Talk:Hormonal intrauterine device

Addition of comments about weight gain

The following content was added by User:Mactivist in this diff. I have moved it here because there are no references provided and I found the statements to be unencyclopedic in tone. I am not confirming or denying the truth of the statements, only that in their current form their inclusion is unencyclopedic. References are necessary. Joie de Vivre 17:30, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Comment: In regards to the amount of weight gain referenced in #The removed content about weight gain, "2 to 4 stone" translates to "28 to 56 pounds" and "approximately 12 to 24 kilograms". Joie de Vivre 17:37, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Comment: please accept my apologies - I do not know how to make is encyclopaedic and I am a new user to wiki. I tend to write plainly so that people reading it who are likely to be affected will understand it. I do not know what 50 lbs looks like, or 24 kilograms - I am in the UK where people tend to measure their weight in stones.

The problem with references is that there is no research article available to back up the claim. Most articles found are referencing the manufacturers comments.

I can link to forums where there are pages and pages of users who can back up the claim - that is all. I wish to add the claim because it needs to be somewhere with a high profile so that women considering the use of this method can see potential problems for themselves, whereas at the moment, the only thing they are likely to find is the manufacturer's and health advisors claim that there is no weight gain with this method.Mactivist 17:48, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

You have nothing to apologize about; it's fine to be new. Wikipedia even has a policy about that, WP:BITE refers to "don't bite the newbies". So if anyone gives you flack just remember that they should know better!

In regards to the content, you are absolutely right in pointing out that there is a lack of research available. However, I think we agree that a lack of research demonstrating a side effect does not necessarily mean that the side effect does not exist! There may very well be deliberate negligence on the part of the manufacturer in reporting a common side effect, especially something as off-putting as 30-50 pounds of weight gain.

The best thing you can do is look for the most credible or reliable source that talks about this happening. Would you post links here and let us know what you find? Maybe there will be something credible enough to mention it in the article. Thanks! Joie de Vivre 17:52, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

The removed content about weight gain

Weight gain

Note: In regards to the average range of weight gain, "2 to 4 stone" is equal to "28 to 56 pounds" and "approximately 12 to 24 kilograms".

Although there appears to be no published research evidence that Mirena coil causes weight gain, a brief search on Google will confirm that there are many many women out there who suffered enormous weight gain after insertion of a Mirena coil and are suffering from depression and anxiety as a result. Many of these reports, mostly found in women's and health forums, state that the woman was normal weight, even after the birth of a child, and then put on large amounts of weight, maybe three or four stone in the months after initially using the coil. The weight gain appears to occur in some users in spite of them being of previously normal weight, taking regular exercise and eating the usual amount of food. Most women reporting this phenomenon report similar effects - - much of the weight is put on around the waist - the weight gain is usually somewhere between 2 and 4 stones - the weight gain is often accompanied by greasy hair and acne - No amount of exercising or dieting seems to help these women to lose the weight they have gained, and many have had the coil removed in the hope that they will return to their former condition. - on speaking to their doctors, they are told that the weight gain risk which is stated in the user information is a 'theoretical risk' only and that is not the reason why they have put on the weight.

If anyone has any research which confirms that some women suffer from this serious side effect, perhaps they could link it.

Literature Omissions About Verifiable Side Effects

I had the most drastic weight loss surgery available in 2004 (the DS) and had been maintaining a nearly 200-lb weight loss for over a year. In Nov 2006, I got the Mirena primarily for birth control, secondly to lighten my debilitating periods, and finally because the manufacturer (Bayer/Berlax) claimed no significant weight gain.

I still couldn't believe that my 10-or-so pound weight gain was the Mirena's fault even though I have become a fastidiously healthy woman who is ridiculously careful about what I eat. And because of this, it is usually pretty easy to lose any weight gained--even if there was no plausible reason how/why I had gained it in the first place (in other words, as long as I apply the same principles regularly, I virtually cannot not gain weight).

In April 2007 I discovered a 1"x3" mass in my right breast that appeared nearly overnight. Still, I couldn't believe it was the Mirena. When a second fibroadenoma seemed to have appeared less than 2 weeks after the benign fibroadenoma was removed, then I wondered if there was a correlation. I Googled for info (searched mirena+fibroadenoma). None of this surfaced prior to insertion or I am likely never to have gotten it.

