Yesterday the Center for Reproductive Rights posted a cute bunny video encouraging the FDA to make the morning-after pill available over the counter to minor girls....
Currently pharmacies must check photo IDs, because the law states no one under 17 may purchase the MAP without a prescription, although pro-abort Amanda Marcotte wrote, "There is no scientific reason for this, because EC is quite safe."
Well, that's remarkable news, Amanda. Please share your source, because the pharmacology label of Plan B states...
Safety and efficacy of progestin-only pills have been established in women of reproductive age for long-term contraception. Safety and efficacy are expected to be the same for postpubertal adolescents under the age of 16 and for users 16 years and older.
"Expected to be" because there have been no long-term studies conducted on the safety or harm of emergency contraception on developing girls' bodies.
There are other health and safety concerns, such as those NARAL cited a decade ago in a statement now removed from its website, although I kept a copy:
The need for emergency contraception can bring women, and young women in particular, into family planning centers, where they can receive other health care services and counseling. For those who remain sexually active, emergency contraception provides a bridge to ongoing contraception and disease prevention.
Then there's the issue of child sex abuse, which over-the-counter distribution of MAPs would enable, since young girls could purchase MAPs as easily as candy. Planned Parenthood's research arm, the Guttmacher Institute, reported:
The younger women are when they first have intercourse the more likely they are to have had unwanted or nonvoluntary first sex, 7 in 10 of those who had sex before age 13, for example.
Teenage girls with older partners are more likely to become pregnant than those with partners closer in age....
Teenagers who have been raped or abused also experience higher rates of pregnancy - in a sample of 500 teen mothers, two-thirds had histories of sexual and physical abuse, primarily by adult men averaging age 27....
Among women younger than 18, the pregnancy rate among those with a partner who is six or more years older is 3.7 times as high as the rate among those whose partner is no more than two years older.
Then there's the issue of maturity, for example, according to the National Guideline Clearinghouse:
Teens may not be able to give sufficiently adequate menstrual histories to exclude a preexisting pregnancy, and some teens already pregnant may try to use emergency contraception as an abortifacient.
"Abortifacient." Well, contrary to NGC's claim, Plan B's label states:
Plan B® is believed to act as an emergency contraceptive principally by preventing ovulation or fertilization (by altering tubal transport of sperm and/or ova). In addition, it may inhibit implantation (by altering the endometrium). It is not effective once the process of implantation has begun.
Implantation of what? A 5- to 7- day-old human being, not a bunny.
One final point. Multiple worldwide studies have concluded easy access to the MAP does not lower the pregnancy rate, the latest coming out last week...
The only people gaining from wider distribution of the MAP are the people making money from it, certainly not the women and girls ingesting this mega-dose of female steroids.
I honestly don't understand the big push to make this over the counter for teenagers. Before I was pro-life or knew of the abortificient properties of the MAP, I took it.
I was 16. I just walked into Planned Parenthood and asked for it, got a 5 minute talk about other birth control methods, and paid 40 dollars.
Honestly, it was no harder than going to the local CVS to do the same. They didn't even ask me my age or the age of my partner (he was 18).
I don't know what they hope to accomplish by taking out this very minor roadblock.Posted by: Lauren at March 23, 2010 12:43 PM
Um, Plan B is not an abortifacient. It cannot kill an embryo that has already implanted. Yes, perhaps teenage girls who fear they are pregnant may think otherwise, but that is an education issue. The fact that Plan B is not an abortifacient is indisputable.Posted by: Dhalgren at March 23, 2010 12:56 PM
Um, yes it is an abortificient. It can kill a child already conceived. Just because the definition of pregnancy was changed to try to hide the fact that hormonal birth control kills developing human beings doesn't change the fact that it does.
Jill Stanek, quoting Plan B's drug label wrote:
In addition, it may inhibit implantation (by altering the endometrium). It is not effective once the process of implantation has begun.
Nobody is claiming it can end a pregnancy once implantation has occured. The drug makers themselves admit that it can kill a conceived embryo by preventing implantation from occuring. So, yeah. It is possible that this drug acts as an abortifacient.Posted by: Keli Hu at March 23, 2010 1:25 PM
Bunnies aren't cute, they're vermin!Posted by: Phillymiss at March 23, 2010 1:29 PM
Just want to encourage those who are interested to attend the annual Hope for Life Conference!! There is an amazing line up of speakers this year!
details are here
The child abuse issue is valid, but the maturity issue is ludicrous. Whatever effects Plan B has on a developing girl's reproductive system, it makes no sense that those effects would be more profound or body-altering than the effects of pregnancy and childbirth.Posted by: Ashley Herzog at March 23, 2010 1:48 PM
"The fact that Plan B is not an abortifacient is indisputable.
