Anytime you have unprotected sex there is a possibility of conception. However if it was really 5 seconds I highly doubt she got pregnant. If you are really concerned if this was in the last 72 hours she can get a plan B pill. Plan B is ment to stop a fertilized egg from attaching to the uterus. She would need a doctor to prescribe it or the health clinic in most states.

The pullout method is not a reliable form of birth control and Plan B is not ment to be used on a regular basis. You should purchase a box of condom and she should go get birth control if you two intend to continue having sex.

thanks for the help, can pre-cum really cause pregnancy, ive heard different things at different sites. thank you again for your time we dont plan on having sex again. it was a one time thing and we both regret it.

futureshock posted something about that...

unless you previously ejaculated, there should be no sperm in your pre-cum. They've tested samples and NONE of them came back positive for sperm... I'll look for the post...

http://ehealthforum.com/health/topic122910 .html

that's the link to futureshock's post on it.

The source for that study was actually a blog by someone who read stuff.

There are conflicting arguements on subject and I think its best to assume theres a possibility and always aire on the side of caution.

yes, but Plan B is not a birth control method either. 5 seconds (whether he pumps or not) is not enough to be completely worried and flip out and get a huge dose of hormone that is most likely not needed.

Although I do agree you do need to get a box of condoms/ birth control if you plan on continuing having sex.

but again it's my opinion and obviously not to be taken to like I'm a goddess and know everything...

I have posted the actual study right out of a medical journal.

Here is is again


Does preejaculatory penile secretion originating from Cowper's gland contain sperm?
Zukerman Z, Weiss DB, Orvieto R.

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Rabin Medical Center, Petah Tikva, Israel.

PURPOSE: To determine if spermatozoa are present in the preejaculatory penile secretion, originating from Cowper's gland. METHODS: DESIGN: Prospective clinical and laboratory study. SETTING: Andrology and Sex Counseling Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Academic Teaching Hospital. PATIENTS: Five patients referred for premature ejaculation, three for excessive fluid secreted during foreplay and four normal healthy volunteers. INTERVENTION: Glass slide smears of preejaculatory Cowper's gland secretion obtained during foreplay from at least two different occasions, and semen samples after masturbation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Microscopic examination of air-dried smears, and routine semen analyses. RESULTS: None of the preejaculatory samples contained sperm. All the patients had sperm in routine sperm analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Preejaculatory fluid secreted at the tip of the urethra from Cowper's gland during sexual stimulation did not contain sperm and therefore cannot be responsible for pregnancies during coitus interruptus.

PMID: 12762415 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?c md=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstrac tPlus&list_uids=12762415

You are correct that the pull out method is not a reliable form of birth control. This is for two reasons:

1) There can be sperm in pre-ejaculate if you have ejaculated recently, earlier in the day, because the leftover sperm can mix with the pre-ejaculate and cause pregnancy.

2) Most young men can not control ejaculation efficiently enough to pull out in time. That's why the failure rate is upwards of 27%.

The way Plan B works is NOT by causing the fertilized egg not to implant, but by delaying ovulation. This is why it must be taken with a few days or else it will not work. Plan B has no effect on a fertilized egg or an established pregnancy.

O I read somewhere it was

Y do ppl have such a problem with it then? you know like comparing it to abortion?

I'd say because it interrupts natural courses. If it was meant to happen, nothing should interfere with it. Abortion is definitely more major in my eyes because once the heart starts beating (in my eyes) you're taking a life. But if it just stops the egg and sperm from joining, then no real life was taken.

(if you ask me my views on abortion, I'm still not 100%)

This is an excellent question, and the answer is long and complicated, but here you go:



Because the pro-life people who are anti-birth control say that Plan B (and all forms of birth control that aren't barrier methods like condoms) cause fertilize eggs to not implant.

In nature, with no contraception, just normal unprotected sex, 9 out of 10 conceptions die before birth. Most happen before a woman even knows she is pregnant.

