Which TV ads do you find confusing?

Oh yeah. I remember seeing them even as a kid.

Even back then, at like 10 years old I was like "That doesn't make sense. How is rubbing something on you skin supposed to make the whole thing get bigger?"

Although, I will confess, I always felt as a kid, and in a funny way even though I knew better, into adulthood, that if a woman drank a lot of milk she'd have big breasts.

And that wasn't about the hormones in milk. I didn't know anything about that. It just made sense to me. Milk = breasts.

I remember my mother would drop me off at a salon, and they were always running over an hour late. I would sit in a chair and start reading these outrageous mags like true detective. Because I was only about 10 or 11 and I was briefly fascinated with these strange articles, so I'd read another and by the time I started on the third I realized it was all sensational bullcrap and the articles were almost identical only the names were changed, or the women had different hair color, and the detectives might favor cigarettes, cigars or a pipe. I figure if an 11 year old becomes irritated reading that crap...someone wrote truly dreadful shlock. It was a terrible waste of time. On a par with Jerry Spinger's guests sob stories..it might catch you attention for a moment, but then you start to feel slimy. Yuck.

Could it be whipped cream?

Ah you beat me to it

Any type of medicine ad - they show the person all happy, successful with a beautiful significant other simply because the medicine helped them from having some minor infliction --- then at the end the voice very rapidly spews off thousands of side effects all much more worrisome than the infliction to begin with -- some side effects even resulting in death (although rare) - and just to cure one small pimple.

Linkat, most of the time that's just the company covering their ass because of lawsuits.

When they do clinical trials with people, they have to note each and every thing the trial participants report. Even if it's not even clear it's related to the drug.


"How are you feeling on day 16 of the trial sir/ma'm"?
"Well, I was feeling a little constipated/had diarrhea this morning, also I was tired when I got up" Doesn't matter if they ate rich and cheese and no veg/a pound of brussel sprouts the day before, or went to bed at 3am and got up at 6am

Warning - medication may cause intestinal blockage/diarrhea/fatigue.



They have to say/write all that because many people are just too stupid for words.

Just came home from the store.
I saw a package of vanilla bean hummus.

I looked at it like this.

Those adverts for sanitary towels which make it seem so jolly and fun that I start envying menstruating women.

Like this?

This is my all time favorite SNL skit regarding periods.

I could watch :40 through :48 over and over, between Tina Fey, and Bill Haders panicked face, I'm dying.

No confusion here.

I remember seeing that when it aired, those things were tortuous and I loved that the comedians were demented enough to create that sketch. In Tina Fey's book 'Bossy Pants' she writes that that bit was a hard sell because the male writers couldn't relate and didn't see the humor. I'm glad the woman convinced them to take a chance.

I never saw that one, wow, now it's my favorite. They actually did market a drug some years back where a group of women were relaxing around a pool, every one was gorgeous and when the complaint about 'my monthly' came up, one woman speaks soothingly about this new medication that frees you up from all that inconvenience and it's safe to take (because guess why) she knows because she's a 'doctor' Ta Da!!!.

It wasn't as safe as the commercial claimed, and it was taken off the market declared dangerous.

I don’t know what product you’re referring to that was considered dangerous , but I do know it’s quite safe to take birth control pills continually with no break.

When bc pills were first developed , by men of course, they considered it would be too upsetting to women if they didn’t get their period every month. Our delicate grip on reality would be smashed I guess.

There’s no biological reason a woman needs to take a break every month, every 3 or 6 months, etc. and have a period. It was just following convention. About a third of women with hormone bc implants don’t get periods.

I don't agree with you on this one, not every woman can take birth control safely. One of my cousins had a massive stroke at 39, autopsy determined it was due to the pills and smoking. An autopsy was required by the police because she died alone at home, her kids found her between the sliding doors and the patio when they came home from school. I'm not saying that this ia a leading cause of death in young women, but it happens.

The latest Geico and Progressive commercials are incomprehensible. Insurance? How? Where? For what?

Glad I'm not the only one who's confused. I was beginning to think I was getting stupider as I age.

