Billings Ovulation Method Association of Trinidad & Tobago



The Science Behind the
Billings Ovulation Method® 

The importance of the mucus as nature’s signal of fertility has been recognised since the nineteenth century. Scientific research over the past 50+ years has gradually unfolded its vital role in assisting new life to begin.

The changes in the mucus reflect a highly complex chain of events in the body’s hormonal system.

As the cycle begins, the pituitary gland at the base of the brain starts to produce two chemical messengers, Follicle Stimulating Hormone (FSH) and Luteinising Hormone (LH). The over-riding control of FSH and LH production occurs in the area of the brain called the hypothalamus which acts like a computer – analyzing nerve signals from other areas of the brain, including those generated by emotions and environmental factors, as well as assessing hormone signals relevant to fertility.

The follicles (that is, the groups of immature eggs within the ovaries) have a threshold requirement for FSH below which no stimulation occurs (that is, the FSH has to reach a certain level in the bloodstream before the follicles will start developing). During the early infertile days of the cycle the FSH level is below the threshold, and any discharge is commonly sparse and dense or absent altogether. These days, when the pattern is unchanging, are recognised as the Basic Infertile Pattern (BIP).

Once the FSH level passes the threshold, a group of follicles begins to develop. The follicles produce the hormone, oestrogen. At this point, if you have experienced dry days, you will notice mucus; if your BIP was one of an unchanging discharge, you will now notice that there is a change in the sensation produced at the vulva and/or in the appearance of the discharge.

When a follicle is developing satisfactorily, it produces the hormone oestradiol, an oestrogen, which acts as a signal informing the brain of the level of ovarian activity. In response to a high oestradiol level, the pituitary gland slows down its production of FSH and releases a series of surges of LH over a period of forty-eight hours. The dominant follicle rapidly matures and important changes take place in the chromosomes of the ovum (egg cell) – which contain the inherited genetic material.

The peak LH level triggers ovulation about seventeen hours later. The LH is also responsible for the production of the corpus luteum which forms from the empty follicle in the ovary after the release of the ovum.

After ovulation, the corpus luteum produces the hormones progesterone and oestradiol. These are necessary for the continued growth and development of the nutritive endometrium in preparation for possible implantation should a sperm cell fertilise the ovum.

In the absence of pregnancy, the production of these hormones begins to decline after about 6-7 days, removing the hormonal support for the endometrium, which is shed when menstrual bleeding commences 11-16 days after ovulation, and so a new cycle begins with a rise of FSH.

More on the Science...

How to Treat Article and Quiz For Healthcare Professionals

Preventive Medicine? Health Risks & Birth Control

For far too long there has been an ominous silence across America on arguably the most controversial and devastating issue of the day—birth control.   As so often we see in history, oppression gives rise to courage and, no question, courage is exactly what we are seeing in Church leaders and layman alike in response to the Obama administration’s recent birth control mandate and more recent unacceptable modifications.

The Birth Control Mandate has forced the issue of contraception to move from being the elephant in the room to center stage. Perhaps in time we will see that it was a hidden blessing for our country.    For years pro-life organizations refused to discuss or take on this topic despite the fact that free access to birth control increases the number of surgical abortions(1) (2).  Most people repeat over and over that birth control decreases the number of abortions.  Nothing could be farther from the truth. In fact, today for every child born in the US, there are an estimated 2 children killed in the womb from both surgical and chemical, abortifacient drug abortions (3).  What isn’t being talked about is that the new mandate also pre-disposes women to serious long term and permanent health problems.  In conjunction with the defense of both religious liberty and the spiritual well-being of women, we must also refute the absurd and deceptive statement that “women are healthier on birth control”.

Providing free hormonal birth control to women under the guise of ‘preventative services’ and ‘women’s health’ is a lie and women of all faiths deserve to know the truth.

Hormonal birth control methods can enter the body in various ways.  These ways include ‘The Pill’ (by mouth), the Mirena IUD (Intrauterine Device), the implant (placed under the skin), ‘the Patch’ (absorbed through the skin), and the Vaginal Nuvaring. There are many other estrogen -progestin name brands that can be added to this list.  Any way you name it, these hormone drugs dispense poison into a woman’s body.

Perhaps HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius should inform her President of the following before he makes additional statements to the press like “it is cheaper to prevent than to treat”.  Consider this:

–Since 1975 there has been a 400% increase in “in situ” breast cancer among pre-menopausal women under 50 years old. This mirrors the increased use of birth control over these same years. (“In situ” is a medical term which means “at the location” (4).

