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

But there's never any guarantee that you'll carry the baby to term. I miscarried my first pregnancy at 8 1/2 weeks (discovered at 12 weeks). Should I still not have tested until then? Should we wait until we are 12 weeks late and the m/c risk has greatly reduced?

51% accurate? ie evens chance that you are or aren't, so you may as well just flip a coin. I've never tested before I was due, because waiting just a few more days changes the probability of a true result from flip-a-coin to nearly 100%.

I had one miscarriage at 5w - barely pg, but my cycle was 4w and I had already been having morning sickness for a week before testing, so knew even without confirmation of the test. I had another at 7w, days after we had announced to my family, and grieved bitterly. OTOH, my mum had had a very late period, very heavy and painful at 8w - but it never occurred to her that she had miscarried until she subsequently got pg with her first child and recognised the early pg symptoms that she had previously had. So beyond a brief pang of regret she didn't have to suffer any grief over the mc.

Agree with you PC. We are being 'set up' for greater losses. I can understand the drive to 'know', been there, done that. But I don't think that these very early tests are helping anyone.

possibly. the first 12 weeks of pregnancy are possibly the most stressful. will I carry the baby to term, should I tell the family or hold off just in case, I've got cramps/discharge am I losing my baby. Before the home pregnancy test was invented women didn't find out they were pregnant until they had missed at least two periods. A lot probably had miscarriages, but they were none the wiser, and IMO it probably made the ttc experience less stressful for them. If you don't know you've had an early miscarriage, you're not going to spend all the time ttc worrying that you might have another one.

CSWS No, of course there's no guarantee, and I'm not saying women shouldn't test ever, and of course miscarriages can happen at any stage

I was just wondering whether stopping people having so much awareness of very, very early pregnancy loss would save heartache all round.

yes I think I agree

but the whole TTC thing can be incredibly painful and obsessive with or without early testing

i had a miscarriage at 5 weeks and the midwife thought this was an appropriate time to voice your sentiment HM. She said something like "if it wasn't for these tests you wouldn't even have known you were pregnant"...which was true, but not at all helpful...

wannabe. I lost my first at 12 weeks, we havn't told anyone, but since I lost it over xmas, everyone ended up knowing anyway

Second time we told everyone from about 6 weeks. I figured that they might as well share the 'nice' bit even if I did MC again, IYSWIM.

In between DS1 & 2 I could feel ovulation pains so knew I had fell pregnant when the week or 2 after I had spotting, I knew it was implantation then the week after that I started bleeding and knew it was a missed miscarriage. sp

If I had not looked into and studied everything my body was doing I would have perhaps thought it was a period and would have saved both me and dh a lot of arguing, upset and heartache.

He couldn't understand what was going on as I hadn't even had a pregnancy test yet was gutted.

If there are any more baby mellows they will be accidents, I don;t want to get over anxious again. iykwim

I saw a women on here saying she was 3 weeks pregnant... I didn't think that was posible?

and there are also so many different brands of tests with so many different ways of telling positive/negative. 1/2 lines, +/- three windows with circles and dots and god knows what. and recently I fell victim to these differences when I tested and my dh looked at the test and thought that two lines meant it was positive. After 19 months of trying I could bearly contain my excitement as i ran to get the instructions to check. turned out it was +/- so although there were two lines one should have been a + or something so the test was negative. was gutted.

will only buy digital if I ever test again.

DrumMum - I expect she didn't realise that you count from LMP rather than conception.

We're ttc again now Hunker. I'm at least 3 weeks late but have only done one test, when I was a week late - you'd be so proud of me!
(Don't think I am pg btw - cycles just not settled yet as still bf)

CanStarveWillStarve... I wasn't sure if she had tested early!

Is it me or is that 51% accurate thing completely out of order??? That is just 1% less than completely useless!!

I agree. Makes the whole ttc thing even worse. Canstarve - of course m/c can occur later, but its just that these very early miscarriages are so common. The longer the pregnancy lasts, the less chance there is of miscarrying. I find it very difficult to understand anyone pg testing before period is even due, and the marketing suggesting you can do this should be banned. What does it achieve? If you are pg, you will know in a few days anyway. If you are not, ditto. It must all add to the stress of ttc, which is not helpful at all, as stress just makes it less likely that you will conceive. And btw I do know what its like not to be pg month after month when all and sundry around you seem to be falling without even really trying.

for everyone caught up in this nonsense.

its only so low cos of lotsof false negatives

Message withdrawn

I agree with you HM, I think the manufacturers are totally irresponsible and with the cost of these bloody tests they are preying on vulnerable women. The statistics speak for themselves.

I SO agree with the original posting. I have had similar discussions with my godmother. In the early 70's when she had her child (her only child) there were no such things as finding out early, never mind discussion groups to meet others, share experiences, and to wonder what else might go wrong....
She always wanted another child but was told by her Dr "what will be , will be" ....
Thank God for the advances in fertility, but Oh how i wonder if a little ignorance is actually bliss, as i sit agonising whether to test or not, whether its a heavy period or a losing a longed for pregnancy, wondering what is happening....
I deffo think early prg tests have their place....but when so unreliable, and also bloody expensive with no guarantee of accuracy......one does have to wonder, why do women bother??
So says the woman on cd34, desperate to test, but also WILL NOT test , would rather just wait than get the horrendous BFN.
XXXXXXXXX

TBH I didn't realise people tested so early until I came on here. I did a test at one week late with both my pregnancies and then the second test in the pack at 2 weeks late and then got appt with GP. And, in fact, had a hol in Tenerife with my ILs in between test 1 and 2 with DD and never let on.

I remember my grandmother telling me that when she was having children the doctor would basically come once you'd missed I think 2 periods. And then would say "i'll see you in six months".
I think with my mother she was also told not to bother going to the doctors until she'd missed 2 periods.
I, on the other hand, tested on the day my period was due with dd and had doctor's appointment a week later.
With ds, tested about 7 days later because had irregular periods. Still got an early appointment with the doctor so could get a booking in appt with the midwives and nuchal scan arranged asap.

I said virtually the exact same thing to dh when we saw those digital ones advertised on TV last night. We spent nearly 2 years trying for dd and it's soul-destroying enough frankly.

Doesn't it mean of 100 people who ARE pregnant, the test detected only 51? It isn't THAT bad but it's not like they've changed the actual tests, they've ALWAYS been that sensitive or not sensitive at 4 days early, just First Response as always cornered that market.

I DO agree with the OP though. Having said that, I recently tested on what I later discovered would have been the equivalent of day 27 had I not had a period since before conceiving dd april 2005. I just felt pregnant coz I couldn't express enough milk.

I have never understood why women test early... the companies that spout "4 days early" nonsense just drive me crazy!! I have been ttc for a short while, and have never tested. I won't test either until at least a week late.

I am trying hard at the moment on the conception board to suggest that people don't waste their money, or cause themselves all that anxiety on early testing.