Ulipristal Acetate and liver-injuries by Bruno Mozzanega MD

Ulipristal Acetate and liver-injuries:

while Esmya is revoked, EllaOne is allowed in repeated self-administrations possibly exceeding UPA toxic-dosing with Esmya. – Bruno Mozzanega, MD – Assistant Professor Dept Woman’s and Child’s Health, University of Padua (Italy)

To the Editor of Journal of Hepatology,

Ulipristal Acetate (UPA), an antagonistic Selective Progesterone-Receptor Modulator (SPRM), is the active-principle of two drugs: Esmya and ellaOne. While Esmya for fibroid treatment has been revoked because of severe liver-injuries, the emergency-contraceptive EllaOne is allowed in repeated self-administrations possibly exceeding UPA toxic-dosing with Esmya.

ESMYA – Micronized-UPA, 5mg-tablets in blisters of 28. It was taken daily for three to six months to treat uterine fibroids, after EMA (European Medicines Agency) authorization in 2012. It needed medical prescription and treatment was supervised by experienced doctors. It reduced progesterone-induced fibroid growth.

Due to the appearance of serious liver injuries in 8 Esmya-treated patients, the EMA Pharmacovigilance-Risk-Assessment-Committee (PRAC) started an evaluation (EMA/791062/2017) [1] that concluded that UPA had a possible role in injuries. EMA recommended measures to minimize the risk (EMA/355940/2018) [2]: contraindication if liver problems; information to patients; liver-tests before, during and after treatment; repeated courses only to inoperable women.

On September 4th 2020, a further review by EMA-PRAC confirmed that UPA 5mg can cause liver injury, including the need for liver transplantation. Since it was not possible to identify which patients were most at risk or measures that could reduce the risk, the PRAC concluded that the risks outweighed its benefits and Esmya should not be marketed in the EU (EMA/455818/2020) [3].

The strict post-marketing surveillance made it possible to link Esmya-administration to side-effects. The time from Esmya first-intake to hepatic failure ranged from few days to six months [4].

ELLAONE – Micronized-UPA, 30mg single-dose tablets, authorized for emergency contraception.

Both the 2018 and 2020 EMA-PRAC Reports on Esmya-related risk 2,3 specify that with ellaOne there is no concern about liver injury.

When the Members of EMA-CHMP (Committee-Human-Medicinal-Products) recommended ellaOne for marketing-authorization in 2009, they acknowledged that UPA accumulates in tissues, with a high tissue-to-plasma ratio (EMEA/261787/2009,page 13) [5]. They acknowledged that repeated UPA-administrations (even scheduled monthly) lead to a progressive accumulation in the liver, eventually resulting in liver-toxicity. Consequently, EMA-CHMP authorized single-dose administration and warned against repeated self-administration.

However, in 2015 this scenario changed: the EMA-CHMP removed the warning against repeated self-administration and made ellaOne-supply “not subject to medical prescription” (EMA/73099/2015) [6]. Since then, the repeated self-administration of ellaOne in the same cycle is allowed and suggested as safe, without any medical supervision.

Up-to-date, no cases of hepatotoxicity have been reported after single-dose administration of ellaOne; however, the patient 2 in Meunier’s series [4] evidenced severe liver injury after taking Esmya (UPA 5mg) for 3 days (15mg=half ellaOne) to 26 days. Women on Esmya-treatment were strictly surveilled, while those taking ellaOne are unidentified: eventual adverse events could hardly be attributable to an undocumented drug-self-administration.

Indeed, liver-toxicity seems due to UPA-accumulation, while circulating levels of either UPA or its metabolites [7] have no impact on safety. The life-threatening DILI (drug-induced-liver-injury), including autoimmune hepatitis, associated with UPA in post-marketing surveillance may be partially explained by UPA physiochemical (high lipophilicity) and pharmacokinetic (hepatic metabolism, long half-life, inhibition of liver transporters, reactive metabolite formation) features [8].

The most challenging form of DILI is the so-called idiosyncratic one: it is unpredictable, usually unrelated to the dose and is characterized by a variable onset-time. DILI is an important public health issue: not only it strengthens the importance of the post-marketing phase, when urgent withdrawal sometimes occurs for rare unanticipated liver-toxicity, but also shows the imperfect predictivity of pre-clinical models and the lack of validated biomarkers beyond traditional, non-specific, liver-function tests [9].

The removal of the warning against repeated use was requested and obtained by HRA-Pharma, basing on HRA2914-554 Study (Report-pages 6-9) [6] that examined the effect of repeated administration of ellaOne on ovulation, menstrual cycle and safety. EllaOne was given weekly (Q7D, twelve women) or every 5 days (Q5D, eleven women) for 8 consecutive weeks since the first day of the menstrual cycle. No safety-issues emerged for those 23 women, suggesting that, should ellaOne be used more than once in the same cycle, the safety profile is similar to that for a single administration [6]. The repeated self-administration of EllaOne in the same cycle was authorized as safe [6].

Overlooking the fact that almost every woman had normal ovulations during the repeated self-administration of ellaOne, officially presented as anti-ovulatory [10], the total UPA-dosing for women was 270mg in Q7D and 360mg in Q5D. These amounts are presented as safe, but are equal to or greater than Esmya-dosing in the same 8 weeks, UPA 280mg: the UPA-dosing leading two patients to liver transplantation [4]; besides, the single UPA-bolus to liver was six time-higher than with Esmya.

The burden of DILI is likely underestimated: clinical trials are usually underpowered to identify rare idiosyncratic events and most data come from post-marketing retrospective studies. DILI occurs only in a small fraction of exposed-subjects [9]: with UPA the percentage was 1/10.000: 8 out of 80.0000 Esmya-patients, but ellaOne is taken by millions of women every year and repeated-self-administration cannot be quantified. EllaOne is not subject to medical prescription, so no data are available for post-marketing evaluation.

