Friday, January 10, 2014

The Real War on Women: Scientific Facts about the Harm to Women as a Result of Abortion

To comment on the proposed IRS regulation to restrict the Freedom of Speech of conservative groups:!submitComment;D=IRS-2013-0038-0001


REAL Health Care Respects LIFE
A project of Americans United for Life

How Abortion Harms Women and Why Concerns for Women’s Health must be part of Abortion-related Policies and Media Debate

The grisly trial of now-convicted murderer Dr. Kermit Gosnell brought national attention to the deplorable conditions in America’s ‘legal’ abortion industry. Gosnell’s trial showed that abortion carries inherent risks to women, whether it is performed at a clinic like his, or not (And also leads to the MURDER of one innocent unborn baby!—my addition).

In an increasingly health-conscious society, why does abortion lack a ‘warning label (It would not be good for business! And the government is an accomplice to the MURDER! Particularly, the Obama Administration!—my addition)?’ Numerous, well documented studies in peer-reviewed medical journals demonstrate that abortion poses significant medical risks for women (My use of red—my addition)

The health risks of abortion undermine the false narrative promoted by the abortion industry, namely that the abortion debate requires choosing sides between mothers and their unborn children. The truth is that regulating abortion benefits both mothers and children—even their children in future pregnancies.

Women and girls deserve to know the facts about abortion. Information is the lynchpin of true ‘choice (The last thing the baby MURDERERS want is the truth about their industryand informed choice!”—my addition).’ Consider the following:

1) Abortion has undisputed immediate health risks.

The undisputed risks of immediate medical complications from abortion include blood clots, hemorrhage, incomplete abortions, infection, and injury to the cervix and other organs.1 Abortion can also cause cardiac arrest, respiratory arrest, renal failure, metabolic disorder, shock, and missed ectopic pregnancy.
Immediate medical complications affect approximately 10 percent of women undergoing abortions, and approximately one-fifth of these complications are life threatening (And yet, many States do not require the abortion MURDERERS to have admission privileges at a hospital and the baby MURDERERS fight such requirements tooth and nail!—my addition).2

2) Studies reveal that the long-term physical and psychological consequences of abortion include an increased risk of:

· subsequent preterm birth;

· placenta previa (a complication during pregnancy where the placenta partially or totally covers the mother’s cervix and which can cause severe bleeding before or during delivery);

· serious mental health problems;

· breast cancer as a result of the loss of the protective effect of a first full-term pregnancy;

· miscarriage;

· and death.3

These medical risks, consistently documented by peer-reviewed medical journals, gravely endanger women’s physical and psychological health (Do you think the abortion MURDERERS inform the mother of these possibilities? Is there informed consent?—my addition).

In addition, the impact on her reproductive future and health of subsequently born children is vital information for a woman to have if she considers abortion, as up to 75% of women who have an induced abortion will become pregnant again.4

a) Abortion increases the risk of pre-term birth in future pregnancies.

A preterm birth (PTB) is a birth occurring three or more weeks before the due date of the baby.5

The link between having an induced abortion and PTB has been recognized in over 130 peer-reviewed scientific studies6, as well as being listed as an ‘immutable medical risk factor’ by the Institute of Medicine.7 Some of the reasons given for abortion increasing a woman’s risk for PTB in later pregnancies commonly include: ‘mechanical trauma to the cervix, infection, and scarring of the endometrium.’8 A recent study found that 31.5% of preterm births are likely to be the result of a woman having an abortion earlier in her life.9

PTB is the leading cause of infant death both globally and in the United States.10 Worldwide PTB causes over 3 million deaths every year.11

Another major concern with PTB is the baby being significantly underweight when born (‘very low birth weight’ or VLBW). Babies born with a VLBW face many health consequences and have an increased risk for developmental problems. Some of the potential long term complications include: cerebral palsy, cognitive impairment, vision problems, hearing problems, dental problems, behavioral problems, psychological problems, and chronic health issues.12 These complications may not be realized immediately, and can surface later in childhood or even into adulthood.13

There are also high financial costs associated with PTB. Hospital costs alone coming from abortionrelated PTB are estimated to be $1.2 billion per year.14 That figure does not include any long term costs to the families providing care for the prematurely born babies who suffer from conditions requiring long term treatment (Do you think the abortion MURDERERS inform the mother of these possibilities? Is there informed consent?—my addition).

b) Induced abortion is a risk factor for a woman developing Placenta Previa in future pregnancies.

