I my opinion the Catholic view has some support in recent biology that has
something to do with whether contraception is morally considerate of life-
if it is artificial or not - and this has to do with the pill. 

The female birth control pill utilizes synthetic estrogen to control
implantation of the fertilized egg witin the lining of the uterus. Studies
both in Germany and in the USA have found that the pill is capable of
altering the level of desire in women who take the pill. For instance,
Deborah Blum, writing in "Sex on the Brain" relates the finding of a study
done in Germany on oral contraceptives:

"A recent study done in Germany found that women on birth control pills see
the world as a far more platonic place than women using other forms of
contraception....Compared to other women in the study, those on the pill
were far less likely to do that [get excited by looking at a nude body] and
more likely to see a body as a neutral composition of muscle, bone, and
skin. They were also less likely to be charmed by pictures of babies,
another hint of influence on reproductive interests."

"In 1978, the New England Journal of Medicine published a study tracking two
groups of women, one using oral contraceptives, the others relying on
diaphragms, IUDs, and your basic collection of sperm buffers. Each of the 35
participants kept a daily log of sexual activities and of what scientists
call "interest", but which is a lot more fun than that: more the way sexual
fantasy drifts, unbidden, to mind, the way arousal jolts, unexpectedly, as
you watch a partner in the morning, rubbing sleep away. Women who were not
on the pill reported a rise in both interest and activity timed closely to
ovulation. Women on the pill reported no particular change in interest or
initiation." 

The most striking evidence of an effect on behaviour associated with  is
found in studies on primate monkeys. When monkeys were given oral
contraceptives the finding was that
 
"On the pill, when the animals were housed together, sex continued according
to the males' wishes....There may be some women who are unusually sensitive
to estradiol effects and who may find that the pill changes a relationship.
A woman who doesn't like her current partner much anyway may be even less
enthralled while on the pill." 

But more importantly the issue too is whether estradiol should be used by
women when it is emitted into the environment. The levels of estradiol in
water surrounding Berlin is quite high and in fact rivers in England
downstream of sewage plants also have high levels of synthetic estrogens.  

A recent unpublished study by Hanson et al (1998) shows that estrogen
mimicing compounds found in water in the city of Berlin are feminizing fish
species. In some cases up to 99 % of a species of fish species is female. In
laboratory studies this feminization (in vitro) has been widely observed as
vitellogenesis in male fish, that is the formation of yolk in male fish
species. Only certain chemicals are capable of this: synthetic estrogens are
1000 to 1 million times more potent than are the plasticizer compounds found
in plastic [phthalates], and bisphenol A, for instance, so large amounts of
one and some amounts of others combine to create very abnormal conditions
for developing fish and even human males who drink the water, eat the fish
and breath the air. Denmark for instance has very high rates of
cryptorchidism, testicular cancers, hypospadias, etc., in it's male
population, and the trend appears to be worsening in incidence. 

In Puerto Rico there is an outbreak of precocious puberty in young girls as
young as 6 years old near the plants that make birth control pills which are
used in birth control pills, and there are unexplained effects elsewhere due
to DES perhaps used in livestock operations. 

Other cases reported are found in countries that continue to use DES a
compound used to increase the growth of chicken and factory farm animals. 

So the problem regarding birth control is difficult to solve on a moral
basis and on a environmental basis. Certainly, women should be able to find
and use a method of birth control that is both effective and safe to the
environment. The problem with condoms is that they are not 100 % effective. 

Some catholics use a method called the "thermo-symptomatique technique".
This method relies on taking the womens temperature and so on to find out
when she is likely to ovulate, a chart is made to assess each womans
characteristics surrounding when she ovaluates. It is suitable for couples
but as far as unplanned sex is concerned the other methods work better [i.e.
the pill and condoms]. 

I am not an expert in contraception but I have written a paper [graduate
level paper on synthetic estrogens] and place my concern with the women that
are taking the pill. 