Liver-toxicity due to Esmya-administration were still unreported in 2015, when the EMA-CHPM removed the warning against the repeated self-administration of ellaOne, but nowadays it seems difficult to state that ellaOne-self-administration is always safe. The PRAC-EMA assessed definitively that UPA has a direct responsibility in inducing liver-injuries 2,3. Besides, it is commonly known that ellaOne can be taken repeatedly by millions of women whenever unprotected-sex-intercourse recurs, in whichever period of the cycle (ellaOne Package-Leaflet). In the light of the above, it is easy to argue that repeated self-administration can lead to a total UPA-intake even exceeding the UPA-amounts responsible of the dramatic DILI officially 2,3 attributed to Esmya. As well, it is easy to argue that nothing can either discourage or only restrict ellaOne-repeated self-administration: not only women are not informed about its risks, but, furthermore, they are reassured that even closely-repeated self-administrations are as safe as a single-tablet self-administration [6].

The overall metabolic impact of Ulipristal and/or its side-effects are still unknown. EllaOne frequent self-administration for subsequent contraceptive-emergencies is authorized as a correct and safe behaviour, but is likely to present a danger, in the absence of medical supervision, due to the progressive UPA-accumulation in the liver.

CONCLUSIONS

The repeated-self-administration of ellaOne, micronized-UPA 30mg, likely can be associated with hepatotoxicity in unaware women. However, further investigations are required to understand the underlying pharmacological mechanisms, to define the UPA-toxic-thresholds and to assure women the best protection.

Information to women and to the Medical Community seems mandatory to preserve women’s health.

REFERENCES

  1. EMA/791062/2017 – https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/referral/esmya-article-20-procedure-review-started_en.pdf

View in Article 

  1. EMA/355940/2018 – https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/referral/esmya-article-20-procedure-esmya-new-measures-minimise-risk-rare-serious-liver-injury_en.pdf

View in Article 

  1. EMA/455818/2020 – https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/referral/ulipristal-acetate-5mg-medicinal-products-article-31-referral-prac-recommends-revoking-marketing_en.pdf

View in Article 

  1.  
  • Meunier L.
  • Meszaros M.
  • Pageaux G.P.
  • Delay J.M.
  • Herrero A.
  • Pinzani V.
  • et al.

Case Report. Acute liver failure requiring transplantation caused by ulipristal acetate.

Clin Res Hepatol Gastroenterol. 2020; 44 (Epub 2020 Mar 4): e45-e49https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinre.2020.02.008

View in Article 

  1. EMEA/261787/2009 – https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/assessment-report/ellaone-epar-public-assessment-report_en.pdf

View in Article 

  1. EMA/73099/2015 – https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/variation-report/ellaone-h-c-1027-ii-0021-epar-assessment-report-variation_en.pdf

View in Article 

  1.  
  • Pohl O.
  • Osterloh I.
  • Gotteland J.P.

Ulipristal acetate – safety and pharmacokinetics following multiple doses of 10–50 mg per day.

Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics. 2013; 38: 314-320

View in Article 

  1.  
  • Gatti M.
  • Poluzzi E.
  • De Ponti F.
  • Raschi E.

Liver Injury with Ulipristal Acetate: Exploring the Underlying Pharmacological Basis.

Drug Saf. 2020 Aug 3; (Online ahead of print)https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-020-00975-8

View in Article 

  1.  
  • Raschi E.
  • De Ponti F.

Strategies for Early Prediction and Timely Recognition of Drug-Induced Liver Injury: The Case of Cyclin- Dependent Kinase 4/6 Inhibitors.

Front. Pharmacol. 2019; 10: 1235https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2019.01235

View in Article 

  1.  
  • Mozzanega B.
  • Nardelli G.B.

UPA and LNG in Emergency Contraception: the information by EMA and the Scientific Evidences indicate a prevalent anti-implantation effect.

Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2019; 24 (10.1080/13625187.2018.1555662. Epub 2019 Jan 18): 4-10

View in Article 

Article Info

Publication History

Accepted: November 24, 2020

Received in revised form: November 23, 2020

Received: September 23, 2020

Publication stage

In Press Journal Pre-Proof

Footnotes

I declare no conflict of interest, neither any financial support

Identification

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhep.2020.11.041

Copyright

© 2020 European Association for the Study of the Liver. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

ScienceDirect

Access this article on ScienceDirect

This is a Journal-of-hepatology.eu letter to the editor piece  

Ref: https://www.journal-of-hepatology.eu/article/S0168-8278(20)33828-9/fulltext#%20

Protests across Ireland following late-term abortion report release

Protests across Ireland following late-term abortion report release

Pro-life protests have taken place across Ireland in response to the shocking revelations about the nature and extent of the late-term abortions now occurring in Ireland.

Published in the British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, September 2020, a report confirmed that babies are being aborted via foeticide, where the baby receives a lethal injection of potassium chloride into the heart. Doctors in the report described late-term abortion as “‘brutal’, ‘awful’ and ‘emotionally difficult’, referring to it as ‘stabbing the baby in the heart’, and held themselves responsible for the death of the baby”.

The shocking study was raised in a debate on Thursday 4th December in the Dáil (the Irish Parliament). The Minister for Health, Stephen Donnelly, failed to show up to answer questions from concerned TDs (Members of Parliament).

Niamh Uí Bhriain of the Life Institute, the group organising the pro-life vigils said: “There can be no cover-up in relation to these absolutely appalling revelations and the horrific treatment of babies in late-term abortions”.

“During the 2018 referendum, voters were assured that late-term abortions would not take place. They were told that in the case of an advanced pregnancy and where the baby had a severe anomaly, the baby would simply be delivered. This study has shown those claims to be untrue. The paper notes that ‘Ireland’s legislation is without gestational limits so creating opportunity for late TOP (termination of pregnancy) following FFA (fatal foetal anomaly)”. The horrific reality is that babies are being given lethal injections into the heart in late-term abortions and babies are also surviving abortions and not receiving care”.

“We will not allow the Health Minister to sweep this under the carpet. He must investigate and then he must take action to stop this barbaric practice from happening”.

