This is not an article to debate abortion. I believe abortion is wrong for a number of reasons, but that is not what this article is about. The link between Planned Parenthood and Margaret Sanger is troubling at best. The fact that the majority of abortion clinics are located in low-income neighborhoods is also troubling, but more troubling is the fact that the dangers of the abortion pill are being overlooked.<\/p>\n
On Thursday, The Federalist<\/a> reported:<\/p>\n More than 100 pro-life, pro-women, and pro-family organizations sent a letter<\/a> to President Donald Trump\u2019s top drug and health agencies asking them to \u201cput the safety of women first\u201d by reinstating the abortion pill safeguards stripped away by the Obama and Biden administrations.<\/strong><\/p>\n \u201cThe danger this drug poses to women and girls is clear,\u201d the letter states.<\/strong><\/p>\n In the request to U.S. Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Martin Makary and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., the coalition of concerned advocates warned that data shows \u201cchemical abortion is neither safe nor effective.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n \u201cIn short, the FDA\u2019s purpose is to safeguard the health and safety of Americans. In the case of mifepristone, these bedrock principles\u2014necessary not only for the trust of Americans, but also for the safety of women\u2014have been undermined by political whims that obscured the growing evidence of mifepristone\u2019s harm,\u201d the letter continues.<\/strong><\/p>\n The letter highlighted a new landmark study<\/a>, which determined that mifepristone, a key part of the drug regimen used to complete more than half of the nation\u2019s abortions, has a rate of life-threatening or serious complications that is at least 22 times higher than what the FDA and the pill\u2019s manufacturer suggest.<\/strong><\/p>\n Corporate media tried to blackout and undermine<\/a> the study with smears that it is\u00a0\u201cbogus,\u201d<\/a> relies on\u00a0\u201cbad data,\u201c<\/em><\/a> and amounts to \u201cjunk science\u201d<\/a> because it was not peer reviewed. The Washington Post even claimed<\/a> that the discovery of mifepristone\u2019s high injury rate is no big deal because it has a warning label.<\/strong><\/p>\n Researchers Ryan Anderson and Jamie Bryan Hall told The Federalist<\/a> they were careful to exclude certain data, including 72 percent of emergency room visit diagnoses, to avoid overstating the risks of the drug. Even with that added caution, they found \u201c11 percent of women who have a chemical abortion suffer a serious adverse event.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n Obviously, pregnancy is a natural reaction to a certain activity. It is a natural function of a woman’s body–it is not a disease that needs to be cured, and it is not simply a lump of cells to be destroyed. When you use a drug to interfere with the body’s natural function, there are going to be consequences. When that drug kills something that is attached to the body, there may be complications.<\/p>\n It’s time that the Food and Drug Administration actually worked for the benefit of Americans rather than for the benefit of drug companies. We have seen the scandals with tobacco, Oxycontin, the Covid-19 vaccine, and now the abortion pill. The agency needs either to go away or to change its paradigm.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" This is not an article to debate abortion. I believe abortion is wrong for a number of reasons, but that is not what this article is about. The link between Planned Parenthood and Margaret Sanger is troubling at best. The … Continue reading