Placenta Previa, a complication during pregnancy where the placenta partially or totally covers the mother’s cervix and which can cause severe bleeding before or during delivery, can be dangerous for both the mother and the baby. One of the greatest risks to the mother is hemorrhaging,15 which is extremely serious as the amount of blood lost in fifteen minutes is enough to be potentially life threatening.16 The placement of the placenta over the cervical canal may also require an emergency cesarean section be performed to deliver the baby early (often prior to full term) so to not cause the severe bleeding to the mother.17

Induced abortion is a risk factor for a woman developing Placenta Previa in future pregnancies.18 The risk of Placenta Previa after a dilation and curettage (D&C) abortion holds a relative risk (odds ratio, or OR) of 1.9 compared with women who do not have an abortion.19 The risk of Placenta Previa is also greater for women who get infections following their abortion procedure.20 After an infection from her abortion, a woman’s risk of Placenta Previa is 3.6 (OR) compared with women who do not have an abortion history (Do you think the abortion MURDERERS inform the mother of these possibilities? Is there informed consent?—my addition).21

c) Decades of medical evidence has revealed that abortion carries significant psychological risks, including increased risks of depression, anxiety, and suicide.

The data surrounding abortion shows a high correlation between abortion and an increased risk of mental health problems.22 There are over 100 studies that demonstrate the connection between abortion and subsequent mental health problems.23 One study found that women whose first pregnancies ended in abortion were 65 percent more likely to score in the high risk range for clinical depression than women whose first pregnancies resulted in a birth—even after controlling for age, race, marital status, divorce history, education, income, and pre-pregnancy psychological state.24 Studies found that 10% of mental health problems suffered by women are directly attributable to abortion.25

Studies also reveal an increased risk of suicide ideation and suicide following induced abortion. One of the leading studies, led by a pro-abortion researcher and controlling for all relevant factors (including prior history of depression and anxiety and prior history of suicide ideation), found that 27 percent of women who aborted reported experiencing suicidal ideation, with as many as 50 percent of minors experiencing suicide or suicidal ideation.26 The risk of suicide was three times greater for women who aborted than for women who delivered. The study also found that 42 percent of women who aborted reported major depression by age 25, and 39 percent of post-abortive women suffered from anxiety disorders by age 25.

Studies have linked a history of abortion to sleeping disorders and eating disorders.27 Adolescents who had abortions were three times more likely to experience trouble sleeping (Do you think the abortion MURDERERS inform the mother of these possibilities? Is there informed consent?—my addition).

d) Abortion is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer.

As with every topic touching on the issue of abortion, the abortion-breast cancer link has been hotly disputed. However, it is scientifically undisputed that a woman’s first full-term pregnancy reduces her risk of breast cancer. Aborting a first pregnancy before 32 weeks eliminates the protective affect against breast cancer for that woman.28 It is also undisputed that the earlier a woman has a first full-term pregnancy, the lower her risk of breast cancer becomes.29

The association between having an induced abortion and a subsequent increased risk of breast cancer has been examined in 70 studies.30 Of these studies, 33 showed a positive association between having an abortion and developing breast cancer, 19 of which were statistically significant. None of the studies showing a negative association were statistically significant (Do you think the abortion MURDERERS inform the mother of these possibilities? Is there informed consent?—my addition).

