This is the third and final part of the NRLC Special Report.
Editor’s Note: As previously demonstrated in Part 1, the most recent data does not substantiate the assertion that mifepristone is a safer alternative to commonly used pharmaceuticals such as Tylenol, penicillin, and Viagra. In Part 2, we demonstrated why it is inappropriate to compare these life-saving and life-enhancing medications with abortifacients that are being used to destroy human lives. In the final section of this article, we will re-examine the risk profile of the abortion pill, finding that it is much more dangerous than is commonly advertised.
A significant underestimation of the potential risks associated with mifepristone.
The assertion that mifepristone is four times safer than penicillin or ten times safer than Viagra is not solely based on the potential risks associated with antibiotics or erectile dysfunction drugs. It is also contingent upon an overly optimistic assessment of the abortion pill.
As previously observed, the CNN report was based on an earlier FDA report on adverse events associated with mifepristone. The risk increases slightly when more recent deaths are included. However, this assumption is contingent upon the FDA being apprised of all deaths and other adverse events. There is a compelling argument to suggest that the FDA is not fully aware of all incidents that occur.
A significant amount of data is missing.
The FDA is candid about the limitations of its ability to detect and monitor complications. In its brief in the case of Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. FDA (2023), the FDA acknowledged that the FAERS (the FDA’s Adverse Events Reporting System) data cannot be used to calculate the incidence of an adverse event or medication error in the U.S. population.
One medical professional conducted a comparative analysis of adverse event data from Planned Parenthood for the year 2010 with data from the FDA for the same period. The analysis revealed that the FDA failed to report at least 866 adverse events from Planned Parenthood, which is believed to be responsible for approximately 40% of the abortions performed in the United States.
The FDA would only record deaths associated with mifepristone if they were identified and reported as such. Nevertheless, some abortion pill providers anticipate that some patients may end up at the emergency room and openly caution them not to reveal that they have taken these drugs. Instead, women are instructed to claim that they are experiencing a miscarriage.
It is possible that women may not inform their families or partners that they have taken mifepristone. Furthermore, abortion providers inform women that doctors in the emergency room would be unable to ascertain from an examination that they have taken the drugs. This would presumably include coroners as well, rendering mortality figures reported by the FDA incomplete at best and gross underestimations at worst.
A selective reading of the data was conducted.
CNN cites a 2015 study from the University of Southern California, San Francisco abortion researcher Ushma Upadhyay as evidence that serious complications from mifepristone/misoprostol are uncommon, amounting to approximately 0.3% of cases. She posits that the data demonstrate that chemical abortions are even safer than surgical or procedural abortions.
It is evident that CNN has failed to exercise due diligence in its analysis of the data presented by Upadhyay. This is evidenced by the apparent lack of attention paid to the methodological limitations of the study, which could have led to a more nuanced understanding of its findings. The study indicates that 5.19% of patients undergoing chemical abortion presented to the emergency room with a complication, a figure that is nearly seventeen times higher than the rate highlighted by Upadhyay in her discussions with the press.
It is difficult to comprehend how this is possible.
The definition of a “major complication” is narrowly defined to include “unexpected adverse events requiring hospital admission, surgery or blood transfusion.” However, complications such as hemorrhage, infection, uterine perforation, and incomplete or failed abortions are classified as “minor.”
Before dismissing these as inconsequential or statistical anomalies, it is important to consider that all of these seemingly minor incidents were sufficiently concerning to prompt more than a thousand women in this study to seek emergency care at a hospital emergency room.
In light of the broader range of complications, chemical abortion is demonstrably riskier than either surgical abortion or even birth. This is contrary to the assertions made by CNN.
The results of other field data indicate a higher risk.
The complication rate of 5.19% as found by Upadhyay is a cause for concern, but there is evidence that even that estimate may be low. Researchers from Canada, who examined nearly 40,000 abortion patients in Ontario between 2017 and 2020, utilising a comparable pharmacy distribution system to the one recently proposed in the United States, discovered that nearly 10.3% of chemical abortion patients visited the emergency room with some concern or complaint (Annals of Internal Medicine, 3 January 2023).
It remains uncertain whether the Canadian figures reflect an increased risk due to the looser protocol in use or simply reflect better reporting from a nationalised health system. However, this finding is at odds with the more optimistic assessment of the abortion pill advocates and their media allies in the United States.
It is possible that we may begin to observe a significant increase in the number of women presenting at local emergency rooms with symptoms such as bleeding, infection, or ruptured ectopic pregnancies. There is a possibility that a sudden and unexplained rash of women may die from miscarriages or rare bacterial infections.
Those who are familiar with the drug and its mode of action will be able to comprehend the information presented. Those who have relied upon and reprinted the spin of the abortion industry will have to provide an explanation.
In conclusion, the product is not as safe as it is purported to be.
Those who previously asserted that unborn babies lack the capacity to experience pain, exhibit brain waves, or have a beating heart are now claiming that abortion pills, which could result in at least one in ten women being hospitalized, are completely safe, even safer than common drugs like penicillin and Viagra.
The evidence does not substantiate this assertion. The drugs in question save lives, relieve pain, and generally improve the quality of life. Mifepristone is a medication that is used to terminate a healthy pregnancy. It has been demonstrated to cause significant physical distress to the mother, including bleeding and pain. Furthermore, it has been shown to pose a risk to the mother’s life and health.
Those women who possess a more comprehensive understanding of chemical abortion and the related safety data are better positioned to discern the veracity of the claims made by abortion pill advocates and their media allies.
The potential for adverse consequences is simply too significant to warrant further action.
Daniel Miller is responsible for nearly all of National Right to Life News' political writing.
With the election of Donald Trump to the U.S. presidency, Daniel Miller developed a deep obsession with U.S. politics that has never let go of the political scientist. Whether it's the election of Joe Biden, the midterm elections in Congress, the abortion rights debate in the Supreme Court or the mudslinging in the primaries - Daniel Miller is happy to stay up late for you.
Daniel was born and raised in New York. After living in China, working for a news agency and another stint at a major news network, he now lives in Arizona with his two daughters.
