The Report Card On the Morning-After Pill Is In
— Posted by John (January 5, 2007 at 11:46 am)
CWA: Morning-After Pill Fails Tests
Journal reports that no study found a decrease in pregnancy or abortion rates, even with increased use
WASHINGTON, Jan. 5 /Christian Newswire/ — Well-known advocates for the morning-after pill have admitted that “increased access to emergency contraception pills enhance use but has not been shown to reduce unintended pregnancy rates” in a meta-analysis of studies conducted in 10 countries published this month in the Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology. They also state the drug’s effectiveness may be “substantially … overstated.”
“The same researchers who demanded the morning-after pill become non-prescription now admit that making the drug easy to get does not live up to their promises of reducing pregnancies and abortions. Due to intense pressure from them and other abortion advocates, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) caved and made it non-prescription to buyers over 18, denying women the medical counseling and testing that they need before taking this drug,” stated Wendy Wright, President of Concerned Women for America (CWA).
Authors Elizabeth Raymond and James Trussell state that “no study found an effect on pregnancy or abortion rates.” Access to the morning-after pill “is unlikely to produce a major reduction in unintended pregnancy rates no matter how often women use it” and “previous expectations that improved access could produce a direct, substantial impact on a population level may have been overly optimistic.”
They also question the morning-after pill’s effectiveness, noting that “the published efficacy figures calculated from currently available data on this regimen … may overstate actual efficacy, possibly quite substantially. Clearly, if the method is only weakly efficacious, it is unlikely to produce a major reduction in unintended pregnancy rates no matter how often women use it.”
In 2002, Elizabeth Raymond stated, “Easier access to and wider use of emergency contraception could dramatically lower the high rates of unintended pregnancy and induced abortion in the United States.”
James Trussell stated in 1998, “We decided that making emergency contraception widely available was the most important step we could take in the United States to reduce the incidence of unintended pregnancies.” For years he harshly criticized the Bush Administration and the FDA for “allowing politics to trump science.”
“Now we will see if ideology and abortion politics will trump science. Advocates should drop their demands for easy access to the ineffective morning-after pill since the science proves their claims to be wrong,” said Wendy Wright.
“The authors mislead readers regarding sexually-transmitted diseases (STD). The studies they relied on, which claim that the morning-after pill does not impact STDs, included only women who were sexually active. None of their studies considered the impact of whether access to the morning-after pill encouraged women and girls to begin having sex,” noted Wendy Wright.
I won’t hold my breath to wait to hear what any of the makers of the morning-after pill have to say about this.
They’re probably too busy counting their profits to take the time to issue a comment.
Related
This entry is filed under Abortion, Contraception, Culture Wars, Health Issues, Sexuality. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
mary kay says:
nuts. just plain and simple nuts. all of us.
MK
Comment posted January 5th, 2007 at 7:19 pm
mary kay says:
John,
I know you hate off topic, but senator Brownback is inviting people to an “after march” reception following the march in D.C. web: http://www.brownback.com.
I’ll be sponsoring a candlelight vigil at St. Paul of the Cross in Park Ridge while you’re in Washington, but I thought you might want to spread the word…
MK
Comment posted January 5th, 2007 at 7:22 pm
Rosie says:
MK,
Did you hear? He is going to be running in ‘08.
Comment posted January 5th, 2007 at 7:33 pm
mary kay says:
Rosie,
Yes and I hope he doesn’t disappoint! I want so badly to believe in someone again…
MK
Comment posted January 6th, 2007 at 11:50 am
Sunnyday says:
Sen. Brownback is running for what position in ‘08? President?
Will you guys be participating in the Walk for Life? We don’t have that here but I sure look forward to that annual event and seeing the photos and reading the accounts afterwards!
Comment posted January 6th, 2007 at 7:03 pm
Sunnyday says:
Sorry, I was off-topic too.
