{"id":255017,"date":"2021-10-17T13:47:41","date_gmt":"2021-10-17T18:47:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.liveaction.org\/news\/?p=255017"},"modified":"2021-10-16T14:40:23","modified_gmt":"2021-10-16T19:40:23","slug":"bad-science-question-study-abortion-safer-childbirth","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/bad-science-question-study-abortion-safer-childbirth\/","title":{"rendered":"‘Bad science’: Why you should question the lone study claiming abortion is 14x safer than childbirth"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

A wealth of media outlets have cited a 2012 pro-abortion study<\/a> which claims that abortion is\u00a0up to 14 times safer<\/em> than childbirth. Yet, as Dr. John Ferrer pointed out in his article<\/a> for the Equal Rights Institute, no other study has ever been able to confirm this finding, and the 2012 study is highly unreliable.<\/p>\n

The study in question, authored by two pro-abortion researchers, is called “The comparative safety of legal induced abortion and childbirth in the United States.” And though it’s been heavily quoted by the media, it’s also heavily flawed.<\/p>\n

“It’s a pretty radical claim to say that abortion is 14 times safer than childbirth,” Ferrer said. “It’s so radical, there’s only one source that claims they can prove it. It’s a journal article from abortion-choice researchers Elizabeth Raymond and David Grimes (hereafter, ‘RG study’).” Ferrer notes that Grimes is “one of the biggest names in the pro-choice lobby.”<\/p>\n

He explained, “There is a reason, however, why no other study claims to demonstrate … this ’14 times safer’ claim. “They can’t reproduce the results, so no other study has been able to corroborate that enormous claim. The RG study might be the most famous, and most widely cited paper on the subject, but despite its popularity, it’s pretty much useless.”<\/p>\n

Incomparable Data on Abortion vs. Childbirth<\/strong><\/p>\n

According to Ferrer, the RG study relies on abortion numbers from the Center for Disease Control (CDC) and the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute, but those numbers do not include statistics from Maryland, Washington D.C., or New Hampshire. They also lack information from two of the areas with high abortion numbers and nearly no pro-life laws: California and New York City. None of these locations have reported abortion statistics to the CDC in years, but they do report all childbirths and related maternal deaths. The reporting of childbirths and related deaths is mandatory, but the reporting of abortions and abortion-related deaths is not. In addition, not all states that do<\/em> report their statistics require abortion facilities to report all of their information. There is no federal law requiring the reporting of abortions or abortion complications.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

“The two data sets RG compares differ dramatically; one covers everything meticulously, and the other is filled only at the whim of individual organizations,” said Ferrer. “There is no meaningful or valid comparison of the two that can be made.”<\/p>\n

READ: OB\/GYN Dr. Brent Boles debunks the idea that \u2018abortion is safer than childbirth\u2019<\/a><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

But the problem doesn’t stop there. Not only are abortion-related deaths not required to be reported, but if<\/em> they are reported, they can be reported as maternal deaths related to pregnancy and childbirth<\/em>. The example Ferrer gives is a woman who dies from hemorrhaging after taking the abortion pill. Her abortion may be recorded as a miscarriage and her death listed as childbirth complications, skewing the data.<\/p>\n

In addition, while the RG study included births that did not take place in a legal clinical setting (such as home births), it excluded non-clinical abortions. At-home births using hypnosis or acupuncture increase the risks associated with childbirth. And at-home abortions, which are becoming more common with the abortion pill regimen, as well as criminal misconduct abortions, increase the associated risks.<\/p>\n

Furthermore, Ferrer explained that it was “irresponsible” of researchers to avoid acknowledging the existence of both inherent and chosen risk. Some mothers will risk personal injury to ensure their baby is born healthy and safe, such as women with cancer. That would increase her risk of death. He further noted that some complications during pregnancy could also be linked to previous abortions. Past abortions increase the risks of complications and death in future childbirth, and also put women at higher risk of ectopic pregnancies, which can be deadly for the woman. According to the American Pregnancy Association<\/a>, women who have undergone “several induced abortions” are at increased risk for ectopic pregnancy in the future.<\/p>\n