Pro-Life Groups Want FDA to Reconsider  RU 486 Abortion Pill
FDA Report Shows Abortion Pill May be Dangerous, Misued
RU 486 Abortion Drug Linked With Birth Defects

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Group Says Cal. Sen. Boxer Pushed for Lower Abortion Drug Standards

by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
October 20, 2003

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Last week, Concerned Women for
America released a June 2000 letter by California Sen. Barbara
Boxer (D) calling for the FDA to relax standards regarding the RU
486 abortion drug that the agency approved only months later.

The information comes at a time when the FDA, state officials and
others are investigating the death of a California teen. Holly
Patterson, 18, died only days after taking the two-pill abortion
drug.

CWA president Sandy Rios says the letter may have contributed to
the FDA loosening its patient safety standards for the drug.

"Sen. Boxer's eagerness to carry water for the abortion lobby may
very well have contributed to the death of one of her own
constituents. Certain patient safety standards were eliminated by
the FDA -- standards that Sen. Boxer insisted be eliminated,"
said Sandy Rios. "What should be more important to Sen. Boxer
than the health and safety of a young girl?"

During the clinical trials for the abortion drug, virtually all
women experienced some sort of complication and 23 percent of
them considered "severe." At the time, FDA officials wanted to
limit distribution of the drug only to doctors who met certain
qualifications:

* They must have been able to handle the complications resulting
from an incomplete abortion (necessary in 5 to 8 percent of
cases, such as the situation that led to Holly Patterson's
death).

* They also must have been trained at performing ultrasounds and
be able to detect ectopic pregnancies. Danco Labratories, the
maker of Ru 486 says the abortion drug should not be taken by
women who have such pregnancies and, in fact, an undetected
ectopic pregnancy led to the death of Brenda Vise in 2001.

* The FDA also said those who disseminate the abortiojn pills
should be required to take a training program and have admitting
priviledges at a nearby hospital to be able to provide follow-up
medical care for women who have botched abortions.

In her letter, Boxer calls the satey procedures "barriers" and
"draconian restrictions" and the FDA ultimately eliminated all of
these safety standards when it approved RU 486 for use.

"The letter clearly raises questions about the role political
pressure may have played in the death of Holly Patterson, and
Sen. Boxer should answer for that," Rios concluded.

Woman Dies Following Use of RU 486 Abortion Drug

by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
September 19, 2003

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- A California woman died shortly
after taking the dangerous RU 486 abortion drug she received from
a local Planned Parenthood.

Local officials are investigating the death of Holly Patterson,
18, who died Wednesday, the San Francisco Chronicle reports. She
received the abortion drugs from Planned Parenthood on September
10 to cause an abortion of her seven-week unborn child.

"A patient who recently sought health care services at a Planned
Parenthood health care center died yesterday at a hospital in
Pleasanton," Dian Harrison, president of Planned Parenthood
Golden Gate, said in a statement Thursday evening. "The cause of
death is unknown at this time. . . . We extend our deepest
sympathy to the family. We wish them strength and support in this
tough time."

Holly's father Monty Patterson said his daughter went to a
Planned Parenthood in Hayward, California, on Wednesday of last
week. Holly began taking the abortion drugs on Saturday. She
lived with her father and did not tell him about the pregnancy.

"On Sunday, she was crying and crying, and she told me she was
having cramps, that she had a bad period," Monty told the
Chronicle.

He said he only learned of her pregnancy hours before she died.

Between the time Holly took the abortion drugs and her death, she
was in severe pain, bleeding heavily and was unable to walk.

Her boyfriend took her to a local medical center on Sunday. Holly
was given painkillers and released.

Holly then went to a local hospital overnight on Tuesday and by
Wednesday afternoon she was dead. The Alameda County coroner's
office confirmed it was investigating Patterson's death and had
not yet established the cause of death.

"The tragic death of this young woman illustrates the
recklessness of fast-tracking the FDA approval of the chemical
abortion method RU 486," Michaelene Jenkins, director of the Life
Resource Network, told LifeNews.com.

Jenkins wondered whether Planned Parenthood informed Holly of the
risks associated with the abortion drug.

"Most women seek abortion out of desperation," Jenkins explained.
"They are unaware of the possible risks and complications of the
procedure as well as the community resources that are available
to help them if they desire to carry the pregnancy to term."

Last year, the deaths of two women from mifepristone (RU 486)
prompted the FDA to issue warning letters about the abortion
drug.

Pro-life groups say the death also points to the need for
parental involvement laws. Had California had a law requiring
parents to be notified, Monty Patterson could have talked her out
of the abortion or have been better able to her following the
complications.

The maker of Cytotec, an ulcer drug used as the second part of RU
486 to deliver the dead baby, has previously issued warnings not
to use their drug in combination with the abortion pill.

In August 2000, more than a month before RU-486 was approved by
the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Searle, the maker of
Cytotec, sent out a strongly worded letter, with the cooperation
of the FDA, saying misoprostol "is not approved for the induction
of labor or abortion." The letter said misuse of the drug can
cause adverse effects such as a ruptured uterus, vaginal bleeding
and "maternal or fetal death."

