however - doctors have been using a "3 month" cycle for many years
with no indications that it truly is unsafe in anyway.  Of course,
since such use is not considered a "correct" use of the drugs, there
isn't much in the way of data.  US docs wouldn't report their findings
on this because they aren't supposed to do it.  But they do -
prescribing the pill such that the patient misses two out of three
cycles.  In some contries, the 3-month pill has been approved for
several years.  data may be easier to come by in European medical
journals.

There are some women who naturally have very erratic and loong cycles
(two months or more.)

IMO - it's a matter of priorities - I would rather risk long-term
*potential* problems (but of course do other things to try to prevent
them such as supplemental calcium or whatever) than put up with the
horrific pain that often accompanies my cycle along with the
near-suicidal emotional turmoil that goes with it.  Basically it's a
quality of life issue for me.  

As hubby would say - would you rather have a horrible ending or
horrors without end.  I vote the former.

kcat