You are viewing brucem

 

Bullshit, Hypocrisy, & Stupidity -- A Study of Social Acceptance - A Medication Warning I'm Surprised Does Not Exist

About A Medication Warning I'm Surprised Does Not Exist

Previous Entry A Medication Warning I'm Surprised Does Not Exist Jun. 14th, 2008 @ 06:40 pm Next Entry




"Women should not take or handle this medication due to a risk of miscarriage."

In other words, the medication induces an abortion like RU-486 (Mifepristone) a/k/a the "morning after pill." Such a drug is called an abortifactant, or what I like to call a fetus laxative. I believe RU-486 only works within a brief timeframe after fertilization, but I could be wrong about that.

Anyway, the whole abortion debate could become moot if we could find an abortifactant which causes fetal termination at any point during gestation, market it for some other condition, and sell it over the counter without a prescription. Market it as an allergy medication or as a stool softener or a laxative or a pain reliever or a cough medicine - I'm sure in double blind studies there will be some evidence that it works in one or more of those capacities. So it would be sold as, say, a cold medicine for runny noses and congestion, and it would have a big, bold-letter warning label saying that women should be careful not to take (or even handle) it due to a specific risk of miscarriage. Women could freely buy it OTC for their "colds" and use it off-label as an abortifactant. And there would be no limits on when it could be taken. If you take it and cause a miscarriage after the second trimester... oopsie, it was an accident... had a bad cold and didn't read the label.

There's a commercial for a drug called Avodart, used to treat enlarged prostate, that has the warning "Women and children should not take AVODART. Women who are or could become pregnant should not handle AVODART due to the potential risk of a specific birth defect." Not even safe to touch due to teratogenic effects on a fetus... specifically children with male genitalia but female sexual features. It sounds like Avodart would be extremely popular among pregnant women in Thailand.

Since this hypothetical "cold medicine" but definitely, most certainly not (wink wink) abortifactant would be sold OTC for the price of Sudafed, women could induce abortions whenever they felt like it and it would be entirely private - the way it should be. Women wouldn't have to go to abortion clinics and deal with those jackass Bible-fuckers brachiating around the entrance with their asinine anti-freedom signs festooned everywhere within a 100 yard radius. Women wouldn't have to go to a doctor to get a RU-486 presription and then deal with a selfish, inconsiderate, moronic Bible-fucking pharmacist who feels he has a First Amendment right to not do his job because he Knows that Jesus doesn't want him to. Of course the religious nuts would want to ban this drug, or at the very least not allow it to be sold OTC. But it's NOT an abortion drug - no more so than Avodart is. There are plenty of drugs that can endager a fetus when taken by a pregnant woman. We just need to sell one of them OTC and market it for some other, noncontroversial purpose. A controversial side effect (warned against in big, bold letters) is completely different than a controversial intended purpose. Therein lies the beauty of this.

So, please, let's get such a drug out on the market, tell women not to touch or handle it, and let's shut up all the bible-fucking, "we don't want rights!" braying jackasses once and for all.
Leave a comment
From:(Anonymous)
Date:July 9th, 2008 02:17 pm (UTC)

Your comments

(Link)
Science clearly shows that human life begins at conception. Why do you deny rights to such persons? And why do you relegate all prolifers to "religious nuts," when the rationale for opposing abortion does not stem directly from religion? (That is, the argument is that innocents should not be intentionally killed - not that Jesus or some other prophet said not to do it.)

Perhaps you should take a deep breath, rethink your understanding of science, and reconsider whether you really want to advocate the murder of innocents for the sake of convenience.
From:brucem
Date:July 21st, 2008 11:55 pm (UTC)

Re: Your comments

(Link)
The rationale for opposing abortion stems directly from racism, and only indirectly uses religion to accomplish its goals. Nobody ever had a problem with abortion until the black slaves were freed and started to reproduce. One day, a pregnant negro was an investment, about to double her owner's property - the next day she became a threat to white power. Meanwhile, abortion was an luxury white only white women could afford. So what to do... freed black former-slaves are fucking like rabbits, popping out little black kiddies while white women are only having one or two kids, with the luxury of family planning. By gosh, at that rate the blacks will take over the country! Answer: ban abortion all around. Since they couldn't stop the blacks from getting pregnant, they sure as hell were not going to let the white women have less babies. Gotta even the racial birthing field. So the racist bastards decided to make abortion "murder" ... not until after the civil war did anyone consider abortion to be murder. The thought was ludicrous. Deep down inside even today's ardent pro-lifers know it's ludicrous because they don't have funerals for stillbirths and miscarriages. Actually there are a few nuts who actually DO that, but they do it solely to get attention, and it's quite rare. At least they're consistent though - I'll give them that. But unless you're willing to go balls out and spend $5,000+ for a funeral every time your wife has a miscarriage or stillbirth, don't talk about how human life begins at conception.

