Talk:Essure
Page contents not supported in other languages.
 | This article is ratedStart-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale. It is of interest to the followingWikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Need to clarify whether these refer to getting it inserted or are on-going risks. So, for example, when "Vasovagal response" is listed as a risk, is that a risk only during the procedure being done, and if you don't get it while it's being done, or whether there is additionally, a risk of getting such an effect not just during/right after the procedure but days or months or years later.—Precedingunsigned comment added byHarel (talk •contribs)01:24, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Started separating the immediate vs. long-term risks. Added frequency of complications for those I found a reference for. Need to update more, as it's still just a long list of risks without a lot of context. May be beneficial to have a cutoff below which rarer complications should just not be listed.Lukascolashop (talk)00:41, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Noticed a TV ad for the first time tonite. Is that new? I think they mentioned 5 years experience; did they recently finish a long-term study that provides a new marketing-strategy option? If verifiable, such changes of status seem to me appropriate for inclusion.
--Jerzy•t01:18, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know enough about this but it looks like the page has been edited to include strange remarks about carcinogens and what appear to be uncited statements about the product's safety (or lack thereof).— Precedingunsigned comment added by71.238.224.66 (talk)18:01, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure this is exactly true. From the "Risk" section:
"The U.S. Army Medical Command (MEDCOM) Contracting Center North Atlantic, located at MCAA NA Bldg T20, 6900 Georgia Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20307-5000 has announced its plan to procure 'ESSURE' Permanent Birth Control devices, using Taxpayer money, to permanently sterilize Female Military Service-persons and their Spouses. It is announced under Solicitation Number: W91YTZ-15-T-0044 (https://www.fbo.gov/spg/USA/MEDCOM/DADA15/W91YTZ-15-T-0044/listing.html)."
This section and/or citation either need clarification or to be removed.— Precedingunsigned comment added byBear77 (talk •contribs)01:04, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This long indiscriminate list of adverse events under "Risks" would seem to violateWP:MEDMOS: "a long list of side effects is largely useless without some idea of which are common or serious."
I think most doctors agree that Essure has risks, such as those reported in the NEJM and BMJ articles -- of death, intractable pain, and unintended pregnancy. But I think we should limit the adverse effects to those reported inWP:MEDMOS sources. I realize that some doctors follow Facebook to find out adverse effects that aren't reported elsewhere, but Facebook isn't even aWP:RS. --Nbauman (talk)11:07, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the uncited mention of stillborn babies being born with coils in their ears, but that whole paragraph about the facebook group is a mix of copy-paste from the BBC article and non-grammatical sentences...Archdiamond (talk)01:49, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link onEssure. Please take a moment to reviewmy edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visitthis simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored byInternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other thanregular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editorshave permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see theRfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template{{source check}}(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot(Report bug)00:45, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