Shocking and unspeakable

Independent TD for Tipperary, Mattie McGrath, said the report made for “grim reading”. He said what was revealed in the paper was shocking, unspeakable and had to end. He added that the Minister for Health during the time of the referendum, Simon Harris, dismissed concerns from TDs on this issue in 2018.

Carol Nolan, Independent TD for Laois Offaly, said TDs were assured that babies would never be born alive after abortion and left without care but that it was now happening. “What are you going to [do] about this?” she asked the government, adding that it was shameful that the Health Minister was not here to take questions. “It’s barbaric and shameful.” she said.

The pro-life protests took place in Carlow, Cork, Donegal, Dublin, Galway, Kerry, Kildare, Laois, Leitrim, Limerick, Mayo, Navan, Trim, Offaly, Roscommon, Sligo, Waterford, Wexford and other centres.

Late-term abortions in Ireland

Abortion legislation in Ireland permits abortion throughout all stages of pregnancy if the baby has a disability such that doctors can form a ‘reasonable opinion’ that the baby is likely to die within the first 28 days of his or her life.

Late-term abortions typically use a procedure known as ‘foeticide’, whereby the baby is killed in the womb, before inducing labour so that the mother gives birth to a dead child. This involves the injection of potassium chloride directly into the baby’s heart to end the baby’s life.

The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) says that “failure to perform foeticide could result in live birth and survival, an outcome that contradicts the intention of the abortion”.

The administration of potassium chloride in executions in the USA is considered so painful that it is necessary to first administer an anaesthetic before its use. There is, however, no such obligation to use painkillers in late-term abortions, despite the mounting evidence that the unborn baby is capable of experiencing pain and distress.

Spokesperson for Right To Life UK, Catherine Robinson, said: “Irish pro-lifers are absolutely right to protest against the extremity of abortion as revealed in this report. Through its interviews with those who actually perform abortions, the report shines a light on the total inhumanity of the whole process, and many people in Ireland are rightly disgusted”.

“It is particularly shameful that the former Minister for Health, Simon Harris, dismissed these kinds of concerns during the referendum and the current Minister for Health, Stephen Donnelly, has not presented himself to face questions on this”.

 

This is a Righttolife.org opinion piece

Ref: https://righttolife.org.uk/news/protests-across-ireland-following-late-term-abortion-report-release

 

UK Government rejects pressure from assisted suicide lobby to review law

UK Government rejects pressure from assisted suicide lobby to review law

The Government has announced it has no plans to review the law on assisted suicide or to issue a call for evidence.

In response to a Parliamentary question, the Government announced that “any change to the law in this area must be for individual Parliamentarians to consider as an issue of conscience, rather than a decision for Government”.

The announcement came after a question from assisted suicide supporter, Andrew Mitchell MP.

Assisted suicide campaigners have been putting pressure on the Government to undertake a review of the current law on assisted suicide.

The Government’s response is consistent with the continued Parliamentary rejection of assisted suicide legislation at the beginning of this year.

Through the courts

Parliament has consistently rejected attempts by the assisted suicide lobby to introduce assisted suicide. The Marris-Falconer Bill was defeated in 2015, with 330 to 118 voting against introducing assisted suicide.

Assisted suicide supporters have since attempted to pass assisted suicide legislation through the courts. All such attempts have so far failed. Last year, the high court said the courts were not the place to decide moral issues. In a ruling concerning a man with motor neurone disease who wanted to be assisted in suicide, the court said: “In our judgment the courts are not the venue for arguments that have failed to convince parliament”.

Similarly, at the beginning of this year, the Lord Chancellor Robert Buckland QC confirmed the Government has “no plans” to introduce assisted suicide legislation.

Support among Parliament, the courts and doctors for changes in assisted suicide legislation, which protects the most vulnerable, remain low. A recent BMA survey found that 84% of doctors in palliative medicine would not be willing to perform euthanasia on a patient should the law ever change.

Pushing the boundaries

Calls for the legalisation of assisted suicide come at the same time as a global pandemic and lockdowns, which are having an adverse effect on many people’s mental health. In October of this year in Canada, a 90-year-old woman was euthanised because she said she couldn’t cope with another lockdown.

Countries, like Canada, which have already legalised the practice, reveal that the motivations for assisted suicide are largely social and not medical. For example, in 2019 Canada reported that more than a third (34%) of those who opted for “medical assistance in dying” cited concerns of being a burden to family or carers. A further 13.7% cited “isolation or loneliness” as their reason for procuring an assisted suicide.

While proposed changes to assisted suicide legislation would likely not permit an assisted suicide under these circumstances, other countries which have introduced supposedly restricted assisted suicide and euthanasia legislation, have seen an expansion of their laws as medical professionals and activists push the boundaries of acceptable practice.

Euthanasia has been legal in the Netherlands since 2002. The law permits voluntary euthanasia for anyone over the age of 16, and children aged 13-15 can be euthanised with their parents’ consent. Earlier this year, the Dutch government said it would be changing the regulations to allow doctors to end the lives of terminally ill children between the ages of one and twelve. Non-voluntary euthanasia is already available for Dutch babies before the age of one.

Right To Life UK’s spokesperson, Catherine Robinson, said, “This latest Government rejection of calls to change the law on assisted suicide is welcome news. Throughout the COVID-19 restrictions, many people are suffering and sadly, some have ended their own lives. To introduce assisted suicide in England and Wales at this time would have particularly disastrous consequences for the most vulnerable in our society”.

 

This is a RightToLife.org opinion piece

Ref: https://righttolife.org.uk/news/government-rejects-pressure-from-assisted-suicide-lobby-to-review-law

Baby Molly Sets World Record: Born 27 Years After She Was Frozen as an Embryo

Baby Molly Sets World Record: Born 27 Years After She Was Frozen as an Embryo

An East Tennessee baby whose birth was facilitated by the National Embryo Donation Center (NEDC) has made history with her arrival. Molly Everette Gibson, the daughter of Tina and Ben Gibson, spent more than 27 years as an embryo in frozen preservation, setting the new known record for the longest-frozen embryo to ever come to birth, according to research staff at the University of Tennessee Preston Medical Library.

