Cervix uteri and seven or eight related things » Marquette comparison with LH kit and Peak mucus
In this record of a 42-years old woman, our device detected delayed ovulation on cycle day 17, while two other methods estimated ovulation from day 16 to day 18. This lack of precision and accuracy is not at all good for natural birth control and/or for trying to achieve fetal gender pre-selection (= trying to conceive either a boy or a girl). But, with such inaccurate methods, which are available now before we bring the Ovulona into the market, you can see here that you might be fortunate and hit on at least a part of the fertile window. In this example, the LH-indicated days 16 and 17 were fertile days because the sperm are viable for about 3 days. Perhaps even day 18 may have been a fertile day, if the ovum (egg) lived long enough, and depending on when exactly on day 17 the detected ovulation occurred. Such uncertainties will be removed by properly designed experiments with the Ovulona.
In this example, our device detected delayed ovulation while the LH ovulation kit indicated positive for ovulation on two days (not just one) and the mucus assessment (Creighton method) indicated positive one day later.
May 27, 2009 at 12:39 pm |
Is there any study assessing how accurate this device is for contraception use?
November 13, 2015 at 2:26 am |
Aw, this was a very nice post. Finding the time and actual effort to produce a superb article… but what can I say… I hesitate a whole lot and don’t manage to get nearly anything done.
October 9, 2020 at 2:43 pm |
[…] our Ovulona not only anticipates but also detects ovulation, which detection is all important): https://biozhena.wordpress.com/2007/12/16/cervix-uteri-and-seven-or-eight-related-things/marquette-co… […]