Gleanings from an article on the Abortion Pill

The LA Times carried an article about 4 women dying after taking the abortion pill RU-486. Although this blog does not deal directly with abortion, some of the points in the article have broader implications for women's health.

• An FDA warning has been issued about the potential for serious bacterial infection under certain circumstances.
• The idea that it is acceptable for some women to pay the ultimate price so that the abortion pill can be legal
• The often repeated comments that childbirth is more than 10 times riskier than contraceptives and medical abortions.
• That doctors do not follow the FDA-approved regimen by cutting the dosage of one drug and instructing women to take the second vaginally, instead of orally, at home.
• The similarity between the desired effect of the drugs and the signs of a serious infection/reaction.
• The fact that reporting deaths and side effects of the drug is voluntary for doctors. The FDA estimates that only 10% of the problems with the drug are reported.

So , the bottom line appears to be:

• The FDA approves new drugs under specific use requirements
• Doctors might not follow those regimens
• Patients are self-administering, sometimes in non-sanitary conditions
• Patients can't self-diagnose problems
• To protect a political agenda, adverse reporting is limited
• There isn't enough data to carry out investigations
• No one really knows the risk involved so opinions become fact.

Hate to say it but that is often the scenario for women's reproductive health whether its a contraceptive, an STD, abortion or cancer.

"Superhero for Choice"

In the same week that Lorraine Lathem, VP for Community Education at Planned Parenthood-Wisconsin, urged the end to the sex ed wars at the DPI Sexual Risk Prevention Conference, the press release on a video by Planned Parenthood Golden Gate came across my email.

In the video, a female superhero has the sole mission to protect "choice". She encounters "Sleezy Dude" as he tells teens that "the only way to prevent pregnancy is to practice abstinence". One teen objects that they learned other ways to have safe sex in school to which Sleazy Dude responds "Those are instruments from the devil's toolbox". Our superhero interrupts and throws Sleazy Dude into a trash can and asks if the kids know where to go "for their health care needs and reproductive advice". The response is "Planned Parenthood Golden Gate...because we have a choice" . Before departing, the superhero throws a "safe sex kit" to the kids as she yells, "Remember, safe is sexy".

There are other encounters even more outrageous such as vaporizing abortion protestors in a hail of condoms that encapsulate them and then explode. The scales of justice are used with "choice" on one side and "ignorance" on the other.

That, dear readers, is the mentality of the people and organizations determining the social agenda and health care in this country and around the world. Being debuted in San Francisco, this attack is a bit more bizzare but the themes run right through all confrontations in this state. Those that don't support the "choice" agenda are deemed stupid, evil, religious fanatics and rightwing conservatives forcing their ideas on Americans free to do whatever they please. The people connected with Wisconsin Abstinence Coalition proudly put the health, welfare and happiness of children first.

Bravo Planned Parenthood--keep making blunders like this one and you'll lose your audience and your funding and have no one else to blame.

The Teen Brain

The National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy is the latest organization to present research on the workings of the teen brain; a scientific onslaught in the past year. Basically all have said that, using MRI as a tool, there is now proof that the pre-frontal cortex of the human brain is under-developed until the mid-twenties. This is the area that makes intelligent decisions by remembering, understanding and evaluating information and experiences. Connectors, transmitters, and chemicals in the brain are just not present or are too immature to handle the requisite processes.

Campaign Director Sarah Brown raises concerns in the document's forward that this new research will be used to deny "opportunities for (teen) autonomous decisions...to argue that minors should not be able to obtain family planning care without parental consent...". Its hard to imagine why it should not be used just for those situations. Ms Brown also asserts that "no one should turn away from new research findings just because they might modify our thinking." Quite a statement from someone whose organization has stood firmly with Planned Parenthood. We agree completely with Ms. Brown's assertion that the message is " teens--however competent--are not adults and we need to think harder about the nature of this critical life stage." We agree that teens "fare best in environments where there is an appropriate degree of structure and guidance...options with ample adult involvement." Social science has proved that for years. Now biology has come on board.

Letting teens suffer consequences for decisions they were not fully capable of making in the first place seems just plain cruel.

Where's the Story? OC, menopausal treatment and Breast Cancer

I have asked, but as yet have not received an answer, as to why the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel did not print an article on the World Health Organization's July 29th press release. In it, combined estrogen-progeston oral contraceptives were raised to a Group 1 carcinogen rating. That adds them to the same level as cigarettes as highly carcinogenic--the highest ranking. Specifically mention is the connection with breast cancer as it is with menopause hormone treatments

Now currently in the state there is:
1) legislation pending that would ban the promotion and distribution of emergency contraception on UW campuses,
2) reaction to the Academy of Pediatrics support of contraception for adolescents,
3) a Race for the Cure scheduled in a month
4)a new coalition to fight abstinence education and expand contraception
So the reason can't be that it isn't currently newsworthy!

21 scientists from 8 countries reviewed a mountain of studies for The World Health Organization before issuing this new warning classification. The organization is well-known for its support of contraception especially in developing countries. It supports and is supported by a host of organizations all over the world that do likewise.
So the reason can't be that this is a biased, non-professional report from a group with an axe to grind!

So why wouldn't women be given this information? Afterall, the vast majority of women of child-bearing age use hormonal birth control and menopause therapy. Breast cancer rates seem to have escalated over the last few decades. Younger women are getting breast cancer. This would seem to be a logical link and, at the least, a plausible explanation. It is definitely information women should ask their doctors about.

So was it just a young male staffer who disgarded the press release as irrelevant? Or was the "wait and see what further research says" approach adopted? Or is someone afraid women might not buy products that make drug companies profitable? Or will the information harm efforts to get birth control covered by insurance? Or does this info forbode lawsuits similar to what hit cigarette companies? Or will young women decide sex without a wedding ring just isn't worth it anymore?

Call me cynical but if a woman or girl decides to use the Pill, she should at least know what could happen to her and that negates all reasons for not printing this story!