Molly was frozen on October 14, 1992. She was thawed by NEDC Lab Director & Embryologist Carol Sommerfelt on February 10, 2020 and transferred to Tina’s uterus by NEDC President & Medical Director Dr. Jeffrey Keenan on February 12, 2020. She was born October 26, 2020, weighing 6 lbs. 13 oz. and measuring 19 inches long.

What makes all of this even more special is that Molly broke her own sister’s record!

Fellow NEDC baby Emma Wren Gibson, born in 2017, had been frozen for more than 24 years, holding the known record for longest-frozen embryo to come to birth until Molly’s arrival. Both girls were frozen together as embryos and are full genetic siblings.

“I think this is proof positive that no embryo should ever be discarded, certainly not because it is ‘old!’” said Dr. Keenan. “This is also a testament to the excellent embryology work of Carol Sommerfelt. She is perhaps the preeminent embryologist in the country when it comes to thawing frozen embryos. And of course it’s a testament to how good God is, and to His infinite goodness and love.”

Follow LifeNews on the Parler social media network for the latest pro-life news!

“When Tina and Ben returned for their sibling transfer, I was thrilled that the remaining two embryos from the donor that resulted in Emma Wren’s birth survived the thaw and developed into two very good quality embryos for their transfer,” said Sommerfelt. “It was even more thrilling to learn 11 days later that Tina was pregnant.  I rejoiced with Tina and Ben as we all anxiously waited for the arrival of their second child.”

Sommerfelt added, “When Molly Everette was born on October 26, she was already 28 years old from the standpoint of the time the embryos had been frozen. This definitely reflects on the technology used all those years ago and its ability to preserve the embryos for future use under an indefinite time frame.  It also shows the reason the NEDC mission is so important, giving all donated embryos the best chance for life.”

The faith-based NEDC has gained distinction as the world’s leading comprehensive embryo adoption program, with more births facilitated (more than 1,000) through embryo adoption than any other organization or clinic. Its dual purpose is to protect the lives and dignity of frozen embryos that would not be used by their genetic parents and to help other couples build the families they have longed for via donated embryos. Embryos have been donated to the NEDC from all 50 states and couples have traveled to Knoxville from all over the United States as well as some foreign countries for their embryo transfers. Our website is www.embryodonation.org.

This is a LifeNews.com opinion piece

Ref: https://www.lifenews.com/2020/11/30/baby-molly-sets-world-record-born-27-years-after-she-was-frozen-as-an-embryo/?fbclid=IwAR0FdJhYlVh0tpL7wdYkGDCyLkI0iXLAafbEkszaT2-l1hQ8O0th1wqRxrU

Abortions in the U.S. Hit All-Time Low

Abortions in the U.S. Hit All-Time Low, More Babies Saved From Abortion Than Ever

Americans have another reason to give thanks this week. A new report from the Centers for Disease Control shows abortions have once again hit an all-time low as more babies are being saved from abortion than ever before.

The new CDC report covers the year 2018 and confirms America’s abortion decline continues. The report indicates the number of babies killed in abortions has declined 1.4% from 2016-2018 and the abortion rate — the percentage of women having an abortion or choosing life for their baby — has declined 2.% as more women opt against abortion.

The abortion decline was widespread. Not every state reports its abortion data to the CDC, but of the states that do 29 of them saw declines in their abortion rates. California, Maryland, and New Hampshire did not report abortion statistics to the CDC and, as a result, the actual number of babies killed in abortions is higher — usually estimated to be around 900,000 a year.

Looking at the data more historically, the number of babies killed in abortions has dropped 21.8% since 2009 and the abortion rate has declined 24.2 percent, making it clear that lifesaving efforts such as pregnancy centers across the nation have helped and supported more women as they give birth instead of having abortions. The abortion rate has declined over 50% since 1980.

Click here to sign up for pro-life news alerts from LifeNews.com

From 2009 to 2018, the total number of reported abortions, abortion rate, and abortion ratio decreased 22% (from 786,621), 24% (from 14.9 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15–44 years), and 16% (from 224 abortions per 1,000 live births), respectively.

Despite the decline and more babies saved, the number of children killed in abortions is still staggering, as the CDC indicated 619,591 babies had their lives ended by abortion in 2018. And despite the overall decline from its last report covering 2016 to this one covering 2018, the number of abortions in 2018 increased slightly by 1% from the 2017 levels.

The CDC indicates young women continue to have more abortions than other age groups.

In 2018, women in their 20s accounted for more than half of abortions (57.7%). In 2018 and during 2009–2018, women aged 20–24 and 25–29 years accounted for the highest percentages of abortions; in 2018, they accounted for 28.3% and 29.4% of abortions, respectively, and had the highest abortion rates (19.1 and 18.5 per 1,000 women aged 20–24 and 25–29 years, respectively). By contrast, adolescents aged <15 years and women aged ≥40 years accounted for the lowest percentages of abortions (0.2% and 3.6%, respectively) and had the lowest abortion rates (0.4 and 2.6 per 1,000 women aged <15 and ≥40 years, respectively). However, abortion ratios in 2018 and throughout 2009–2018 were highest among adolescents (aged ≤19 years) and lowest among women aged 25–39 years.

But the good news is “Abortion rates decreased from 2009 to 2018 for all women, regardless of age.”

The decrease in abortion rate was highest among adolescents compared with women in any other age group. From 2009 to 2013, the abortion rates decreased for all age groups and from 2014 to 2018, the abortion rates decreased for all age groups, except for women aged 30–34 years and those aged ≥40 years. In addition, from 2017 to 2018, abortion rates did not change or decreased among women aged ≤24 and ≥40 years; however, the abortion rate increased among women aged 25–39 years. Abortion ratios also decreased from 2009 to 2018 among all women, except adolescents aged <15 years. The decrease in abortion ratio was highest among women aged ≥40 years compared with women in any other age group. The abortion ratio decreased for all age groups from 2009 to 2013; however, from 2014 to 2018, abortion ratios only decreased for women aged ≥35 years. From 2017 to 2018, abortion ratios increased for all age groups, except women aged ≥40 years.

