Project Description
Chemical Abortions
RU-486
The woman takes the Ru-486 pills at the clinic, which block the action of progesterone, the natural hormone vital to maintaining the rich nutrient lining of the uterus. The developing baby starves as the nutrient lining disintegrates. The woman is given pills to be taken at home the next day. The pills are a dose of artificial prostaglandins, usually misoprostol, which initiates uterine contractions to expel the body of the embryonic baby. The pills trigger delivery of the baby and placenta, but the contractions can be more painful because they are induced chemically. At least 4% of women using this method must return for surgical abortions, due to incomplete expulsion of tissue.
Have you taken the first dose of the ABORTION PILL (Mifeprex or RU-486)? Do you regret your decision and wish you could reverse the effects of the abortion pill? We can help you at abortionpillreversal.com!
Our helpline will connect you with one of our medical professionals who can guide you towards reversing the effects of the abortion pill. We will help you every step of the way. Call now.
Telemedicine or “Web-Cam Abortions”
Abortions are done by video conferencing whereby the abortionist is located at one location and uses a closed circuit TV to talk with a woman who is at another location over a computer video screen. The abortionist never sees the woman in person. They are never actually in the same room together. The pills she is directed to take are the RU-486 pills (see above). In 2017, West Virginia prohibits abortions from being done using Telemedicine.
The Case Against Chemical Abortion
By Paul Stark, Communication Director, Minnesota Citizen Concerned for Life
Chemical abortions are on the rise. They provide a convenient way for the abortion industry to extend its reach—and are quickly becoming the most common method of abortion.
These drug-induced abortions (called “medication abortions” by supporters) haven’t typically generated the same level of opposition as abortions later in pregnancy or those that use viscerally brutal methods like dismemberment.
But they should. Chemical abortions threaten produce—indeed, have already produced—a large-scale destruction of children and a range of dangers to their mothers.
Here’s the case against them.
Chemical abortion isn’t ‘medication’
The first sign that something’s wrong with chemical abortion? It’s universally described by its proponents as “medication” even though it is demonstrably the opposite.
Medication treats or prevents disease, but chemical abortion doesn’t do that. It doesn’t restore health or save a life. On the contrary, it deliberately impairs healthy reproductive functioning in order to end a life. That’s its purpose.
Chemical abortion is usually a two-drug process. The first drug, mifepristone, blocks the pregnancy hormone progesterone, preventing the unborn child from receiving nutrients and support. It is literally a poison that causes death by starvation. The second drug, misoprostol, induces contractions to evict the child from her natural environment.
Whether that’s morally right or wrong, it’s not “medication.” It’s the death of a living, growing individual.
Chemical abortion takes a life that really matters
Many people think chemical abortions happen when unborn children are too small and undeveloped to really matter. These abortions remove amorphous “pregnancy tissue,” not babies, Planned Parenthood says.
But abortion practitioners offer chemical abortions as late as 11 weeks’ gestation. That’s long after an unborn child has a heartbeat. It’s well after she has detectable brain waves. It’s after organs and major body systems have formed and the child looks recognizably human.
The most important biological fact, though, is that the unborn child—not just at 11 weeks, but since coming into existence at fertilization or conception—is a distinct and living member of the species Homo sapiens. She isn’t mere tissue. She is, rather, a whole organism developing herself through the different stages of her life as a human being.
Those poisoned to death by chemical abortions are not a different kind of thing from us. They are what each of us once was.
And each of us—every single one—has value and human rights simply by virtue of being a human being. It doesn’t matter if we are small, or immature, or dependent on other people. After all, big humans don’t count more than small humans. Teenagers are physically and mentally superior to toddlers, but that doesn’t make them any more valuable. Infants depend entirely on their parents, but that’s no rationale for neglecting them.
Human embryos and human fetuses are our fellow human beings. And human beings are important. They deserve our respect, and they deserve the protection of our laws.
Chemical abortion risks genuine harm to women
Chemical abortion doesn’t just destroy a young human being. It poses risks to the mother’s health, too.
