We publicly stated our relief that the federal government exhibited a smidge of common sense when it determined that morning-after pills should not be available over the counter like they’re sticks of bubble gum. But let’s step back and think about the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius’ announcement in light of future possibilities.
It is obvious that the pressure from the reproductive rights movement is not going to disappear. According to Huffington Post, “Women’s health advocates said Wednesday they were shocked by Sebelius’ decision. ‘We are outraged that this administration has let politics trump science,’ said Kirsten Moore, president and CEO of the Reproductive Health Technologies Project.”
FDA Commissioner Hamburg also clarified that she sees no problem with her previous approval of over-the-counter status for Plan B. “I reviewed and thoughtfully considered the data, clinical information, and analysis provided by CDER, and I agree with the center that there is adequate and reasonable, well-supported, and science-based evidence that Plan B One-Step is safe and effective and should be approved for nonprescription use for all females of child-bearing potential.”
Though Hamburg has dutifully informed the drug manufacturer, Teva, of the secretary’s decision, we cannot lose sight of the fact that Teva made the initial request for over-the-counter status for the drug and therefore will have a vested interest in continuing pursuit of that approval even though there is now tension between the FDA and DHHS.
Could it possibly be that Sebelius’ announcement is a sop with less temporary relief than baby aspirin?
Parents and their pre-pubescent daughters may be safe for a time, but there is something suspicious about these events and their long-term results. When notorious pro-abortion Catholic Sebelius rendered her negative decision on Plan B, “she noted that 10 percent of 11-year-old girls can bear children, so they needed to be studied as well.”
Is this a signal to Teva to commence such a study so that she can reverse her decision at a later date? Is it possible that such data exists in the clinical trials Teva has already conducted and that it will miraculously appear in the coming months? We cannot know with certainty, but there is a strange angle to the way these events have unfolded that leaves at least this pro-life leader a bit uncomfortable.
The problem is, frankly, that nobody is admitting the real facts about Plan B One Step, including—most importantly—the clinical reality that Plan B can abort a human being. On the Plan B official website we read, “Plan B One-Step® is one pill that has a higher dose of levonorgestrel, a hormone found in many birth control pills that healthcare professionals have been prescribing for more than 35 years. Plan B One-Step® works in a similar way to prevent pregnancy. Plan B One-Step® will not affect an existing pregnancy.”
Note two things about this amorphous statement. The first is that it does not explain that levonorgestrel has at least four modes of action including interference with uterine lining which can cause the embryonic child to be aborted prior to implantation. Further, the drug can also work to impede the embryo’s progress toward the uterine wall, again resulting in his possible death.
The website writers avoid explaining these effects by using the term “established (implanted) pregnancy” which means that since medical testing cannot confirm the establishment of pregnancy until implantation, anything that happens before then is inconsequential—including an early-day (prior to implantation) abortion.
No matter how you look at it, the outlook for young women of every age is not good. The government is playing a deadly game which requires little celebration and a whole lot of due diligence.
No female, including an eleven-year-old child, should ever ingest a lethal chemical like Plan B.
