TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- morning after pill gets over-counter recommendation
morning after pill gets over-counter recommendation
http://edition.cnn.com/2003/HEALTH/...pill/index.html
what do you guys think about it? good thing or bad?
Re: morning after pill gets over-counter recommendation
| quote: |
| Originally posted by King_Mack http://edition.cnn.com/2003/HEALTH/...pill/index.html what do you guys think about it? good thing or bad? |
It's a good thing, people are going to have sex no matter what they're told...at least now if it's unprotected and people are worried about pregnency, they can get the morning after pill without worry their parents will find out and shit. I think all would agree that taking the morning after pill beats out abortion or having to give a child up for adoption.
do you think though, that people will go about saying 'well if the pills are available over the counter, i dont need to wear a condem.' cause thats exactly what im thinking peoples logic is going to be. i think there is a lot more behind this.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by TrAnCe CoNtRoL do you think though, that people will go about saying 'well if the pills are available over the counter, i dont need to wear a condem.' cause thats exactly what im thinking peoples logic is going to be. i think there is a lot more behind this. |
Well birth controll pills via perscription wern't very uncommon in the first place, and emergency morning-after's wernt incredibly difficult to get if you needed one. So I dont think it would promote less condom use. It would just help the morons who would have needed them anyways.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by TrAnCe CoNtRoL do you think though, that people will go about saying 'well if the pills are available over the counter, i dont need to wear a condem.' cause thats exactly what im thinking peoples logic is going to be. i think there is a lot more behind this. |
I dont think people will stop using condoms because of this. Pills have loads of disadvantages, like not stopping infections
| quote: |
| Originally posted by daffodil i highly doubt it. it's not as reliable as a condom, plus it's a pretty unpleasant experience for most women. first off, it's far more expensive than condoms, and it's physically unpleasant. the morning after pill works as a huge hormone flux which makes most women pretty sick, or at the very least feel as if they are having the worst PMS of their life. most men don't consider this, but PMS is miserable for women, not just y'all. i think if anyone considers using it as a birth control method, they will cease after the first time. |
My thread in the debate forum didn't go anywhere (I guess everyone agreed with me). Here are my thoughts:
http://rutlandherald.nybor.com/News/Story/76116.html]
| quote: |
Plan B pill may be OK'd December 16, 2003 By GINA KOLATA The New York Times GAITHERSBURG, Md. - In a 23-4 vote, two expert advisory committees to the Food and Drug Administration recommended Tuesday that a so-called morning-after pill to prevent unintended pregnancies be sold over the counter. The FDA usually follows the advice of its committees, though the final decision rests with its commissioner, Dr. Mark McClellan. But the overwhelming vote by the agency's outside advisers led both proponents and opponents of the move to expect that McClellan would go along with the committees, making his decision within weeks to months. The drug is an emergency contraceptive known as Plan B, when Plan A (regular contraception) either fails or is skipped. Consisting of two high-dose birth control pills, Plan B is meant to be used within 72 hours after unprotected sexual intercourse. If approved, its widespread availability could have an effect second only to the advent of the birth control pill, advocates say. The proponents, including groups like Planned Parenthood, argued to the panel that Plan B was safe and could prevent many unintended pregnancies. But opponents, including some religious groups, told panel members that over-the-counter sales could encourage irresponsible sexual behavior. They also worry that women may not understand how this type of pill works. While it usually acts by preventing ovulation, it also may prevent a fertilized egg from implanting. Those who believe that pregnancy begins with fertilization say that the pills, then, can induce abortions. The company that will market Plan B, Barr Laboratories, says it will provide detailed information to women on what the pills do and on how to use them. It wants to sell the drug only in stores with pharmacies, but adds that it plans to advertise widely to women and doctors, letting them know the drug is easily available. The prescription now sells for $25 to $35, the company said, adding that it had not decided what to charge for over-the-counter sales. If the FDA agrees, proponents and opponents say, they expect enormous medical and social consequences. Dr. James Trussell, an advisory committee member from Princeton, who enthusiastically voted for the approval, said he had waited for years for this day to arrive. "It's hard to believe it actually happened," he said. Making Plan B