|
Re: Plan B denied
| quote: | Originally posted by NeoPhono
http://www.cnn.com/2004/HEALTH/05/0...l.ap/index.html
Gotta tell you all, I'm very disappointed with the FDA concerning this matter. I'm pro-life, but I was very much in favor of this becoming more widely available. I contend that the start of human life begins at syngamy, not fertilization (I can get into the biology of that if you wish), and this pill does a great job of stopping that process from happening. I realize that a government supporting anything less that a pronatality policy is counter-intuitive, but this is a reasonable way to reduce the amount of abortions that would have been performed regardless. Hopefully the pharmaceutical company will come back and get this thing approved. I'm not hysterical yet over the inflitration of the government by the religous right, but this is getting on my nerves. |
Troubling right from the start of the article:
| quote: | Proponents immediately accused the Food and Drug Administration of bowing to conservative political pressure -- noting that the agency had overruled its own scientific advisers, who had overwhelmingly called easier access to emergency contraception a safe way to prevent thousands of abortions.
In a letter to Barr Laboratories late Thursday, the FDA said there wasn't evidence that teens younger than 16 could safely use the pills without a doctor's guidance. |
I'm personally getting sick of these federal agencies playing politics like this (Michael Powell and the FCC, Environmental Agency to name a few). These groups should be influenced by no one. I tend to wonder, however, just how much support the pharmaceutical companies had on this matter. I would have thought that they would be making a killing off of this had it passed. So were the pharm. companies advocates of the plan to pass this or not (I honestly don't know)?
Some other parts to note:
| quote: | | "The decision blatantly disregards the overwhelming scientific evidence," said Kirsten Moore of the Reproductive Health Technologies Project. "The Bush administration has denied American women timely access to a safe, proven second chance to prevent pregnancy." |
finally,
| quote: | | The FDA's move will "have a negative impact on the public health," said Dr. Alastair Wood of Vanderbilt University, one of the FDA advisers who voted 23-4 in December to back the nonprescription switch. |
23-4? I'd say the scientific advisors are once again getting the shaft. Why the hell do we have scientific advisors on any federal agencies if no one will fucking listen to them? This is becoming absurd.
This part probably pisses me off the most:
| quote: | But conservatives who had intensely lobbied FDA that nonprescription emergency contraception would encourage teen sex lauded the decision.
"The FDA is siding with our nation's teens and their health," said Rep. Dave Weldon, R-Fla, who is a doctor.
"The FDA is right to be cautious about having a potent drug that can harm women next to candy bars and toothpaste," added Wendy Wright of Concerned Women for America, an anti-abortion group. |
Unless I'm mistaken, there is absolutely no scientific evidence to support the assertion that contraception of any sort increases teen sex. What is known, however, is that teen pregnancies increases (as does STDs) without safe sex policies (i.e. abstinence only education). So I guess it's okay to have more babies and STDs, but it's not okay to know how to avoid them via safe sex?
This type of backwards logic of fundamentalism really makes me cringe, esp. when it has so much power in our gov't.
I suppose this is a ray of hope:
| quote: | | But Thursday, FDA officials left open the door for Barr to try again, telling the company what information they would need to reconsider: either data showing young teens could use the pills safely without a prescription, or details on how to make the mixed-marketing approach work. |
I really don't want to argue about abortion being right or wrong. I really try to sit on the fence on this particular issue, because I both agree and disagree with both sides. But what troubles me the most about this particular article and FDA issue is the continual hand-waving of scientific advice to these federal panels. This shit has gotta stop.
Edit: I do want to add that if we carry the fundamentalist argument on abortion to it's logical end, then we should therefore ban ALL contraceptive devices of any sort, including oral birth control, condoms, diaphrams (sp?), etc. I know there is a minority of fundies that actually carry this argument logically to its end, but the vast majority of religious folks tend not to want to go that far.
Why? Logically, one must do so.
Okay, I lied, I am entering the abortion debate. Sorry.
___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...
|
