Birth Control Pills - Are they really all that benign?

In reading this it seems that birth control pills basically operate by manipulating the levels of powerful hormones. Obviously the risk benefit is positive for the BC pill users in that having an unwanted child is a more dire immediate circumstance than most other alternatives.

Long term however, if a woman takes BC pills for say 20 or 30 years, does long term use of birth control pills have any subtle permanent effects on a woman’s physiology (other than keeping her non-pregnant)?

IANAD, but have been told that these days some doctors will not prescribe BC pills to women who smoke. There is apparently an added risk of, IIRC, heart disease or stroke. I don’t know the exact underlying mechanism that is related to that.

It’s the estrogen that carries the most risks - strokes (especially in women who smoke and are over 35), higher blood pressure … there are others but I can’t remember right now.

It has benefits though too - reduced chance of ovarian cancer is one.

They have “mini-pills” that don’t have estrogen - just the progestin - and they have less risks.

From http://www.epigee.org/guide/medfaq.html

Blood clots are a risk. There’s a link between estrogen levels and the clotting system, for obvious reasons. Usually, though, doctors won’t worry about it unless there are other risk factors present, like smoking.