Should menstruation be optional for women?

Lancet

Volumn 355, Issue 9216, 2000, Pages 1730-

  McGurgan, P ^a   O'Donovan, P ^a   Duffy, S ^a   Rogerson, L ^a  

^a BRADFORD ROYAL INFIRMARY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ORAL CONTRACEPTIVE AGENT;

AMENORRHEA; FEMALE; HUMAN; LETTER; MENSTRUATION; ORAL CONTRACEPTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

EID: 0034643719     PISSN: 01406736     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)73142-1     Document Type: Letter

References (5)

1. SL Thomas C Ellerston Nuisance or natural and healthy: should monthly menstruation be optional for women? Lancet 355 2000 922 924
2. Committee on Safety of Medicines Combined Oral Contraceptives and Thromboemboli 1995 Committee on Safety of Medicines London
3. J Guillebaud Contraception Today 3rd edn. 1998 Martin Dunitz Ltd London
4. E Suvanto-Luukkonen A Kauppila The levonorgestrel intrauterine system in meno-pausal hormone replacement therapy: five-year experience Fertil Steril 72 1999 161 163
5. KG Cooper C Bain DE Parkin Comparison of microwave endometrial ablation and trans-cervical resection of the endo-metrium for treatmenr of heavy menstrual loss: a randomised trial Lancet 354 1999 1859 1863