{"id":288996,"date":"2023-04-13T10:37:57","date_gmt":"2023-04-13T15:37:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.liveaction.org\/news\/?p=288996"},"modified":"2023-04-13T11:42:50","modified_gmt":"2023-04-13T16:42:50","slug":"mainstream-media-dangers-abortion-drugs","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/mainstream-media-dangers-abortion-drugs\/","title":{"rendered":"Mainstream media understate dangers of chemical abortion drugs"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

(National Review<\/a>)\u00a0On Friday, U.S. District Court Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk ruled to revoke FDA approval of mifepristone, one of the pills used for chemical abortions. The ruling has not taken effect yet and will certainly be subject to legal appeals. Both the lawsuit and Judge Kacsmaryk\u2019s ruling have received a great deal of media attention.<\/p>\n

In their coverage of the lawsuit, many media outlets have argued that chemical abortions are safe and that the science on the issue is largely settled. However, a closer look at FDA policy changes and recent research tells a different story.<\/p>\n

Indeed, on April 1, the New York Times<\/em> published a thorough analysis<\/a> of the research on chemical-abortion drugs. They conclude that a vast majority of the academic studies show that chemical abortion drugs do not pose a significant health risk to women. However, much of the research on the Times<\/em> article is not relevant to current risks of chemical abortions obtained in the United States. That is because, on multiple occasions, the FDA has instituted policy changes that likely increased the health risks involved with the chemical-abortion-pill regimen.<\/p>\n