FDA authorizes expanded use of medical abortion pill

by
March 31, 2016

1459362331952
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has kicked up a potential abortion hornet’s nest with states that impose restrictions on a common abortion-inducing drug, approving a new label for the medication that relaxes guidelines for using it.

The FDA notified the manufacturer of Mifeprex, a drug previously known as RU-486, in a letter on Tuesday that the drug is safe and effective for terminating a pregnancy in accordance with the new label. Also known as mifepristone, the synthetic steroid drug is used in combination with another drug, misoprostol, to end a pregnancy.

Under the new label, a smaller dose of Mifeprex can be used significantly later in the pregnancy — up to 70 days of gestation, from 49 days.

The decision could rankle lawmakers in states that required the drugs to be used in accordance with the original labels. Critics complained those labels were outdated and restrictive.

  • billyrb1

    Ken, I wish you were right. However, I have to disagrees with your opinion of the FDA.
    The drug companies know when they create certain drugs, these certain drugs are created to be used for specific purposes, some for abortion of live fetuses, since government approved drugs can be used to kill live fetuses.
    Then the drug companies have their lobbyist to target FDA officials that can pass the drugs for specific purposes. Just like they get Congress to pass bills they want to see passed for specific purposes.

    • Ken says

      Get real – the Pharmaceutical Industry is infiltrated up the ladder at the FDA just like Monsanto controls tests and approvals. Support Trump to get a grip on OUR EMPLOYEES – efficiency, accountability and terminations will start to make OUR employees responsive.

  • Amelia Williams

    The FDA has approved toxic food and medications for years. Lucky Charms, for example, is made with a heavy duty house hold chemical, their goal is to kill as many Americans as possible and eventually try and control the survivors with government assistance. It surely does not surprise me that they are creating more abortion pills. They use aborted fetuses in many of the shots given to children and adults today. Which are actually full of toxins and are more harmful than beneficial to us. It is all about $$$ they do NOT care about our health or our future!

    • empty pockets

      Eugenicists rarely DO care about SAViNG lives. For instance, PP was founded by a eugenicist, it is supported by eugenicists and “useful idiots” who enable it often in ignorance of what it’s true goal is.

      The FDA has been wrong numerous times since its creation. Like the rest of the exec branch it is a tool for behavior modification and redistribution of wealth (and rewarding of friends, punishment of enemies). Sounds like a conspiracy theory doesn’t it? But if you follow the connections and the money, the “theory”part just evaporates. All things considered, I suppose we should be grateful they get ANYTHING right. The old adage about throwing enough s**t against the wall comes to mind… But while the agency and all those at the top put political ideology (and money) above science and integrity, there are some good people in the ranks which explains why they DO get some things right, IMO.

  • Navalair59

    We can’t seem to find cures for cancer, we can’t seem to find a way to secure our country, we can’t seem to find a way to fight ISIS BUT we sure know how to murder over 50 million babies and improve on that.. We have become a nation without character, integrity or morals.. You want proof, just look at three of the so called presidential candidates.. Hillary, a lying, thieving traitor, Bernie, a communist, and Trump, a loud mouthed belligerent buffoon…

    • Ken says

      You forgot Kaslich and Cruz – both Establishment Puppets

      • empty pockets

        True about Kasich anyway, the delusional megalomaniac.

        • Ken says

          George Soros donated to Kaslich last month – Cruz will be next.

          • empty pockets

            There are basically two reasons why people donate to politicians. Either they wish to influence their decisions or they wish to support the kinds of decisions they’ve already shown they will make.

            For Soros, he always intends to influence but even if he did donate somehow to a Cruz supporting PAC he wouldn’t be expecting to change him nor would he be supporting him. It would be entirely to stop Trump who, though being an habitual leftist, is also a bombastic loose cannon as apt to insult world leaders as not. Soros would find Kasich acceptable if he can’t have either of his first two picks–Bernie and Hillary, in that order. He’s come out in support of Bernie–the full socialist.

