U.S. District Judge Daniel Domenico said in an opinion on Saturday that a Colorado law banning so-called medication abortion reversal treatment likely violates the U.S. Constitution’s guarantee of religious freedom. His order stops the state from enforcing the law against Bella Health and Wellness, which sued to block it, or against anyone else working with Bella Health, while he considers the medical center’s challenge to the law.
The office of Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser, which defended the law, declined to comment.
Medication abortion begins with the drug mifepristone, which blocks the action of the hormone progesterone, crucial for sustaining pregnancy, and is completed with a second drug, misoprostol. Proponents of the so-called medication abortion reversal say that if a woman changes her mind after taking mifepristone but before taking misoprostol, the pregnancy can be continued by administering a high dose of progesterone.
There are no large controlled studies of the treatment, and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has said that its safety and efficacy are unsupported by science.
Someday it would be nice to see judicial decisions on women’s healthcare be supported by science instead of a Constitution written by mostly men.
Allowing unproven medical procedures on the basis of religious freedom is truly a wacky preposition.
Agreed then it should at least be labeled as faith item, not medical.
What exactly are you suggesting? Sorry, if I missed your point
It should say right on the top of the box.
FAITH ITEM - NOT MEDICINE
or something like that.
“These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. Not intended to treat or diagnose any illness, medical condition, etc.”
But more like this:
That it isn’t medicine. It was pretty clear.
Are you suggesting that a massive dose of progesterone should not be considered medication? Because that’s what this article is about.
He’s suggesting that “medicine” has effects backed by some reasonable amount of scientific study. Telling people to ingest random substances that don’t have that is essentially witchcraft, not medicine.
But if you want to label progesterone as “faith items”, don’t they become even less controlled? If they are labeled as a medical item (or whatever makes sense to keep nut jobs from ‘prescribing’ it) wouldn’t they fall under more observation and inspection and control? The whole reason I’m asking these questions is because it seems like you all want to give religious nut jobs the ability to dose people with hormones as part of a religious ritual. Is that what you all are saying? I did say at the beginning that I might be misunderstanding.
Do you know what progesterone does?
Yeah, it’s a hormone. Which is why I imagine any synthesis of it would be controlled like a medication and not declared as a faith item. But maybe I misunderstand
Yeah, imagine if it was any other religion. Hell I’m not dumb enough to throw money at fighting for proven medical procedures that my religion blesses
If biology for humans were such that both participants had an unpredictable, uncontrollable, 50/50 chance to carry the baby, abortion access for all and would be a non-issue.
Alternatively, if Jerry Falwell never existed, it still wouldn’t be nearly as contentious an issue.
Humans in any meaningful numbers never fail to find a group of their own to single out, marginalize, and persecute out of schadenfreude.
You’re supposing the judge obeyed the Constitution here. He did not; freedom of religion is not freedom to defraud, and the people selling this drug are committing fraud.
*mostly white men who would be rather confused by the whole thing.
Partly because abortions were common if not particularly talked about.
One wonders, how many people have asked for this treatment? I’m guessing it’s not super common, and quite possibly the lawsuit is wishful thinking.
The first time someone has an adverse reaction, it’s over. The medical community is protected by the fact that things are heavily tested and regulated. If you have a complication related to a treatment, it will be a known risk. When you give someone snake oil and they die from it, you’re done.
I was asking how frequently people want to reverse abortions in the first place, not how safe it was.
(Which, it’d safety would be impossible to test ethically. “Well we’re going to give you the first part of an abortion pill and then try to reverse it… your baby should be fine” )
Gotcha. It Is a strange thing to want.
I assume the few legitimate reversals are derived more from family/friends finding out and being shamed for not wanting a baby. If that ever happens at all.
24-48 hours isn’t a lot of time for things to suddenly get better, but I suppose it is possible. That said, this wouldn’t be the first time lawsuits have been brought because people”might” be affected
Once this reversal thing is a thing the next phase is to demand counseling appoinments be held in between pills.
And before.
Yeah.
LOL your religious liberty is to use quack medicine now?
