{"id":251735,"date":"2021-08-27T12:40:56","date_gmt":"2021-08-27T17:40:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.liveaction.org\/news\/?p=251735"},"modified":"2021-08-25T22:51:52","modified_gmt":"2021-08-26T03:51:52","slug":"abortion-industry-pill-insider-connections-scientific-american","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/abortion-industry-pill-insider-connections-scientific-american\/","title":{"rendered":"Researcher tied to abortion industry promotes abortion pill in Scientific American"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

A researcher\u00a0with deep connections to the abortion industry recently\u00a0published<\/a>\u00a0an opinion piece in Scientific American, where she made an unchallenged and false claim that\u00a0the “science is clear” on the safety of the abortion pill. The piece, however, failed to cite the thousands of adverse events associated with the abortion pill which have been reported to the\u00a0Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as well as other known complications\u00a0\u2014 and there’s probably a reason for this: its author is deeply embedded within the abortion industry.<\/p>\n

Author\u00a0Kelly Cleland is listed by the publication as a researcher with the\u00a0Expanding Medication Abortion Access Project (EMAA)<\/a>.\u00a0The EMAA\u00a0website reveals<\/a> the organization “seeks to improve the way the medications prescribed for medication abortion care are dispensed in the United States….”\u00a0While Cleland’s piece is listed as an opinion piece not necessarily endorsed by Scientific American, Cleland’s other pro-abortion ties were not listed in her bio.<\/p>\n

Claiming abortion pill is safe<\/strong><\/p>\n

In 2017, Cleland told<\/a> the media,\u00a0“We’d like to see Mifeprex [the abortion pill] be available in pharmacies like other drugs.” Her wish may soon come true if the\u00a0FDA lifts the important Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy<\/a>\u00a0(REMS)\u00a0safety measures on the abortion pill.\u00a0Without the REMS, women or teens may obtain the abortion pill\u00a0without<\/em>\u00a0the longtime required in-person visit to an approved prescriber.<\/p>\n

In her opinion piece, Cleland claimed that “actions from the FDA\u00a0and new research<\/strong> show us that removing the restrictions on medication abortion care has the potential to expand access for many people who need care.” (emphasis added)<\/p>\n

What exactly is<\/em> that research?<\/p>\n

It is a series of reports and studies published by the pro-abortion journal Contraception<\/a>, where Cleland serves as editor and author.\u00a0It\u00a0is the\u00a0official journal<\/a>\u00a0of the Association of Reproductive Health Professionals (AHRP) and the Society of Family Planning (SFP). ARHP was originally founded as The American Association of Planned Parenthood Physicians in 1963 by Planned Parenthood president\u00a0Alan Guttmacher,<\/a>\u00a0and has gone through\u00a0multiple name changes<\/a>. It was funded<\/a> “largely by Planned Parenthood, with some small grants from [unnamed] pharmaceutical companies.”<\/span><\/p>\n

“The July 2021 special issue of the journal\u00a0Contraception<\/a>\u00a0focuses on the restrictions on medication abortion, mifepristone, including its impacts on safety and efficacy, access to abortion, and burdens on patients and providers,” Cleland wrote in Scientific American (SA)\u00a0\u2014 referring to a piece she<\/em>\u00a0co-authored and edited<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Additional authors of that research are also deeply connected to abortion:<\/p>\n