          • Ken says

            Soros would not have to change him – Cruz is already an Establishment Puppet. 5 candidates left running for President. Kasich, Sanders,Cruz and Clinton are all Establishment Puppets and the Establishment would be happy with any one of them. Trump is an outsider – not a Professional Politician like the other 4 – Trump is not bought and controlled. All the Conservative voters need to wake up – the 4 Puppets will not change anything and will be handed the agenda and continue with more of the last 27 years. If the Conservatives and Moderates do not get together and we will have more of the same Government we have now. I am a Constitutional Government Conservative and have no problem giving up a few of my “wish list” Conservative ideals in order to get action on some of them. After the last 27 years – ANY change in direction is a big improvement

          • empty pockets

            You are aware of his multiple lies? His multiple lies about his lies? His “positions” which seem to be decided at any given time by spinning a bottle and are subject to change on a whim? How can anyone know what he believes–other than HE is entitled–when he has no idea what he believes or is supposed to believe for the role of repub he’s currently playing.

            If you are yet you STILL believe he will even attempt to do any of the stuff he’s said -if you can pin him down on something…anything–then there is no point to continuing any back and forth.

          • Ken says

            I’ve know Trump over 20 years. He is an astute businessman and negotiator. He is also a very Patriotic American. He embraces some of the Conservative issues that concern me – debt, size of government, National Security, open borders, defense and the VA, education – the list goes on but those are most important. Just for starters the 4 candidates previously mentioned will give “lip service to get elected” – then flip you off as they have for 27 years. This is the first time there is a REAL choice this Century. The choice is yours – do you want more of the same or an attempt to change it?

          • empty pockets

            If I wanted more of the same I would support Trump as you do. It’s because I DO want restoration of America’s fed gov’t to something within sight of its original Constitutional model that I can never support Trump since he hasn’t the first clue what that is, means or why that is necessary for us to get back on track for prosperity and security in an unstable and dangerous world.

            Your guy has shown no interest in learning about it either. He can’t even be bothered to learn the rules of the Party he is pretending to be part of as candidate. I support the candidate whose actions support his words—something Trump’s words do not do. His actions have supported those AGAINST what I believe, what Trump says NOW that he does…until he filps his position or flops it then back again.

            NO…He is not my guy…you keep him.

          • Ken says

            Empty Pockets – keep voting for the Establishment and their Liberal RINO and DEM Puppets – their agenda is to keep your POCKETS EMPTY – eliminate Rights and reduce the USA to a Third World Country. You will be happy with any of the 4 – Kasich, Sanders, Cruz, Clinton (or any other candidate the Establishment picks to run in either Party). They will all give you more of the same. This year a choice is possible.

    • I Seigel

      There are several promising treatments for different kinds of cancer, but there is not just one “cancer” to cure.

      There are ways to secure our border, but Congress can’t find the will or the funds to do it. But it makes a great topic to campaign on and raise donations.

      There are ways to fight ISIS, but they ALL involve Saudi Arabia and Iran. You can’t “carpet bomb” an ideology.

      Why not complain about dealing with climate change? Or bringing to justice the bankers who caused millions of people to lose their homes?

    • Amelia Williams

      A lot of the ingredients they put in food we buy and medicines create cancer. When people lived off of the land a long time ago, they use to live healthier and longer lives.They do not want to cure cancer because they make billions of dollars treating people with it. I am not happy with the presidential candidates this year, the one person who I felt could help make a change for the better, Ben Carson, dropped out. : (

  • billyrb1

    I think FDA should stay out of the abortion business. I feel insulted that they are using money from American Tax Payers to fund abortions. Because vast majority of Americans are against abortions. They should not let meat heads like the government, obama and SCOTUS make the decision to allow abortions to be legal.
    A vote by all American Citizens in the election year of 2016 should be allowed to decide about of abortions. American should be the ones to decide if they want their Taxes to pay for ABORTIONS or not. Those meat heads mentioned above should not be allowed to crame this issue down the throats of American Tax Payer. Most politicians are being paid huge amounts of money by drug cartel lobbyist to make the issue on abortions legal, government is not deciding for the American people over all. Government is deciding for themselves and always passing bills getting money from lobbyist for themselves to line their pockets.