over the counter, he added, "sends a signal to women that it is safe." But Dr. W. David Hager of the University of Kentucky, one of four committee members to vote against the approval, worried about the implications for sexual behavior. Like birth control pills that, he said, ushered in "a new day and age for the expression of sexuality among young people," making Plan B available over the counter will have a similar effect. "What we heard today was frequently about individuals who did not want to take responsibility for their actions and wanted a medication to relieve those consequences," Hager said. He said he worried in particular about giving license to adolescents who could just buy the drug on their own. While Plan B and a similar drug, Preven made by Gynetics, were, in theory, available to women by prescription, medical experts say that the drugs were woefully underused , even in five states that passed laws to make them easier to obtain. Those states - Washington, California, Alaska, New Mexico and Hawaii - allow pharmacists to provide emergency contraceptives to women without a prescription. Dr. Carole Ben-Maimon, the president of Barr Laboratories, which is buying Plan B from Women's Capital, explained the problem. "California had a huge media campaign," she said, with ads to consumers and health care professionals. Yet, she added, only 14 percent of pharmacies and pharmacists provide the drugs without a prescription. "In a state as large as California, finding emergency contraception without a prescription is still an enormous challenge," Ben-Maimon said. Another obstacle for women is that they are required to talk to the pharmacists, who decide whether emergency contraception is indicated. "In my pharmacy, there aren't any areas where I can hold a private conversation with my pharmacist," Ben-Maimon said. At the meeting Tuesday, two FDA committees, the Nonprescription Drugs Advisory Committee and the Advisory Committee for Reproductive Health Drugs, heard evidence from FDA staff, the company marketing the drug and the public. The panels consist of experts in a variety of fields, including obstetrics and gynecology, pharmacology, pediatrics, internal medicine and reproductive endocrinology. They also represent a spectrum of views on birth control, from Dr. Joseph B. Stanford, who says he does not prescribe birth control pills, to Trussell, a vocal advocate of all forms of contraception. The company provided data from studies that surveyed women ages 12 to 50 in shopping malls, showed them the label, and assessed their comprehension. It also provided a study of more than 500 women in family planning centers who took the drug, asking whether they followed instructions. Both types of studies, the company argued, indicate that women can understand the label and take the drug as intended. Extensive studies with contraceptives also indicate that Plan B is safe, the company said. Side effects, like nausea and vomiting, were limited and minor, it reported, adding that it knew of no deaths. Then it was the public's turn to speak. Each speaker was allotted two minutes before the panel. "Women deserve access at any time, at any age, for any reason," said a young woman from the Gainesville, Fla., area chapter of the National Organization for Women. "I braved football game traffic to go to the campus infirmary." It was closed. "I had no idea where I could get it," and so, she said, she just hoped for the best. Opponents said the data did not convince them that the drug was safe enough to be so freely available. "Women could theoretically start using Plan B as a form of birth control," said Dr. Chris Kahlenborn, an internist in Altoona, Pa. "In Jamaica, pharmacists are ringing alarms: some women are using it twice a month, some as often as five times a month." He and others are also concerned that women who believe that pregnancy begins with fertilization may not appreciate that they can be preventing a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus. Judy Brown, president of the American Life League, said, "the pill acts to prevent a pregnancy by aborting a child." And so, she added, while Plan B may be called emergency contraception "the emergency in this case is a baby." Committee members urged that the drug's actions be described so that women understood that a fertilized egg might be disrupted.. Others argued that pregnancy was a far worse alternative, for teenagers. "It is the rare adolescent that ever comes to see me before she has sex the first time," said Dr. Abby Berenson, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston. "Usually that's because she hadn't planned to have it in the first place. It just happens, usually on a Saturday night when I'm not available." |
| quote: |
