Posted on 12/25/2002 6:59:00 PM PST by FourPeas
Physician criticized by women's groups named to FDA panel
The Associated Press
12/25/02 7:09 PM
WASHINGTON (AP) -- A physician who has been criticized for his views on birth control was named to a Food and Drug Administration panel on women's health policy.
Dr. W. David Hager, a University of Kentucky obstetrician-gynecologist, was among 11 physicians appointed Tuesday to the FDA's Advisory Committee for Reproductive Health Drugs.
Hager has questioned the safety of the abortion pill, RU-486, and acknowledges he is anti-abortion.
Abortion-rights activists are concerned about Hager's appointment because he participated in a Christian Medical Association campaign this year that attempted to reverse the FDA committee's 1996 recommendation that led to RU-486 being approved.
The National Organization for Women and six other groups that support abortion rights have called Hager's selection a conflict of interest in the name of ideology.
The Planned Parenthood Federation of America issued a statement Tuesday calling the appointment of Hager and other doctors on the panel as a "a frontal assault on reproductive rights that will imperil women's health."
It said Hager and his wife, Linda, have recommended "specific scripture readings and prayers for such ailments as headaches and premenstrual syndrome."
But Hager, a part-time professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University Kentucky College of Medicine, said his beliefs won't compromise his judgment.
"Yes, I'm pro-life," he told The Courier-Journal of Louisville, Ky. "But that's not going to keep me from objectively evaluating medication. I believe there are some safety concerns (about RU-486) and they should be evaluated."
Hager also has condemned the birth-control pill, used by an estimated 10 million American women, saying it has provided a convenient way for young people to be sexually active outside of marriage.
But Hager said he does not deny birth-control prescriptions to unmarried women.
The advisory committee has not met for two years, and its entire membership had lapsed. Its job is to review and evaluate data -- and make recommendations -- on the safety and effectiveness of marketed and experimental drugs for use in obstetrics, gynecology and related specialties.
It will be chaired by Dr. Linda C. Giudice, the chief of reproductive endocrinology and infertility for the Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics at the Stanford University Medical Center.
FDA Commissioner Mark McClellan said the panel "will provide sound, science-based advice on reproductive health issues that will improve women's lives across the country."
In addition to Hager and Giudice, the other physicians appointed were Leslie Gay Bernitsky, a urologist from Albuquerque, N.M.; Susan A. Crockett of the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio; Nancy Dickey, chancellor of the Texas A&M College of Medicine; Scott Shields Emerson of the University of Washington, Seattle; Michael Furman Greene of Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston; Vivian Lewis of the University of Rochester Medical Center in Rochester, N.Y;. George A. Marcones of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; Valerie Montgomery Rice of the University of Kansas Medical Center in Kansas City, Kan.; and Joseph Barney Stanford of the University of Utah, Salt Lake City.
Something tells me that 'conflicts of interest' are not what they are worried about. As if they would ever object to a purported conflict of interest if a pro-abortion doctor were appointed. Once again a bunch of lefties are being disingenuous or outright lying. I'm shocked, just shocked...
One further note: we celebrate the advent of Jesus among us in the Christmas season; in reality, since He was likely born in late summer or early autumn, we are celebrating the arrival of God among us with the conception of Jesus in Mary's womb. Conception begins the lifetime of a unique, individual human life. Abortion kills an individual human being.
Forget all you know about abortion politics and look at the above sentence with a clear head.
How does carrying babies to term "imperil women's health"???
PPA makes it sound as if pregnancy were a disease!
How did this happen? How did we allow the lunatics to control the asylum? I weep for this nation, whch has so clearly lost its way into an abyss of evil. I pray to God that the next generation will have the strength and courage which has so clearly failed us the last 30 years.
The "Modern" Hippocratic Oath, recited by some newer med grads, says in part:
I will remember that there is art to medicine as well as science, and that warmth, sympathy, and understanding may outweigh the surgeon's knife or the chemist's drug.
If the National Organization for Wookies and their taxpayer-funded cohorts at Planned Parenthood [sic] were the least bit interested in women, they'd quit killing them while they're in their mothers' wombs. They'd also quit coming to the defense of the long train of scumbag abortionists who sexually assault women in their clinics, or kill their wives on Valentine's Day, or butcher women. But they're not interested in women's health, obviously. Just making a quick buck, keeping the black population in check.
God forbid we should have someone on this panel who is concerned about the safety of women.
If you're not into infant sacrifice for Satan, you need not apply?
Geeze, no conflict of interest by the ladies of the night- Gosh, no. They're only trying to be "fair".... to themselves.
A-hem, what about those who support life? There's millions of them! Last poll had 90% of women agreeing abortion is murder.
Liberals. Gotta be the dumbest eople on earth. Literally.
Anyway there are probably more women's groups in favor of this appointment than against it. Why doesn't AP publish a balanced story?
The truly frightening thing is that the radical pro-aborts truly believe this!
I weep for my country.
This was supposed to be tagged with sarcasm, but my tag got whacked. Lest there be any confusion, it is supposed to be sarcasm and definitely does not reflect my belief.
I thought the same thing. But you have to understand, they don't really believe that. It's just something they say to get people angry. Actually, that makes them even worse.
That was generations ago. Since the late 19th century, when doctors learned about washing their hands, the dangers of delivery have been incredibly reduced.
Childbirth rarely kills or even significantly harms either mother or child now (in this country). That makes the allegation (stated in the article) that opposition to abortion equates to direct endangerment of women's lives an ugly slander.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.