Is She Serious??????

The author of the below article about what is going on in Iowa with Planned Parenthood & "telemed abortions" asks "Why can't they just take it on their own?" Yes, she wants to know why does a woman even need to see a doctor at all? & of course she repeats the old cannard (out & out lie) about back alley abortions & coat hangers. Does she have any idea of why the regulations are there for RU-486??? If she does, then she clearly doesn't give a damn for the women she claims she cares about.

1st of all, the exam is required not to make it more difficult, but to ensure the woman is pregnant & how far along she is. 2ndly, the woman needs to receive counselling before taking the drug. A common practice that I know from personal experience for various prescriptions I have had over the years. But here she wants to throw that out. But then remember, abortion promoters oppose even basic info that would be common with other surgical proceedures, so this shouldn't be surprizing.

I checked several pro-abort sites that promote RU-486. They ignore the deaths & downplay the side effects. There was no mention of the fact that 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® due to Toxic Shock Syndrome.

Then there is this fact about Misoprostol (brand name Cytotec), the prostaglandin used with RU-486 in the U.S. used a few days later that is also ignored. G.D. Searle (now part of the Pfizer), recommends that Cytotec not be used for abortion: "Searle regards the administration of misoprostol, either alone or in combination with other drugs to interfere with the course of pregnancy, as misuse of the product. ... We strongly condemn misuse of the product."

On 23 August 2000 Searle issued a letter to all Health Care Practitioners entitled "Important Drug Warning Concerning Unapproved Use of Intravaginal or Oral Misoprostol in Pregnant Women for ... Abortion." It states in part: "Serious adverse events reported following off-label use of Cytotec in pregnant women include maternal and fetal death; uterine hyperstimulation, rupture or perforation requiring uterine surgical repair, hysterectomy [removal of uterus] or salpingo-oophorectomy [removal of ovaries and Fallopian tubes]; amniotic fluid embolism; severe vaginal bleeding, retained placenta, shock, fetal bradycardia and pelvic pain."

Then there is this "black box" warnings on Cytotec's label that states in part: "UTERINE PERFORATION HAS BEEN REPORTED FOLLOWING ADMINISTRATION OF COMBINED VAGINAL-AND-ORAL CYTOTEC IN PREGNANT WOMEN TO INDUCE ABORTION. IN EACH OF THESE REPORTED CASES, THE GESTATIONAL AGE OF THE PREGNANCIES WAS UNKNOWN."

I am posting this article simple to show you what someone who has elevated the idea of abortion as the ultimate sacrament for radical feminism will do. Her bit about the having to have a doctor watch as you take a penicillin would be funny if it weren't for the fact that, as I pointed out above, RU-486 is much more dangerous. & does she realize why penicillin is a prescription drug as well??? Is she condoming making penicillin an over the counter drug???

Like I said, this is a prime example of throwing out all logic & reality in order to perpertuate the radical feminist sacrament of abortion, the sacrificing of unborn children at the altar of the "culture of death".

Iowa's anti-abortion concern trolls
Iowa women can now take an abortion pill while teleconferencing with a doctor online. Why can't they just take it on their own?

Jennifer Abel

The internet is in many ways superior to real life. Consider the matter of concern trolls: online, if they do too much damage to a comment board's ambience, moderators can step in and stop their shenanigans. But in real life the opposite holds true: the moderators in government are terrified of alienating the concern-troll voting bloc, so the mods codify bad-faith trollery into law and call it "compromise".
One example of this is unfolding in Iowa, where women in rural areas are taking advantage of a new innovation in telemedicine: out in the boondocks where abortion providers are unwilling or unable to travel, a woman requiring their services need no longer make long, costly trips to the city. Instead, she can take mifepristone (formerly know as RU-486 or the abortion pill), while videoconferencing with a doctor over the internet.
Why can't she just take the pill on her own? Because that's illegal in Iowa; the law requires a licensed physician be present. This patronising law, ostensibly for women's own good, was of course intended to inflict additional difficulty and expense on women who seek abortions. (And remember the "abortion compromise" in the Obamacare health bill: however many medically unnecessary but legally mandated hoops a woman must jump through to get an abortion, her insurance company can't pay for any of it if they accept federal money.)
The New York Times reports that anti-abortion advocates claim to oppose the Iowa teleconferencing programme because they fear for the safety of women who take the abortion pill without a doctor present. You know, just in case something goes wrong.Aww. What heartwarming and thoughtful concern for women's safety, from people nostalgic for the days when abortions could only be had via coat hangers in back alleys. At least Troy Newman of the anti-abortion group Operation Rescue deserves credit for honesty when he explains his opposition: no concern-trolling over women's health risks, but the straightforward desire to make doctors' jobs as difficult and time-consuming as possible. "Think about it," Newman said. "With this scheme, one abortionist sitting in his pyjamas at home could literally do thousands of abortions a week. This is about expanding their abortion base."
Of course, these doctor visits – online or in real life – wouldn't be required in the first place if not for medically unnecessary legal roadblocks set up by anti-abortion concern trolls in the Iowa legislature. Imagine if Christian Scientists enjoyed the same government influence as the anti-choice anti-sex crowd: "Take one penicillin pill with water, every 12 hours for 10 days. Each pill must be swallowed in the presence of a licensed physician – hey! Watching on a webcam doesn't count! Think about it: with this scheme, one GP sitting in his pyjamas at home could prescribe literally thousands of antibiotics a week. This is about expanding their infectious-patient base."
Anti-abortion concern trolls in Iowa deserve the same response as drug warrior concern trolls opposing harm-reduction measures for narcotics: give up the pretence, guys. You're not motivated by concerns for their safety and you're not fooling anyone that you are; you just don't like what they're doing, and want them to suffer as much as possible.

H/T: Dbq Co Right to Life