Austin, itโ€™s a little unfair to say that I โ€œskipped overโ€ Lant Pritchettโ€™s findings on โ€œunmet needโ€ (which are indeed interesting). What I did was both refer (very briefly) to those findings and link back to your post in which you had already discussed them in more detail (I also linked to Pritchettโ€™s full paper). What I wanted to do in my post was to highlight something that you had โ€œskipped overโ€ (if I may say so), namely the fact that the professor whose paper you had cited (favorably) had in the same paper, made clear his belief that (a) his findings were โ€œno reason for governments to limit the availability of contraceptionโ€ and that (b) that โ€œthe expanded availability of modern contraception has greatly improved human welfareโ€. You can agree or disagree with those beliefs, but given the context in which they were stated, I thought it would be of interest for our readers to see them.