Therefore an anti-hCG drug wouldn't necessarily have any health effect on the mother directly, it would mainly cause her to develop antibodies which would attack the embryo, which is to say, she would have an immune reaction that counteracts the embryo's hCG and therefore disrupts implantation.
Am I right?
And β-hCG is used in the Philippines, Nicaragua and Mexico as a birth control method, am I right?
Now tell me: is there any way to get an effective tetanus shot without the shot being laced with β-hCG? Or is it right that the price of tetanus vaccination would be abortifacient immunity to all your subsequent offspring?
I don't want to misunderstand you with any false assumption, but you seem to write as if early abortions by hormonal disruption are not morally problematic.
From a public health point of view, it would be much better --- would it not? --- to use a Tetanus shot which has no abortifacient side-effects, and a birth control method which is fully reversible, under the control of individual women themselves, without side effects, and not pushed on them by the "motivating" or coercive power of the State?
I have another question:
Have tetanus shots always contained beta hcg, or is this a ‘new’ thing?
When did it become a ‘new’ thing and why...?
Knowing that the shots may cause infertility would cause me to avoid them for my young daughters, is this the effect that public health officials want?