Misinformation

OK.  So I'm going to go on a little diatribe about information one receives about fertility, pregnancy, childbirth, nursing, etc.  First of all, I'm bugged about all the information one hears about what "normal" or "typical" is in this whole process.  For example, the 28 day cycle.  I don't know for how long I've heard that 28 days in a cycle is normal and that is what most women have.  And if you don't have that, there's something wrong:  you're not normal.  Folks, that is not true!  Women's cycles range from 26 to 36 days and women can vary from month to month.  And all of that is normal!  Normalnomalnormalnormal!  I have to really appreciate Consumer Reports who does not call the 28 day cycle normal, but "most common."  Statistically speaking, it's the mode.

I also want to gripe about the whole ovulation test kit thingy in which one tries to detect one's LH Surge, aka Sergio.  We like Sergio because Sergio tells us when Ovalina is ready for her debut.  This involves peeing on a stick and checking out whether one or two lines appear.  When should one perform this lovely act?  Well, the ClearBlueEasy test kit says do it first thing in the morning.  Many web sites say that is the exact wrong time to do it, that Sergio starts studying in the morning and doesn't show up for the test until the mid-afternoon. (He's a late sleeper)  And Consumer Reports says that for 1/3 of women, Sergio lasts less than 10 hours and one test a day could easily miss it.  I recall one web site that implied that if a woman had to test twice a day for Sergio, she was atypical/abnormal/"special."  I would like to point out that statistically speaking, 38% do not make a slim minority of women.  And if you've got the timing wrong, two tests a day are absolutely necessary!

And finally, I've had several long and interesting conversations with women close to my age who have just given birth.  As they all shared their experiences, one theme was common:  "It wasn't like what I had expected.  My experiences were different than what they told me to expect.  It wasn't normal."  Well, if most people's experiences aren't normal, what is?

I'm a researcher--I like information.  I like googling and reading the web sites on topics of interest.  And the sites I find are not always the "Women's cycles are 28 days and are influenced by the moon" (Which skeptics.com debunked).  Some of these sites actually appear to be good sources of information!  But they imply typical/normal/average is "A" and if you don't experience "A", you're not normal.  When in fact, there's a range of behavior around A which is perfectly normal and that's what we should really focus on.  (It's the whole problem with focusing on the average or the "mean" and not understanding the role of variance or the standard deviation around the mean to explain "typical".)

OK.  Enough of a rambling bitch and moan session.  All is fine in our world.  It just bugs me when information does not converge to a single "truth" and I can't figure out which information to trust. 

9:03:41 AM