Home

Popping Pills, Ending Lives

pdf version for easy printing

Pills and prescriptions are supposed to make us feel better. We take pills for headaches, backaches, to lower our blood pressure and pills to fight off infections and diseases. The controversial abortion pill called RU-486 has a purpose other than healing. The purpose of this pill is to kill, taking a life at its earliest stages.

RU-486, a synthetic steroid also known as mifepristone, was developed in 1982. The RU-486 abortion regimen involves combining mifepristone with another drug, misoprostol (a prostaglandin). When combined, the drugs are about 95 percent effective in destroying an unborn child.(1)

When a woman is pregnant her body secretes a natural hormone which prepares the lining of the uterus for a human embryo. Mifepristone blocks this action. The uterus lining softens and breaks down until the embryo is expelled from the body. Sounds simple? Sounds easy? Sounds like a lot of information is missing. The Population Council, other pro-abortion groups, and some media reports make the pill sound like a magic “cure” for any problem pregnancy. Just pop these pills as soon as you find out you’re pregnant or up to week 10 of your pregnancy and your life can get back to normal. Not true—chemical abortions are complicated.

During the first visit to the abortion facility, a woman will take mifepristone orally, and will take misoprostol orally at home. A second visit is required later to confirm the death of the unborn child and to check for complications. Even with the use of these two powerful abortion-causing drugs, around five percent of the women will have to have a surgical abortion.

The Population Council holds the rights to mifepristone in the United States. The Population Council is an international population control organization founded by John D. Rockerfeller in 1952. The Population Council licenses a company called Danco Laboratories to distribute mifepristone in America under the brand name Mifeprex. Mifeprex is the only product distributed by Danco Laboratories.

America did not step blindly into the chemical abortion procedure. A small trial in the United States showed the serious ramifications of this procedure.(2) Clinical trials were conducted in the U.S. on 2,121 women from September 1994 to September 1995 at 17 abortion facilities. The Population Council and the New England Journal of Medicine reported these findings:

arrow The most frequent side effects were bleeding and cramping
arrow 56 women underwent surgical intervention for excessive bleeding
arrow Four women received blood transfusions
arrow The average duration of bleeding and spotting was 13 days
arrow Gastrointestinal side effects of the drugs, such as nausea, diarrhea and vomiting were documented
arrow 8 percent of the women did not abort with the medication and were encouraged to have a surgical abortion
arrow 5 percent of the women never completed the study

One important question remains. Are there any long-term effects on women who opt for this medical abortion? For women, it is too soon to know the ultimate ramifications of this chemical cocktail. For the unborn, the long-term effect is clear; a human life ended.

You at day 70 of pregnancy

Abortion providers may say that the fetus at 10 weeks is only a “blob of tissue,” but that doesn’t do justice to the amazing development of a child in the womb. Don’t be fooled into thinking an unborn child is merely “tissue” during the earliest stages of human life. Learn the facts!

Our lives begin, of course, long before birth. Not open to dispute is the fact that every one of us began our lives at the moment of fertilization. How much do you know about your own beginnings? Let’s take a look at your history.

At fertilization, sperm joined ovum to form a single cell which, miraculously, contained the genetic blueprint for every detail of your development: sex, hair and eye color, height, skin tone and everything else. Over the next week, you traveled through your mother’s fallopian tube to her uterus, implanting in the nutrient-rich lining. By week five (only 21 days after fertilization), your heart was beating.

By week six the foundation of your brain and nervous system had been laid. Your tiny heart was already pumping blood, and beated about 100 times a minute. Your tiny nostrils were probably visible and your hands and feet were beginning to take shape, along with your facial features: ears, nose, lips, tongue and even tiny teeth.

By the 10th week of pregnancy, your eyes were plainly visible. Your eyelids were beginning to close over them to protect their delicate development. Your toes had formed, and your arms could bend at the elbow as your armbones developed. You were about an inch long.

FDA approval of RU-486 remains questionable

The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved RU-486 as a chemical method to end the life of a developing unborn child on September 28, 2000. On that day, the FDA stepped out of the healing business and into the killing business. Under former President George H.W. Bush, RU-486 was banned from the United States. Its deadly effects could not kill unborn humans and could not injure women. But under the Clinton Administration, RU-486 was welcomed to America to take the lives of innocent children, haunt women who regret aborting their unborn children, and continue disintegrating families.

When the FDA approved RU-486, it did so under an accelerated process for drug approval called “21 CFR 314 Subpart H.” According to the FDA, this accelerated process is supposed to only be used to “accelerate approval of certain drugs for serious or life-threatening illnesses.” Pregnancy is not a disease.