Danco Laboratories, producer of the abortion drug in the U.S.
sent letters to doctors in April 2002 saying that six women have
died from using the abortion drug in North America.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
Woman Traumatized By Finding Her Aborted Child In Jar

GLASGOW, Scotland, Oct 9, 02 (LSN.ca/CWNews.com) - Nicola McManus, 27, a mother of three who had a painful drug-induced hospital abortion, was stunned to find her dead unborn child in a jar labeled with her name while taking a phone call in another room in the hospital. "I fell apart," McManus said. "I couldn't believe anyone could be careless enough just to leave it lying there. That image will live with me forever."

She also described callous, business-like treatment by staff: "They explained the [RU-486] procedure and got me to sign some forms. But no one actually sat down and asked me if this was what I really wanted to do. I was struggling to get my head around it. They made me feel just like a number. ... They gave me a bed pan to take to the loo and something to cover it up. Eventually, I felt it happen. I was really upset. I've never felt so low."

McManus plans to sue North Glasgow NHS Trust, claiming their handling has left her psychologically scarred. She added: "Women need more counselling before abortions, not less. I will never get over what happened to me."

Catholic World News
CWNews DAILY NEWS BRIEF for OCTOBER 9, 2002
© Copyright 2002 Domus Enterprises

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
Feminist Doctor Surprises Audience With RU 486 Attack

Sydney, Australia -- Outspoken feminist Germaine Greer compared abortion to
amputation as she attacked an abortion pill she had been asked to promote
at a medical conference.

Dr. Greer was a keynote speaker at the Best For Women gynacologists and
obstetricians conference in Sydney.

At the beginning of her address, she revealed she had been approached and
asked to assist in "bringing pressure to bear" for increased access to the
the dangerous abortion pill RU486.

She said it was an "odd situation" where access to abortion was regarded as
some kind of privilege.

"Of course we need access to amputation but we need even more to make sure
that as few people are in a situation where they need amputations as
possible," she said. "Likewise abortion."

Dr Greer described RU486 as a powerful and unpleasant succession of
experiences.

"These are violently active chemicals and they have violent reactions on
the organism," she said. "What is the situation in which a woman would
undergo that kind of assault?"

From:  The Pro-Life Infonet <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>
Reply-To:  Steven Ertelt <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>
Subject:   Feminist Doctor Surprises Audience With RU 486 Attack
Source:   Australia Associated Press; October 4, 2002

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
Initial Reports Show RU 486 Drug Posting Mixed Results

New York, NY -- More than 100,000 women in the U.S. have used the dangerous
abortion pill Mifeprex since the drug became available in the United States
in late 2000 after approval by the Clinton administration, according to New
York City-based manufacturer Danco Laboratories.

Mifeprex -- commonly known as RU-486 -- showed a 36% sales increase in the
U.S. for the first eight months of 2002 compared with last year, indicating
that use is on the rise, Danco added. However, the company would not release
actual sales figures.The privately held firm, which licenses Mifeprex in the
U.S. from a pro-abortion group called the Population Council, does not
release specific sales figures for the drug.

Abortion advocates have long believed that mifepristone holds the potential
to increase women's access to abortion, as it can be administered by people
who are not trained to perform surgical abortions. When Mifeprex was launched
in the U.S., nearly all prescribing of the drug took place at abortion
failities -- but that seems to be changing, Danco said on Tuesday.

Private practices now make up about 17% of sales and represent 63% of
accounts, according to the firm.

Several pro-life groups have petitioned the FDA to take the drug off the
market. The groups argue the drug not only destroys the life of an unborn
child but is harmful to women. A spokesman for one of the groups, Concerned
Women for America, said the Danco release was "a PR effort" to deflect
attention from serious problems with the drug.

In April, the company sent letters to doctors reporting that six women had
developed serious illnesses and two died after taking the drug to induce
abortions. Three of the women suffered bleeding caused by the rupture of
ectopic pregnancies.

Not all abortion advocates believe the abortion drug has caught on.

"It's not the social revolution that people predicted," said Ron Fitzsimmons,
the executive director of the National Coalition of Abortion Providers, which
represents about 150 abortion businesses. "There were all these predictions
that doctors would come out of the woodwork and offer it. We haven't seen it.
We haven't seen people who do not do surgical abortions offer it. There were
predictions that this would get the protesters away from the clinics. It
hasn't panned out that way."

William West, who practices at an abortion business in Dallas, said most
women who arrived asking for the pill changed their minds when they heard
what was involved. "Most say, `Heck, I don't want to go through all that,' "
he said. "They say, `Let's get it over with today,' " and choose a surgical
abortion. Fewer than 1 percent of his patients end up taking the pill, he
said.

Mifeprex, which is taken orally, is approved for use for up to 7 weeks after
the beginning of a woman's last menstrual period and can be taken as soon as
pregnancy is confirmed. The drug works by blocking the hormone progesterone,
without which the lining of the uterus breaks down and the unborn child
starves to death.

Mifeprex is taken as part of a regimen that also includes the
contraction-inducing drug misoprostol. However, Searle, the drug's
manufacturer, original made the drug for use in treating ulcers and has
written doctors advising against using the drug in conjunction with an
abortion.

The abortion drug fails to work 7 to 8 percent of the time, according to
Danco. Women suffering from incomplete abortions are required to undergo a
follow-up surgical abortion.