3) The known, substantial health risks of chemical abortions may be significantly underreported.

Because of its known dangers, the use of the mifepristone and misoprostol chemical abortion drug regimen (also commonly referred to as ‘RU-486’) has been strictly regulated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). On its website, the FDA notes, ‘Since its approval in September 2000, the [FDA] has received reports of serious adverse events, including several deaths, in the United States following medical abortion with mifepristone and misoprostol.’ A 2011 FDA report31 accounts for at least 2,207 cases of severe adverse events, including hemorrhaging, blood loss requiring transfusions, serious infection, and death.
Thousands of reported instances of serious adverse events, including death, already raises alarm. The concern for women’s health and safety is heightened when considering the known inadequacies of what is being reported to the FDA about chemical abortions and that FDA reports capture ‘only a small proportion of events that actually occur.’32

Additionally, abortion-providers are openly flouting the FDA protocol and state laws designed to protect women against these dangers. Planned Parenthood’s own studies acknowledge that off-label use of chemical abortions has come at the cost of women’s lives and ‘higher-than-expected’ consequences to health. According to a 2009 study produced by Planned Parenthood,

Prompted by the deaths that occurred after medical abortion and internal data that show a higher-than-expected rate of serious infection, [Planned Parenthood Federation of America] changed its medical abortion protocol at the end of March 2006.33

Only after women died and suffered serious infections did Planned Parenthood stop the vaginal use of misoprostol, an off-label use never approved by the FDA. In her ‘whistleblower’ lawsuit filed against Planned Parenthood of the Heartland, Sue Thayer alleges that, lacking the ability to care for these women at their own facilities, Planned Parenthood’s ‘telemed’ chemical abortion patients who later experienced significant bleeding were told ‘to go to an emergency room and report that they were experiencing a spontaneous miscarriage.’34 On top of being unethical, encouraging a woman to be dishonest jeopardizes her health. Lying to a healthcare provider about the cause of the patient’s condition leads to a host of obvious problems including inappropriate care and inaccurate reporting of abortion complications (The abortion MURDERERS do not care!—my addition)..

Studies have also found chemical abortions can carry even more risk to women than surgical abortion.

For example, a major review of nearly 7,000 abortions performed in Australia in 2009 and 2010 found that 3.3 percent of patients who used mifepristone in the first trimester required emergency hospital treatment, in contrast to 2.2 percent of patients who underwent surgical abortions.35 Women receiving chemical abortions were admitted to hospitals at a rate of 5.7 percent following the abortion, as compared with 0.4 percent for patients undergoing surgical abortion.

Another study revealed that the overall incidence of immediate adverse events is fourfold higher for chemical abortions than for surgical abortions (Do you think the abortion MURDERERS inform the mother of these possibilities? Is there informed consent?—my addition).36

4) It is undisputed that the later in pregnancy an abortion occurs, the riskier it is and the greater the chance for significant complications.

A well-respected peer-reviewed journal—one which is also frequently cited by abortion advocates—notes that, Abortion has a higher medical risk when the procedure is performed later in pregnancy. Compared to abortion at eight weeks of gestation or earlier, the relative risk increases exponentially at higher gestations(Do you think the abortion MURDERERS inform the mother of these possibilities? Is there informed consent?—my addition).’37

Gestational age is the strongest risk factor for abortion-related mortality (Do you think the abortion MURDERERS inform the mother of these possibilities? Is there informed consent?—my addition).38 Compared to abortion at eight weeks gestation, the relative risk of mortality increases significantly (by 38 percent for each additional week) at higher gestations.39 In other words, a woman seeking an abortion at 20 weeks (five months) is 35 times more likely to die from abortion than she was in the first trimester. At 21 weeks or more, she is 91 times more likely to die from abortion than she was in the first trimester.