A large Finish study found that chemical abortions produced “adverse events” in 20 percent of cases—almost four times the rate of immediate complications as early surgical abortions. That shouldn’t be surprising. Chemical abortions take longer than surgical ones. They cause more blood loss. They have a significant failure rate and can lead to infection. And, in some cases, they mask the presence of a deadly ectopic pregnancy because their expected symptoms are very similar.
The FDA reports 26 deaths of women in the U.S. (and thousands of other complications) connected to chemical abortion, and the inadequacies of U.S. reporting requirements mean that some complications go unreported.
And yet, in the years since these drugs first became available, proponents have succeeded in loosening or even removing important safety regulations. Now, following a recent change at the FDA under President Biden, abortion practitioners can send abortion drugs to women through the mail—with no in-person medical examination beforehand.
In-person screening can, among other things, verify gestational age (complications increase later in pregnancy) and rule out the possibility of ectopic pregnancy. The absence of such screening figures to only exacerbate the risks. One recent study found that 6 percent of patients visited an emergency room or urgent care center following a mail-order abortion. And research into such “telemedicine abortions” in the United Kingdom (where they have been legal for the last two years) has shown increases in post-abortion emergency care.
But the dangers don’t end there. Some rural women who receive abortion drugs live far away from the help they would need in the event of serious complications. Moreover, these at-home abortions make it much harder to detect and prevent pressure and coercion.A 2021 survey found 82 percent of British general practitioners were concerned about individuals falsely obtaining abortion drugs; 87 percent were concerned about the possibility of unwanted abortions coerced by domestic abusers.
Chemical abortions— especially when sent through the mail and ingested at home without supervision or in-person evaluation—raise serious worries about the health and safety of women. We should not ignore them.
Chemical abortion isn’t good for anyone
The reality is that chemical abortions aren’t good for anyone. They aren’t medicine. They are a poison that kills unborn human beings and, too often, harms their mothers as well.
So, as these abortions spread, what can pro-lifers do?
We can inform others about the dangers to women and about the humanity of unborn children. We can advocate legislation to protect against chemical abortions and to require safety standards. We can support positive alternatives for pregnant women facing difficult circumstances. And we can promote abortion pill reversal (APR), an important new option that allows women who change their minds midway through an abortion to counteract the effects of mifepristone and save their baby.
The battle against chemical abortion has never been more important, and every pro-lifer needs to be part of it.
Article appeared in NRL News, February 2022 issue. Click here for a printable copy of article.
Former Abortionist Describes Abortions Done by the Abortion Pill
By Sarah Terzo
Dr. Anthony Levatino, abortionist turned pro-life activist, on abortions by pill:
24 – 48 hours after taking RU-486, the woman takes misoprostol, also called cytotec, that is administered either orally or vaginally. RU-486 and misoprostol together cause severe cramping, contractions, and often heavy bleeding, to force the dead baby out of the woman’s uterus.
The process can be very intense and painful, and the bleeding and contractions could last from a few hours to several days. While she could lose her baby at any time and anywhere during this process, the woman will often sit on a toilet as she prepares to expel the child, which she will then flush.
She may even see her dead baby within the pregnancy sac. At nine weeks for example, the baby will be almost an inch long, and if she looks carefully, she might be able to count the fingers and toes. After she has disposed of her baby, the woman may have bleeding and spotting for several weeks.
Bleeding lasts on average, nine to 16 days. 8% of women bleed more than 30 days, and 1% require hospitalization because of heavy bleeding.…
The failure rate increases as the pregnancy progresses. At seven weeks, it is a 5% failure rate, at eight weeks an 8% failure rate, and at nine weeks a 10% failure rate. If failure occurs, she will usually be offered a surgical abortion.
For the mother, medical abortion often causes abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, headache, and heavy bleeding. Maternal deaths have occurred, most frequently due to infection and undiagnosed ectopic pregnancy.
Study finds ‘significant’ gap in FDA’s reporting of abortion pill complications
By Nancy Flanders
Just one month after the FDA loosened safety restrictions on the dispensing of the abortion pill, the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AAPLOG) said a study has found a “significant” gap in the federal government’s reporting of complications associated with the abortion pill.