Follow LifeNews on the Parler social media network for the latest pro-life news!

Most all abortions involved killing babies between 7 and 13 weeks of age, but 9% of all abortions involved killing older babies past 13 weeks. And 1% of abortions killed babies at or after viability, meaning abortions killed over 6,100 viable babies.

The CDC also indicated that half of abortions now involve the dangerous mifepristone abortion drug while the other half remain surgical abortions. When it comes to later abortions, the CDC report shows more surgical abortions are done to end babies’ lives than abortions with the pills.

The abortion industry continues to target black women and, as a result, they continue having abortion at much higher rates than women of other ethnicity.

“Among the 31 areas that reported race/ethnicity data for 2018, non-Hispanic White women and non-Hispanic Black women accounted for the largest percentages of all abortions (38.7% and 33.6%, respectively), and Hispanic women and non-Hispanic women in the other race category accounted for smaller percentages (20.0% and 7.7%, respectively),” the CDC reports. “Non-Hispanic White women had the lowest abortion rate (6.3 abortions per 1,000 women) and ratio (110 abortions per 1,000 live births), and non-Hispanic Black women had the highest abortion rate (21.2 abortions per 1,000 women) and ratio (335 abortions per 1,000 live births).”

Abortion also continues to be used as a method of birth control as 23.9% of women having an abortion had previously had one abortion, 9.9% had previously had two abortions, and 6.4% had previously had three or more abortions.

Overall, the news is encouraging for pro-life advocates who are working to empower pregnant mothers to choose life and to restore legal protections to unborn babies.

From providing free diapers and ultrasounds to educating parenting students about their rights on campus, to sidewalk counseling to laws that protect unborn babies from brutal dismemberment abortions, pro-life leaders are making a difference in the lives of countless families every single day.

Not since the U.S. Supreme Court allowed abortion on demand in 1973 through Roe v. Wade have abortion numbers been so low. An estimated 62 million unborn babies have been aborted since the infamous case was handed down.

This is a LifeNews.com opinion piece

Ref: https://www.lifenews.com/2020/11/25/abortions-in-the-u-s-hit-all-time-low-more-babies-saved-from-abortion-than-ever/

Pope Francis Opposes Argentina Bill Legalizing Abortions: Don’t “Eliminate Human Life to Solve a Problem”

Pope Francis Opposes Argentina Bill Legalizing Abortions: Don’t “Eliminate Human Life to Solve a Problem”

Pope Francis, answering the pleas of Argentine women who are fighting for the rights of unborn babies, wrote a public letter to his home country this week urging its leaders not to legalize abortions.

According to the National Catholic Register, the grassroots group of pro-life women recently wrote to the pope, urging him to “help us by making our voice heard” in opposition to a new pro-abortion bill. Their letter and the pope’s response both appeared in the newspaper La Nacion on Wednesday.

“Is it fair to eliminate a human life to solve a problem? Is it fair to hire a hitman to solve a problem?” the pope wrote, adding that the pro-life women “know what life is.”

Argentina is facing renewed pressure to abandon its protections for unborn babies and legalize abortion on demand. Earlier this month, President Alberto Fernandez announced plans to introduce a bill to legalize abortions up to 14 weeks of pregnancy, according to the Buenos Aires Times.

Wide-spread public opposition stopped a similar bill from passing in 2018, and pro-life advocates hope to do so again.

In his letter Wednesday, Pope Francis praised the women who have been fighting for years to prevent the violence of abortion in Argentina.

“The country is proud to have such women,” he wrote. “Please tell them for me that I admire their work and their testimony; that I thank them from the bottom of my heart for what they do, and that they keep going.”

REACH PRO-LIFE PEOPLE WORLDWIDE! Advertise with LifeNews to reach hundreds of thousands of pro-life readers every week. Contact us today.

The women who wrote to Pope Francis began meeting in 2018 to fight pro-abortion misinformation and advocate for the lives of women and babies in their country. One survey that they conducted found that 80 percent of Argentines oppose abortion, according to the report.

They told the pope that poor women and their children will be hurt the most if the pro-abortion bill passes.

Here’s more from the report:

The women told Pope Francis about being filled with “cold terror” after the abortion bill was introduced to the legislature last week, “just thinking that this project is aimed at adolescents in our neighborhoods.”

“Not so much because in the villa [shanty town] culture abortion is thought of as a solution to an unexpected pregnancy (Your Holiness knows well our way of assuming motherhood between aunts, grandmothers and neighbors),” the women wrote, “but because [the law] is oriented to cultivate the idea that abortion is one more possibility within the range of contraceptive methods and that even the main users must be poor women.”

They urged Pope Francis to use his voice to help them fight against the idea that “our life is the unwanted one and that we do not have the right to have children because we are poor.”

Currently, Argentina protects unborn babies from being killed in abortions. Exceptions are allowed in cases of rape or threats to the mother’s life. Most countries in Central and South America protect unborn babies from abortion, but Fernández wants Argentina to change that.

“Legalizing abortion saves women’s lives and preserves their reproductive capabilities, which are often affected by unsafe abortions, but it does not increase the number of abortions or promote them,” he said earlier this month.

None of this is true. Abortions destroy lives, they do not save them, and pro-abortion laws jeopardize the lives of more unborn babies by putting the government’s approval on killing them. Pro-abortion groups often overestimate the number of illegal and unsafe abortions that occur in countries across the world, and some have admitted to lying about the numbers. Growing research also indicates that access to basic health care, not abortion, is what really helps improve women’s lives.

Pro-lifers have been making their voices heard to lawmakers. In 2019, approximately 2 million Argentines participated in the country’s March for Life in Buenos Aires. Thousands more protested in March after Fernandez first announced his plans to legalize abortion on demand.

A similar proposal to legalize the killing of unborn babies in Argentina failed in 2018 because of strong public opposition. But pro-abortion groups, backed by some of the richest men in the world, continue to put intense pressure on Argentina and other countries to legalize abortion on demand.