Upon removal of the Mirena, I felt an immediate difference. So many things I had been attributing to my autoimmune disease (Hashimoto's Thyroiditis, not hypothyroid) and fibromyalgia, all seem to be traceable to the Mirena (loss of desire, back pain, depression, fatigue, sight problems, weight gain, problems concentrating, etc). It took approximately six weeks for my hormones to regain some balance, including return of period and weight loss.

It appears that very thin or average weight women gain weight and/or cannot lose weight post-Mirena. It may have something to do with the lack of fat to absorb the additional hormones. From what I've researched, heavier women fare much better--as I did when on the pill and at a much higher weight.

<a href="http://www.aippg.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=24435&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0">Click here for just one example of Mirena users who have experienced small to horrific weight gains post-insertion. Many of these women had never had a weight problem before. It is over 40 pages of posts spanning more than two years.</a>

<a href="http://www.mirena.ca/en/pdfs/MirenaEn.pdf">Click here for data regarding fibroadenoma of the breast as a side effect of the Mirena.</a>

Weight gain parameter in infobox

I would like to treat this parameter the same on all the hormonal contraception articles. Please read my opinion and discuss this issue at Talk:Combined oral contraceptive pill#Weight parameter in infobox. Lyrl^Talk _C 21:31, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Risks parameter in infobox

A user has recently added fibroadenoma, a side effect experienced by about 1% of Mirena users, to the infobox at the top of the page. Other side effects experienced by approximately 1% of Mirena users include upper respiratory tract infection, sinusitis, candidiasis, bronchitis, urinary tract infection, rhinitis, back pain, musculoskeletal pain, depression, breast pain, genital discharge, vaginal infection, and acne. Including this entire list in an infobox is impractical.

The previous listing included ovarian cysts (which some studies have found in more than 10% of users, so a very common side effect), pelvic inflammatory disease (possibly leading to infertility, a serious side effect), and uterine perforation (possibly leading to serious infection, may require surgery, also serious). Unlike these three effects, I don't see anything about fibroadenoma to distinguish it from the dozens of other effects Mirena can have. Since we're not including an exhaustive list of side effects in the infobox, I don't think fibroadenoma belongs there, either. Lyrl^Talk _C 00:42, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Capitalization

Is this device properly an IntraUterine System, or an intrauterine system? ("CamelCaps" are only used in a registered trademarks, not normal English words.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:42, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

This Johns Hopkins document uses "intrauterine system". I believe that is the correct usage. Lyrl^Talk _C 17:17, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Hair loss is a VERY large side effect!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.194.162.10 (talk) 02:46, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Article name

What was the basis for changing the article name from "Intrauterine System" (80,400 hits in Google) to "IUD with progestogen" (9,110 Google hits)? Even "Hormonal IUD" (49,200 Google hits) would be better (more general, more recognizable), but why move from more common term to less common one? Zodon (talk) 05:45, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Response at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Medicine/Reproductive_medicine_task_force#Recent_split_and_renaming_of_IUD_articles. --Arcadian (talk) 10:52, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Anectdotal Evidence

• I'm no medical expert (EMT-B is about it) nor a statistician, but if some people attribute their medical/hormonal/depression problems to this "Mirena coil" and the problems go away after its removal, it should at least be noted imho. More at http://www.reddit.com/r/reddit.com/comments/alpyt/thank_you_reddit_you_have_saved_my_life Pär Larsson (talk) 19:17, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

• I removed the comment about this product possibly causing breast enlargement, as I could find no references for that other than this one conference presentation that reported seeing it mentioned on someone's blog: Takeshita, Chikako. "From Grass-roots to Blog-roots: Women's Health Activism on the Internet" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the 4S Annual Meeting - Abstract and Session Submissions, Komaba I Campus, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan, Aug 25, 2010 <Not Available>. 2011-03-09 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p421831_index.html> --HarvardSlacker (talk) 17:10, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

This article has serious debatable and misguiding information

This article is outdated and needs attention. Mirena IUD is now sure to cause weight gain even if Bayer - the producer - does not report this. Many of the side affects that are currently know are not mentioned here, severe acne, depression, dramatic changes in skin appearance, etc. Noakk (talk) 19:22, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

This article was written and last edited until recently quite a long time ago. So much information has been published recently to update it.Noakk (talk) 14:32, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Proposed format change to this article

I am proposing that this article and the IUD with copper article are modified to have the same format. They are very similar devices and it would be nice if the article's mirrored each other in format. I am probably going to do this in the next month if no one has issue with it. SarahRose12 34 (talk) 21:18, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Side effects and complications section