| Rates of Teenage Childbearing in the U.S. Are the Highest in the Developed World. The U.S. teenage birth rate is the highest in the developed world: twice as high as England�s, three times as high as Australia�s, four times as high as Germany�s, six times as high as France�s, eight times as high as the Netherlands�, and 15 times as high as Japan�s (Annie E. Casey Foundation, 1998; Berne & Huberman, 1999). Reasons for the lower rates of teenage childbearing in these countries include mandatory, medically accurate sexuality education programs that provide comprehensive information and encourage teens to make responsible choices easy access to contraception and other forms of reproductive health care, including abortion social acceptance of adolescent sexual expression as normal and healthy straightforward public health media campaigns government support for the right of teens to accurate information and confidential services (Berne & Huberman, 1999) |
| quote: |
| Thirteen percent of all U.S. births are to teens (AGI, 1998). Preliminary findings show that in 1998, 484,975 women aged 15�19 gave birth, a rate of 51.1 live births per 1,000 women in this age group. This figure marks a two percent decrease from the 1997 rate and an 18 percent decrease from the 1991 rate. Moreover, the 1998 rate is close to the 1986 record low of 50.2 (Ventura et al., 1999). The preliminary teenage birth rate in 1998 was one birth per 1,000 women aged 10�14, 51.1 births per 1,000 women aged 15�19, 30.4 births per 1,000 women aged 15�17, and 82.0 births per 1,000 women aged 18�19 , That year, the teenage birth rate was 93.7 per 1,000 for Hispanics, 85.3 per 1,000 for blacks, and 45.4 per 1,000 for whites (Ventura et al., 1999) Seventy-six percent of teens giving birth in 1996 were unmarried. Sixty-nine percent of births to white teens, 96 percent of births to blacks teens, and 68 percent of births to Hispanic teens occur out-of-wedlock (Annie E. Casey Foundation, 1998). However, teens now account for only 30 percent of all births outside of marriage, a decline from 50 percent in 1970 (AGI, 1998). |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by tranceDJ I think thats the only concern but hopefully this won't happen because I'm guessing there's still a risk in pregnency with the morning after pill plus it makes you really sick I think. |
I dont think it will lessen the use of condoms, its not as if it is being advertised as the 'brand new best way to avoid pregnancies, you dont even have to remember a condom when your that wasted'
But as said above will drastically reduce teen and many other ages of unwanted pregnancies. Especially as a lot of the younger generation are scared to talk to adults when they get in these sorts of troubles, and are therefore less likely to ask for help. I think in this day and age is a very good thing, and if the more accessible it is means the more it will be used, then over the counter it should be.
On that it makes the lady sick, this was not the case when i took it once (and never again i might add) no side effects at all.
I am actually quite torn about the subject. It is a rather strong dosage of medicine, and if abused can lead to indefinate steralization. On the one hand those of us who would not abuse the privilages will benifit from this greatly, the other hand however is those of us who would abuse the rights.
After careful consideration I am most sure that my decision would lean more so towards the negative, I do not believe the M.A.P should be found on a shelf. There isn't a Doctor in the world who would turn down a patient asking for that prescription, it comes down to being pure lazy. Its apparently too much effort to take that extra hour or so out of your day to go to the clinic. There should be no excuse for not going to the Doctor, you were mature enough to make the mistake, and realise it was a mistake, now all you have to do is fix it!
| quote: |
| Originally posted by LAYLA-KEKET I am actually quite torn about the subject. It is a rather strong dosage of medicine, and if abused can lead to indefinate steralization. On the one hand those of us who would not abuse the privilages will benifit from this greatly, the other hand however is those of us who would abuse the rights. After careful consideration I am most sure that my decision would lean more so towards the negative, I do not believe the M.A.P should be found on a shelf. There isn't a Doctor in the world who would turn down a patient asking for that prescription, it comes down to being pure lazy. Its apparently too much effort to take that extra hour or so out of your day to go to the clinic. There should be no excuse for not going to the Doctor, you were mature enough to make the mistake, and realise it was a mistake, now all you have to do is fix it! |
TO DAFF
I do see your point, very well actually, but do you really see mine? Yes, one does have 72 hours to go fix a potential problem... If in three days you can't be bothered to take and hour or so out of your time, then however did you end up in the situation to begin with? And my issue isn't with older working women who know the results of their actions, generally for them its a good idea. I am talking about the younger kids aged 10-20, who tend to make rash decisions they end up regretting later. A 16 year old is going to be more concerned with the issue of having to tell someone she's been having sex, rather than just take responsibility for it. If she had to go to a Doctor they would point out over usage and warn her of said conquences.
I don't think a woman later on should remain childless because of a few mistakes she made when she was a teenager, do you?