Nearly 1 million women worldwide have used the abortion pill, formally called
mifepristone, over the last decade. The drug is approved in 26 countries,
including many in Europe, where it was first developed. A recent report from
the pro-abortion Alan Guttmacher Institute said that more than half of the
early abortions in France, Scotland and Sweden were now done with pills
rather than surgery but that it took a decade for medical abortions to reach
such levels.

From:  The Pro-Life Infonet <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>
Reply-To:  Steven Ertelt <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>
Subject:   Initial Reports Show RU 486 Drug Posting Mixed Results
Source:   Reuters Health, NY Times, Washington Post; September 24, 2002

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
More German Women Use Dangerous RU 486 Abortion Drug

A letter from the drug company manufacturing the baby kill pill mentions the
following:

>>>>Two cases of serious systemic bacterial infection (one fatal) following

treatment with Mifeprex and misoprostol have been reported. While it is
known that menstruation, childbirth and abortion (whether spontaneous,
surgical or medical) create conditions that can result in infection, we do
not believe that Mifeprex and misoprostol present a special risk of
infection. Although serious infection in medical abortion is rare, we ask
that you be alert to this possibility if your patients report symptoms or
have signs of infection. We have also received a report of myocardial
infarction occurring in a 21 year old woman three days following use of
Mifeprex and misoprostol.<<<<<


So let me get this straight... they feel strongly enough to warn medical
professionals about this but don't think it COULD be the pill, right?

Myocardial infarction is what the rest of us call, a heart attack.  Hence, a
21 year old woman gets the abortion pill, goes through the pain and bleeding
(we all know this is NOT the most comfortable type of abortion except for
the abortionists perhaps) and then, a day later, has a heart attack (50
percent of people die from their first heart attack).

So how badly did she really NOT want that baby?  and the 50 million dollar
question... will she be TOLD beforehand, that she can get a gruesome
infection from this "pill" or that she might have a heart attack?

I think we all know the answer to that one.

Who is that who doesn't care about the woman?

Sue Widemark

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
  FDA Report Shows Abortion Pill May be Dangerous, Misued

Washington, DC -- A 21-year-old woman had a heart attack three days after
using the dangerous abortion pill mifepristone, but there is no way to
know if the pill played a role, health officials said Wednesday.

In a letter to doctors, the pill's distributor also said two women had
serious infections after using the abortion pill - one of whom was a
Canadian woman reported by doctors last fall to have died.

Again, there is no way to know if mifepristone had a role, the Food and
Drug Administration said in a fact sheet posted on its Internet site
Wednesday.

But the FDA ordered the reports released for another reason: concern that
doctors were giving the abortion pill to some women with ectopic
pregnancies - something they are not supposed to do. The agency has three
reports of ruptured tubal pregnancies among mifepristone users, one of
whom died.

Ectopic, or tubal, pregnancies are potentially life-threatening situations
where a human embryo lodges outside the woman's uterus.

While the abortion pill will not have any effect on an ectopic pregnancy,
the concern is that a woman with the kind of pain that signals a
life-threatening rupture might attribute the pain to the abortion pill and
delay seeking care.

Doctors are supposed to rule out ectopic pregnancies before prescribing
the abortion pill, but they can be hard to diagnose.

``This is a reminder to clinicians and women to be alert to the risk of
ectopic pregnancy,'' said FDA drug chief Dr. Janet Woodcock.

The FDA approved use of the dangeorus abortion pill in September 2000.

Mifepristone's distributor, Danco Laboratories, claimed the six reports
were an ``extremely small incidence'' of problems. It refused to say how
many women have used the abortion pill in its 17 months on the market.

Mifepristone blocks the action of a hormone vital for an embryo to
develop. Women then must use a second drug, misoprostol, that causes
contractions to then expel the dead unborn child. The process only works
in the first seven weeks of pregnancy.
The FDA Question and Answer document is available at:
http://www.fda.gov/cder/drug/infopage/mifepristone/mifepristone-qa_4_17_02.htm

From:  The Pro-Life Infonet <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>
Reply-To:  Steven Ertelt <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>
Subject:   FDA Report Shows Abortion Pill May be Dangerous, Misued
Source:   Associated Press; April 17, 2002

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
  Pro-Life Groups Want FDA to Reconsider RU 486 Abortion Pill

Washington, DC -- Pro-life groups petitioned the Food and Drug
Administration Wednesday to halt sales of the dangerous abortion pill
Mifeprex, saying the agency shouldn't have approved it almost two years ago.

The American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists,
Christian Medical Association and Concerned Women for America argued that
FDA bent its own rules in approving Mifeprex, including eliminating
safeguards required during the abortion pill's testing.

The groups called the drug dangerous for women, citing FDA's report last
April of five Mifeprex users with health problems, including two who
suffered ruptured ectopic pregnancies, one fatal. The FDA data also
reported that another 22 women required hospitalization or another
"intervention to prevent permanent impairment or damage" after taking
Mifeprex during the same time period.

Mifeprex does not abort an ectopic, or tubal, pregnancy, and is not
supposed to be given to women with that life-threatening condition.

The other reports included two women with infections, one fatal, and one
heart attack. The FDA hasn't determined that the drug played any role in
the cases.

The FDA said it would review the 90-page petition, which puts in official
form recurring criticism from pro-life groups.

