Beware: Mifepristone is ingredient in latest new "pill" to be hawked to women

SocietyGuardian.co.uk Health New pill promises to reduce breast cancer risk

The Guardian reports that there could be a new pill on the way that will take the place of the current progesterone/estrogen pill that is used as a contraceptive for women. The report in part says:

"Scientists are working on a new generation of chemical
contraceptives which could hugely reduce side-effects, including the risk of
breast cancer and blood clots, 50 years after the first trial of the pill.

Laboratory studies suggest that, aside from stopping women getting pregnant,
the new pill could reduce breast cancers, thrombosis, and heart disease
associated with the existing pill. It also stops women having periods altogether
- suggesting it could offer relief for the hundreds of thousands suffering from
PMT.

But it will be controversial because the new group of compounds include
a drug known as mifepristone, which is licensed in the UK for use in chemical
abortions."

It looks as if the people who brought us RU486 are not content with the number of women who have already died as a result of taking the Mifepristone/Misoprostone combination, so now they want to try and convince women that a pill that has Mifepristone as one of the ingredients is going to be the panacea for a whole range of women's problems - including a reduction of cases involving thrombosis, and the best one of all, is that it will stop periods and thus end PMT.

It is difficult for me to comprehend how a woman health reporter can be so naive to think that women who get PMT are going to benefit by taking Mifepristone and seeing their periods stop. Since we still do not have sufficient information on Mifepristone, it is irresponsible for a health writer to suggest that a "pill" with this ingredient is going to be the panacea of all panaceas and that all of the women's problems in one hit.

Premenstrual Syndrome is caused not from having a menstrual bleed, but from the imbalance in a woman's hormones. The problem needs to be solved on a very individual basis, possibly through the use of an endocrinologist who is specialised in the study of the hormones of the body. It will not be solved by taking a chemical that has Mifepristone as an ingredient.

It seems that nothing has been learned from the lack of success as far as effectiveness is concerned with Mifepristone on its own as a drug for use as an abortifacient. In fact it has a lousy success rate. The pill in the normal combination of progesterone/estrogen is by far a safer alternative for women than anything containing Mifepristone. My comments are not about being anti-abortion as far as this matter is concerned, rather I am concerned about the fact that when Mifepristone was offered to a French woman who was no more than 35 years old, she died as a result of taking that drug. This is a red flag issue. It is not one that should be taken lightly.

Women of all creeds and political affiliations need to re-examine this issue and the younger women need to be aware that these new drugs are not the panacea to their problems. Most of the gynaecological problems can be resolved without resort to something that is as dangerous to one's health as Mifepristone.

As a woman who has borne three children, I appreciate the need for some women to want to regulate their fertility. However, using a pill that has Mifepristone as an ingredient is not what I would consider a safe alternative. Where is the proof that it can do any of these suggested things? Is this going to be yet another attempt to get Mifepristone into the marketplace without ensuring that it is safe for women to use it on a regular basis? What, if any research has been done regarding to the known and possible side effects from taking this drug?

All women need to think very carefully about allowing their bodies to be used for these experiements that are taking us into the unknown. Do we really want to go to these places? Do we want to see thousands, if not millions of women dying mysteriously, only to discover that the women were told that a pill containing Mifepristone is safe for consumption? This is how they tried to hawk the "Pill" in the first place. It was being hawked as something that was safe to use, yet it caused some women to die of a stroke after being taken down by thrombosis. It has been linked in some cases to breast cancer, and there are some other ill effects. However, are those now controlable contraindications a good enough reason to introduce Mifepristone as a contraceptive?

I hope that all women will take the time to think long and hard about this situation and that they weill say no to the introduction of this new pill. We do not need it and we do not want it. The time has come to say "No, I am not going to be a human experiment for you".

Planned Parenthood clinics responsible for 4 maternal RU486 deaths

CNN.com - Two more women die after taking 'abortion pill' - Mar 20, 2006

CNN reports on the two further deaths of women who made the decision to opt for RU486 instead of surgical abortion. The drugs relating to RU486 had been administered in Planned Parenthood clinics through the off label method of vaginally inserting the misoprostone (the second part of the abortion).

It is becoming increasingly clear that Planned Parenthood is behind the reluctance of the FDA to take the abortion drug RU486 off the market despite the fact that there has been an further increase in the number of reported events from its use. These events now include at least 4 maternal deaths in California alone where Planned Parenthood had advised inserting the anti-prostaglandin vaginally. It appears that this method had increased the risk of infection and blood sepsis in women who had been administered with this abortifacient.

It makes no sense that the FDA has remained blind to the dangers of RU486 whilst it continues to crack down on the use of other medications that have also had increased risks of death due to off label uses. Instead of making the decision to pull RU486 pending an extensive investigation into the reported events including the latest deaths, the body has stated that the number of deaths is consistent with other forms of abortion and risks of giving birth.

It is my view the reaction from the FDA is not good enough. Even if Planned Parenthood state that they will no longer recommend the off-label use of misoprostone, there is no guarantee that there will be no further deaths and reported adverse events. There needs to be a tougher stance over the use of RU486. It has a very poor record but that record is being suppressed by the promoters of this particular regimen. It is definitely not safer than having an abortion via the suction method. A curette during the very early stages of a pregnancy is a far safer alternative than turning to RU486. The FDA needs to think twice about the risks and benefits. Do the benefits, if there are any, outweigh the risks of taking RU486?

What I do not understand is why a certain group of feminists continue to advocate a method of abortion that is in fact far more excruciating to the woman than a surgical abortion that is over and done with on the same day. When RU486 is administered the woman can end up in agony for anything up to 9 days after the administration of the two lots of drugs. On top of this is the very real and increased risk of secondary infection, expecially the insidious infection that has claimed anywhere up to 10 lives.

