Do I nurse presently and only surprise me if the LAM aka, Lactational Amenorrhea Method is effective?

KonnteKonnte I possibly intercorse with my friend has, if I nurse at the moment? As many information as mögliche would be helpful. Thanks to hunnys! xxxx mwa.

from GranolaM...

Best answer chosen by voters

I relied long six months, that follow the births of each of my children, with no unexpected results, on LAM. LAM has his/its own sentence of the rules to make it effective, it, s not only any lot of BF. Control the connection f belowür good information about it, to nurse, and fertility.

Source(s,:

Save to! ! RSS

Other Answers (4)

from Mom2#3to.... you want to know if this is an effective form of the birth control? Because is not. A woman can birth in some weeks with ovulates, glätten you, if she/it, that nurses, is exculsively. Only because still came hasn\'t your menstruation theück, you don\'t think that you don\'t ovulate. Use another form of the birth control!

from Shan, I would not trust him/it except if you didn\'t care because you have another baby so soon! A friend of me ließ three to it support to use this method back, so that not I it white, \'s definetly effective for everyone. 20 percent 1 voices

my doctor (OB/GYN) said about Elena R not to rely on it to nurse for birth control. My Ehemann\'s-Großmutter became pregnant with her/its/their second child while they nursed her/it/them the first. Remember, thereß a period normally comes, after you ovulated, therefore you use another form except if you are okay with having another baby. 20 percent 1 voices

through tedgrein..., if exclusively you never quiet and formula or solid meal gives, and your period didn\'t return, is approximately 1 percent your risk to be become pregnant, before the baby is enough, full age six months and is similar "to that of other modern contraceptive methods." This actually is a lower risk as is normally seen with more effectively condum-Verwendung.

Source(s,:

Contraceptive effectiveness of lactational amenorrhoea.

Kennedy KI, Visness CM.

Lancet. 1992 Jan 25;339(8787):227-30. 20 percent 1 voices