In this article I review common arguments and frameworks used by participants in the debate about extended use of combined hormonal contraceptives (CHCs; usually oral contraceptive pills) for menstrual suppression. I examine the way in which menstruation is described and the scope of risks considered. I consider the role of the pharmaceutical industry, personal and clinical experience, and concerns about the contraceptive effectiveness of contraceptive formulations with lower doses. I also address public consequences of the debate, including the possibility of inciting a pill scare, and increasing product awareness and off-label practice.