Well, here’s some scary-as-shit news from the world of “being a woman is really crappy and hard and dangerous sometimes.”
I mean, like a commenter said, yes, there’s an increase in risk, but a 56% increase over really, really, really tiny is still really, really tiny.
" The risk of thromboembolism for the average woman not on hormonal birth control is about 3-4/10,000. Hormonal birth control that contains estrogen (pills, patch and ring) increase that risk about 2-fold (to about 8/10,000). The Lidegaard study is poorly designed, but even if we accept that it shows an increased risk of the ring compared to pills, the risk would be about 10/10,000.
In comparison, the risk of thromboembolism in pregnancy is about 30-40/10,000. And in the peripartum period (up til about 6 weeks post-partum) it is as high as 300-400/10,000.
Another issue not mentioned here is that the highest risk is in the first 3 months you use birth control. After that, your body adjusts to it and your risk decreases back down almost to baseline. So starting and stopping your birth control (which often happens when people panic about these types of health articles in the lay press) actually substantially increases the risk of thromboembolism.
I am a gynecologist with fellowship training in contraception. This is my bread and butter and I know these studies inside out. It is soooo frustrating to see this kind of reporting that doesn’t put any of the risks into context, and where the reporters clearly have no training in statistics or research study design. Sigh.” - one of the last comments