Aside (not incomprehensible, just beyond annoying). If that pillow guy doesn't shut the hell up, I'm gonna buy one of his pillow just so I can shove it up his ass.

Agree! Actually, I find insurance commercials to usually be quite entertaining, but like you, I have trouble understanding exactly what they're selling.

Good advertising should not only be memorable; they should also tell you what they are selling. Like Burma Shave.

roger, You picked one of the worst racist advertisers during WWII. "Slap ........ with burma shave." I remember that even though that was almost three-quarter century ago, and I was a kid. It hurts, because the US government put us Japanese Americans into concentration camps, but not Germans or Italians. A strictly racist move on our government, ignorant the Constitution.

I agree - I had a great doctor - the big thing was that with birth control was not to smoke - that with smoking it significantly increased other medical issues - that and high blood pressure.

However I think Chai was referring that having a "break" from your period does not cause a medical issue.

So I think it is more a difference of what you are both discussing.

That being said like anything there are risks or side effects involved the important thing is to understand those side efforts, how harmful they are - and if the side effects outweigh the benefits.

To me the most important is to have a competent doctor and one that will openly discuss these with you so you fully understand and can make a reasonable judgement on what is right for you.

Some doctors just immediately prescribe the drug rather than discuss your personal situation.

From my personal experience, I found that competent doctors always refer with their associates about best coarse of action in the treatment of any disease. I had that kind of experience with my CKD at Kaiser Hospital in Santa Clara. I had a tube coming out of my stomach area for dialysis, but after a few months, it was removed because my kidney function came back enough to survive without it. I'm now 84 years old, and still doing okay. I get a lab test done every 6 months to make sure it's still doing okay. My brother and nephew are doctors, and even they were impressed with my recovery.

Oh I definately agree with you that some women shouldn't take bc pills. Even though the hormone levels are much lower than back in the day, you still shouldn't smoke and take them for instance, because of increased risk of blood clots, strokes etc.

They are the ones that shouldn't be taking them in the first place. Taking them every day, or the 21 days on, 7 days off routine.

I meant that there is no medical reason to take this 7 day break after 21 day on, for a woman who is not suseptible to bad side effects.

The entire reasoning was that somehow a woman needed either physically, mentally, or both to have this period, or something was wrong.

In cultures in the past and present where birth control pills are unknown, or not used, women don't get this perfect 21/7 = 28 pattern.

In fact a woman in such a situation may only end up having a handful of periods in her life. She would most definately be shocked to learn that in developed countries we menstruate monthly.

Look at it this way. In older times, a woman maybe lived to be 45 to 48.
Her childbearing years were let's say 15 to 35 or 40. Twenty to twenty five years.
You had more children than now, and half of them died. A woman who married at 15 may have had 5 to 8 children. If most of them lived long enough to get to being weaned, right there is about 10 years time the woman didn't have a period.

That's not including pregnancies that ended in miscarriage, but there was no period for awhile.
Nutrition, illness could also play a factor. That might also include periods being so light and/or brief as to not be much to mention. As they got older, being irregular becomes apparant. Being irregular when first becoming fertile is common too. Plus many woman have longer cycles.

When all these things and more happened, the women didn't rush off to the doctors. They let nature take it's course. I don't think it would have been at all uncommon for a woman to eventually, between pregnancy and breast feeding and normal "getting back on track" after weaning, to have 2 or 3 periods before starting all over.

Anyway, my point was the development of bc pills artificially pushed this "normal" 28 day cycle of women, which forces menstruation according to some, in truth, someone arbitrary time schedule. In reality, some women would naturally have a cycle much quicker, others much less frequently.

In fact, just musing here, it might be better to stay on bc pills with no break for months at a time.

Since the pills are tricking the body into thinking it's pregnant, I'd guess it must be something of a shock to the inner working to every month feeling "I'm pregnant, no I'm not, yes I am, no I'm not". You take it every day, the body is "I'm pregnant", which was pretty much a normal regular feeling for it to have through the ages.