Comment posted January 6th, 2007 at 7:06 pm
Rosie says:
Sunnyday,
“Will you guys be participating in the Walk for Life?”
I wish, i’m having a hard enough time walking, it’s more like a waddle : )
Comment posted January 6th, 2007 at 7:20 pm
Rosie says:
John,
“I won’t hold my breath to wait to hear what any of the makers of the morning-after pill have to say about this.”
That is probably wise! LOL!
Comment posted January 6th, 2007 at 7:25 pm
Sunnyday says:
Waddle, tee-hee! Well, that is good enough. Oh, but I remembered it’s March for Life and not “walk”. =)
Here I go again with the mixed-up info, but when did you give birth again? I know Pansy delivered recently; one of my friends is due anytime now, and another friend is 4 months on the way.
Comment posted January 6th, 2007 at 8:01 pm
Rosie says:
Sunnyday,
Haven’t yet, i’m due at the end of March.
Comment posted January 6th, 2007 at 9:27 pm
Sunnyday says:
Oh, ok. =)
Comment posted January 6th, 2007 at 11:12 pm
Mike says:
GFL,
I have not posted here for a while for a certain reason. First off, I think this is a great website. It has great information, research and discussions. In the past, I have frequently promoted the website on other internet discussion boards.
I have become irritated lately that a few of my posts were deleted because they were off topic a bit. I therefore have not been back to this website for a month. I used to visit this site about three times a day.
I believe Pro-Lifers have a hard enough time getting their message out in secular society and all Pro-Life websites should encourage discussion of Pro-Life topics and not discourage discussion like this website has done to me about a month ago.
We need to promote interaction between both sides of the issue even if we do get a bit off topic. This is the only way we will win the battle.
If you want to continue to have a great website, then encourage discussion. If you want to discourage discussion, then people will go somewhere else. I remember a time when each thread topic was getting about 100 posts for thread. Now what is the average? About 7-10. I therefore would encourage the administrators of this website to think hard before deleting posts.
Thank You,
Mike
Comment posted January 7th, 2007 at 4:11 pm
mary kay says:
Mike,
At the risk of being deleted myself, I too was upset when I saw that we were being asked to “stay on topic”…I felt like a five year old being chastised.
That said however, it isn’t our website, and while I thought about finding another one to talk on, I realized that I care about you guys too much to just desert.
Bottom line is: John’s website, John’s rules.
I also understand that on other websites you seem to be required to stay on topic also, but those websites have thousand of participants. This website seemed more intimate somehow. Like a family.
I will abide by John’s rules, to the best of my ability, but I too miss how we used to just “converse” and have a good time.
I have missed you, and was pretty sure I knew why you were gone. I was right. Welcome back.
To be on the safe side…The morning after pill doesn’t work. Big surprise!
MK
Comment posted January 7th, 2007 at 6:13 pm
Joe says:
“Bottom line is: John’s website, John’s rules.”
After the site “shut down” a few months ago I realized GLF never really wanted a “blog” site. What they really wanted was an on line newspaper. The only problem with that is getting people to read it. So they have been forced to allow commentary.
I was unaware that a fellow pro-lifer was having their posts deleted because they were “off topic”. I am not surprised and am glad I read your post and Mary Kay’s post before they were “inadvertently deleted”.
If someone finds / makes a blog that is more “pro-life BLOGGER friendly” let me know. My email address is jkocan–at–neweve–period–net
I will echo MK comments now, so my post has a better chance of not being deleted… The morning after pill is a horrible thing.
Joe
Comment posted January 7th, 2007 at 6:34 pm
mary kay says:
#
Eric says:
PLEASE NOTE: I have just deleted several comments here that were totally unrelated to the content of the original article, and beg all to refrain from posting such unrelated comments.
Sorry John. I don’t really think of this as GFL sometimes. I think of it as John’s website. I realized that it was Eric that deleted the comments, not you. Mea culpa. Me and my big mouth.
