception for using condoms again.
Did they consider the Fertility Awareness Method? I realize it's not for everyone (some women don't want that much body awareness, don't like to be in contact with their own bodily fluids, etc.) but well-practiced FAM is highly effective and almost totally green! All that's needed is a good digital thermometer and a notebook using 12 pages per year. Recycle the paper, if you must, but most women like to keep it for the record.
Withdrawal is also quite green. Effectiveness if subject to user error, but isn't that true of every form of birth control?
The most effective way to be super-ecological AND super-careful not to accidentally overpopulate would be to exchange PIV sex for something else. But I guess mainstream media can't come up with an idea like that.
I read this article earlier this week, and according to them, condoms didn't win out on the eco-friendliness.....
"Luckily, there is one clear champ in this contest. Among the nonpermanent forms of contraception, the one that is least wasteful and most effective—that is to say, the greenest—is the copper intrauterine device. The copper IUD is hormone-free; made from a small amount of a cheap, plentiful metal; and can last up to 10 years. It's also 99 percent effective in typical use, as compared with 82.6 percent for condoms and 91.3 percent for the pill. Nevertheless, less than 2 percent of contraception-using women in the United States use copper IUDs."
As a copper IUD user, this was one of many reasons why I opted for this form of contraception. Granted, I'm a double-dutch type who uses condoms as well, but let's give copper IUDs credit where credit is due!
If you're using condoms for the sake of being "green" than they really should be vegan. Regular condoms contain milk byproducts, and as we all know factory farming is one of the worst things for environment.
Check out Glyde brand.