This is a Righttolife.org.uk opinion piece

Ref: https://www.lifenews.com/2020/11/25/pope-francis-opposes-argentina-bill-legalizing-abortions-dont-eliminate-human-life-to-solve-a-problem/

 

US States Passed 19 Pro-Life Laws in 2020 Saving Unborn Babies from Abortion

US States Passed 19 Pro-Life Laws in 2020 Saving Unborn Babies from Abortion

Despite the coronavirus shutdowns and limited legislative sessions, 13 states still made protections for unborn babies a priority in 2020.

A new report from Americans United for Life recently highlighted the life-saving laws and resolutions that state lawmakers passed this year – doing what they could to end the human rights abuse of abortion against unborn babies in the midst of the COVID-19 crisis.

According to Americans United for Life, 13 states passed 19 pro-life laws in 2020, including measures to require abortion facilities to give mothers accurate information and to protect underage girls from secret abortions without a parent’s knowledge or consent.

“While state lawmakers hit the ground running in January, pursuing dozens of life-affirming bills, efforts stalled in March when the COVID-19 global pandemic prematurely ended the legislative sessions in most states,” the pro-life organization said.

Thankfully, the shutdowns meant that states also passed fewer pro-abortion laws; only Virginia and the District of Columbia voted to expand abortions, AUL noted. Currently, Massachusetts also is considering a last-minute amendment tacked onto its budget that would expand late-term abortions in the state.

HELP LIFENEWS SAVE BABIES FROM ABORTION! Please help LifeNews.com with a year-end donation!

The states that passed pro-life laws were: Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nebraska, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, West Virginia and Wyoming.

Idaho and Utah passed legislation that would ban abortions when Roe v. Wade is overturned or the U.S. Supreme Court allows states to begin protecting unborn babies again, according to the report.

Three other state legislatures passed bills to protect newborns from infanticide, but only the one in West Virginia became law. The governors of Kentucky and Wyoming vetoed the Born-Alive Infant Protection Acts in their states.

Meanwhile, Florida passed a law to strengthen parental involvement when an underage girl has an abortion. The state now requires a minor to have a parent’s consent prior to aborting her unborn baby. Such laws not only protect young girls and their babies from abortion, but they also can help prevent and expose sexual abuse.

Four other states, Alaska, Iowa, Kansas and Kentucky, moved forward with ballot initiatives and constitutional amendments to protect unborn babies, according to the report.

Meanwhile, Louisiana voters just overwhelmingly passed a pro-life amendment to their constitution on Nov. 3. It states, “To protect human life, nothing in this constitution shall be construed to protect a right to abortion or the tax payer funding of abortion.”

Pro-life laws do save lives. Americans United for Life pointed to research by Dr. Michael New, professor of social research and political science at the Catholic University of America and associate scholar at the Charlotte Lozier Institute. New’s research found a direct correlation between increasing the number of state pro-life laws and reducing the number of abortions.

As a result, “the national abortion rate continues its downward trend, and it is now the lowest rate since 1973, when Roe v. Wade legalized abortion,” the pro-life organization said.

There were 862,320 abortions in the U.S. in 2017, down from a high of about 1.5 million annually in the early 1990s, according to the Guttmacher Institute.

The declining abortion rate comes as states pass a record number of pro-life laws. In 2019, the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute reported 33 states passed a record 479 pro-life laws since 2011. To put that number into perspective, states have passed 1,271 pro-life laws since 1973 when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Roe v. Wade. This means more than one third of all pro-life laws in the U.S. were approved in the past decade.

However, the abortion industry is challenging many of these laws in court. Because of Roe v. Wade, states have very limited power to protect unborn babies and mothers from abortions.

Many state lawmakers recognize that their constituents want unborn babies to be protected.

Polls consistently show strong support of abortion restrictions. A 2019 Hill-HarrisX survey found that 55 percent of voters said they do not think laws banning abortions after six weeks – when an unborn baby’s heartbeat is detectable – are too restrictive.

Another poll out of Harvard University found that just 6 percent of Americans said abortions should be allowed “up until the birth of the child,” while 8 percent said they should be permitted up to the third trimester. It also found that a majority of Americans want the U.S. Supreme Court to revisit Roe v.Wade.

This is a LifeNews.com opinion piece

Ref: https://www.lifenews.com/2020/11/17/states-passed-19-pro-life-laws-in-2020-saving-unborn-babies-from-abortion/

 

 

Abortionist Forced Woman to Have Abortion: “Don’t Scream, You’ll Scare the Other Patients”

Abortionist Forced Woman to Have Abortion: “Don’t Scream, You’ll Scare the Other Patients”

Crystal’s abortion was like a horror story in real life.

Pressured by her boyfriend and then forced into it by the abortionist and his staff, the young woman never fully recovered from the trauma of her unborn baby’s abortion death, Live Action News reports.

However, she went to a Rachel’s Vineyard retreat where pro-lifers helped her begin to heal from the pain and abuse that she experienced and grieve the loss of her baby. She shared her story in the book “Shockwaves: Abortions Wider Circle of Victim,” by Janet Morana.

According to the report, Crystal became pregnant at age 18 to her 22-year-old boyfriend. She said he quickly began pressuring her into an abortion, and she consented to go to the abortion facility.

“I was never asked what I wanted to do about the baby, he decided for me,” she said.

The abortion facility staff confirmed that she was 13-weeks pregnant when they did an ultrasound, the report continues. Crystal said she had to beg them repeatedly before they finally let her see her unborn baby’s image.

“Finally, they turned the screen toward me. I could see my BABY, not a ball of tissue or clump of cells, but my BABY moving around. Face, hands, and even the heart beating. I got to see the tiny child turning somersaults in my belly,” she remembered.

REACH PRO-LIFE PEOPLE WORLDWIDE! Advertise with LifeNews to reach hundreds of thousands of pro-life readers every week. Contact us today.

Crystal said she began to argue with her boyfriend again about the abortion, and again he insisted that she go through with it. Because they did not have $1,200 for the abortion and anesthesia, she paid for the abortion without pain relief, the report continues.