Before RU-486, there were only 30 drugs that had been approved under Subpart H, all of which were for treatment of HIV/AIDS, cancer, and other debilitating diseases. Since RU-486 was approved under an accelerated process, it didn’t have to go through any long-term effects studies that other drugs go through. No one knows if these two drugs will cause more serious long-term side effects to the women that use them.

Another “red flag” was raised regarding RU-486 when a letter was sent to health care providers from the drug company Searle. Searle was the manufacturer of misoprostol (also known as Cytotec). In an August 23, 2000, letter to health practitioners, Searle said, “Cytotec is not approved for the induction of labor and abortion.” Searle also warns abortionists about “serious adverse events” such as maternal death, and “uterine hyperstimulation, rupture, and perforation” which can take place when Cytotec is taken for an “off-label” use.

FDA changes rules after abortion clinics ignore them

On March 30, 2016, the Food and Drug Administration altered its guidelines for using RU-486 after years of the abortion industry ignoring the initial FDA guidelines. These previous guidelines called for the drug to be used only in the first 49 days of pregnancy, and that women should take three trips to the abortion provider. The new guidelines extend the time the drug can be used to 70 days, and reduce the number of visits to the abortion provider to two.

The new guidelines also allow for non-physicians (such as physician assistants, nurse practitioners and midwives) to provide chemical abortions as being a physician is not one of their guidelines.

The FDA also changed the Mifeprex web page to delete information on the deaths of several women from sepsis after undergoing RU-486 abortions. In the span of less than two years, four women from California—Orianne Shevin, Chanelle Bryant, Vivian Tran and Holly Patterson—all died from Clostridium sordelli infections after having an RU-486 abortion. Clostridium sordelli is a bacterium that can, in rare situations, produce fatal toxins.

According to the FDA’s 2011 adverse events report, at least 14 women have died after taking RU-486.(3)

In light of these deaths, the FDA during the George W. Bush Administration issued a public health advisory to alert abortion providers and the public about the dangers of RU-486 abortion.(4) In the advisory they stated that the “safety and effectiveness of other Mifeprex dosing regimens, including use of oral misoprostol tablets intravaginally has not been established by the FDA.”

The FDA warning fell on the deaf ears of abortion providers. In response, some states passed legislation requiring abortionists to follow the FDA guidelines. In 2016 during the Obama Administration, the FDA simply altered their guidelines to match the abortionists’ desires. While the abortion industry touts the new RU-486 regimen as safe, a study in the New England Journal of Medicine found that complications from RU-486 abortions double if the pregnancy is 56 to 63 days.(5)

Eliminating another visit to an abortion clinic, taking doctors out of the equation and prescribing RU-486 up to three weeks later isn’t about making the abortion physically safer for women, it’s to make it more convenient for the abortion provider.

Webcam abortions put women at further risk

Changing FDA guidelines aren’t the only ways the abortion industry is trying to maximize their profit margins. Planned Parenthood has an ongoing problem finding enough business to afford setting-up abortion clinics in rural areas. Having doctors in the office is a significant cost if there aren’t enough abortions to pay for them.

In 2008, Planned Parenthood clinics in Iowa developed webcam abortions as a way around this obstacle. The doctor sits in an office miles away and talks with the patient via webcam, and then presses a button to remotely open a drawer containing the RU-486 for the patient. Planned Parenthood and other abortion clinics have expressed interest in adopting this telemedicine abortion technique, and many states are considering legislation to ban the practice. Michigan banned telemedicine abortions in 2012. Planned Parenthood is happy to save money on doctors examining patients in person before giving them medication that has potentially life-threatening side effects.(6)

References
1 - Irving M. Spitz et al., “Early Pregnancy Termination with Mifepristone and Misoprostol in the United States,” New England Journal of Medicine 338, no. 18 (1998): 1241-1247.
2 - Ibid.
3 - Available online on the FDA website: www.fda.gov
5 - Available online on the FDA website: www.fda.gov
5 - Irving M. Spitz et al., “Early Pregnancy Termination with Mifepristone and Misoprostol in the United States,” New England Journal of Medicine 338, no. 18 (1998): 1241-1247.
6 - Monica Davey, “Abortion Drugs Given in Iowa via Video Link,” The New York Times, 9 June 2010, A1.

top

 

 

 

 

 

 

© RIGHT TO LIFE OF MICHIGAN, 2340 PORTER ST SW, PO BOX 901, GRAND RAPIDS, MI 49509-0901, (616) 532-2300
PRIVACY POLICY | VIDEO/IMAGE USAGE POLICY