The petition is based on 22 months of research from the two pro-life
medical groups. Using information obtained through Freedom of Information
Act requests, the document chronicles how political pressure corrupted the
normally objective FDA drug review process and in the process endangered
the health and lives of women who use the drug.

"This document outlines the significant health and safety concerns that
have emerged after several years' experience with RU-486," noted Dr. David
Hager, a Kentucky obstetrician who assisted with the petition. "Women
deserve a full and objective accounting of a drug's dangers based on sound
and complete medical evidence."

Dr. Gene Rudd, an obstetrician and CMA Associate Executive Director, added,
"As an obstetrician dedicated to protecting women's health, I am quite
concerned with the physical dangers this drug can pose to women. But I am
even more concerned with the personal and spiritual impact an abortion can
have on women, whatever method is used. I have counseled many post-abortive
patients and shared many tears of regret with women who wished they had
chosen an alternative to abortion."

The FDA has long defended its September 2000 approval of Mifeprex (known
also as RU 486), which came after four years of review, as based on sound
science plus 12 years of the pill's use in Europe. To revoke approval or
place new restrictions on Mifeprex, FDA would have to decide there is new
evidence of risk to women.

Mifeprex underwent ``very rigorous'' testing and review before FDA approval
and ``has proved to be a very safe and effective and acceptable drug,''
said Beverly Winikoff of the pro-abortion Population Council, which holds
U.S. rights to Mifeprex. ``There is no evidence to the contrary.''

Carrie Gordon Earll, Bioethics Analyst for Focus on the Family, responded,
"These groups have thoroughly researched the FDA's process and raised
serious questions about the risks involved with taking Mifeprex.
Unfortunately, it appears that this drug was pushed through the system on a
fast track due to political considerations. No policy interest should ever
take precedence over the safety of America's women."

The FDA approved Mifeprex under a fast-track policy designed for rapid
approval of life-saving experimental treatments for patients with lethal
diseases, such as AIDS or cancer, even when
the treatments have not been thoroughly tested.

"Since Mifeprex may only be used on healthy mothers with healthy
pregnancies, there is no way to
justify approval of this drug for a life-threatening illness," said
Cathleen Cleaver, Esq., spokesperson for the national Catholic bishops. "In
fact, the irony here is hard to ignore:  the very purpose for this drug is
lethal -- to end the life of a healthy child in the womb."

In early 2001, Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson said he
intended to explore the safety of Mifeprex.  Around the same time, the
White House said FDA approval of the drug would be reviewed.

Earll said, "That was more than a year ago. This petition gives the Bush
Administration ample evidence and opportunity to begin its own
investigation."

Only women in the first seven weeks of pregnancy are candidates for a
Mifeprex abortion. Mifeprex blocks a hormone vital for embryo development
and essentially withholds nutrition from the developing baby. A second drug
called misoprostol causes contractions to expel the embryo. The makers of
the drug, intended for use in treating ulcers, have cautioned doctors
against using it to induce abortion.

The drug combination fails at least 5 percent of the time and causes women
sevre bleeding and possible infections.

From:  The Pro-Life Infonet <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>
Reply-To:  Steven Ertelt <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>
Subject:   Pro-Life Groups Want FDA to Reconsider Abortion Pill
Source:   Associated Press, Pro-Life Infonet; August 21, 2002

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
Organizations file petition for re-call of RU 486
(Sue Widemark)

Citing "numerous violations of the FDA's standards and rules, and reports
medical complications suffered by women who took RU-486", several consumer
groups including some physicians recently filed a petition requesting the
re-call of the "kill pill" the RU 486.
The Citizen Petition was filed on August 20 with the Food & Drug
Administration to immediately revoke the drug RU-486, the abortion pill and
is based on evidence that the FDA approved the drug in violation of its own
regulations and evidence that RU-486 is severely harming American women.
The conclusion of the several organizations involved was based on a study of
some 8000 FDA documents.
source:
http://cwfa.org/library/life/2002-08-21_pr_ru-486.shtml

From: "SueW" <gswidemark@cox.net>
To: <cinlife@cin.org>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 08:26:35 -0700
Subject: [Cinlife] organizations file petition for re-call of RU 486
Reply-To: cinlife@cin.org

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
FDA Defends RU 486 Abortion Drug Despite Latest Report

Washington, DC - An official from the Food and Drug Administration
Thursday defended the dangerous abortion-inducing drug combination RU-486
-- despite acknowledgement from the maker of the drug that two women who
were on RU-486 died and four others became very sick.

According to a report in Thursday's Washington Post, Danco Laboratories,
the maker of the drug marketed as Mifeprex, has sent a letter to doctors,
telling them about the six women.

The letter, however, also says it's not known if RU-486 actually caused
the deaths and illnesses. According to the newspaper report, three women
suffered bleeding caused by the rupture of ectopic (fallopian tube)
pregnancies; one died. Two other women had serious bacterial infections;
one of them died. The sixth patient had a heart attack three days after
taking RU-486, but she recovered.

The letter Danco sent to doctors reminded them to report any serious
problems in women who take the abortion drug combination.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) official, who agreed to speak only
on background, said the RU-486 regimen was not responsible for the two
deaths or for most of the other complications.

In the case of the ectopic pregnancies, the women took RU-486 unaware of
the ectopic condition, the official explained. Only later did they
discover that RU-486 had not caused an abortion. "A while later she starts
having abdominal pain and bleeding [and] she thinks it's because she had
an abortion," the official explained.

