Posted on 04/06/2013 2:09:37 AM PDT by markomalley
A federal judge on Friday ordered that the most common morning-after pill be made available over the counter for all ages, instead of requiring a prescription for girls 16 and younger. But his acidly worded decision raises a broader question about whether a cabinet secretary can decide on a drug’s availability for reasons other than its safety and effectiveness.
In his ruling, Judge Edward R. Korman of the Eastern District of New York accused the Obama administration of putting politics ahead of science. He concluded that the administration had not made its decisions based on scientific guidelines, and that its refusal to lift restrictions on access to the pill, Plan B One-Step, was “arbitrary, capricious and unreasonable.”
He said that when the Health and Human Services secretary, Kathleen Sebelius, countermanded a move by the Food and Drug Administration in 2011 to make the pill, which helps prevent pregnancy after sexual intercourse, universally available, “the secretary’s action was politically motivated, scientifically unjustified, and contrary to agency precedent.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Levonorgestrel is in a class of medications called progestins. It works by preventing the release of an egg from the ovary or preventing fertilization of the egg by sperm (male reproductive cells). It also may work by changing the lining of the uterus (womb) to prevent development of a pregnancy.
If a baby is a separate life at birth, it is life at 20 weeks. And it is its own life the minute the sperm cell fertilizes the ovum. And if one takes any definitive action to prevent a zygote from implanting itself in the uterine wall, one is just as guilty of abortion as if one cuts the spinal cord of a fully developed baby before it emerges from the birth canal.
I’m confused. The judge is “offended” by procedure, but permits children to abort without parental consent?
This administration is oddly pleased to provide more avenues for killing minority babies.
So is the judge.
I would think this is a dangerous thing for this judge to do.
Actually this is one of the few areas where the administration is non-racist. They are happy to kill babies of any color.
Yep. And they are stupid enough to snuff out their own race. That’s why they are part of the low information voter base.
This judge will have blood on his hands.
How much does it cost per pill ?
Who pays for it ?
The standard for determining whether contraceptives or any other drug should be available OTC turns “solely on the ability of the consumer to understand how to use the particular drug safely and effectively.”
Lots of drugs are sold OTC that should not be given to children under any circumstances whatsoever. Neither law nor existing regulation provide for anything other than point of sale restrictions. The White House can't arbitrarily step in and say that a drug which clears every other hurdle put up by the FDA is different because they don't like what it's for.
I don't like children using this but it's likely better to have parents control this than the state.
The nineteen year old who impregnated the thirteen year old of course.
Without prescription, guys will be able to buy the pills and appear oh so caring as they prepare special breakfasts in bed for their girlfriends.
For scientific reasons, I do not place a zygote as being the equivalent of a fully developed baby several months into the pregnancy. Most fertilized ova do not implant. Of the ones that implant, many do not survive long enough for the mother to know she is pregnant. Only about 10-25% of all fertilized ova are capable of survival to birth. At the time of implantation, the blastocyst has ~200 cells--meaning that it truly is just a ball of cells, with no distinguishing features at all. It is incapable of any feeling or self-awareness. From a technical standpoint, I cannot see any significant difference between a blastocyst and the human cells I grow for experimentation in the lab.
The neural tube starts to form about 3 weeks into the pregnancy. Because the sense of self and all awareness are rooted in the nervous system, I think that that is a good time to give the embryo legal protection from all harms.
With all that said, I still think this is a horrible move by the judge, one which will result in severe injury and death. Plan B is a potent endocrine disruptor. The body may be able to efficiently repair the damage after a one-time emergency use. But with it being available OTC, there will be many women and girls who take one every time they have intercourse, believing that its OTC availability means it is perfectly safe. It is not. Long-term repetitive use is likely to cause bleeding disorders, organ damage, and cancer, among other complications.
I wonder, can women and their families sue this judge for damages resulting from using this drug in a way never intended when the FDA approved its use?
This judge's opinion should not be allowed to trump the science-based regulatory decisions of the FDA. I would hope the head of the FDA stands up and says that the FDA refuses to change its recommendations without a good solid scientifically informed reason to do so.
Does it have its own DNA? Or does it have its mother's DNA (exclusively?
Most fertilized ova do not implant.
I realize that.
Life begins at fertilization. While a zygote (or a blastocyst) probably does not have feelings, it is a life. Whether that life is capable of feeling or not, it is a life. It is not man's (i.e., human's) place to interfere with the development of that life.
I bet this is one of those products that comes with a label saying that it's a violation of federal law to use other than as directed. At some point there must be personal liability for what we do.
“This judge's opinion should not be allowed to trump the science-based regulatory decisions of the FDA. I would hope the head of the FDA stands up and says that the FDA refuses to change its recommendations without a good solid scientifically informed reason to do so.”
It was the FDA that issued a science-based regulatory decision that this should be OTC. The Obama Administration stepped in and made a self-admitted and “purely political decision” to restrict OTC sales because they thought it would be more popular.
The more I think about it, the more I'm wondering how the prior policy could have been implemented effectively at all. Did someone need to produce a driver's license or other form of ID to buy it?
Pseudoephedrine?
The pill works in a similar way.
In the early '70s, the AMA changed the definition of conception from fertilization to implantation, so that the pill would not be classified as an abortifacient.
At about the same time, homosexuality was removed from the list of psychiatric disorders.
And of course, 1973 saw Roe v. Wade.
The death toll resulting from these decisions is incalculable.
All hormonal contraceptives work that way.
According to this article, “Nonprescription nicotine replacement therapy products cannot be sold legally to people younger than age 18. A doctor may prescribe one of these products if a person younger than 18 is dependent on nicotine.”
http://www.webmd.com/smoking-cessation/nicotine-replacement-therapy-for-quitting-tobacco
I know that when I purchased nicotine patches at Target, I had to provide my driver’s license. I think it is/was the same the the "morning after pill".
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.