The result is the same. I just shouldn’t have layed it all on you.
Let’s just say “GFL’s website, GFL’s rules.”
And I’ll try to respect them. Whoevers they are. The morning after pill is bad.
MK
Comment posted January 7th, 2007 at 6:53 pm
Mike says:
Mary Kay,
I agree this is not our website but GFL’s website. I just wanted to give them advice so they can spread their message to a wider market. People these days want to be very interactive. They want their voices heard even if it does go a bit off topic at times.
I listen to a lot of talk radio. The best talk radio shows are those which take the most calls from its audience. These are the talk shows which I think are the best. Those other radio talk shows where the host keeps on talking and does not take many audience calls are not that good.
GFL has very good articles on its blog. If they want the blog to gain in popularity then they need to let its visitors speak even if they get a little off topic. There are too many other great interactive websites out there. That’s why it took me a month to come back. I also wanted to vent my feelings on this since I was holding back for a month. I am a financial supporter of both PLAL and GFL so you can see why I was so madly irritated.
Mike
Comment posted January 7th, 2007 at 9:25 pm
Mike says:
Mary Kay,
Just to let you know I don’t know how long a will be able to spend on this website in the near future anyhow. In the near future after the upcoming Pro-Life March in Washington DC, Senator Sam Brownback should be coming out to say he is running for President in 2008. Sen Brownback speaks at the Pro-Life March in Washington DC each year. If he runs I will be jumping on board and working for his campaign. To find out more go to his website or go here…
http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=94617
Mike
Comment posted January 7th, 2007 at 9:41 pm
Sunnyday says:
I believe the guidelines regarding off- and on-topic posts have their pros and cons. However, I don’t even recall having read anything about it so thanks to Mike and MK for pointing it out =) When there are so many posts to read and so little time to do so, of course one misses a lot.
As still is the case, the morning-after pill is illegal in my country (the Philippines) and I hope it stays that way for good. Some sectors are still making huge efforts to present contraception and the use of abortifacients as empowering to women, a manifestation of freedom and development, being practical etc. However, I heard that the congressional bill that will be pursued when congress session days resume in a couple of weeks will be the “anti-discrimination” bill, which gives plenty of room for advocating same-sex union.
Comment posted January 8th, 2007 at 2:42 am
mary kay says:
Did anyone see the movie “Children of Men”? In the movie, all the women in the world have become infertile. No explanation is given, but one girl ends up pregnant and the reaction to the birth of the baby…well, let’s just say, that this is how the birth of every baby should be treated. As an incredible miracle, as a gift, as hope…
The way we treat life, (ie: abortion, morning after pills, birth control, euthanasia) it’s easy to see how God could say “Okay you guys, I gave you free will and apparently you have decided that you don’t like babies. So to honor your wishes I’ve decided to stop making them.”
I doubt that the director of the film is a Christian or Pro-life, but the point gets made in spite of his personal views.
I had just come from the abortion clinic and it seemed doubly clear. Life is precious. If we don’t stop taking this fact for granted we are going to contracept and abort ourselves into oblivion!
Think about it…how much do we hate new life? We do everything we can to prevent it. If that fails, we take a pill the next day to ensure that it doesn’t last. And if that fails, we destroy it. Did I mention that I think the world is nuts?
MK
Comment posted January 8th, 2007 at 5:28 am
Rosie says:
My husband and I were talking about that and we came to the conclusion that it would make much more sense for those who believe in over-population to take a bullet for the team, so to speak.=)
Comment posted January 8th, 2007 at 9:20 am
Eric says:
Mike, Mary Kay, Joe, et al.:
It’s never an easy decision to delete someone’s comments. I don’t like it when it happens to me either.
But the comments I deleted were not just “a bit off topic”—they were completely off topic; they might have been written without the writer’s having so much as glanced at the actual post.