The Danco letter is meant to "remind clinicians that just because someone
has had [an] abortion [regimen], there is still that possibility of
ectopic pregnancy," said the official.

The woman who died after complications from the ectopic pregnancy was an
unusual case, according to the official.

"There's reason to believe that she simply didn't believe this is what was
happening to her," said the official, because the "MedWatch" report showed
the woman had contact with a doctor and was urged to seek medical care.

In the cases of bacterial infections that followed the use of RU-486 could
not be attributed to the use of the drug, because even if the women had
not taken the drug, they could have gotten the infections, anyway, from a
miscarriage or from normal childbirth.

"This kind of thing is rare, but it does happen in rare cases" with normal
childbirth or miscarriage, the official explained. "It can't be attributed
to the drug" because there is no evidence that points in that direction.

The 21-year-old woman who suffered a heart attack, said the official, is
again a different matter.

"There are all kinds of reasons for heart attacks," said the official.
"Without further background info to know what happened, one certainly
could not attribute" the heart attack to RU-486.

The FDA official defended the lag time of several months between the
reported incidents and the FDA-approved Danco letter.

"It always takes some time to sort through these things, determine what
significance there may be and decide what is important to tell the public
and decide what sort of action should be taken.

Telling citizens about the potential for a misdiagnosis of ectopic
pregnancies, the official warned, could "cause people to have undue fear
of a drug that's not warranted."

However, a Danco spokesperson said the company has always divulged the
relevant information about ectopic pregnancies in a patient information
kit that accompanies shipments of RU-486. Also included is an informed
consent form for doctors to get patients to sign.

"The ectopic pregnancy [information is in] the current product labeling
and patient information that walks patients through what to expect," said
Danco spokesperson Heather O'Neill.

The Danco letter, added O'Neill, is a reminder for doctors to have a plan
for management of diagnosis and treatment in the event of an ectopic
pregnancy.

"The key point here is that the regimen is safe and effective," she
concluded.

The FDA approved RU-486 as an abortion-inducer in September 2000, and at
the time, pro-life groups warned of its dangers.  News reports about the
deaths and complications prompted criticism from pro-life organizations.

"The FDA approved RU-486 under intense political pressure, and now women
are suffering the consequences," said Wendy Wright, senior policy director
for Concerned Women for America.

"Abortion lobbyists should stop putting their political agenda above
women's health and end their advocacy and distribution of RU-486," said
Wright.

From:  The Pro-Life Infonet <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>
Reply-To:  Steven Ertelt <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>
Subject:   FDA Defends RU 486 Abortion Drug Despite Latest Report
Source:   Cybercast News Service; April 18, 2002

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
  More German Women Use Dangerous RU 486 Abortion Drug

Frankfurt, Germany -- The number of German women undergoing abortions
in 2001 was little changed from the year before, but the number of abortions
performed with the dangerous RU 486 drug mifepristone jumped by 44%,
according to the German Statistics Office.       

The Statistics Office reported Monday that the number of reported abortions
in 2001 was 134,964, up just slightly from 134,609 in 2000.

Of the total, 5,943 abortions in 2001 were performed with mifepristone, accounting for
about 4.4% of total abortions. In 2000, some 4,120, or 3%, were performed
with mifepristone, also known as RU-486.

Mifepristone is sold in Germany under the brand name Mifegyne and in the US as Mifeprex.

Hans-Juergen  Heilmann, a statistician at the Statistics Office, said mifepristone was first sold on the German market in late 1999.
Asked whether he expected continued sharp percentage increases in the use of mifepristone  in Germany, he said, "I think chances
are high that usage will continue to grow. But by how much, I do not know." He noted that when the drug was introduced in 1999,
medical institutions expected mifepristone in coming years to account for around 20% of all abortions in Germany.

Heilmann said  that the total number of abortions in Germany has risen only slightly since 1996, when 130,899 were performed. He
suspects that the mild increases since 1996 might be due at least in part to better reporting methods. Since 1996, the most
significant trend has been the increase in abortions by girls from
15 to 17 years of age, which in that year totaled 4,359, he said. In 2001, this age group had 6,909 abortions, up 20% from 5,763 in
2000. Some 82.4% of all abortions in 2001 were performed by vacuum aspiration and 10.9% by a surgical procedure called
curettage, while 46.5% of women who underwent abortions were single (never married), 47.2% married, 5.9% divorced and 0.4%
widowed.

From:  The Pro-Life Infonet <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>
Reply-To:  Steven Ertelt <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>
Subject:  More German Women Use Dangerous RU 486 Abortion Drug
Source:   Reuters Health; April 8, 2002

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
  RU 486 Abortion Drug Linked With Birth Defects

Washington, DC -- Failed attempts in other countries to induce abortion using
an ulcer drug called misoprostol may be causing an epidemic of birth defects
around the world. Misuse of the drug is increasingly common as it is
improperly used as part of the RU 486 abortion drug process.

In Colombia, Brazil and the Philippines, the drug is readily available. An
informal survey by the British magazine New Scientist has also revealed that
abortions with the drug are taking place in the Dominican Republic,
Argentina, Spain, Nigeria, South Africa and Indonesia.

