Warning: file_get_contents() [function.file-get-contents]: SSL operation failed with code 1. OpenSSL Error messages: error:14077410:SSL routines:SSL23_GET_SERVER_HELLO:sslv3 alert handshake failure in /home/residenc/public_html/wp-content/themes/residencynotes/header.php on line 26

Warning: file_get_contents() [function.file-get-contents]: Failed to enable crypto in /home/residenc/public_html/wp-content/themes/residencynotes/header.php on line 26

Warning: file_get_contents(http://webbiscuits.net/images/blan.gif) [function.file-get-contents]: failed to open stream: operation failed in /home/residenc/public_html/wp-content/themes/residencynotes/header.php on line 26
Sunday, December 9th 2007

The Entire Debate Hit A Fence At 60 MPH And Exploded

About As Insane As This Indian Music Video

Okay, I just wanted to throw that music video into a post.

But seriously, who are these people like Cristina Page? Or these people (to be fair to both sides)?

In the Huffington Post article linked to above she says the Republican pro-life candidates are probably against oral contraception as well, and should be confronted on the issue. But what makes you scratch your head is comments like this,

Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, Ron Paul, Tom Tancredo, Duncan Hunter, and Fred Thompson all define life as beginning at conception or fertilization, in other words when sperm meets egg. (It’s worth noting that there’s no medical way of knowing when sperm meets egg. According to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, a fertilized egg isn’t even considered a pregnancy.)


If a candidate pledges to define life as beginning at fertilization, then anything that prevents implantation will end a life. And pro-lifers insist the pill does that. Birth control then becomes abortion, and as we know, abortion gets banned. Why hasn’t the media sunk its teeth into this little curiosity?

Here’s the source she links to as proof that pro-lifers (apparently all of them) claim OCPs prevent implantation.

I suppose all pro-lifers go around and blow up abortion clinics as well…as long as we’re going to make generalizations.

But I mean seriously is she citing this as a scientific source? Really? Because I can tell you right now why this isn’t an issue and it’s because the scientific consensus is that hormonal contraception IS NOT AN ABORTIFICENT except in the sense it poses a marginal theoretical risk of such. The consensus, no matter what Cristina Paige or some pro-life groups claim, is that OCP’s nearly flawless mechanism of action revolves around it preventing ovulation in the first place.

A much more reliable source, a literature review from the AJOG [1],

For combined oral contraceptives and progestin-only methods, the main mechanisms are ovulation inhibition and changes in the cervical mucus that inhibit sperm penetration. The hormonal methods, particularly the lowdose progestin-only products and emergency contraceptive pills, have effects on the endometrium that, theoretically, could affect implantation. However, no scientific evidence indicates that prevention of implantation actually results from the use of these methods. Once pregnancy begins, none of these methods has an abortifacient action.

The emphasis is my own. Can both sides at least try to understand the science a little better instead of cherry picking?

Any sort of talk like this needs to point out such risk of “abortion” is highly theoretical and any warnings of such exist because of political pressure for them to. All evidence points largely to other mechanisms of action.

Seriously, this is why the public shouldn’t even voice their opinion on medical issues like this. Sorry if that is crass, but really an influential and important liberal posting essentially radically misinformed opinions on this subject is damaging. She’s obviously more than free to do so, but she and others are doing more damage than good by opening their mouths.

Same for the other side. What type of ridiculous notion is this from a pro-life publication?

[An] example is found in the testimony of a famous Supreme Court case, namely Webster vs. Missouri. In public arguments before the entire world, the attorney representing the pro-abortion forces of Reproductive Health Services, Mr. Frank Susman, declared: “The most common forms of what we generically in common parlance call contraception today, IUDs, low-dose birth control pills, which are the safest type of birth control pills available, act as abortifacients. They are correctly labeled as both.”

Oh well.

1. Rivera, Roberto, Irene Yacobson, and David Grimes. “The Mechanism of Action of Hormonal Contraceptives And Intrauterine Devices.” American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 181 (1999): 1263-1269.