–A Mayo Clinic study confirms that any young girl or woman who is on  hormonal birth control for 4 years prior to their first full term pregnancy increases their breast cancer risk by 52%. (5)

–Women who use hormonal birth control for more than 5 years are four times more likely to develop cervical cancer. (6)

–The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a research arm of the World Health Organization, classifies all forms of hormonal contraception as a Group 1 carcinogen.  This group of cancer causing agents also includes cigarettes and asbestos. (7)  Why is it that the FDA can require cigarette manufacturers to place warning labels and real life photos of corpses on cigarette packages to warn consumers of the health dangers yet they, in turn, take an equally harmful substance (hormonal birth control) and force companies to give it away free to young girls without parental consent and woman of all ages?

–For high school boys and men to take steroid drugs, it is a crime.  Whereas girls and women  taking steroid drugs (i.e. hormonal birth control)  are now treated as if they are taking a sacred, life preserving  vitamin that women cannot live without. (8)

–In October 2010 the NY Times carried an article about Hormone Replacement Therapy drugs.  It quoted the America Medical Association (AMA) as warning women that these post-menopausal drugs which were originally marketed as keeping a women “young and sexy” were discovered instead to be more likely to cause advanced and deadly breast cancer.(9)   It stopped short of making one other startling revelation:  The only difference between  hormone replacement therapy drugs which cause deadly breast cancer and the hormonal birth control drugs  (now mandated by the Obama administration) is that the birth control drugs  are six times the dosage—and are the very same drug!

Never before has the US government mandated that private companies must provide services and it adds insult to injury when this mandate includes substances that harm women and cause them to unknowingly self-abort their babies a certain percentage of the time when they are using these substances.

How is it possible for women to self-abort when birth control is meant to prevent pregnancy?  It is possible because many of these birth control methods still allow the woman’s body to ovulate every month.  If sexual relations occur during that time, it is possible to get pregnant.  Recently doctors tried to figure out why some women could not get pregnant using artificial insemination.  They conducted a study which discovered that the lining of a woman’s uterus must be at least 8mm thick in order for a baby, in its tiniest form, to implant and grow in the womb. They found that the use of hormonal contraception (in any of the forms mentioned above) generally keeps the uterine lining below 6mm.(10)  To be clear, if a baby is conceived by a woman on hormonal birth control the embryo  cannot  implant and grow to full gestation of 9 months if the integrity of the uterine lining is too thin.  Instead the baby, in its tiniest form, is unknowingly self-aborted by its mother.  This is what is meant by the word “abortifacient.”  It isn’t just the “morning after” pill or “Ella” that is in the abortion inducing drug category.  It is nearly all of the hormonal birth control that is being mandated.

Since Roe v Wade there has been over 55 million surgical abortions.  These chemical abortions add an estimated 250 million additional abortions to our nation’s holocaust. (11)

This is not information that should be kept from the public.  Women deserve to be told the truth.  They are not being warned that birth control methods are causing breast, liver, and cervical cancer.  They are not being told about the “silent killer” effect which is causing them to unknowingly abort their babies.  They are instead being told that they are healthier on birth control because it decreases ovarian and uterine cancer.  According to the American Cancer Society, out of 100 women with cancer, 31 have breast cancer, 6 have uterine cancer, and 3 have ovarian cancer.  This is not a healthy tradeoff of risks that is worth taking. (12)

If, indeed,” it is cheaper to prevent than to treat” then it is time for the White House, Kathleen Sebeilius, and all health agencies within the government  to sound the warning trumpet to warn women on hormonal birth control  about these devastating medical consequences.

Clearly, birth control does not help women at risk, it places women at risk.

(1) ;

(2)  Jones RK, Darroch JE and Henshaw SK, Contraceptive use among U.S. women having abortions in 2000–2001, Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 2002, 34(6):294–303.

(3)  International Pharmacists for Life 2003; [2]


(5)  Kahlenborn et al., “Oral Contraceptive Use –as a risk factor for pre-menopausal breast cancer: a meta analysis”, Mayo Clinic proceedings 2006 pp. 1290-1320, 2006

(6)  Bosch, et al, “Effect of oral contraceptives on risk of cervical cancer…” International Agency of Research on Cancer, 2002

(7)  International Agency for Research on Cancer, a research arm of the World Health Organization, 2010


 (9) New York Times, Oct. 19, 2010

(10) Rabe T et al The Effects of Monophasic and triplasic Oral Contraceptives on Ovarian Function and Endometrial Thickness Eura J Contra Reproductive Care 1997 2, 39-51

(11)) Kuhar et al,”Infant Homocides through Contraceptives”, International Pharmacists for Life, 5th Edition 2003