In December, the Food and Drug Administration loosened REMS (Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy) safety rules that had been in place regarding the abortion pill for 20 years, no longer requiring an in-person visit with a doctor, and allowing the drug regimen to be distributed by mail. The FDA said that its data from adverse events (AE) reporting is what led to the decision. However, AAPLOG has said there is a “significant discrepancy” between the FDA data and reporting from the very sources that gave the FDA the data it is citing.
According to Fox News, the FDA used adverse events reporting from Danco Laboratories, which manufactures and dispenses the abortion pill and uses AE reporting from Planned Parenthood. This means Planned Parenthood would report adverse reactions from the abortion pill to the company that makes the abortion pill, which then would report those reactions to the FDA.
Dr. Donna Harrison, co-author and CEO of APPLOG, told Fox News that 2009-2010 allowed the best opportunity to compare the data sources because a “situation which allows a direct comparison does not exist outside of 2009 [and] 2010.” In fact, the reporting of any abortion pill complications except for death has not been required of the abortion pill’s manufacturer at all since 2016. In comparing the 2009-2010 data from the FDA’s online reporting system, actual adverse event reports obtained via the Freedom of Information Act [FOIA], and data from previous studies utilizing Planned Parenthood information, including one by researcher Kelly Cleland, researchers were able to find that the numbers don’t add up.
According to the study, Cleland found that 1,530 adverse events from the abortion pill were reported from Planned Parenthood alone in 2009 and 2010 (which was admitted to possibly being a low number). The FDA Adverse Event Reporting System [FAERS] online dashboard includes — from all abortionists — 664 adverse events. Yet, the FDA released only 330 adverse events through FOIA.
The number of adverse events published in Cleland’s study is significantly higher than those reported in FAERS, which is the opposite of what the numbers should look like. If the Planned Parenthood adverse events reported by Cleland are being reported to the FDA, they should also appear in FAERS.
“Our analysis shows significant discrepancies between the number of AERs identified by Planned Parenthood as reported in Cleland, the number in the FAERS database, and the number received under FOIA,” the authors of the study wrote. “There are also discrepancies in the number of hospitalizations, ectopic pregnancies, and ongoing pregnancies.”
If it is true that Planned Parenthood reports AEs to Danco and Danco then reports them to the FDA, then either Danco did not report a significant number of those AEs to the FDA, or the FDA did not include them in FAERS. This raises the question of whether FAERS includes any or all complications reported by the other 63% of abortionists, which in turn, raises the question of whether or not the FDA ignored data that clearly showed the dangers of the abortion pill and the need for the safety rules it chose to do away with.
Regardless of the FDA’s 2016 decision to no longer require abortion pill AEs aside from death, FDA Commissioner Janet Woodcock said that the FDA’s decision to end the REMS safety rules surrounding the abortion pill was based on AEs from January 2020 to January 2021 — when reporting was not even required. Therefore, it appears the FDA used faulty and lacking data to allow the abortion pill to be dispensed via telemedicine, putting women’s lives at risk and propping up the abortion industry.
Dr. Nisha Verma of the pro-abortion American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) told Fox News that the group supports the FDA’s decision, claiming it used “[d]ecades of rigorous scientific data” that proves the abortion pill “is safe and effective.” The abortion pill has been found to be four times more dangerous than first-trimester abortion, and without safety rules in place, women are even more at risk from complications. Editor’s note.
This appeared at Live Action News and is reposted with permission.
Article appeared in NRL News, February 2022 issue. Click here for a printable copy of article.
Additional Risks
for Home Use of Pills Prescribed by Telemedicine, Delivered by Mail
Inadequate Screening
While women visiting a clinic can have a physical examination and an ultrasound, health care providers doing only an online or telephone interview rely on a woman giving them accurate, honest answers to questions about her last menstrual period, symptoms of ectopic pregnancy, allergies or other disqualifying conditions. If a woman is unaware of these contraindications, mistakes spotting for her last menstrual period, or does not yet recognize signs of ectopic pregnancy, these important factors may be missed and the abortion pills either may not work or may prove dangerous for her.1
Testing for Rh Factor
Failure to identify and treat Rh factor could mean the loss of future pregnancies.2
Higher Failure, Complication Rates
Less careful, less scientific screening will mean more women past the FDA recommended cutoff date of ten weeks, and thus a greater the likelihood of complications or a failed or incomplete abortion.3
Less Assurance of Access to Emergency Care
Women doing screening by telemedicine and having pills shipped to remote locations may not necessarily have ready access to specialized surgical care from their prescriber or a nearby emergency care facility if they suffer sudden serious bleeding episodes or a ruptured ectopic pregnancy.4
Quality of Internet Medication
Women buying mifepristone and misoprostol from a foreign based internet pharmacy have no real assurance of product purity, dose, or efficacy and often receive little or no instructions on appropriate use.5
Sale to Dishonest, Deceptive Buyers
Online, telemedical, or telephonic screening and prescription allows those ordering to misrepresent their intentions or identities, potentially allowing these to be resold or given unknowingly to underage teens, unwilling or unscreened women with later pregnancies or conditions for whom these would not work or might prove dangerous.6
Difficulty knowing when you’re done.