The administration of RU486 remains risky when clinics such as Planned Parenthood have not introduced sufficient procedures to assure that there are no further deaths from ectopic pregnancies, or because the women are either too young for its use, or that they are over the age of 35 and therefore too old to be using that form of abortion.

Once again the report mentions nothing about these increased risks to women that come from the use of chemicals to induce abortion.

Women need to stop and think before going ahead with something that is such a danger to their health. They need to be made aware of all of the facts. They also need to be aware that in the case of RU486 the rush to bring it onto the market meant that there was a compromise in the time taken for related trials, not just on women but also on laboratory animals.

Are the risks of ending up with an infection that causes so much pain and possible death worth it? Surely it would be far better to give birth to a live infant than face such pain and agaony that come come from something as risky as RU486.

Two more RU486 deaths have been reported in the USA

Just as Australia has foolishly taken the decision for importing Mifepristone out of the hands of the Minister for Health, the United States has reported that two more women have died as a result of making the decision to take RU486 instead of opting for a safer form of abortion.

There are now over 10 maternal deaths associated with the taking of RU486, and this is 10 deaths too many. What will it take before all feminists take a second look at what is happening, and how long before they will come to their senses to see that they are being duped into believing that this is some form of miracle drug - not!!

Renate Klein and her feminist associates wrote their book on this subject well before RU486 was allowed to be used in the USA. Their work is no doubt very unpopular with other feminists. In fact Renate Klein has been the butt of some very unkind comments from Australian feminists who have themselves been too stupid to see that they are the ones clinging to a false notion that to use this dangerous drug is their right. Instead of using a scholarly process the feminists have jumped onto the bandwagon of using the religious card - they used Tony Abbott because it allowed them to hit out at the Catholic Church because of her opposition to abortion on demand. Renate Klein, and right thinking feminists have been able to see past the religion card, and they have tried to remove all of the emotive hype from this very charged issue. By doing this, they have shown that the world has rushed into using RU486 without being consistent and thorough in checking all safety concerns.

The FDA needs to tighten its standards in reporting adverse events associated with the use of RU486. It should be mandatory to report all adverse events such as near death caused by heavy bleeding, including the need for a follow-up surgical procedure, as well as the need for a blood transfusion brought about because of the potentially deadly effects of using this particular method of abortion on demand. The FDA also needs to conduct a long term study on women who have undergone this procedure because not enough is known about the long term harmful effects of disrupting a pregnancy through the use of these drugs.

Young women of today need to wake up to the fact that they are being used as guinea pigs by the pharmaceutical companies. They also need to learn how to think for themselves and stop being the slaves to the feminist movement that cares nothing for their physical well-being.

There has already been too many deaths attributed to the use of Mifepristone and the off-label use of Misoprostone. When will somebody say enough?

Hands Off Our Ovaries

Hands Off Our Ovaries

Feminists and pro-life activists have joined together to protest the direction that is being taken by bio-technologists in their push to introduce the cloning of stem cells.

I have provided a link to the site named "Hands Off Our Ovaries" so that like minded men and women can join together to protest the manner in which women are being used to harvest eggs.

In part, this coalition is a response to the Hwang scandal in South Korea, where thousands of eggs were harvested for corrupt research, including the eggs from laboratory workers. This is unethical. It is also a reaction in part to the deaths of two women as they were having eggs harvested for the IVF program.

Scientific research into matters relating to fertility, cloning, and yes even something like Mifepristone, needs to be paused and the bioethics committees need to take stock about where all of this is heading.

So yes, it is time to tell researchers: "hands off our ovaries."

News of the Day #261 - Mechanism of abortion pill toxicity explained

News of the Day #261 - Mechanism of abortion pill toxicity explained

The use of Mifepristone and Misoprostone, that is RU486 can lead to toxic shock syndrome. It is important to understand that Mifepristone was originally developed to treat Cushing's syndrome. However, once it was discovered to be useful as an abortifacient, the French scientists who developed the drug worked on making it available to women as a form of abortion. It must be remembered that the drug was placed on the market in Europe after an inadequate period of testing.

Mifepristone, when taken as an abortifacient increases the risk of post pregnancy toxic shock. This presents as an allergic reaction to the drug.

Patient perception seems to be that the alternative of using Mifepristone and Misoprostone is safe and effective. However, the manufacturer of Misoprostone warns against using the product as an abortifacient. Why does Planned Parenthood, as well as a variety of abortion clinics persist in presenting this perception to their clients? Why do feminists continue to bury their heads in the sand when it comes to the safety of RU486? Do these women want their daughters to use this form of abortion and risk dying?

It must be noted again that there have been 637 reports of adverse events. Of these events, 237 have been for heavy bleeding - 168 were serious, 42 life threatening, and one fatal.

Advisory issued by FDA on RU486

The FDA have issued an advisory against RU486 in July 2005.

On July 19, 2005, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a public health advisory regarding the deaths of four women in the United States after medical abortions with Mifeprex® (mifepristone, formerly RU-486; Danco Laboratories, New York, New York) and intravaginal misoprostol (1). Two of these deaths occurred in 2003, one in 2004, and one in 2005. Two of these U.S. cases had clinical illness consistent with toxic shock and had evidence of endometrial infection with Clostridium sordellii, a gram-positive, toxin-forming anaerobic bacteria. In addition, a fatal case of C. sordellii toxic shock syndrome after medical abortion with mifepristone and misoprostol was reported in 2001, in Canada (2). All three cases of C. sordellii infection were notable for lack of fever, and all had refractory hypotension, multiple effusions, hemoconcentration, and a profound leukocytosis. C. sordellii previously has been described as a cause of pregnancy-associated toxic shock syndrome (3).