Exploring Mifepristone Controversies: The Impact of Abortion Pill Reversal

Share this article on social media or print it using the following links:

Facebook: FacebookShare
Twitter: TwitterShare
Print: Print

Referenced in this article is a National Right to Life News story about the debate over mifepristone, the controversial abortion pill. The new heads of HHS and the FDA have promised to review its safety, which is significant, given that over 60% of abortions are currently performed using this pill.

The Abortion Pill Rescue Network (APRN) currently reports a total of 7,000 lives saved.

Christa Brown, a registered nurse and director of Medical Impact for Heartbeat International, has defended APRN against accusations of spreading medical misinformation. For example, pro-abortion representative, Jerrold Nadler, voiced his concern that Facebook permits APR ads but disallows ads for chemical abortions. Despite this, Google has banned all advertising of APR. Heartbeat International, the managers of APRN, attempted to appeal this decision, unsuccessfully.

According to Brown, there are over 3,000 babies alive today due to their mothers using the APR protocol. The process involves a dose of progesterone to counter the effect of mifepristone, followed by not taking the second drug (misoprostol) typically involved in a chemical abortion. Brown cited several studies supporting the safety and efficacy of progesterone in reversing chemical abortions. Chemical-abortion drugs sales continue online, despite their many risks, while APR is being suppressed.

It’s worth noting that all sources used by Nadler to support his view against APR are pro-abortion. Brown finishes her arguments by questioning what happened to “choice”, pointing out that at least 3,000 women have expressed regret after beginning a chemical abortion and made a different choice, thanks to APR.