Without a professional exam, it is possible a women might bleed and cramp and think her abortion is completed, yet be mistaken.7
Mifepristone Safety & Efficacy
Quick Facts about the Abortion Pill
Drug-induced abortions are painful and bloody.
These pills work by shutting down the child’s life support system, initiating bleeding, and then stimulating powerful, painful contractions to expel the child and other contents from the uterus. Pain and bleeding are unavoidable parts of the process.8
Women lose more blood from a chemical than a surgical abortion. 9
Chemical abortions take longer to complete than surgical ones.
Not counting recovery time, surgical abortions may take maybe 10 minutes to complete, so that a woman can be in and out of a clinic in a couple of hours. 10 Chemical abortions involve multiple drugs taken over a number of days and may take days or weeks to be fully completed.11
“Medication” abortions have a significant failure rate.
The FDA warns these drugs fail to deliver a complete abortion 2-7% of the time. 12
The risk of failure and complications increases with gestational age.
The FDA originally limited use of mifepristone to women no more than 49 days after their last menstrual period (LMP) because of reduced efficacy and increased complications after that point.13 Years of field experience have confirmed this.14
Women see their aborted children’s bodies.
Identification of the embryo or fetus is one of the ways a woman is able to confirm the abortion pill has done its job, but it can also prove traumatic when women report seeing their child’s eyes, fists, or other body parts.15
There have been at least 26 deaths and thousands of injuries among American miferpistone patients.
The FDA reports that more than two dozen mifepristone patients in the U.S. have died after taking mifepristone and that thousands of others have suffered from complications such as hemorrhages, infections, and the rupture of previously undiscovered ectopic pregnancies, many requiring hospitalization and surgery.16
The warning signs of ectopic pregnancy are disturbingly similar to chemical abortion side effects.
Because women having drug-induced abortions normally face considerable abdominal pain and bleeding, patients and even doctors who have not seen an ultrasound have missed these danger signs of a rupturing ectopic pregnancy.17
Several mifepristone users came down with serious bacterial infections.
A number of women taking mifepristone died after contracting Clostridium sordellii, an anaerobic bacteria that thrives in oxygen poor environments where there may be an open wound.18 Bleeding can lead to life-threatening hemorrhage. Every woman going through a chemical abortion does a considerable amount of bleeding, but when this bleeding is heavy and does not stop, she can be in serious danger if she does not get surgical treatment.19
Detailed Notes & Citations
Additional Risks for Home Use of Pills…
1. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), “Mifeprex (mifepristone) tablets Label,” 3/2016 Revision, Reference ID: 3909592, available at https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2016/020687s020lbl.pdf, accessed 8/6/20, see Table 4, p. 13.; Elizabeth Raymond, Daniel Grossman, Ushma D. Upadhay, Mitchell D. Creinin,e t al , “Commentary: No-test medication abortion: A sample protocol for increasing access during a pandemic and beyond,” Contraception, Vol 101, No. 6 (June 2020), pp. 361-366, at 363. A 2007 study appearing in the British Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology found that women’s estimates of pregnancy duration were 19 days fewer [two and half weeks shorter] than ultrasound estimates. K. Blanchard, Beverly Winikoff, et al , “A comparison of women’s provider’s, and ultrasound assessments of pregnancy duration among termination of pregnancy clients in South Africa,” BJOG, Vol. 114, No. 5 (May 2007), pp. 569-75. Even supposing these misestimations are not intentional to meet the gestational deadline, it is possible that women may miscalculate by mistaking early spotting for a menstrual period.