She did not want to abort her unborn baby, but the abortion staff did nothing to empower her to make her own choice. Instead, she said they gave her “one-sided opinions, no medical facts.”

“I was lied to! I was told that there were rarely any side effects. ‘Most women go out that night,’ I was told. ‘It’s really no big deal. It will all be over soon…’” she continued. “After filling my head with lies, they took me to a cold room for the procedure.”

Feeling a renewed urgency to save her baby’s life, she told the abortionist that she did not want the abortion, according to the report. Instead of listening, he told the abortion workers to hold her down, she remembered.

Crystal said she yelled at him and told him “no” several times, but he ignored her. At one point, she said she screamed at him to stop. To which he responded: “Don’t scream. You’ll scare the other patients.”

She said she felt “violated and threatened” as he began, and the pain was excruciating.

The horrific experience traumatized her. Crystal said she began to drink to numb the pain. Eventually, she said she dropped out of school and married her abusive boyfriend to “punish” herself.

“Abortion took my soul, and now I didn’t deserve happiness,” she said. “I felt unlovable. I hated myself, and I was unworthy of forgiveness. I deserved to be punished for what I did. I murdered my baby!”

Crystal was physically traumatized as well. She said she passed out during a pap smear because she experienced a painful flashback to her abortion.

Eventually, she connected with pro-lifers who run Rachel’s Vineyard, a post-abortion healing ministry that counsels women and men across the world. Through the retreat, she said she began to heal, but the trauma may never be gone.

Crystal’s horrific experience is not unique. Abuse is commonly connected with abortion, and women frequently say they felt pressured or even forced to abort their unborn babies – sometimes under threat of violence or death. As LifeNews previously reported, one study found that as many as 64 percent of post-abortive women say they felt pressure to have an abortion.

LifeNews has been keeping track of stories involving allegations of forced and coerced abortions, as well as abuse connected with women who refuse to abort their unborn babies. They include:

England – Man Threatens to Slit His Baby’s Throat if His Ex-Girlfriend Didn’t Have Abortion

England – Husband Orders His Wife to Kill Their Unborn Baby in an Abortion

Florida – Jeffrey Epstein Rape Victim Says She Was Pressured to Have Abortion

California – U.S. Swim Coach Accused of Sexual Abuse, Pressuring Girl into Abortion

Pennsylvania – Man Allegedly Used Abortion Pills to Hide Sexual Abuse of Daughter and Stepdaughter When They Got Pregnant

India – Woman’s Parents Allegedly Strangle Her to Death After She Refuses to Kill Her Baby in an Abortion

Philippines – Police Officer Charged with Raping Intern, Forcing Her to Abort Her Unborn Child

Uganda – Man Stabs 18 Year-Old Girlfriend to Death After She Refuses to Have Abortion

India – Teacher Rapes 13-Year-Old Student, Then Forces Her to Have Abortion

England – Pastor Raped Multiple Women and Children From His Congregation, Forced Them to Have Abortions

Wales – Man Accused of Brutally Strangling His Pregnant Girlfriend, Demanding She Get an Abortion

Texas – Man Jailed for Life After Killing His Pregnant Girlfriend Because She Wouldn’t Abort Their Baby

California – Man Reportedly Forced His Girlfriend at Gunpoint at Take Drugs to Kill Her Baby in Abortion

Wisconsin – Man Allegedly Slipped Abortion Drugs into Pregnant Girlfriend’s Drink

England – Man Allegedly Tries to Force Girlfriend to Abort Their Disabled Baby: “It Would be Cruel to Have a Baby Like That”

Indiana – Teen Kills Pregnant Girlfriend After She Waited Too Long to Get Abortion: “I Took Action, I Took Her Life”

Tennessee – Man Kills Girlfriend and 4-Month Old Baby, She Refused to Abort So He Could Escape Child Support

New York – Attacker Kills Woman 5 Months Pregnant, New York’s New Abortion Law Says Her Baby Isn’t a Human Being

Utah – Man Reportedly Killed His Pregnant Ex-Girlfriend Because She Refused to Have Abortion

Virginia – Doctor Convicted of Spiking Pregnant Girlfriend’s Drink with Abortion Drugs

Hawaii – Man Stabs His Girlfriend More Than Two Dozen Times Because She Refused an Abortion

California – Man Hired Hitman to Kill His Girlfriend and Unborn Son Because She Refused Abortion

Florida – Man Sentenced to 15 Years in Prison for Tricking Pregnant Girlfriend into Taking Abortion Drugs

Norway – Man Convicted of Killing Unborn Baby after Slipping Abortion Drugs into Girlfriend’s Drink

Indiana – Man Charged with Attempted Feticide for Allegedly Spiking Girlfriend’s Drink with Abortion Herbs

New York – Man Convicted of Attempted Murder after Secretly Giving Girlfriend Abortion Drugs

Pennsylvania – Abortion Doc Allegedly Tried to Force His Girlfriend to Abort Their Baby, Then Beat Her When She Refused

Colorado – Man Uses a Skewer to Force His Girlfriend to Abort After She Refuses Demand to Have an Abortion

Indiana – Man Tries to Force Pregnant Girlfriend to Have Abortion By Poisoning Her Drink

England – Man Jailed for Tying Up His Girlfriend, Forcing Abortion Drugs Into Her Vagina

This is a LifeNews.com opinion piece

Ref: https://www.lifenews.com/2020/11/17/abortionist-forced-woman-to-have-abortion-dont-scream-youll-scare-the-other-patients/

 

50 UK Palliative Care Doctors Speak Out Against Introducing Assisted Suicide

50 UK Palliative Care Doctors Speak Out Against Introducing Assisted Suicide

Over fifty doctors working in palliative medicine and care for dying patients have signed a letter to The Times in opposition to any proposed changes in the assisted suicide law.

In the face of continual attempts to legalise assisted suicide, fifty doctors have signalled their continued support for protections in the law for the most vulnerable. In particular, the doctors have called attention to a recent British Medical Association survey on assisted suicide which shows the unwillingness of doctors to participate in assisted suicide and euthanasia.