| quote: |
PRESIDENT SIGNS "PARTIAL BIRTH" ABORTION BAN, DECLARING "NEVER AGAIN SHALL UPPITY SNATCHES THWART GOD'S WILL TO CREATE SEVERELY DEFORMED FETUSES IN HIS IMAGE!" Statement by the President THE PRESIDENT: Thank you very much. Good afternoon. I'm pleased that all of you could join me as the "Partial Birth" Abortion Act of 2003 becomes the law of the land. I especially want to thank Reverend Falwell for coming. We made it a point to seat you front and center, Jerry � on account of how you just ooze love for all peoples. For too many years now, liberal doctors have been practicing a procedure known as "Intact Dilation and Extraction." Indeed, Attorney General Ashcroft has gathered solid intelligence indicating that this emergency procedure has been performed as many as 2500 times since 1973. Heck, that's almost as many Iraqi and Afghan babies as I've killed since January! (Shouts of "Amen.") That's what I said! So anyways, I want to explain how Intact Dilation and Extraction worked before I renamed it "partial birth abortion" and backed this bill to make it a felony. To do that, I'd like all of you fellas in the audience who made this law a reality to close your eyes and pretend that you're actually a woman. (Raucous Laughter.) I know, I know. Ridiculous. But bear with me for a minute. Got your eyes closed? Good. Now pretend you're all preggers. Not just recently-knocked-up preggers, but like late-term super-preggers. You're fat, and ugly, and your husband's so grossed out by your bloated librarian ass, that he's coming home late from Harken Energy every night after plowing his secretary while doing lines of blow off her tits. (Hoots.) Yeah, we've all been there. So anyway, you're real preggers � like just over six months � and your plan is to become a mommy. Then one day, you go in for your checkup, and they tell you that Jesus has decided to flex his mighty love muscle by afflicting your womb booger with one of his most beautiful congenital deformities � like anencephaly, severe spina bifida, or extreme hydrocephalus. You're told that when you carry it to term, not only will God probably kill that baby himself within mere hours or days, but He might just kill you during delivery, AND will sure as hell put your family in the poor house unless you've got one sweetheart federal insurance package! (Laughter.) Right, like we let anyone have those except us! But anyway, here's where it really gets crazy. Did you know that under such circumstances, there are actually man-hating lezbo liberal baby killers out there who want to take steps to interfere with God Almighty's all-knowing and all-merciful plan to kill and/or bankrupt her by hatching that severely deformed thing-child into the world? They don't seem to understand that the Lord wants that little monster to be born � if for no other reason than to amuse Himself watching it struggling to move its 30-pound watermelon head around! (Cheers.) My sentiments exactly! But what do these tramps go and do? They ask their so-called physicians � blood-thirsty murderers who pretend to know what they're talking about simply because they wasted twelve years studying medicine instead of going AWOL and watching baseball � what options are available to them to take a big steaming dump right on the Lord's face! (Gasps.) And what do those "doctors" tell them? They say that there's one procedure � Intact Dilation & Extraction � which is reserved almost exclusively for fabulously rare circumstances such as this. They say it ain't pretty, and that 99 percent of the time, it involves imploding an deformed, incomplete fetus skull through which brain tissue is already protruding. They say that if they don't get have Intact Dilation & Extraction, they might just die. (Boos.) That's what I said! I mean, can you believe it? These girly-girls are never happy. The damned liberals already went and gave them the right to vote and wear pants, and now they want to be able to live? Unreal! Which is why when Pat Robertson called me up and said that outlawing this bitch-saving abomination was almost as important to him as nuking the State Department, I hopped on board right away! And today, here we are! Intact Dilation & Extraction is about to become ILLEGAL! (Cheers.) Hard to believe it's been just seven months since the Senate passed this ban. Because as I said back in March, this is a huge victory in our tireless incremental plot to completely and permanently ban all forms of abortion. It's all about the baby steps, folks. Before you know it, there won't be a single knocked-up slut in this grand country of ours who will even dream about messing around with her insides once she's got a coochie full of man chutney. I mean, if the good Lord meant women to have any say over their bodies, would he have put those sweet little penis pockets between their legs? Hell no! And if the ladies keep nagging about this, well, we'll take back that rib, too! (Applause.) Furthermore, I swear to all of you that the Executive Branch � which means, like, the Marines, Delta Force, and all the paramilitary domestic death squads at my disposal � will vigorously dispatch any highfalutin judge who thinks it's his job to interpret and make rulings about law. And in just a few decades, the uteruses of this country's shirt-ironing, potroast-basting baby makers will be declared National Parks, subject to strict statutes making it a federal offense for womenfolk to so much as squeeze a bottle of Massengill into themselves without direct permission from yours truly. (Applause.) I want to thank Senator Rick Santorum in particular for sponsoring this bill in the Senate. I know how much he struggled with the moral and philosophical implications of banning this procedure � especially knowing that around 10% of those 2500 almost unimaginably deformed fetuses were also homos in waiting. Fortunately, inasmuch as Rickos was instrumental in derailing Hate Crimes legislation last June, he can take solace knowing that any fag octopus babies saved by the Partial Birth Abortion ban can still be fatally gay-bashed with impunity. (Cheers.) In closing, I want to thank you all for joining me for this historic bill signing. My only regret is that there are only twelve letters in my signature � meaning just twelve golden pens to be auctioned off for $2,000.00 a pop at my next campaign stop. (Applause.) My poppy once said to me: "Abortion is a politically tricky thing, Junior. That's why you must never let anyone know about the illegal one you paid for in Houston back in 1970." That oh-so-Presidential wisdom and spirit is reflected in the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003, which I am now honored to sign into law. God bless. (The bill is signed.) (Applause.) Thank you, all. (Applause.) |
| quote: |
Published on Thursday, December 18, 2003 by the Cleveland Plain Dealer Hard to Swallow Objections to Pill by Connie Schultz Women's sex lives made Page One in newspapers around the country yesterday. Needless to say, this did not bring out the best in conservatives who think we shouldn't even be having sex unless it's for birthin' babies. Two advisory committees for the Food and Drug Administration voted 23 to 4 Tuesday to allow over-the-counter sales of an emergency contraceptive commonly called the "morning-after pill." The drug, a megadose of the synthetic hormone found in birth-control pills, is also called Plan B, so named as a backup after Plan A - regular contraception - fails or is skipped. FDA Commissioner Dr. Mark McClellan will make the final decision, but opponents and supporters expect he'll go along with the recommendation within a matter of weeks. The country's largest gynecologists group, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, says allowing over-the-counter sales could cut in half the 3 million unwanted pregnancies each year. Abortion opponents, who ought to be uncorking champagne bottles at this news, instead argue the morning-after pill is just another form of abortion. The science says otherwise. The pill delays ovulation and prevents fertilization by sperm cells. It has no effect if a woman is pregnant. If she's pregnant before she pops the little white pill, she'll be pregnant long after she swallows. It's easy to see abortion opponents' dilemma: If abortions decrease in number, so will the number of patients available for terrorizing outside clinics in the wee morning hours. Career change is always hard. Perhaps abortion foes finally might shift their focus from other women's bodies and lead the drive to adopt all those babies they insist must be born. Many of the same groups who opposed the birth-control pill told the FDA panel that easier access to the morning-after pill encourages "irresponsible sexual behavior." Translation: Women will have sex just because they like it. Let's not get that rumor started. It's bad enough that Dr. David Grimes of Family Health International hailed the FDA decision as "truly enabling and empowering women." I'm sure he was trying to be helpful, but the last thing we need is someone broadcasting to the far right that sex without fear of pregnancy frees up women to do other things, too, like have careers, wage peace and hold elected office. What was he thinking? Now, there is yet another objection to the morning-after pill. Apparently, there is some confusion over just how smart we are. You'd think the instructions on how to take the morning-after pill are self-evident. It is, after all, called the morning after. We're not talking after fresh-water snorkeling. It's after s-e-x. Opponents, though, including Bush's lamentable FDA appointee, Dr. W. David Hager, worry that we women will be unable to wrap our pretty little heads around the instructions for its use. Hager is the same doctor who refuses to prescribe contraception for his unmarried patients and urges them to pray their way through heinous PMS symptoms. Granted, many women pray during such times of hormonal hell, but their pleas tend toward, "Please, God, don't let me kill 'em." This prayer is gender neutral. In fact, it is not even human specific, because on our worst days we wonder why God lets even trees live. Still, if a doctor says the instructions are unclear, I thought it only fair that I try to decipher them for myself. The kind folks at Planned Parenthood of Greater Cleveland gave me a sample packet. To make it as difficult as possible, I imagined being a sexually active teenager who had abstinence-only sex education. Would I, could I, understand what I was reading? Instruction No. 1: Take the first tablet as soon as possible within 72 hours of unprotected sex. Instruction No. 2: Take the second tablet 12 hours after you take the first tablet. I think we women can handle it. Besides, we're used to being underestimated. C 2003 The Plain Dealer |
its a double-edged sword really, i mean the seriousness of the matter (pregnancy) is kinda dulled by the fact that it can be "fixed" by popping a pill that you can get along with cough medicine at walgreen's...
anyways should it be approved, i think clinics can expect to see a significant increase in stds because unedumacated dumbfacks who don't do anything else but fack , will be led to believing that it also stops stds and before we know it, there will be a real AIDS epidemic at hand. well, i guess population has to be controlled somehow... 
hmm... i think i used this all-goes-to-hell scenario elsewhere...
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.