In Britain and the US, those dispensing the abortion drug RU486 also give
misoprostol to induce contractions to expel the dead unborn child, although
it is not licensed for this purpose. Searle, the maker of misoprostol, has
condemned its use in chemical abortions methods.

Searle, a unit of Pharmacia Corp. sent a letter to doctors last year warning
that misoprostol has been approved only to prevent ulcers caused by
aspirin and similar drugs, not to help induce abortion. They warned women
would face severe medical problems if the drug was misused as a part of
the RU 486 chemical abortion process. It is legal, however, for doctors to
prescribe FDA-approved drugs for unapproved uses -- so called "off label"
use.

The Searle letter noted:  "Serious adverse events reported following
off-label use of Cytotec in pregnant women include maternal or fetal
death; uterine hyperstimulation, rupture or perforation requiring uterine
surgical repair, hysterectomy or salpingo-oophorectomy; amniotic fluid
embolism; severe vaginal bleeding, retained placenta, shock, fetal
bradycardia and pelvic pain."

Taking misoprostol on its own only induces abortions about 40 per cent of the
time, so many babies are born after failed abortion attempts. Several studies
in Brazil, where up to 75 per cent of abortions involve misoprostol, suggest
the drug causes birth defects such as fused joints, growth retardation and a
condition known as Möbius syndrome, which is characterised by paralysis of
the face.

One recent study found that out of 93 children with defects associated with
Möbius syndrome, 34 percent of those infants had been exposed to misoprostol,
compared with just 4.3 per cent of the 279 infants in a control group.

Another revealed that 49 percent of infants born with Möbius at seven
hospitals in Brazil had been exposed to misoprostol, whereas only 3 percent
of 96 infants born with neural tube defects had been exposed to the drug.

"I think [these results] are real. Statistically they are highly
significant," says Fernando Vargas of the University of Rio de Janeiro, who
took part in both studies. Because the abortion drug is used secretly, it is
hard to find out how many birth defects might be caused by it, Vargas adds.

From:  The Pro-Life Infonet <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>
Reply-To:  Steven Ertelt <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>
Subject:   RU 486 Abortion Drug Linked With Birth Defects
Source:   New Scientist Magazine (England); August 29, 2001

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
Lawsuit Challenges RU 486 Magazine Ads

Chicago, IL -- Three Chicago residents are suing the National Abortion
Federation on charges that the pro-abortion organization has used
deceptive advertising on behalf of RU-486, the dangerous abortion drug.

The suit, to be filed this morning in Cook County Circuit Court in
Chicago, says the Washington-based NAF published a "deceptive
advertisement" in the July issues of Self, In-Style and Vanity Fair
magazines claiming that the abortion pill was safe without mentioning any
of its side effects.

"Right now, we're asking for a judgment that they violated Illinois law,"
says Curt Mercadante, one of the three plaintiffs. He is referring to the
Illinois Deceptive Trade Practices Act, which forbids a business to
represent goods or services to have characteristics it does not have.

"What we're hoping to do is raise awareness in the state and nationally
about the advertising. We're familiar with Illinois law and perhaps people
in other states will find other laws the ad violates."

Mercadante, who is the program director for the United Republican Fund of
Illinois, joined with Nancy and Eugene Koprowski, also of Chicago, in
filing the suit. The Koprowskis both work for the Institute for Human
Rights in Chicago.

"Most women using the product will experience some side effects, according
to the U.S. government," Mercadante says, adding that "even Joe Camel had
to have a surgeon general's warning next to him."

The ad, which shows a woman leaning against a window, with the text: "You
have the freedom to choose. And now, you have another safe abortion
choice." Text at the bottom gives a toll-free number, a web site address,
and a reminder the pill has been approved by the Food and Drug
Administration.

The ad ran in the July issues of Self and People magazines and appears
this month in Cosmopolitan, Fitness, Health, In Style, Jane, Mademoiselle,
Glamour, Marie Claire, First for Women, Essence, Vanity Fair and Latina
magazines.

"These are anti-choice activists," said Vicki Saporta, executive director
of the National Abortion Federation, which has 400 member abortion
facilities nationwide. "The suit is wholely devoid of merit. Our
advertising campaign is entirely proper, and our attorneys will look at
the complaint and arrive at a definite course of action."

RU-486 is a chemical compound that, taken in pill form, can induce
abortion in women up to 49 days -- or seven weeks -- pregnant. The drug is
sometimes effective up to nine weeks of pregnancy, and unborn child's
heart has long ago started beating, her brain is functioning, and ears,
fingers and toes will have formed.

The drug, taken in two stages over three days, induces a miscarriage.
Dangerous effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, painful cramping and
in some cases heavy bleeding. In 1994, during FDA trials of the drug, an
Iowa woman nearly bled to death.

Although the U.S. government gave final approval to the drug last year,
abortion facilities and abortion practitioners have been slow to
distribute it, for fear of lawsuits and medical complications.

From:  The Pro-Life Infonet <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>
Reply-To:  Steven Ertelt <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>
Subject:   Lawsuit Challenges RU 486 Magazine Ads
Source:   Washington Times; August 8, 2001

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
Pro-RU 486 Ads Overlook Risks and Dangers
by Teresa Wagner

The National Abortion Federation plans to run advertisements this summer
on the controversial abortion drug, RU-486. Vicki Saporta, the
federation's executive director, insists the campaign "really isn't
marketing, it's education." So one thing is certain: This is marketing.