Posted by: Dhalgren at March 23, 2010 12:56 PM"
Gee..wonder how anybody can miss "that" since it was already on the label?
Could it be you were wearing pro-abort glasses?Posted by: RSD at March 23, 2010 2:37 PM
That is why we have scientific studies, because what may seem illogical, may in fact not be biological. I agree it seems unlikely to make much difference, but I am glad that is not a sufficient basis for drug regulation. You have to actually do the studies with real subjects and prove it isn't deleterious before you claim it on the label and distribute it. These drugs are altered versions of hormones, not natural ones like the body produces. That is why women who have many children have a lower risk of cancer while women who just take the artificial hormones have higher risk of cancer.Posted by: hippie at March 23, 2010 2:40 PM
(thinks Dahlgren's job is to refute the obvious, and he probably gets paid to do so.)
Plan B operates mainly to interfere with implantation of the human embryo, due to inherent actions of the drug, and due to the timing of use.
Any person who claims otherwise, demonstrates a lack of understanding of female reproductive physiology, and should not be entrusted with any part of women's health care.
Something like this should be repeated in any live media interview or presentation addressing this topic.Posted by: pharmer at March 23, 2010 3:07 PM
the reason they use bunnies? Bunnies reproduce a lot!
Didn't watch video, but those bunnies remind me of the Cadbury bunny....Posted by: LizFromNebraska at March 23, 2010 3:19 PM
Gee..wonder how anybody can miss "that" since it was already on the label?
Sorry? The label does not say any such thing! It says the pill prevents implantation. It does not, and cannot kill an embryo that has implanted and begun to grow.
If you are saying it could flush-out a fertilized egg or zygote, that's one thing. But let's stick to the medical definition of abortion, please. Plan B does not kill an embryo or fetus, hence it is not an abortifacient.
But what is the use of me arguing to a bunch of wingnuts who take the very extreme, non-scientific view that life begins at conception? That's why I live in New York and many of you live in red states.Posted by: Dhalgren at March 23, 2010 3:27 PM
". But what is the use of me arguing to a bunch of wingnuts who take the very extreme, non-scientific view that life begins at conception?"
Wait, what? Is this a typo?Posted by: Bobby Bambino at March 23, 2010 3:32 PM
"If you are saying it could flush-out a fertilized egg or zygote, that's one thing."
I believe it is in the blastocyst stage when it implants, no?Posted by: Bobby Bambino at March 23, 2010 3:36 PM
Yeah, Bobby...a very large error going by the name of Dhalgren...Posted by: RSD at March 23, 2010 3:36 PM
The rabbits have a point. There isn't enough scientific data reflecting harm that warrants a ban.
The bunnies are wrong (so is the coconut judge who ordered FDA to reverse course) when they claim such evidence is needed. Hormones should never be over the counter drugs.
These dopey teens can't handle the zippers on their pants with enough mastery to keep from getting pregnant. What makes this judge think that they won't misuse the hormones (i.e. overdose) to make it a sure bet?
Hormones are some of the most dangerous drugs on the pharmacist's shelf. We can project the effects in a teen population by knowing how teens behave and the toxicity of the compound in question.
However, common sense and children's safety have never been uppermost in the minds of those who would even permit children to take this drug. We'll have a few hundred first rate funerals before the same coconut judge reverses himself.Posted by: Gerard Nadal at March 23, 2010 3:38 PM
"Plan B does not kill an embryo or fetus, hence it is not an abortifacient."
Um, yes it does. "The embryo of a placental mammal is defined as the organism between the first division of the zygote (a fertilized ovum) until it becomes a fetus."
Try again, DhalgrenPosted by: Lauren at March 23, 2010 3:45 PM
@Dhalgren: The label is linked once in the article and once again in the comments. And fertilized eggs that cannot implant do die. And that failure can be caused by these drugs. Which means that they can kill embryos by way of creating the conditions that cause their deaths.
Which is exactly what everyone is saying!