On reviewing this article, the side effects and complications article is poorly organized and confusing. Some of the articles cited do not even refer to the IUD with progestogen. In particular, one article in the Nursing Mothers section cites a study on Norplant. While Norplant is a progesterone releasing method, it delivers the hormone in an entirely different way than an IUD. It should not be cited in this article. I plan on removing many of the outdated or superfluous citations on this article and reorganize this section. All changes will be properly cited and I will have them checked over by a physician.SarahRose12 34 (talk) 20:53, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

All changes were fact checked by a qualified and practicing OB/GYN who works at a respected medical school in the United States. Here's a summary of the changes I made to the side effects if anyone wants to discuss them. "Location of device"--essentially included expulsion and perforation. I have now stated those separately and explicitly. "Pelvic Inflammatory Disease and sexually transmitted disease".--PID is covered. STIs are mentioned under this, but those are not a side effect. "Postpartum and post-abortion insertion"--moved mention of this under Insertion and Removal Section, doesn't seem to qualify as a side effect to me. The original section included contradictory statements as well. "Hormonal Side Effects" --covered under menstrual patterns. "Systematic"--covered under ovarian cysts and device description. "Nursing mothers"--no longer listed as a contraindication by the CDC Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use. "Effect on cancer rates"--covered under contraindications "Pregnancy"--covered "Bone Density"--not a side effect of the hormonal IUD. These are all the most common side effects. I believe it is fairly comprehensive. However, if you feel that something is left off, let's discuss.SarahRose12 34 (talk) 19:34, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

I reinserted some entries that I still deserve inclusion in this article. Otherwise, I think your edits were all for the better Mikael Häggström (talk) 16:50, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Comparison of blood levels in users of Mirena and progestogen-only pill

According to Fimea (Finnish Medicine Agency) blood levels of levonorgestrel in Mirena users are 206 pg/ml after 6 months of insertion. In comparison, maximum blood level of levonorgestrel in users of progestogen-only pill Microluton is c. 800 pg/ml (0.8 ng/ml), the half-life being one hour. This is hardly a one-to-tenth ratio. I apologize for the references being in Finnish language only, trying to fix that.. Microluton pill, blood levels p. 8 <http://spc.fimea.fi/indox/nam/html/nam/humspc/7/102637.pdf> Mirena, blood levels p. 11 <http://spc.fimea.fi/indox/english/html/nam/humspc/4/125214.pdf> Kaisakettu (talk) 16:50, 27 April 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaisakettu (talk • contribs) 16:44, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Physicians fact sheet link broken?

• Might have been broken only temporarily
• Suggest another: https://www.arhp.org/Publications-and-Resources/Patient-Resources/Fact-Sheets/Hormonal-IUD

Curtbeckmann (talk) 04:56, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Title - Progestin versus Progestogen

This question is probably much ado about nothing, but I'm curious whether the title of this article is accurate. Most hormonal IUD's use progestins (i.e. synthetic progestogens). Wouldn't it be more accurate for the title to be IUD with progestin?

On a similar note, the way we've bifurcated IUD articles into "IUD with Progestogen" and "IUD with Copper" seems a little clunky. Isn't the more WP:COMMONNAME for these things "Copper IUDs" and "Hormonal IUDs" (as seen here for instance)? Anyone object to a move? NickCT (talk) 15:01, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

I support the move. Here's why: a reader wants information on their IUD, so what does common sense tell us about what they will type into the searchbox? We really have to start thinking about readers more instead of other editors (I'm not referring to you, this is just one of my issues.) Best Regards, Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉ 21:57, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

• support move per Barbara (WVS) rationale--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 22:16, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

• Support Hormonal IUD and Copper IUD IMO are better names. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:55, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
• Done NickCT (talk) 19:17, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Use is not recommended during pregnancy.

I'm a man. I may be asking a really dumb question here but ... what exactly would a woman be doing with an IUD if she is already aware she is pregnant? Is "not recommended" a euphemistic shorthand for "not recommended as a means for abortion"? Thanks, —Soap— 03:45, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Okay I guess I answered my own question with some more research .... for anyone who, like me, had no idea what was going on ... apparently the IUD releases a chemical that has no effect on a baby once the baby starts growing. Therefore it does not cause miscarriage in and of itself. But you still have a physical device in your womb next to the baby so I can see why it's "not recommended". —Soap— 15:56, 23 June 2020 (UTC)