this post was submitted on 07 May 2024

268 points (98.6% liked)

News

23436 readers

3642 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.

7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

268

New York attorney general sues facilities promoting ‘abortion pill reversal’ (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 6 months ago by MicroWave to c/news

23 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Heartbeat International, affiliated with more than 2,000 facilities, aims to convince people to continue their pregnancies

The organization behind an international network of anti-abortion facilities is misleading people with claims that abortions can be “reversed”, a lawsuit filed on Monday by Letitia James, the New York attorney general, alleges.

The organization, Heartbeat International, is affiliated with more than 2,000 facilities that aim to convince people to continue their pregnancies. In recent years, many such centers, which are often Christian and sometimes known as crisis pregnancy centers, have started to promote a controversial practice known as “abortion pill reversal”, which claims that people can halt a medication abortion midway through.

The first randomized, controlled clinical study to attempt to study this “reversal” protocol’s effectiveness came to an abrupt stop in 2019, after three participants landed in the hospital hemorrhaging blood. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the pre-eminent membership group for OB-GYNS, has said that claims about abortion reversal are “not based on science and do not meet clinical standards”.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] chillhelm 27 points 6 months ago (2 children)

The first randomized, controlled clinical study to attempt to study this “reversal” protocol’s effectiveness came to an abrupt stop in 2019, after three participants landed in the hospital hemorrhaging blood.

The general horrificness of this aside. How do you recruit participants for a study like this? "Do you want to be pregnant but don't mind having an abortion? Would you like an abortion but don't mind if you actually get it reversed?"

[–] [email protected] 12 points 6 months ago

I can't find the original study, but according to this NPR article they were all scheduled for surgical abortions.

The abortion pill is a two pill process - the study was to find out if progesterone injections could reverse the effects of taking the first pill only.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

I found the study if you're curious on more details. It was basically done because there was a series of relatively poor evidence case series articles pushing the idea of mifepristone antagonization (the first pill in the two step process) with high dose progesterone to try and stop a medical abortion after the first pill but before the second pill. But case series are just basically cherry picked cases and very limited in what they can show. This practice was becoming more common though because of these, and so researchers wanted to learn more about what risks it would pose to women who did this, and if it was even effective in the first place (though this situation is very rare, less than 0.005% of women who take the first pill choose to try and continue their pregnancies).

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31809439/

This is how participants were recruited:

We conducted this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial at the University of California, Davis Medical Center. We approached patients who had completed counseling and consent for a surgical abortion and were 63 days of gestation or less about study participation. Inclusion criteria were 18 years or older, English-speaking, singleton pregnancy, and willingness to delay the abortion by approximately 2 weeks. Exclusion criteria were medical contraindications to medical abortion per the mifepristone U.S. Food and Drug Administration label, an allergy to mifepristone or progesterone, or a peanut allergy (on-label contraindication to oral progesterone). The University of California, Davis, Institutional Review Board approved this study and all participants gave written study consent before beginning any study procedures.

Twelve people were enrolled, though two chose to stop the study early and were given surgical abortions before the planned two weeks. Three had to be transported by ambulance for bleeding, and further enrollment was halted.

What they found was:

Although the study sample size was powered to demonstrate a difference in continuing pregnancy rates between progesterone and placebo treatment after mifepristone ingestion, we could not evaluate this outcome owing to stopping enrollment for safety reasons.

Patients who use mifepristone for a medical abortion should be advised that not using misoprostol could result in severe hemorrhage, even with progesterone treatment. We stopped the study because of these complications and, thus, could not quantify the full extent of this risk. Because of the potential dangers for patients who opt not to use misoprostol after mifepristone ingestion, any mifepristone antagonization treatment must be considered experimental.

So basically, don't do this, and any "crisis pregnancy center" that advises this is putting pregnant individuals in clear danger. The American college of obstetricians and gynecologists knows what they're talking about when they say this should not be done.