You cannot prove a negative. You cannot prove that Plan B does not cause one of these fertilized eggs not to implant. You cannot prove that watching a scary tv show didn't cause it. You can't prove that eating at MacDonald's didn't cause it. See where I am going with this?

However, no scientific study has EVER been able to show that Plan B DOES cause a fertilized egg not to implant.

Here is where the mistaken idea first came from:

Studies showed that women on the birth control pill had a thinner lining of the uterine wall than women not on the pill. (Which is why a period is lighter when you are on the pill.) Some people (and if I can find the story I'll post it) who are against bc took that to mean that, if a woman on the birth control did ovulate (even though the way the pill works is to stop ovulation), and that egg got fertilized, it would fail to implant because the lining of the uterus was too thin.

What they did not know was, the reason the lining of the uterus was thinner in women who were on the pill was PRECISELY because they did not ovulate. OVULATION is what stimulates the lining of the uterus to thicken up. SO, if a woman on the pill DID ovulate, the lining WOULD thicken up, and the egg would implant. This is how babies are born to women on the pill. This would never happen if the lining of their uterus was too thin.

so where do they get their data from that? if the woman doesn't know she's pregnant and gets her period like she always does, how do the doctors/people that collect data know she was pregnant?

In nature, with no contraception, just normal unprotected sex, 9 out of 10 conceptions die before birth. Most happen before a woman even knows she is pregnant.

^^ i wouldnt say they die
the egg just probably didnt attach to the walls or something

that makes a lot of sense, about the lining and what not.

thanks for all the help. i feel a little better now. however my girlfriend told me she was feeling naushes (sp) and sick to her stomach. i know this is a sympton of pregnancy but i think its too soon for hre to have symptoms already. its only been two days. is it her being really nervous or do i need to worry

ya its far to early for nausea symptoms shes probably getting sick or making herself sick with nerves

thanks for all the help i feel alot better now

yep its definately too soon for any symptoms
shes just thinking about it too much

From research on fertility and miscarriages, etc.: The part in bold is the beginning of a direct answer to this question:

source

It is estimated by multiple sources and authors and has been for decades that at the very beginning of life, of human development, of conception, about 50 percent of all potential human beings have a chromosome abnormality, mostly a lethal chromosome abnormality. Chromosome abnormalities are the commonest cause of death in humans. They kill at the very minimum two-thirds of potential humans, more likely 80 to 90 percent and they mostly do so through these lethal aneuploidies.

PROF. SANDEL: Thank you. I have two questions about the rate of natural embryo loss in human beings. The first is what percent of fertilized eggs fail to implant or are otherwise lost? And the second question is is it the case that all of these lost embryos contain genetic defects that would have prevented their normal development and birth?

DR. OPITZ: The answer to your first question is that it is enormous. Estimates range all the way from 60 percent to 80 percent of the very earliest stages, cleavage stages, for example, that are lost.

PROF. SANDEL: Sixty to 80 percent?

DR. OPITZ: Sixty to 80 percent. And one of the objective ways of establishing the loss at least as of the moment of implantation, well, even earlier, let's say as of five days because the blastocyst begins to make a chorionic gonadotrophin and with extremely sensitive assay methods, you can detect the presence of gonadotrophins, let me say, first around Day 7. That's the beta of human chorionic gonadotrophin. And if you follow prospectively the cycles that has been done on quite a few occasions in the Permanente study in Hawaii and so on, a group of women, of nonfertility, who want to conceive and you detect the first sign of pregnancy there of human chorionic gonadotrophin, about 60 percent of those pregnancies are lost.

It is independently corroborated by the fact that the monozygotic twin conception rate at the very beginning is much, much higher than the birth rate and then if you follow with amniocentesis, the presence of the two sacs in about 80 percent of cases,the second sac disappears, one of the sacs disappears.

In my own lab in Helena where I did all of the autopsies on all pregnancy losses for 18 years, the rate of chromosome abnormalities was a little bit higher.






That's exactly right.