NRL News

Pro-abortion attack on Abortion Pill Reversal misses the mark by a mile

by | Feb 16, 2022

By Dave Andrusko

If you haven’t already, please take a few minutes to read “Over 3,000 Lives Have Been Saved Through Abortion Pill Reversal: Erroneous Letter from House Judiciary Chairman Calls Abortion Pill Reversal a ‘Flawed Theory.’” The staff at NRLC did a magnificent job at disassembling and debunking the letter sent by House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler to Meta [Facebook] CEO Mark Zuckerberg fiercely attacking Facebook for having the gall to approve ads for Abortion Pill Reversal or Abortion Pill Rescue (APR). Among many other falsehoods, chairman Nadler blew off the science behind APR as a “flawed theory”.

I will not belabor the obvious point. This is cancel culture on steroids, an evidence-free attack on a technique that has already saved over 3,000 babies. Here is just three of a boatload of insight from NRLC’s press release which you should read in its entirety.

#1. All the names Nadler trots out to criticize APR are stars in the pro-abortion galaxy. They have invested time and talent into debunking ARR. There is not a hint of this conflict of interest or that they are not some academics who are disinterested in the outcome.

#2. Our readers know the basics. Chemical abortions employ two drugs. If the mother decides after taking the first drug (mifepristone) but before taking the second (misoprostol) she made a huge mistake, there is a solid chance she can save her baby by taking progesterone.

Nadler would have you believe that APR is, at best, ineffective, at worst poses dangers to the woman. Nadler flies right past the fundamental truth: Progesterone has been successfully used for decades. “Prescribing progesterone is a recognized treatment for women who face miscarriage because of a history of low progesterone in pregnancy.”

Dr. Creinin’s study is Nadler’s ace in the hole. Dr. Creinin downplayed the fact that of the three women in his study who experienced heavy bleeding, the two that require surgery and blood transfusions were from his placebo group that did not receive progesterone. The other patient from the progesterone group who sought emergency help for bleeding — a known side effect of mifepristone— ultimately did not require surgical intervention or a blood transfusion.

#3. Dr. Christina Francis is chair of the board of the American Association of Pro-life Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AAPLOG). She has written extensively about the real danger—that posed by mifepristone/misoprostol. One example:

One of the largest studies to date, which analyzed high-quality registry data obtained from nearly 50,000 women in Finland, found that the overall incidence of immediate

adverse events is four-fold higher for medical abortions than for surgical abortions. The same study showed that nearly 7% of women will need surgical intervention — a significant number when you consider there are nearly 900,000 abortions per year in the U.S., 40% of which are medication abortions.

NRLC President Carol Tobias summed the situation up well.

“Pro-abortions groups and their allies have a history of promoting misinformation and rewriting the truth to bend it to their will. This does irrevocable damage to women seeking to save their babies’ lives through the Abortion Pill Reversal protocol.”

She added, “However, it shouldn’t be surprising since the abortion industry is all about making money—at the expense of women and their unborn children.”