Would you trust the opk or natural signs?!

[wilderumpus]

Hi all

I have been ttc for a while now and have pretty regular cycles despite a mc back in April. This cycle has been haywire though, I guess because of a CP last month. Normally I use cheapie opks and natural fertility signs to check ov; I usually have five days of EWCM, then a pos opk, then Ov the following day and fertile signs dry up. Lovely and easy.

However! This month I had a pos opk at the usual time and NO EWCM, cervix low etc. Confused but dtd lots anyway. Then five days later, lots of EWCM, soft cervix etc. Bd'ed EOD through this period (arg), then had a strong surge on my opk... possible fade-in to a positive? and ran out of them!

Fertile signs have now gone so I don't know if A) I ov'ed when the opk was pos; B) ov'ed when I had natural fertile signs and strong opk; c) didn't ov at all.

Just wondering, for those who don't temp, would you go for the natural signs or the opk?

TIA!

It is possible for the hormones to start surging, but then not reach a high enough level for you to ovulate. That would probably give a positive on the OPK without ovulation having taken place. And then you've gone on to ovulate a few days later would be my guess.

I would go with the natural signs.

I know when I had my CPs ovulation was a few days later than normal. So think your natural signs were probably the real deal.

Always go with the natural signs first. You can get several LH surges during your cycle before you actually ov. The only way to definitely confirm ov is a blood test or to chart your temperatures through your cycle.

thanks ladies :) I thought best to go with natural signs too. so 2 dpo (instead of 8) it is then!

don't normally need to to temp as opk and natural signs usually correlate wonderfully and all that science freaks me out

thanks again!

I nearly always ov on CD20 or there abouts.
However last month I had a nearly positive OPK and my CBFM gave me a peak on day 14. However my natural signs and temperature didn't agree. When I got to day 20 I tested again with an OPK and sure enough there was a positive OPK and my temperature agreed.

I would trust your natural signs if your cycle is regular.

Hmmm, interesting! pip my opk was pos a bit later than I would normally ov, on CD 22 (instead of CD19, to ov on CD20). The natural signs etc would put me at ov'ing on CD28!

Am so interested to see when I get AF as I always have a 12 day LP... would like to know if opk or natural signs were right (or neither!)

have never had this confusion before.

sorry misread your post pip. I wouldn't consider a near positive to be a positive, only a positive is a positive! So your experience is in line with a lovely regular cycle :)

However, my positive opk at CD22 didn't actually indicate ovulation according to the ladies above :) I agree, because if I ov'ed why would my oestrogen be so high as to produce lots of ewcm for days after.

I agree, I wouldn't have considered it to be ov except for the fact that the CBFM agree with it and thought it was a peak.
I asked Clear Blue about it and they said that the CBFM in never wrong!

oooh! CBFM is never wrong?! it clearly was! Did you read the duofertility thread - seems there that CBFM was wrong quite a few times compared to the duofertility one.

interesting because i was almost tempted to get a CBFM thinking it must be better than my cheap opks.

thanks for your help pip

I used the CBFM for several cycles. It never once got my ovulation right! Probably due at least in part to my PCOS but I would never ever assume something is infallible!

Well at the moment I'm doing clinical trials of the CBFM and they have sent me one to use. So I am comparing the results with that of my own CBFM and they don't agree about highs, but did about the peak.

that's really interesting pip. i suppose all this just points to the fact we all need to ditch monitors and dtd eod. i can't tho, not all month every month!