I don't think human life beings until the fetus turns 21, and have no problem with 83rd trimester "full birth" abortions. Especially when the fetus is an annoying asshole, listening to crappy music and text-messaging other whiny fetuses all day long.

Every time I'm stuck in traffic or forced to wait in a long line, I wish I'd become an abortion doctor. Back when I was a fetus, I always wanted to go to abortion school and become an abortionist. Alas, I became a lawyer instead. But surely nothing would be more cathartic than performing abortions all day. Dilate, crush, suck, extract.... ahhh... what could be better than that? Every abortion is one less car on the road, one less person in front of me in line, one less asshole on a cellphone, one less whiny crying baby in a store. Every day I'd come home from work with placenta on my hands and a smile on my face.
From:(Anonymous)
Date:September 5th, 2008 02:58 pm (UTC)

Re: Your comments

(Link)
I think you err badly. I suggest you read Handbook of Medieval Sexuality by Vern L. Bullough to get an insight into mindset of our Christian based American culture. This is the real background of prevalence of abortions long before it was legal.

I do not see racism behind black abortion history (as relative to freed slaves). You argument of unaffordable to white women is flatly erroneous. It was a matter of morals among the general white and black public until some seventies of 20th century. Even if provided free before then, it still would be unthinkable, unless in secrecy in both races. After all, wire coat hangers, a popular home made abortion tool (now a symbol), was widely available since early 20th century.

Having said that, Bruce, I point you a link which will delight you:

Miss Conceptions
The invisible pregnancies of presidential daughters.
By William Saletan
Posted Tuesday, Sept. 2, 2008, at 8:29 AM ET
http://www.slate.com/id/2199086/
From:brucem
Date:September 5th, 2008 03:22 pm (UTC)

Re: Your comments

(Link)
I never said abortions were "unaffordable to white women" - just the opposite. White women could afford abortions, while black women/families could not. I'm talking about abortions done by a trained medical doctor, of course (I'm sure the local chicken fryer also did abortions for 25 cents using a spatula and BBQ tongs). Abortion and family planning were luxuries that the wealthy could afford, and the poor could not. That means the poor, i.e. black people were reproducing faster than the white people. Religion was used to put a stop to that by making all abortion per se unjesuslike. Attacking the problem from the other end, encouraging and subsidizing abortions for black families was not a viable option.

You're right, though, I did enjoy that link re: Presidential abortions. One thing I wonder, though, is in regards to this:

The reason you're reading about Bristol Palin's pregnancy is that she's taking it to term. If she had aborted it, you'd never have known.

Really? It wouldn't eventually become public that a family member of a candidate for federal political office had an abortion? HIPPA aside, I think it certainly would become public. Especially if it were an anti-choice Republican. The abortionist who performed the procedure would have an ethical duty to anonymously release the fact to the press. And I think they'd do so. Everyone has an overriding moral duty to prevent hypocrisy and make it known to the people. Nobody has the right to be a hypocrite, and as I've said before, I'm a firm believer in ideological estoppel. If I were an abortionist (I always wanted to be one when I was a kid) and a pro-lifer came to me for an abortion, I'd refuse to do it (they should be forced to remain pregnant - that's the position they advocate) and then I'd do whatever I could to make it known to the public that the pro-lifer sought an abortion. I believe preventing hypocrisy and bringing hypocrisy to the attention of the people trumps all other duties of confidentiality and privilege. The First Amendment should not protect hypocrisy.

Thanks for the comment.
From:judithmenairy
Date:October 17th, 2008 06:15 am (UTC)
(Link)
-- Rod Williams A famous gay bar, The Black Cat, had its liquor license suspended under some law that prohibited knowingly serving liquor to sexual perverts (or something like that).
From:(Anonymous)
Date:July 20th, 2008 02:06 pm (UTC)

uba tuba

(Link)
Since this ad is shoved my throat on Good Morning America (between ice cream and diapers ads) I noticed it, and had similar thoughts.

What does that tell you about FDA, if they allow an abortion OTC drug disguised as prostate drug?

Think about it. If that thing induces abortion, what it can do to other parts of the human body? And that only by accidental touching!
From:brucem
Date:July 21st, 2008 11:56 pm (UTC)

Re: uba tuba

(Link)
Well I'm not sure if it induces abortion or just horrible birth defects. But if if you take enough of it, it's just gotta cause a miscarriage at some point, you'd think....
(Leave a comment)
Top of Page Powered by LiveJournal.com