Page:Contraception; 1st ed. (IA in.ernet.dli.2015.94163).pdf/236

persons who have some knowledge of scientific method should nevertheless speak of 'methods of contraception,' and lump their views about them under this one head, as though all the various methods had the same kind of physiological result, and, moreover, should do this in spite of my clear separation of the different types of physiological reactions naturally resulting from the different physiological processes involved in the very great variety of methods in use. It is utterly unscientific, indeed it is absurd, to talk about any general result of 'methods of contraception.' Each method has its own particular reactions and results, and unless they are distinctly specified, any generalization about 'methods' is invalid."

I concluded: "While naturally I approve of the main thesis of Professor Thomson's paper, I think that he weakens his argument by ignoring the proved absorptive property of the vagina, for undoubtedly in unions properly conducted, the woman does absorb through the vagina subtle substances of some nature or another not yet determined, which are certainly beneficial. The particular theory of uterine absorption elaborated by Professor Thomson is one already discussed and disputed in the