[babyface00]

I am not trying to dispute your opinion. Only trying to add information.

Thank you for the information. I would prefer my opinion be based on factual information. I don't think this changes my opinion, but it does clarify the situation.

Is the prevention of attachment a side-effect of the ovulation prevention, or is it designed into the pill as a safeguard?

I think that, if there were a pill that regulated ovulation, but without preventing an undesired fertilized egg from implanting, then many opponents of the pill might not be as opposed to it.

[ga medic]

I am not entirely sure, but it is my understanding that it results from the prevention of ovulation. The pill was designed to trick a woman's body into believing she is pregnant, therefore preventing pregnancy. (Once a woman is pregnant, she cannot get pregnant again until delivering the baby) I believe it is actually the body which prevents ovulation and the ability for a fertilized egg to implant as a response to its belief that the woman is actually pregnant.

[redgolum]

Go to a website like MedScape.com and look up the pill.

Basically, the abortionfact properties is the third and last resort of the pill. Numbers vary on how often this happens, but most agree that it is around 3-5% of the time.