2. FDA, 3/2016 Mifepristone Label (see note 1), Warnings and Precautions. 5.5 Rhesus Immunization,” p. 6. Armando Fuentes, “Rh Incompatibility During Pregnancy,” KidsHealth from Nemours, October 2018. Available at https://kidshealth.org/en/parents/rh.html, accessed 7/31/20. Rh D immune globulin for Rh D negative women having either medical or surgical abortions is recommended by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), “Practice Bulletin No. 181: Prevention of Rh D Alloimmunization“O bstetrics & Gynecology, Vol. 130, no. 2 (August 2017) pages e57-e70. Also see Kristi Stone Hamrick, “Abortion pills without Rhtesting could prevent many women from every having children,”W ashington Examiner , May 29, 2020, at https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/abortion-pills-without-rh-testing-could-prevent-many-women-from-ever-having-children, accessed 7/31/20.
3. FDA, 3/2016 Mifepristone Label (see note 1), accessed 8/6/20. Table 4, p 13 shows risk of failure – defined in terms of “Surgical intervention for ongoing pregnancy” – increased with gestational age. Though that chart showed progression only up to ten weeks, abortion pill advocates led by Elizabeth G. Raymond and Daniel Grossman have advocated a “No-Test” chemical abortion protocol (see note 1) which would rely on prescriber and patient estimates based on last menstrual period or LMP. Authors note that “Regardless of the precise GA [gestational age] limit selected, use of the no-test approach will inevitably result in treatment of some fraction of patients whose true GAs exceed 77 days” [already beyond the FDA limit], p. 363.
4. Alice Cartwright of Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health (ANSIRH), a research group from the University of California – San Francisico that among other things, promotes abortion by telemedicine, writes specifically about “How telemedicine can fill the void left by ‘abortion deserts” Mashable , May 27, 2018 at https://mashable.com/article/abortion-deserts-telemedicine, accessed 1/24/22. “Abortion deserts” are those places that are more than 100 miles or more from an abortion clinic. Cartwright neglects to mention that a person far from an abortion clinic may also be miles from the closest emergency room, a critical factor should a patient begin to hemorrhage, show signs of infection, or go into shock. For a map showing what an enormous portion of the United States qualifies as “abortion desert,” see Jackie Flynn Mogensen, “This Mpa Depicts Abortion Access Across America and It’s Really Bleak,” Mother Jones , May 15, 2018, at https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/05/this-map-depicts-abortion-access-across-america-and-its-really-bleak/, accessed 1/24/22.
5. Chloe Murtagh, Elizabeth Raymond, Beverly Winikoff, et al, “Exploring the feasibility of obtaining mifepristone and misoprostol from the internet,” Contraception, Vol. 97, no.4 (April 2018), pp. 287-291. Though authors tried to argue that their attempted to order abortion pill kits over the internet showed the method was “feasible,” they found that none of the kits came with any instructions or warnings, none required any prescription, some came with pin pricks in the packaging that may have degraded the products, raising serious questions about the safety and efficacy of these drugs and the responsibility of those selling them.
6. If a healthcare provider does not directly examine a woman or ask for some sort of identification or documentation, he or she cannot be certain that the person they are talking to is actually pregnant or is even the intended patient. Even before the FDA authorized prescription of abortion pills by telemedicine, there were multiple occasions where someone ordered pills that they intended to use on others, e.g., Kevin Murphy, “Abortion-drug dealer pleads guilty, linked to Grand Rapids man accused of poisoning pregnant woman’s drink,” Wisconsin Rapids Tribune , March 5, 2020, https://www.wisconsinrapidstribune.com/story/news/2020/03/05/abortion-pill-dealer-ursula-wing-guilty-case-tied-grand-rapids-man/4966488002/; Shereen Siewert, “New York woman convicted of illegally selling abortion drugs in Wisconsin,” Wausau Pilot & Review , July 12, 2020, https://wausaupilotandreview.com/2020/07/12/new-york-woman-convicted-of-illegally-selling-abortion-drugs-in-wisconsin/, accessed 8/7/20.