Joe complains that we don’t really want a blog site, but a news site, and there may be something to that criticism; not that we don’t want a blog, but that perhaps it’s been too newsy. But it seems to me what you’re asking for is not a “blog” but a “forum,” which we do not want at this time.
There is not one thing that is a blog. There are blogs with no comments, blogs that restrict comments to registered users, and blogs like this one that allow open comments but request users to comment within reasonable guidelines.
There are also blogs that apply no restrictions whatsoever, and even blogs that don’t screen out spam. If you saw the literally thousands of spam comments that are aimed at this blog every week . . .
Perhaps a solution would be a weekly sort of “open thread”, such as one sees on blogs like Red State, where folks can discuss anything that is on their minds.
I’m open to considering this as well as other ways we can make this blog more effective, and I thank all for their interest in this site and their contributions to it during our first year online at GFL.
Comment posted January 8th, 2007 at 12:06 pm
Pansy Moss says:
I like enforcing an on topic policy. No offense to anyone here, and I pologise, but I really find it annoying when you read an entry, and go to see what people have to say about that particular entry, and there are a string of posts about random topics. For the blog writer that is even more frustrating because they put the effort in to write a post, and people just ignore it.
Comment posted January 8th, 2007 at 12:35 pm
mary kay says:
I can understand all of these points…Eric, it must seem sometimes as if the sight has been hi-jacked. It’s just that sometimes you read stuff that is so cool, or so pertinent or so…and you have no way to share it.
I love the idea of an off topic “Friday” or whatever. It would give all of us a chance to let each other know stuff that’s going on around town or in the pro-life movement in general. Anyone who wanted to just vent or opine could go to that page, and anyone who wanted to check it, could. It seems like after a few days pass, a post dies, and even if you have info that would apply to it, you can be pretty sure no one will read it…so having a set space for a “garbage salad” would solve a lot of that.
I vote that Rosie can post anywhere she wants tho, when she has that baby!…Birth, it seems to me, is always on topic…
MK
And Pansy, there’s no need to apologize . Everyone views this sight in their own way. You have a valid point, and I am one of the worst offenders when it comes to wandering…
Comment posted January 8th, 2007 at 5:51 pm
Sunnyday says:
Pansy’s point about the blog writer putting a lot of effort into writing it was also on my mind. Hence, my favoring the off-topic guideline.
The “open topic Friday” or something like that sounds like a good idea =)
Comment posted January 9th, 2007 at 7:14 pm
Rebecca says:
I am studying the biology and politics of Reproductive Technologies in school, well on my way to becoming a practicing OBGYN. I have an open mind on these issues, and have some reservations and unlikely opinions myself. After reading through your website extensively, it is clear to me that you have such a weak understanding (and sometimes entirely false) of the issues you are talking about. You cut and slice quotes inaccurately, you use non-scientific and biased sources, and you are doing great harm to the youth of this country.
I think you have every right to educate your children, and I certainly would love to see abortion rates dropping in this country –and worldwide. Everyone would. Everyone would.
The way in which you have gone about this is parentally, legally, and morally irresponsible, to say nothing of corrupt and self-congratulating. This is an extremely complex issue, and an extremely sensitive one. Brainwashing teenagers with false information –or at the very least, only presenting them with ONE side of the story– is perhaps the most horrible and devastating thing you can do as an educator.
I believe you are good people, and that you mean well. I do. And I believe that there should be a much greater dialogue about the ethics of birth control and abortion… However, this website is full of lies and misinformation, and I can only assume your lectures are as well.
Creating honest, open, and safe dialogue is the best way to reach your children. And please remember…. these decisions are extremely difficult, extremely sensitive, and extremely private. “Pro Choicers” do not ENCOURAGE abortion –in fact, many pro-choicers are personally against it. They simply recognize the complexity of the decision, and believe that every woman must be allowed to make that decision for herself. Without the intervetion of the state. Or religion.
Comment posted April 24th, 2007 at 5:51 pm