 Abortion Pill RU 486 is Unsafe (1 views)
From:  David (DavidABrown)    5/24/2002 10:55 am  
To:  ALL    
 
  391.1  
 
Hi,

 

I hope this information will be helpful as people seek the truth in information about their bodies and especially about their Souls.

 

God Bless you,

David

 

From:  The Pro-Life Infonet www.prolifeinfo.org

Reply-To:  Steven Ertelt infonet@prolifeinfo.org

Subject:   RU 486 Maker Admits Abortion Drug Not "Safer" Than Surgical

Abortion

Source:   Plattsburgh (NY) Press Republican; May 20, 2002

 

RU 486 Maker Admits Abortion Drug Not "Safer" Than Surgical Abortion

 

Plattsburgh, NY -- The Food and Drug Administration's approval of the

dangerous abortion drug RU 486 for use in the United States was hailed by

abortion advocates. They claimed the abortion drug would make abortion,

safer, more convenient, and more available -- if also more profitable --

than surgical abortions.

 

Data thus far suggests the abortion drug has been as widely used as

abortion advocates hoped or expected. Now, in a startling admission by the

drug's maker, it may not be safe either.

 

Dr. Richard Hausknecht, the medical director of Danco, the company that

makes Mifepristone, also know as RU-486, spoke about the abortion drug at

a news conference Friday at Northern Adirondack Planned Parenthood in

Plattsburgh, New York.

 

The pills are "the other modality for medical abortion as compared to

surgical abortion," Hausknecht said. "We don't know (RU-486) is safer, but

we do know that it is as safe."

 

RU-486 can be used up to seven weeks into the pregnancy and -- combined

with a drug that spurs contractions -- causes an abortion. The maker of

the second drug has written a letter to doctors saying the drug is being

misused in association with an abortion.

 

Hausknecht, Planned Parenthood and other abortion advocates see RU-486 as

a non-invasive, more private way to conduct an abortion. Some women,

Hausknecht said, see using the Mifepristone pills as "more natural" -- a

feeling Hausknecht said he doesn't quite understand. The abortion drug

involves a multi-step process requiring repeat visits to an abortion

facility.

 

"Other women are afraid they will see something come out of their bodies"

and opt for the surgical abortion, Hausknecht said.

 

However, Dr. John Middleton, district director for New York Right to Life,

said RU-486 "has a bad record. I think the literature is quite clear."

 

Middleton said a problem with an abortion brought about by drugs, versus

the surgical abortion, is its two-stage process, which he says "drags it

out" and makes the abortion more dangerous.

 

The drug is another part of the larger debate surrounding the moral and

legal issues of abortions. For Middleton and his colleagues, the real

issue is about what the abortion pills do.

 

"I believe it is a child. It's only a medicine to kill a child. I don't

favor anything ... that does away with a child."

 

Middleton was a psychotherapist before abortion became legal and saw women

who had had abortions. He said he has counseled women suffering "despair"

or "guilt" after an abortion.

 

"The feeling is very intense. Sometimes they don't know what the feeling

is about. When they come to grips with it, when they come to grips with

their soul," they feel better, Middleton said.

 

"I've been in practice for 53 years" in family and individual counseling,

Middleton said, and his position on abortion "gets reinforced every time I

go through it."

 

--

The Pro-Life Infonet is a daily compilation of pro-life news and

information. To subscribe, send the message "subscribe" to:

infonet-request@prolifeinfo.org. Infonet is sponsored by Women and

Children First http://www.womenandchildrenfirst.org For more pro-life

info visit http://www.prolifeinfo.org and for questions or additional

information email ertelt@prolifeinfo.org



David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
From:  David (DavidABrown)    7/16/2002 8:48 am  
To:  ALL   (2 of 6)  
 
  391.2 in reply to 391.1  
 
Subject:   FDA Removes Warning From Second Part of RU 486 Abortion Drug
Source:   Pro-Life Infonet; July 15, 2002

FDA Removes Warning From Second Part of RU 486 Abortion Drug

Washington, DC -- An FDA decision to alter warning labels for the drug 
Cytotec may pave the way for abortion advocates to claim the dangerous 
abortion drug RU 486 is safe for women.