7. In Stephen L. Fielding, Emme Edmunds, and Eric A. Schaff, “Having an Abortion Using Mifepristone and Home Misoprostol: A Qualitative Analysis of Women’s Experiences,” Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health , Vol 34, No. 1 (January/February 2002), pp. 34-40, at 37, early pioneer Eric Schaff noted early on in the chemical abortion campaign that “Even though a woman may have experienced cramping and bleeding, she cannot know for certain that her abortion is complete until a provider performs either a sonogram or a hormonal pregnancy test.” The FDA concurs. On page 4 of the FDA Mifepristone Label (see note 1), at “2.3 Post-treatment Assessment: Day 7 to 14,” The FDA cautions that “Lack of bleeding following treatment usually indicates failure; however, prolonged or heavy bleeding is not proof of a complete abortion.”
Mifepristone Safety & Efficacy…
8. FDA Mifepristone Label (see note 1) on page 6 says
Abdominal pain/cramping is expected in all medical abortion patients and its incidence is not reported in clinical studies. Treatment with MIFEPREX and misoprostol is designed to induce uterine bleeding and cramping to cause termination of an intrauterine pregnancy. Uterine bleeding and cramping are expected consequences of the action of MIFEPREX and misoprostol as used in the treatment procedure. Most women can expect bleeding more heavily than they do during a heavy menstrual period. Daniel Grossman, et al, “ in “Experiences with pain of early medical abortion: qualitative results from Nepal, South Africa, and Vietnam,” BMC Women’s Health, Vol, 19, No. 1 (October 15, 2019) notes on page 2 that “Pain is often cited by women as one of the worst aspects of the MA [medical abortion] experience.”
9. Ob.Gyn. News (1989), No. 24, p. 1, noted that the average blood loss from mifepristone abortion was reported to be 70ml, nearly four times the blood loss from a standard vacuum curettage abortion.
10. Planned Parenthood, “In-Clinic Abortion,” says “In-clinic abortions are also much faster than the abortion pill: most in-clinic abortions only take about 5-10 minutes, while a medication abortion may take up to 24 hours to complete” www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/abortion/in-clinic-abortion-procedures, accessed 1/22/22.
11. The FDA’s “Medication Guide” for Mifepristone (part of the Mifepristone Label, note 1) (advises women that “medication abortion” is a two drug, multistep process where the prostaglandin misoprostol is only taken 24 to 48 hours after the first drug mifepristone. Though cramps and bleeding may ensue within 2-24 hours after taking the misoprostol, the FDA says on page 19 of the guide that “Bleeding or spotting can be expected for an average or 9 to 16 days and may last up to 30 days.”
12. The FDA’s “MedicationGuide” for Mifepristone (part of the Miifepristone Label, note 1) says on page 17 that “About 2 to 7 out of 100 women taking Mifeprex
will need a surgical procedure because the pregnancy did not completely pass from the uterus or to stop bleeding.”
13. “Table 4” of the FDA’s 3/2016 Label for Mifepristone (see note 1) notes that efficacy diminishes each week after 49 days LMP.
14. Mary Gatter, Kelly Cleland, Deborah L. Nucatola, “Efficacy and safety of medical abortion using mifepristone and buccal misoprostol through 63 days,” Contraception, Vol 91, No. 4 (April 2015). Note particularly Tables 2 and 4, p. 4. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4373977/pdf/nihms662931.pdf, accessed 1/22/22. See also Elizabeth G. Raymond, Beverly Winikoff, et al, “First trimester medical abortion with mifepristone 200mg and misosprostol: a systematic review,” Contraception, Vol. 87, no.1 (January 2013), pp.26-37 showing “treatment failure” for 4.8%. Raymond, et al, notes that risk of failure higher among groups with higher percentage of patients with gestational ages of more than 8 weeks.
15. “Blood and Tears,” Newsweek, 9/17/95. A 21-year old told Louise Levanthes, of Health (Jan/Feb 1995) “When I looked at it, it had two dark spots like eyes and a little skeleton not quite formed….I haven’t talked about it to anyone. I feel quite empty.” See also the Endowment for Human Development (EHD) website on fetal development at 8 weeks https://www.ehd.org//science_main.php?level=i#th9 accessed 1/26/22. EHD lists a number of features that would be present and visible in the child’s eighth week (10 weeks LMP). At this stage of development, the child would be more than an inch tall from the crown of the head to his or her rump and would have a fully distinguishable head with a visible face, mouth, ears, nose, eyes as well as arms, hands, legs, and feet.