The federation is an association of abortionists that promotes abortion in
the areas of medicine, politics and, apparently, fashion magazines. Of the
publications asked to run the ad -- including Glamour, People, Self,
Mademoiselle and Cosmopolitan -- only Redbook has declined to do so.

Featured in the ad is a pretty woman looking off into the distance with
the text, "You have the freedom to choose. And now, you have another safe
abortion choice." At the bottom is a blurb highlighting the drug's FDA
approval and a 1-800 number.

Redbook's decision has now made it a target of an online petition by
pro-abortion groups, who claim the magazine is "censoring" early abortion
options and depriving women of a "public education" advertisement.

A magazine's refusal to run an ad is not censorship, of course, and the ad
in question is not "education" of any sort: The 1-800 number is simply a
referral to the federation's member clinics. The ad is just an ad -- which
is to say that it is designed to sell a product: the abortion pill.

Most businesses need advertising to sell their products. This is
especially true of something like RU-486, which doesn't do very well on
its own. Consider the European experience: According to Patricia Ireland,
president of the National Organization for Women, no more than 10 percent
of women seeking abortions in France have selected chemical abortion. In
Great Britain, the rate is even lower, at 6 percent.

Such limited use is understandable. The administration of RU-486 involves
three clinic visits: one to give mifepristone (brand name Mifeprex), which
blocks the hormones necessary for the child to develop; another to
administer misoprostol (brand name Cytotec), which stimulates contractions
to expel the child; and yet another to ensure that no human parts remain
in the womb. If some do, surgical abortion becomes necessary. This happens
in 5 percent to 8 percent of cases.

According to Edouard Sakiz, former CEO of Roussel-Uclaf, the drug's French
manufacturer, the process takes "at least a week" (possibly much longer
since the effectiveness of contractions varies with each woman) and is an
"appalling ordeal." Catherine Euvard, Roussel-Uclaf spokeswoman, explained
that many women in France avoid the drugs because "when they take a pill
... there is more psychological pain."

For doctors, the problems are more practical. The visits required, the
counseling involved and the necessary follow-up make RU-486
labor-intensive and time-consuming. As Pittsburgh abortionist Mitchell
Creinin remarked after trying to teach others about mifepristone, "Most
doctors who say they are interested in offering this, change their minds
when you tell them what's involved."

Recent reports about the pill's reception in the United States confirm
Creinin's observations.

If the ad campaign were truly educational, it could only provide more
reasons to avoid the drug. For example, nowhere will a consumer be told
that while RU-486 is distributed in America by a company called Danco
Laboratories, it is made by a state-owned pharmaceutical factory in China.
According to former Rep. Tom Bliley, former chairman of the House Commerce
Committee, this same factory has shipped highly contaminated, as well as
mislabeled, drugs to the United States.

Neither does the National Abortion Federation inform women that Cytotec,
the second drug required in the regimen, has not been approved by the FDA
for abortion. Its manufacturer, the Searle unit of Pharmacia Corp., has
officially warned against this use. In a strongly worded letter to
health-care providers last summer, Searle explained that the serious
adverse events reported with off-label use of Cytotec in pregnant women
include "maternal or fetal death" and "uterine hyper stimulation and
rupture."

Information is not the point of advertising, Saporta's comments
notwithstanding. Selling is. The abortion business doesn't like to admit
this, however, because it wants more than anything for abortion to be
considered medicine -- hence the dubious term "medical abortion" attached
to RU-486. Indeed, advocates for the drug hope abortion in pill form will
seduce more doctors into the practice, and thereby mainstream it.

[Pro-Life Infonet Note:  Teresa Wagner is special counsel for life issues
at the Family Research Council. She regularly speaks on television news
programs in defense of life issues.]

From:  The Pro-Life Infonet <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>
Reply-To:  Steven Ertelt <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>
Subject:  Pro-RU 486 Ads Overlook Risks and Dangers
Source:   Family Research Council; July 24, 2001

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
FDA Should Review RU 486 Decision
by Teresa Wagner

[Pro-Life Infonet Note:  Teresa R. Wagner is special counsel for life
issues at the Family Research Council.]

The FDA's approval last fall of the controversial abortion drug RU-486
presents a danger to American women and children and should be reviewed by
the Bush administration as soon as possible.

For starters, while RU-486 is distributed in the United States by a
company called Danco Laboratories, it is made by a state-owned
pharmaceutical factory in China.

According to Rep. Tom Bliley, former chairman of the House Commerce
Committee, this same factory has shipped highly contaminated, as well as
mislabeled, drugs to the United States. It also has given false
information to U.S. inspectors about plant conditions and procedures.

According to documents amassed by Bliley's office, one FDA official wrote,
``The information in the (controls) that I reviewed didn't correspond to
methods and specifications used by the firm.''

In fact, authorities at the plant had ``copied'' production standards from
U.S. manuals that had ``nothing to do with the testing they perform.''

Next, the second drug required in the RU-486 regimen (Cytotec) has not
been approved by the FDA for abortion. Its manufacturer, the Searle unit
of Pharmacia Corp., has warned against this use.

Searle explained that the adverse events reported with off-label use of
Cytotec in pregnant women include ``maternal or fetal death'' and
``uterine hyperstimulation and rupture.''