Honestly, this time you must be trying to miss the point.Posted by: Keli Hu at March 23, 2010 4:00 PM
I took Plan B after conception and before implantation, and I have a healthy son due in 16 weeks....Posted by: Hilary at March 23, 2010 4:05 PM
Hilary, congratulations on your son.
Just to be clear, Plan B doesn't prevent implantation 100% of the time. It makes the lining of the uterus less hospitable which increases the likelyhood that the child won't implant.Posted by: Lauren at March 23, 2010 4:08 PM
Lauren, I was also a Planned Parentless customer for a number of years. I went to them for birth control. I used to think they were okay. I asked the N.P. about Depo Provera, and she assured me that "A woman doesn't ovulate while on this medication." Since coming to this site, I have gained so much information about contraception/abotaficients. I really had no idea.Posted by: heather at March 23, 2010 4:45 PM
Hilary, yes. Congratulations on your son indeed!! I am due April 23rd. I am also having a boy!!! May you have a safe and happy delivery!.......Also, sorry about the typo above. Depo Provera is also an abortifacient!Posted by: heather at March 23, 2010 4:52 PM
Dhalgren, I live in a blue state. I can only conclude that you flunked science. You are indeed wrong! And you are also wing-nutty!! tee-hee.Posted by: heather at March 23, 2010 4:57 PM
Uh, Dhalegren, Jill lives in Illinois, a blue state, and I live in a "dark blue" city in a blue state.
Anyway, I am sticking to my story -- rabbits are destructive vermin!Posted by: Phillymiss at March 23, 2010 5:48 PM
It's amazing how uninformed even the pro life folks are regarding this very powerful dose of cancer causing steroids..
I have lived the pain, suffering, and misery that these pills bring with my ex girlfriend. It was only after she started puking and bleeding half to death that she found out the truth online that her college withheld from her. She tried offing herself a few weeks after the worst period in her life. And it was early, not late..
There is no shortage of others who have found out the hard way:
Additionally, there is no reason why anyone should suggest that implantation cannot be disrupted and/or ended before it is complete by this crap.
Hilary, forgive me and I'm not wishing this on you - but the damage to your child may already have been done. Google "progestin birth defects" and see for yourself. This stuff attacks male fetal parts in particular. Damage to a prostate in utero may not be noticeable in a newborn, but our prostate cancer rates have shot through the roof. They haven't in countries that have never allowed the pill.
Progestin is far more likely to cause an early abortion than estrogen is. Here's just a small doage of the medical facts that the ghouls who made this video want nobody to see:
If this breast cancer causing drug is not an abortion pill, then there are no such things as twins either. That happens before implantation, and a woman's body knows it's pregnant long before implantation. The embryo has sent out the hormonal alarm long before that.
Facts, people, facts.. Some of them very unpleasant. But until pro life embraces the reality of how many early abortions happen from all these pills, we got this big wide gap to explain to everyone else..
Posted by: Sean at March 23, 2010 5:52 PM
Bunnies aren't vermin, they're cute.Posted by: Joe at March 23, 2010 5:58 PM
"Bunnies aren't cute, they're vermin!"
Also, no hormones should never be over the counter, because they can interfere with a lot of medications and medical conditions. It's a matter of public safety.Posted by: prettyinpink at March 23, 2010 7:31 PM
are you ready to come back home from the dark side and leave the Dumbocratic party?
Is that the voice of Amanda Bynes????
She makes Disney Movies doesn't she?Posted by: anonymous at March 24, 2010 11:41 AM
Sooo, the point the bunnies make is that is wrong for the pharmacist to request for an ID and get the "evil eye". What else would the pro-death's like? put plan B next to the self-checkout cashiers at the supermarket?Posted by: Maria at March 24, 2010 1:42 PM
No, anonymous. She was sold to Nickelodeon at an early age. The same Nickelodeon whose parent company also owns MTV. I doubt they really care about the condition of our nation's youth...they're part of the problem anyway.Posted by: xalisae at March 24, 2010 2:01 PM
I wonder if the same people who don't seem to mind if these steroids are dispensed like candy to there daughters, would have similar ease with the thought of a coach giving there sons Testosterone..... But that's illegal ;) hmmmmmm might we have a little bit of sexism going on here? Might we be guilty of valuing the health of our sons more? Because we won't stand for anyone making THEM guinea pigs, but our daughters are fair game.
btw... came from a blue state, moved to a red state, and helped it turn blue. This proud pro-life dem fought FOR HCR.