16. FDA, “Mifepristone U.S. Post-Marketing Adverse Events Summary though 6/30/2021,” Reference ID: 4862568, available at https://www.fda.gov/media/154941/download, accessed 1/23/22. Though the FDA stopped soliciting information on complications and non-lethal events in March, 2016, the post-marketing report still records not only 26 deaths which include seven cases of death associated withC lostridium sordelli i, another withC lostridium perfringens , two cases of ruptured ectopic pregnancy, cases of hemorrhage, overdose, etc, but hundreds of non-lethal infections, blood loss requiring transfusions, and nearly a hundred cases of ectopic pregnancy. The FDA also notes a dozen deaths from other countries which involved bacterial sepsis, hemorrhage, heart attack, and other cases. Reported U.S.complication rates have been lower than those reported by European governments with nationalized medical systems and centralized health registrations which are thought to obtain more complete, accurate counts. A Finnish study from 2009 (M. Niimnim ki, et al, “Immediate complications after medical compared with surgical termination of pregnancy, Obstetrics & Gynecology , Vol 114, No. 4 (October 2009), pp 1281-89) showed that 20%of chemical abortion patients experienced adverse events (largely a result of a higher rate of hemorrhage of 15.6%).
17. The FDA’s label for mifepristone (see note 1) notes at “5.4 Ectopic Pregnancy” that “Healthcare providers should remain alert to the possibility that a patient who is undergoing a medical abortion could have an undiagnosed ectopic pregnancy because some of the expected symptoms experienced with a medical abortion (abdominal pain, uterine bleeding) may be similar to those of a ruptured ectopic pregnancy. The presence of an ectopic pregnancy may have been missed even if the patient underwent ultrasonography prior to being prescribed MIFEPREX.
18. Marc Fischer, et al , “Fatal Toxic Shock Syndrome Associated with Clostridium sordellii after Medical Abortion,” New England Journal of Medicine , Vol. 353, No. 22 (December 1, 2005), pp 2352-60, at p. 2358. Adam L. Cohen, et al, “Toxic Shock Associated With Clostridium sordellii and Clostridium perfringens After Medical and Spontaneous Abortion,” Obstetrics & Gynecology , Vol. 110, No. 5 (November 2007), pp. 1027-33, at 1031. John Hopkins Medicine, “Toxic Shock Syndrome (TSS).” Available at https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/toxic-shock-syndrome-tss, accessed 8/4/20. Beryl Manning-Geist, Bassam H. Rimawi, “Severe Infections in Obstetric and Gynecology: How Early Surgical Intervention Saves Lives,” Journal of Clinical Gynecology & Obstetrics, Vol. 5, No.1 (March 2016), pp. 1-16, at 3-4. These infections are notoriously hard to recognize because they often present without fever, keeping them from being identified and treated right away. The FDA’s 3/2016 Label for Mifepristone has a “black box” warning about “SOMETIMES FATAL INFECTIONS” which cautions that “Atypical Presentation of Infection. Patients with serious bacterial infections and sepsis can present without fever, bacteremia or significant findings on pelvic examination. A high index of suspicion is needed to rule out serious infection and sepsis.”
19. In addition to recorded deaths and serious adverse events associated with bleeding in the FDA’s 6/30/21 Mifepristone U.S. Postmarketing Adverse Events Summary mentioned and linked in note16 above, there are multiple warnings about the possibility of hemorrhage on the FDA’s 3/2016 label for Mifeprex (mifepristone), including a special “black box” warning stating the following:
WARNING: SERIOUS AND SOMETIMES FATAL INFECTIONS OR BLEEDING…
Serious and sometimes fatal infections and bleeding occur very rarely following spontaneous, surgical, and medical abortions, including following
MIFEPREX use…
* Bleeding. Prolonged heavy bleeding may be a sign of incomplete abortion or other complications and prompt medical or surgical intervention may be needed.