    • Ken says

      they are not in the abortion business – as inept as they are – they approve and classify pharmaceutical products.

    • I Seigel

      Your taxes are not being used to pay for abortions. That stopped during the Reagan administration. Where have YOU been?

      • empty pockets

        Keep telling yourself that. Money is fungible. Besides, taxpayer money which funds “approved” expenses but not others, still frees up funds from the SAME organization to be USED for those UNapproved things.

        • I Seigel

          Oh, you mean like SuperPAC money? Not donated directly to a candidate, but those funds free up other monies that the candidates can spend directly. Fungible like that, you mean?

          • empty pockets

            No…completely separate entities have completely separate money. See the word “same” I used above?

            But your attempt at distraction, while lame, is noted.

          • I Seigel

            I’m not attempting to distract. I’m drawing an analogy, which I’m sure you’re intelligent enough to see.
            And when you say “same”, you’re implying that government money somehow makes its way into abortion services, which is not correct. Or, if I misunderstood and you’re saying that PP uses funding from OTHER sources to provide abortion services? Then yes, that’s true and nothing illegal about it.

          • empty pockets

            A more apt analogy: A business owns a large building. On one side is a day care and on the other side, legal porn movies are made. The day care is a “non-profit” and offers services to low income mothers and is at least partially taxpayer funded. Day care funds are used to pay utilities and “rent” to the other “side” of the biz which that “side” would have to pay in full regardless of what was in the other half of the building, even if nothing. But the money brought in by the DC half defrays some of the costs for the porn half leaving them more of “their” money to spend on that biz or as profit from that biz.

            The vast majority of taxpayers would scream bloody murder over that kind of set up yet that is not unlike PP’s model. Furthermore, most PP locations offer nothing not readily available in any other clinic for the same cost to the patient–except abortion. In fact, PP does not do mammograms or many other services, they give referrals to those other clinics who do perform them so there is no reason for any taxpayer funds to go to a place which does nothing but act as a yellow pages and push abortion.

          • I Seigel

            That’s a good analogy. What you’ve described is called money laundering. And following your analogy, there are millions of businesses in every country, and thousands of leaders of countries all over the world, that profit by that same analogy. Just look at the new news about the “Panama Papers”.
            You could say, for example, that the Koch Brothers funnel monies that they’ve earned from their coal and oil businesses into politics and pay a portion of their profits to candidates and lobbyists to gain influence. And how did they get those profits? Well, one way is by getting the tax breaks for oil and gas exploration, or from government contracts they hold to provide whatever services they do. Planned Parenthood is peanuts compared to what these other folks are up to. But with the Kochs et al, it’s all under the table and behind the curtains. With PP, it’s all in plain sight.

          • empty pockets

            Had you used Soros or any of the left’s “whales” or even some of the right’s it would make more sense and be far more accurate than the Kochs. They are libertarians who have supported policies which would end subsidies to all, something they support. They have also supported dems as well as Rs.

            But your extrapolation into crony-ism is precisely why federal gov’t MUST be shrunken. When business and government collude, business always takes over the control. A gov’t that has no power over areas where they aren’t SUPPOSED to have power also have no power to trade for “donations”. Their power is supposed to be only to rein in biz excesses, not party with the offenders.

            As for In plain sight on PP…yeah when the baby chop shop op came into “plain sight” something that was not supposed to even be going on, something they still professed was NOT going on, they then said “it’s stopped”.

            I guess “in plain sight” means something very different to you than to me.