Most doctors would not participate in assisted suicide or euthanasia

In the letter, the doctors point out that whatever marginal support there is for the idea of assisted suicide, it remains the case that a “majority of doctors licensed to practise would not agree to prescribe lethal drugs (assisted suicide) and a larger majority would not administer them (euthanasia).”

In other words, when the doctors who answered the survey were asked if they would personally “participate in any way in the process” of assisted suicide, 45% said ‘no’, as opposed to 36% who said ‘yes’. When asked if they would personally “participate in any way in the process” of euthanasia, 54% said ‘no’, and only 26% said ‘yes’.

The same BMA survey showed that 84% of doctors in palliative medicine would not be willing to perform euthanasia on a patient should the law ever change.

The letter also notes that supposed safeguards in euthanaisa and assisted suicide laws are regularly breached. “Every legislature that allows ‘safeguarded’ assisted dying has seen its safeguards breached, starkly illustrating the gap between principle and practice.” In the Netherlands, for example, reports indicate that the requirement for explicit consent is frequently ignored, as is the required reporting of all instances of euthanasia.

The signers of the letter also emphasise the role medical professionals, which “if ever assisted dying were to be legalised… must be limited to the provision of an opinion on the applicant’s medical condition. It should be for the courts alone to make decisions – as they do now – on life-or-death issues.”

Being a burden

Calls for the legalisation of assisted suicide come at the same time as countries that have already legalised the practise reveal that the motivations for assisted suicide are social and not medical.

For example, in 2019 Canada reported that more than a third (34%) of those who opted for “medical assistance in dying” cited concerns of being a burden to family or carers. A further 13.7% cited “isolation or loneliness” as their reason for procuring an assisted suicide.

Right To Life UK’s spokesperson Catherine Robinson, said: “Once again, this letter shows that the vast majority of those doctors working with dying patients are opposed  to the introduction of assisted suicide.

“The data from Canada shows that ‘isolation or loneliness’ is a reason people choose assisted suicide. With the current COVID 19 lockdowns, loneliness is likely to get worse. This is a serious social problem, not a medical one, and the solution to it is not to end the lives of those suffering.”

This is a Right to Life opinion piece

Ref: https://righttolife.org.uk/news/fifty-palliative-care-doctors-speak-out-against-introducing-assisted-suicide/

Ban on Celebrating Mass During Lockdown: the French Government’s Abuse of Power

Ban on Celebrating Mass During Lockdown: the French Government’s Abuse of Power

A judge of the Conseil d’État, ruling in summary proceedings, decided this Saturday, November 7, not to restore full freedom of worship, thus rejecting the appeal filed by the Conference of Catholic Bishops, Congregations and Faithful. This decision deserves several comments.

Article published in the French weekly Newspaper Valeurs Actuelles on Novembre, 9.

A first observation is obvious: the decline in the knowledge of Catholicism by public authorities, and the resulting historical choice of the bishops to take the government to court to defend their liberties. This is a cultural change.

For the government, commerce is more worthy than religion; and at no time has the Conseil d’État questioned this axiom. Freedom of worship would be only one aspect of freedom of assembly and would be worth less than freedom of demonstration, which is still permitted.

This is a considerable fall because never before had the drafters of the 1905 law imagined that freedom of worship would be belittled in this way. International law even places this freedom of religion above the other freedoms by admitting “no derogation” from it, even “in the event of a public emergency which threatens the existence of the nation and is proclaimed by an official act.” Surprisingly, the judge deliberately ignored this provision of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Nor did the judge note the government’s abuse of power in deciding which religious ceremonies can be celebrated in a church (marriage and burial with 6 and 30 people respectively) to the exclusion of others (baptisms, confirmations, ordinations, etc.), which clearly violates the 1905 law. The Republic is supposed to ignore religious practices.

However, we can be grateful to the Conseil d’État for providing several useful clarifications:

The faithful may go to places of worship located more than one kilometre away and for a period of more than one hour, by checking the box “urgent family reason” [in the auto-attestation form that is compulsory to go outside during the lockdown in France]. In this regard, the judge in charge of summary proceedings invites the Government to correct the form to “explain” this option.

The ministers of religion may receive the faithful individually, go to their homes and to the establishments where they are chaplains to exercise their ministry. Catholic priests may therefore administer the sacraments in the church, in private homes, as well as in schools, prisons or hospitals, without being subject to the limit of six persons constituting a group when this does not apply.

The faithful may also go to places of worship while the priest is celebrating Mass, provided that they avoid “any gathering with persons who do not share their home.” On this last point, the criteria are still unclear. As the government acknowledged at the hearing, one can be more than six people in a large church without creating a grouping… it all depends on the size of the place of worship. It is regrettable in this regard that France has not adopted an objective criterion of density of faithful per square meter, as many countries have done.

 

Finally, the scope of this decision should be put into perspective.

Like every summary proceeding, it is a decision taken by a single judge, in a state of urgency. It is not final and is only valid “in the state of the investigation and at the date of the present order.”

Thus, the judge may be called again in summary proceedings as soon as new circumstances can be invoked in support of the release of the cult. In this respect, the judge emphasized that the extension of the state of health emergency “presupposes the commitment to a consultation with all the representatives of the main religions, aimed at clarifying the conditions under which these restrictions could evolve.” In doing so, the judge discreetly supports the request of the representatives of the cults to be heard.

Finally, any believer can still appeal to the Conseil d’État against the decree of October 29, 2020, so that the judges, sitting this time in a collegial manner, can decide this question on the merits. A priority question of constitutionality (QPC) could even be added to the procedure. But this procedure will take several months.

In the meantime, it remains possible to declare at the prefecture the holding of demonstrations in public squares, to demand full freedom of worship while celebrating mass. Priests can also celebrate daily requiem Masses with thirty faithful, even in the absence of a body, as the decree authorizes them to do.

This is a eclj.org opinion piece by Grégor Puppinck

Ref: https://eclj.org/religious-freedom/french-institutions/ban-on-celebrating-mass-during-lockdown-the-governments-abuse-of-power