Obstetricians who use Cytotec to induce labor in pregnant patients say that 
recent label changes for the drug approved by the FDA "may ease safety 
concerns" among patients and physicians about the drug's use during labor. 
The label for Cytotec, which is known generically as misoprostol and was 
originally approved by the FDA to treat stomach ulcers, had stated that 
pregnant women should not take the drug under any circumstances because of 
the drug's ability to induce uterine contractions. 

The FDA agreed to remove that warning in April, and the new label will 
instead state that women who are taking Cytotec to treat ulcers should not 
become pregnant. The change was made to reflect the fact that the drug is 
widely used by doctors to induce labor. 

The drug is also part of the FDA-approved regimen for inducing medical 
abortion in conjunction with mifepristone, known as RU 486.

However, Searle, a unit of Pharmacia Corp. sent a letter to doctors last year 
warning that misoprostol has been approved only to prevent ulcers caused by 
aspirin and similar drugs, not to help induce abortion. They warned
women would face severe medical problems if the drug was misused as a part of 
the RU 486 chemical abortion process. It is legal, however, for doctors to 
prescribe FDA-approved drugs for unapproved uses -- so called "off label" 
use. 

The Searle letter noted:  "Serious adverse events reported following 
off-label use of Cytotec in pregnant women include maternal or fetal death; 
uterine hyperstimulation, rupture or perforation requiring uterine surgical 
repair, hysterectomy or salpingo-oophorectomy; amniotic fluid embolism; 
severe vaginal bleeding, retained placenta, shock, fetal bradycardia and 
pelvic pain." The new FDA label includes information about these risks. 

Although Cytotec is still not formally approved by the FDA for obstetric use, 
some physicians say that the recent label change is "just a few steps shy of 
formal approval." Studies involving the use of the drug in more than 6,000 
pregnant patients have yielded "very good results," and the American College 
of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has endorsed the use of Cytotec in women 
with no previous uterine surgeries or caesarean sections. 

Still, some physicians say that the drug is "dangerous" and the negative 
outcomes associated with the use of Cytotec to induce labor have been "vastly 
underestimate[d]." 

--
Please consider making a donation to help the work of the Pro-Life Infonet. 
You can send a donation to:  Women and Children First, P.O. Box 523143, 
Springfield, VA 22152. We appreciate your support.


--------------------
From:  The Pro-Life Infonet www.prolifeinfo.org
Reply-To:  Steven Ertelt infonet@prolifeinfo.org




David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  CRAW (FREDCDOBBS99)   7/24/2002 7:08 am  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (3 of 6)  
 
  391.3 in reply to 391.2  
 
----And I'm SURE of course , that if the drug were absolutly safe {100%} that you would have no trouble with the idea that women would use it?? You motives are obvious---use any info, any statement true or not to prevent/scare women into avoiding the drug. 

PRO CHOICE PRO AMERICA PRO WOMAN ANTI SUPERSTITION 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    7/24/2002 9:28 pm  
To:  CRAW (FREDCDOBBS99) unread  (4 of 6)  
 
  391.4 in reply to 391.3  
 
Hi,

 

I am all for safe drugs.

 

Safe for the Mother and Safe for the Child.

 

David



David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Bobs New Babe!! (WPJSGAL)   8/3/2002 1:24 am  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (5 of 6)  
 
  391.5 in reply to 391.4  
 
>>Safe for the Child<< 
I'm all for drugs being safe for the "child". An embryo or fetus, however, is not a "child". 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


   From:  David (DavidABrown)    8/3/2002 8:12 am  
To:  Bobs New Babe!! (WPJSGAL)   (6 of 6)  
 
  391.6 in reply to 391.5  
 
Hi,

 

You are choosing not to call a fetus a baby or a child But you still have to acknowledge that whatever you call it, it is Alive!

 

Therefore the purpose of Abortion is to Kill that which is living.

 

David 



David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit  
 