          • I Seigel

            I’m a little confused by your second paragraph. Government MUST be shrunken, so that they can’t trade power for “donations”. Their power is only to rein in business excesses. Do I have that right?
            So, if you shrink government – and I assume you don’t include the military in this statement? – then you shrink their resources and their ability to rein in business excesses. You shrink the SEC, the Dodd-Frank Act, the FBI and other agencies whose job it is to rein in excesses, and you have business – like MetLife – who want to rebuild their “too big to fail” empires.

            One of the main problems with your goal of shrinking government is that Congress – with Republicans in majorities in BOTH houses – can’t decide how to shrink it. Where are the bills? Why hasn’t Obama vetoed any Republican proposals to shrink or eliminate anything? One group wants to eliminate the Dept of Education. Another group wants to eliminate oil & gas subsidies, corn subsidies. Another wants to get rid of the IRS. Another wants to eliminate subsidies for federal flood insurance. Axe NASA, axe medical research, cut highway funding. Cut foreign aid, contributions to NATO and the UN. Is it really only about money? Trump would have us think so. What does our country look like after all those cuts. How much will YOUR taxes go up so that you can have clean water coming out of your tap, or you have a road to drive on to get to work, or so that you can send your kid to a public school?

          • empty pockets

            Your confusion stems from your preferred ideology. Conservative ideology (used to also be Republican and still is in word only) is that smaller gov’t–Constitutional federal gov’t–does what the Constitution authorizes and little more.

            Carter created the DoE. Before that education was under state control. The fed moving in was not to improve educational standards and certainly not to improve results–as we can clearly see–though that was the lie to sell it. It was to gain more unconstitutional control. Ditto other departments and agencies created by both Ds and Rs over the years.

            The more the fed tries to do what it has no constitutional authority to do the more poorly than can do what they are SUPPOSED to do.

            I didn’t say it should be shrunken equally across the board and any argument that is what I meant is a straw man. Enforcement agencies–which ALL executive agencies are–should expand AND contract as needs change. Yet we NEVER see any contraction. The opposite, in fact. For every problem created by gov’t interference where it should never have been, we are told we must have MORE gov’t to ‘FIX” it.

            That is utter BS. It’s like saying that if your house is flooded what you need is more water.

            But you stick with your ideology and ride it all the way to its destination–tyranny of one collectivist form or another.

            Don’t look for me. I won’t be following you.

          • I Seigel

            “…smaller gov’t–Constitutional federal gov’t–does what the Constitution authorizes and little more.”
            So, if it’s not in the Constitution, government shouldn’t be doing it? What, then, should government NOT be doing in the 21st Century? Tell me what the US Government would like if “true conservatives” got their wish list.

          • empty pockets

            Begin by reading the Declaration of Independence to see what it is we objected to in the first place and how much of it has returned. Then read the Constitution to see the “cure” and prevention of recurrence our founders devised. Then read the amendments –the first 10 part of the original doc. The rest shows why the SCOTUS should NOT be the last word in all.
            The reading won’t take long–they’re short documents (44 pages for ALL of them)…so take the time. Then go online to Hillsdale College and sign up for free –YES FREE–course on the Constitution available online to fit in your schedule at your convenience and at your own pace.

            I’m not going to write you a book or discuss endlessly a subject with someone who begins with a closed mind, already made up to reject anything you don’t already embrace.

          • I Seigel

            Seems to me you should buying yourself a flintlock, some Revolutionary War duds and run around playing reenactments of crossing the Delaware. You’re stuck in the 1770’s. Try living in the 21st Century. The country has grown a lot. So has its government and its Constitution.
            Talk about having a closed mind….. You seem to have a closed life.

?>

Keep the Fake News Media in check.

Don’t let the MSM censor your news as America becomes Great Again. Over 500,000 Americans receive our daily dose of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness along with Breaking News direct to their inbox—and you can too. Sign up to receive news and views from The 1776Coalition!

We know how important your privacy is and your information is SAFE with us. We’ll never sell
your email address and you can unsubscribe at any time directly from your inbox.
View our full privacy policy.

Facebook Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com
Google Analytics Alternative