Moreover, researchers have concluded that it may not be possible to reduce the risk of death in later-term abortions because of the ‘inherently greater technical complexity of later abortions.’40 This is because later-term abortions require a greater degree of cervical dilation, with an increased blood flow in a later-term abortion which predisposes the woman to hemorrhage, and because the myometrium is relaxed and more subject to perforation.41

At least two studies have concluded that second-trimester abortions (13-24 weeks) and third-trimester abortions (25-26 weeks) pose more serious risks to women’s physical health than first-trimester abortions.42

Researchers have also found that women who undergo abortions at 13 weeks or beyond report ‘more disturbing dreams, more frequent reliving of the abortion, and more trouble falling asleep (Do you think the abortion MURDERERS inform the mother of these possibilities? Is there informed consent?—my addition).’43

Even Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion provider in the United States, agrees that abortion becomes riskier later in pregnancy. Planned Parenthood states on its national website, ‘The risks [of surgical abortion] increase the longer you are pregnant. They also increase if you have sedation or general anesthesia [which would be necessary at or after 20 weeks gestation].’44

5) Myth: Abortion is safer than childbirth

Other researchers confirm a substantially increased risk of death from abortions performed later in gestation, equaling or surpassing the risk of death from live birth (Do you think the abortion MURDERERS inform the mother of these possibilities? Is there informed consent?—my addition).45

When the Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade in 1973, there was no evidence in the record related to medical data. The ‘abortion is safer than childbirth’ mantra of 1973 continues to be repeated by abortion advocates today. However, it has been undermined by the plethora of peer-reviewed studies published in the last 40 years. Specifically, recent studies demonstrate that childbirth is safer than abortion especially at later gestations (Do you think the abortion MURDERERS inform the mother of these possibilities? Is there informed consent?—my addition).46

The forty-six footnotes are at the website:

Bottom line: Every abortion MURDERS at least one person. That said, women should have complete knowledge in all aspects until we finally outlaw the barbaric practice of MURDERING our own children!

The March for Life in Washington D.C. is January 22, 2014. Roe v. Wade will be the illegal, unconstitutionallawof the land for 41 years on that date!

We will have been MURDERING unborn babies for 41 years! A total abomination for any nation! A total atrocity for any nation! A total evil for any nation!

No one has the rightto MURDER another person! NO ONE!

Christians were bold in the First Century church! Are Christians as bold today?

Christians were resolute in the First Century church! Are Christians as resolute today?

Christians stood for the truth in the First Century church! Are Christians standing for the truth today?

If not Christians, who? If not now, when?

This is my two part suggestion to Tea Party groups, social conservatives, Constitutionalists, and anyone else who wants to save our Republic from the approaching destruction.

1) Run as many conservative candidates in as many Republican primaries as possible.

2) Then, run as many independent and/or third party candidates as possible in as many races as possible where we did not win the primary.

That is why I am working to get the Constitution Party on the ballot in Texas. If we get on the ballot, we will have two Congressional House candidates running and two State candidates running. Getting on the ballot is the first step. Winning elections is the second. Winning elections will grow the Party. The Constitution Party is much more in line with the Tea Party movement than is the Republican Party. And I have been involved with all three!

If elected to Congress, I will not, under any circumstances, vote for present Speaker of the House John Boehner to be Speaker of the House. I call on every Republican primary candidate running in Texas Congressional District 19 to publicly (in writing) make the same pledge. It would not be a bad idea for every Republican candidate running for the House of Representatives to give the same pledge. See my post at on December 16, 2013 entitled “Speaker of the House John Boehner Attacks the Tea Party Again for Being Fiscally Responsible!”

If I am elected to the House, I will use the Constitution, as written, to do everything in my power to stop judicial tyranny! Will the other candidates pledge the same? I know our present Representative has NOT done everything possible to stop judicial tyranny! Why is that?

Competition is good for the economy and competition is good for the Republican Party!!! Competition keeps Congressmen committed to we the people!!! Primary Republicans who do not support the Constitution as written.