I think that testing before your period's even due is just setting yourself up for heartbreak

[hunkermunker]

Don't you?

I understand what it's like not to be pregnant again, month after month. I know what it's like to be told I'd never have children. I know what it's like to test, only for your period to show up that afternoon. I know what it's like to be a bit late, then have a very, very heavy period and wonder whether I was pregnant or not.

But I really do think that the seeming obsession with testing very early is just meaning that very early miscarriages are picked up, causing grief where, IMO, there need not be any.

What do you think? Is it better to see a very faint positive four days before you're due, get your hopes up, then have them dashed five or six days later? I really can't see how

I agree.

It does of course amount to exactly the same thing - physically - but there is a world of difference between knowing you are pregnant and therefore, the blood loss at usual period time is regarded, correctly, as a miscarriage ...... and the comparatively less upsetting disappointment of yet another period (if you never knew you were pregnant for even a few days).

Feeling you've lost a baby seems even more unfair than "failing" (so far as you're aware) to fall pregnant again, when your period arrives.

i know what you mean hunker, although i have been testing all week!

Im day 30 today, my cycles were always 28 days, then one cycle was 29 days, last month was 23 days!

I dont know when im due because my body is playing games, but im testing in the hope!

I was watching the Clearblue Ad the other day, with the disclaimer at the bottom saying '51% accurate if test is taken four days before period due' (or words to that effect).

I actually think it's immoral to market tests like this.

Knowing that they're out there, not many women can resist using them (I know I couldn't).

The whole industry is hugely exploitative. I think the NHS should give tests out, and specify that they're only to be used from a certain point in your cycle.

i know what you mean hunker, although i have been testing all week!

Im day 30 today, my cycles were always 28 days, then one cycle was 29 days, last month was 23 days!

I dont know when im due because my body is playing games, but im testing in the hope!

i know what you mean hunker, although i have been testing all week!

Im day 30 today, my cycles were always 28 days, then one cycle was 29 days, last month was 23 days!

I dont know when im due because my body is playing games, but im testing in the hope!

i know what you mean hunker, although i have been testing all week!

Im day 30 today, my cycles were always 28 days, then one cycle was 29 days, last month was 23 days!

I dont know when im due because my body is playing games, but im testing in the hope!

i know what you mean hunker, although i have been testing all week!

Im day 30 today, my cycles were always 28 days, then one cycle was 29 days, last month was 23 days!

I dont know when im due because my body is playing games, but im testing in the hope!

I've often thought this hunker. When I had my children even the tests at the doctors weren't good enough to give a result before you were 2 weeks late.

Definitely wouldn't test before period was due as just can't see the point. Our 2nd child, DD took a bit longer than we had hoped to concieve but was never tempted to do an early test. I have always took the attitude, what is to be, is to be and early testing wouldn't change anything. You are either pregnant or you are not and will find out sooner rather than later and an early test might only get your hopes up.

Definitely wouldn't test before period was due as just can't see the point. Our 2nd child, DD took a bit longer than we had hoped to concieve but was never tempted to do an early test. I have always took the attitude, what is to be, is to be and early testing wouldn't change anything. You are either pregnant or you are not and will find out sooner rather than later and an early test might only get your hopes up.

Definitely wouldn't test before period was due as just can't see the point. Our 2nd child, DD took a bit longer than we had hoped to concieve but was never tempted to do an early test. I have always took the attitude, what is to be, is to be and early testing wouldn't change anything. You are either pregnant or you are not and will find out sooner rather than later and an early test might only get your hopes up.

I so agree with you, Hunker. I suppose because pg testing was in its infancy when I had my boys I just don't see the need. A doctor wouldn't test you until you'd missed two periods. The test makers are playing with people's emotions, imo. So many pg's end in m/c anyway, it's all part of nature's way, and it's unkind to exploit that.

I agree with this completely.

I think pinkmagic agrees too

agree totally. have been ttc for 21 months now (af due tomorrow) and have never ever tested before my period was due.

I also think it's better not to know. In January I had an experience where I was 5 days late, had cramping but no af, had nausia/sore boobs, but pg tests were negative. When my period arrived it was more painful than it has ever been, and the bleeding was horrendoug with clots etc. I often wondered if I'd had an early miscarriage and the hormone just hadn't shown up, but in reality I'll never know, so grieving for a baby that might not even have been there is futile IMO - sorry if that makes me sound insensitive.

I also think that putting "51% accurate from 4 days before period" is wrong, because people will read "accurate from 4 days before period is due" and psychologically will look past the 51%. What about the 49% that aren't accurate?

I have a bit of an 'it depends' attitude to this. I think if you are charting (and understand how to interpret the chart properly), then there may be a case for testing early if your chart shows signs of implantation, but otherwise I agree totally.

The one and only time I tested early in over 4 years of ttc was when I was pregnant with dd. I used a clearblue digital rather than any sort of early prediction test.

Its hard to wait.

Yeah. You test early, get a negative, then think 'but it might be a false negative because I tested early', then go out and spend more money on tests.

They're quids in with this approach!

(I actually tested + for this pregnancy on Day 27 of my cycle, so I'm not judging anyone who tests early btw. Think most of us do!).

But even if your chart shows implantation, there's no guarantee you'll carry that baby to term.

I was desperate to test with DS1 (I'd had clomid) - but I rang the hospital to check my blood test levels for something or other they'd tested for before I did the test.

I didn't dare to test with DS2 (conceived naturally and immediately) - I was nearly 6 weeks pg when I tested with him! I didn't believe my body could get it right, having failed so miserably so often before.

I totally understand it's hard to wait, and I'm not judging women who test early, far from it.

I just think that if you leave it, you'll save yourself heartache - maybe?

I think you're right hunker, but (as you know) when you're in the middle of ttc heartbreak it's not always easy to be that rational, especially if it's dragging on and on.

I really think the onus should be on the test manufacturers to act more responsibly, especially Clearblue and First Response with their heavy emphasis on early testing in their marketing strategy.

I actually think though that the longer you are trying, the easier it is to resist. I think that testing early, especially with digital tests which are extortionately expensive, is just setting yourself up for a fall, because invariably the tests are negative, and then comes the disappointment, even though your period isn't even due yet.

I don't keep pregnancy tests in the house, that way I can never be tempted to use them.