In this week’s archive, the Observer Magazine from 20 January 1985 gets hot under the collar for contraception. Our reporter Christine Doyle investigates pills, coils, implants, patches and other paraphernalia available in 1985 to stop you from getting pregnant.
The pill had developed a pretty bad rep, with women choosing to take a more natural approach. After a study in the Lancet in 1982 linking the pill with breast cancer, ‘as many as 500,000 women in Britain may have given up the pill, one-third apparently making no immediate switch to another method,’ reports Doyle.
In search of alternatives to the pill, here’s what the Observer’s projected timeline for the future of contraception was, presented alongside rather alarming-looking illustrations.
February 1985: a hi-tech sponge. A ‘mushroom-shaped’ device that ‘guards against some sexually transmitted infections’. In other words just what everyone wants: a 27% chance of chlamydia and a toadstool in the nether regions.
1985-87: calendar control. Similar to our new wave of natural cycle apps, the ‘Vatican roulette’ of birth control whereby couples attempt to avoid the fertile time of the month by measuring body temperature. Fertility thermometers were available for $3,000 in the US. For those on a tighter budget there was the timeless ‘withdrawal’ technique, arguably less effective.
1990: his and hers nasal sprays. ‘A sniff a day keeps the baby away’ – a spray containing tiny amounts of brain hormones ‘to produce subtle changes in the pituitary gland so that it shuts ovulation or production of sperm’. I think I’ll stick to Olbas, thanks.
Mid 1990s: superglue sterilisation whereby ‘chemical glue is “gunned” into tubes where it causes the growth of tissue.’ Yum.
Late 1990s: a pill for men. Still waiting for this one…
What I’ve concluded from this week? Abstinence is underrated.