John 


At 05:24 PM 11/9/1998 -0500, you wrote:
>
>I'd like to hear what this list has to say about the following postings.
>They originally appaeared on Ecolog (the listserve for the Ecological
>Society of America), but the discussion also seems pertinent to the
>enviroethics discussion.  Thanks.
>
>-norm
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1998 11:58:55 -0500
>From: "Leila Z. Hadj-Chikh" <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Re. 40% deaths environmental--rebuttal
>
>Dear Ecolog-ers,
>
>I would like to offer a rebuttal to Dr. Brach's letter of Nov. 2, which
>objected to the conclusions of Pimentel et al.'s article on population
>growth and environmental degradation (Bioscience, 48:817-827).
>
>I wholeheartedly agree with Dr. Brach that many of the environmental
>problems facing us today are the result of over-consumerism and poor policy
>decisions.  However, changes in consumer habits and reallocation of world
>resources can only provide a temporary solution to these problems.  The
>amount of energy used by an individual can only be reduced to a finite
>extent without reducing quality of life to an unacceptable level.  Thus, as
>long as population growth continues, humans will continue to consume an
>increasingly greater proportion of the earth's net primary productivity.
>The NPP itself can only be increased to a finite extent, because it is
>ultimately constrained by the amount of solar energy that reaches the
>earth.  The NPP therefore places a very clear limit on human population
>growth, and I am sure it is not a limit that any of us would wish to see.
>Yet how is it possible to avoid this limit without implementing some form
>of population control?  Female reproductive systems do not simply shut off
>with the birth of a second child, nor do most couples cease having sex
>after this time.
>
>Population growth is the inevitable result of human behavior when it
>remains unchecked.  This is as true for us as it is for any other animal.
>Yet it is also true that it is impossible to consume more energy than is
>available to us.  Thus, our population WILL be checked eventually, it is
>only a matter of how.
>
>Dr. Brach states that population control is a "disguised evil."  I
>disagree.  Is culling a deer population evil, or neutering one's dog or
>cat?  We do these things in order to prevent the suffering of animals due
>to starvation, and to limit the damage that they do to their environment.
>As a biologist, I see no ethical distinction between controlling the
>population growth of other species and controlling our own.
>
>The Catholic Church condones "Natural Family Planning" as a means of
>preventing unwanted pregnancies, but how effective can any "natural" method
>be when it requires people to abstain from sex?  Any such plan is doomed to
>fail under the laws of natural selection.  There will always be cheaters
>who choose to have sex when they shouldn't, and it will be the cheaters who
>drive the evolution of conscientious behavior (or the lack thereof).  You
>cannot expect this form of contraception to succeed on a wide-spread basis
>because it runs entirely counter to one of the most basic of human
>instincts.  And you cannot expect it to succeed in the long term because
>the instinct controls its own evolution.
>
>The Catholic Church believes that "artificial" methods of contraception are
>immoral.  I also disagree.  Condoms and birth-control pills are certainly
>objects of human creation, but they are no more artificial than a bow a
>person uses to hunt for food, or a stick that a chimp uses to extract
>termites from a mound.  Are these things immoral?  They are all tools
>created to solve problems.  The only difference is in the degree of
>technical sophistication, and the purpose for which each is designed.
>
>I am reminded of a joke I once heard from a Catholic priest.  A town was
>being evacuated because of flooding, but one man refused to leave his home.
>When a friend came to his door offering him a ride out of town, the man
>said, "Don't worry about me.  God will save me."  So his friend left, and
>the water level rose higher.  The man moved up to the second floor of his
>house, and a woman in a rescue boat came to his window, pleading with him
>to come with her.  But the man said, "Don't worry about me.  God will save
>me."  The water climbed still higher, and the man moved onto his roof.  A
>helicopter came and lowered a rope ladder, but the man refused it, saying,
>"Don't worry about me.  God will save me."  And the man drowned.  And when
>he got to Heaven, he asked God why He did not come to save him, since he
>had always been a devout Christian.  And God said, "You fool!  I sent you a
>car and a boat and a helicopter!!"
>
>Humans are unique in that we possess the ability to control our own
>population.  Because of this, we are not necessarily doomed to become the
>victims of famine and disease.  We can avoid our own suffering simply by
>using the intelligence that has been given us.  We have been blessed with
>very wonderful brains, and I think it would be a pity not to use them.
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Leila Z. Hadj-Chikh, Ph.D. Candidate
>Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology
>Princeton University
>
>
>>Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1998 07:31:39 -0500
>>From: Anthony R. Brach <[log in to unmask]>
>>To: [log in to unmask]
>>Subject: Re. 40% deaths environmental
>>
>>Dear Ecolog-ers,
>>
>>I have a problem with the conclusions of the Bioscience article on
>>population and emerging diseases.
>>
>>The problems were created by materialism, consumerism, inadequate safety
>>and health care, and the injustices in our world between the poor and rich
>>nations.  The article lists air pollutants, schistosomiasis, pesticides &
>>carcinogens, inadequate sanitation, dengue fever, pollutants & respiratory
>>disease, tobacco smoking, leaded gasoline, and pesticides as factors.
>>However, it concludes that only comprehensive population control combined
>>with environmental management could control the problem.
>>
>>Now what is the real root of the problem?  The problem will not be solved
>>by abortion or interfering with the Creator's Design for married couples to
>>have children.
>>
>>What proportion of our governments' budgets goes to guaranteeing the
>>quality of life of humankind and of the environment, health and safety
>>standards, environmental remediation, restoration ecology, and peace &
>>justice? vs. how much is spent on the military, weapons research, and war?
>>
>>Population control is a disguised evil, whether it be abortion, euthanasia,
>>or artificial contraception.  For me and millions of Roman Catholics, we
>>stand with Pope John Paul II and our Church in defending the life and
>>dignity of every human person on this earth.  We are called to stewardship,
>>NOT ONLY of the earth and its resources and the affluent, but of every
>>human life.
>>
>>Sincerely,
>>
>>Anthony R. Brach, Ph.D.
>>Missouri Botanical Garden & Harvard University Herbaria
>
>
>***************************************************************************
>Leila Hadj-Chikh                               email:[log in to unmask]
>Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology   phone:(609)258-3836
>Princeton University                             fax:(609)258-1334
>Princeton, NJ 08544-1003 U.S.A.
>***************************************************************************
>
>______________________________________________________________________________
>The Sunseeker				"The key to successful tinkering
>Norman E. Leonard				is to keep all the parts."
>Institute of Ecology					- Aldo Leopold
>University of Georgia
>Athens, GA 30602-2202
>706-542-5881
>[log in to unmask]
>
>He who dies with the most toys, is, nonetheless, still dead.
>
>
>
>
        



%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%