A new analysis of abortion pill data, the largest known of its kind, released by the Ethics and Public Policy Center, reveals that the abortion drug mifepristone may be causing serious adverse events at a rate 22 times higher than the Food and Drug Administration’s official claim. Specifically, the study found that more than 10 percent of women who take mifepristone suffer hemorrhaging, infection, sepsis, and more — while the FDA’s mifepristone drug label claims that serious adverse events occur in “less than 0.5 percent” of instances.
The latest data on the dangers of the abortion pill doesn’t just expose a national health crisis that must be addressed by lawmakers and the policymakers at the FDA, which under the Biden administration eliminated the requirement that mifepristone be dispensed in person. It also underscores the necessity of vigorously defending the life-saving option of Abortion Pill Reversal, or APR, for women who regret their decision, mid-chemical abortion. //
APR is a protocol that floods the body with the natural pregnancy-sustaining hormone, progesterone — offering a lifeline to women in a literal life-or-death moment. When the protocol is begun within 72 hours of first taking mifepristone, APR has a 64-68 percent success rate, without any safety risks, according to peer-reviewed studies recognized by the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
The success of APR is consistent with natural progesterone’s long history of use as a safe and effective treatment for sustaining pregnancies. Indeed, APR has saved the lives of approximately 6,000 babies according to Heartbeat International, the global pregnancy center network that operates the Abortion Pill Rescue© Network. //
Pro-abortion attorneys general contend that peer-reviewed studies confirming APR’s validity are “discredited” because they rely on “case studies” rather than “clinical trials.” But randomly assigning a placebo to a mom who wants to save her baby is obviously unethical. And even the prestigious Journal of the American Medical Association recognizes that use of such case series is preferable when clinical randomization would be unethical.
