“Laboring” In Vain: Plan B Study Shows It Doesn’t Reduce Pregnancy Rate
by Tony Perkins
April 26, 2007
Here’s today’s Washington Watch Daily commentary from FRC Radio:
According to a new study, emergency contraception is delivering. But unfortunately, that’s the problem. The study, by Cochrane Collaboration, found that instead of reducing pregnancies, women who received the so-called “morning-after pills” pills were just as likely to conceive. The research combines eight studies of over 6,000 women in the U.S., India, and China, where the results were all the same. It turns out that the morning-after pill is no cure for morning sickness. That’s hardly good news for the 21 states basing legislation on it. “We expected that easier access to contraception could help women use the pills more quickly when they needed them,” said Chelsea Polis, the lead researcher. But increasing its availability didn’t increase its effectiveness. Instead, the women who had Plan B didn’t use it—and if they did, they took it too late for the pills to work. We can add this to the long list of reasons why the FDA should not have approved the pills in the first place. Instead of fast-tracking the bills on Plan B, state leaders would be wise to take a long pregnant pause to consider all the facts.
To download this commentary as an MP3, follow this link. To subscribe to the Washington Watch Daily radio commentary, go here.
Family Research Council is a 501c(3) non-profit organization. If this post has been helpful to you, please consider a gift to help us continue to advance Faith, Family, and Freedom.
Comments
I’m sorry to put this so bluntly but this is a misrepresentation of science in the most egregious manner.
This study does not compare plan B to no contraception at all which is the implication of your post. This study compares women who are given plan B ahead of time to women who have used plan they obtained by prescription.
Not only does your article misrepresent the systematic review, but it fails to mention the systematic review proved that plan B use did not increase promiscuity, STD transmission, or alter previous contraceptive habits – all arguments that FRC has made at one point or another.
Finally this review also from Cochrane, is proof aggregated from dozens of trials that plan B is indeed highly effective as birth control.
You have cherry-picked statements that you wanted to misrepresent the actual science in an extremely deceptive manner. This post should be removed and you should apologize.
Mark: This is by no means the first time I have seen the FRC misrepresent scientific studies for their political purposes. Its a quite common theme for them. Several past events come to mind:
- Citeing a paper showing severe medical risks of first-trimester abortions, while not mentioning that the two authors of the paper were both members of the board of directors of a pro-life pressure group and that the paper had not been accepted in any peer-reviewed journals.
- Citeing a paper showing that abstinance-only programs are by far the most effective way to reduce teen pregnency – again, failing to mention that it was produced by a political organisation with the open aim of promoting abstinance-only education, and which had not been accepted by any more respectable journal. I addressed this incident on my own blog.
- On numerous occasions, pointing to specific instances of cold weather as ‘proof’ that climate change is not occuring.
- Citeing another study on abortion written by a doctor who has been churning out papers on the subject for decades, every single one showing abortion has serious negative impacts – study after study demonstrating that abortion causes everything from cancer to suicide to sleeping difficulties. Think carefully about the last one, and wonder what he might have used as a comparison. Very few of these papers were published in credible journals because his bias was so well-known, including the one the FRC choose to cite.
By: Suricou Raven | April 26, 2007 at 4:49 pm
The pills work very well, under laboratory conditions, so the drug itsself is fine. No problems there. Its not as effective as condoms or the Pill, but thats why its called Plan B.
The problem seems to be education – the drugs are good in the lab, but in the real world people just arn’t using them correctly. Is this a reason to abandon the drug? No, it just needs some more attention. Clear up the labeling, make sure that ‘AS SOON AS POSSIBLE’ is in large enough text, and get the instructions added to those sex-ed programs that havn’t yet been butchered in the name of abstinance.