Some claim these risks exist only in later pregnancy, but the Searle
letter contains no such qualification. According to a former FDA general
counsel, the agency's approval and encouragement of a drug's off-label
use, to say nothing of going against the wishes of its manufacturer,
``sets an extraordinary precedent.''

Finally, the FDA approved RU-486 pursuant to regulations titled
``Accelerated Approval of New Drugs for Serious or Life-Threatening
Illnesses.''

How an abortion drug was placed in this category remains a serious
question. Accelerated approval can compromise the health interests of
consumers, since these regulations allow for less testing of drugs before
they are put on the market. But even more important is the effect on the
legal rights of the drug's users.

Legal scholar Vivian Orlando explains that manufacturers of drugs approved
under these regulations may escape liability for injuries associated with
its use. But nowhere in the pages of warning and labeling for RU-486 will
a woman be told of this.

Even absent the dangers that are specific to American FDA approval, RU-486
presents a health risk. The long-term effects are virtually unknown, and
the method has proved dangerous in France, the country that produced and
first allowed it. France's Health Ministry placed restrictions on its use
in 1991 after the death of a 31-year-old woman and three reported cases of
life-threatening heart attacks.

Logic alone explains why the drug has proved unpopular. RU-486's
administration prolongs the unpleasant abortion experience, requiring
three clinic visits over a span of two weeks, with considerable
psychological and physical pain. And in 5 percent to 8 percent of cases,
surgical abortion is still necessary to remove human remains or to stop
excessive bleeding.

But the fundamental reason RU-486 is a danger applies to all abortion,
chemical or otherwise. As one abortion practitioner testified, abortion is
a ``killing act.'' It destroys the child conceived but not yet born, and
in so doing also destroys a part of the mother. And when mothers and
children suffer, so do we all.

From:  The Pro-Life Infonet <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>
Reply-To:  Steven Ertelt <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>
Subject:   FDA Should Review RU 486 Decision
Source:   Miami Herald; July 5, 2001

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
Unleashing the Killer Pill

                                                   by William F. Jasper

                         RU-486, the abortion pill, is a dangerous drug that not only kills the unborn infant but
                         endangers the mother's life and health as well.

                         On September 28th, the Clinton administration launched its chemical warfare
                         attack on unborn Americans with the announcement that the Food and Drug
                         Administration (FDA) had approved RU-486, also known as the "abortion pill,"
                         for marketing and prescription in the United States.

                         Predictably, abortion advocates hailed the announcement as a great triumph.
                         The FDA approval is a "total victory for U.S. women,'' Eleanor Smeal, president
                         of the Feminist Majority Foundation, declared. "At long last, science trumps
                         anti-abortion politics.'' Gloria Feldt, president of Planned Parenthood,
                         proclaimed that RU-486's U.S. arrival marked the "beginning of a new era'' for
                         American women. Vice President Al Gore was also pleased with the action.
                         "Today's decision is not about politics but the health and safety of American
                         women and a woman's fundamental right to choose,'' he announced.

                         Pro-life leaders were just as quick to denounce the FDA action as a purely
                         political maneuver. "The Clinton-Gore Administration, which claimed it wanted to
                         make abortion rare, has embraced an abortion pill that will result in more
                         abortions and new risks to women," National Right to Life Committee (NRLC)
                         spokeswoman Laura Echevarria declared. Commenting on an ABC News poll
                         conducted September 6th-10th, which found that a plurality of Americans
                         opposed making RU-486 legal (47 percent to 45 percent), Echevarria noted:
                         "The degree of opposition would no doubt be even higher were it not for the
                         misinformation that has colored much of the past media coverage of the issue,
                         including highly inaccurate references to RU-486 as a `morning-after pill' or as a
                         drug that causes expulsion of a `fertilized egg.'" "In reality," Echevarria said, "this
                         method involves administration of two potent drugs, and frequently produces
                         profuse bleeding, in order to kill a human embryo who is two to five weeks old."

                         According to the NRLC, the FDA approval of RU-486 represents "the first time in
                         our nation's history that our government has ever approved a drug for the specific
                         purpose of taking the life of another human being." Pro-life advocates point out
                         that the abortion pill, like surgical abortion, is never "safe" for the baby who is the
                         target and bears health risks for the mother as well, risks that are neglected or
                         grossly understated by pro-abortion militants. "Only four months ago, after years
                         of study, the FDA recognized the substantial risks of this two-drug abortion
                         method, proposing restrictions such as requiring administration within one hour
                         of an emergency room," noted Dr. Randall K. O'Bannon, NRLC's director of
                         education. "Now, four months later, the FDA has dropped most of these
                         protections for women's health. What has changed, other than a four-month
                         campaign of political pressure by the abortion industry and its allies? The FDA
                         opted for the convenience of abortionists over the safety of women."

                         The FDA's approval of RU-486 will likely "result in more abortions and therefore
                         more dead babies and injured women," according to Teresa Wagner, legal
                         analyst for the Family Research Council. "It's not only unprecedented for the FDA
                         to approve a drug that has no therapeutic effects, but it's unethical as well," says
                         Wagner.

                         Communist Pedigree

                         In addition to many indications that the Clinton administration short-circuited the
                         normal FDA process to facilitate approval of the abortifacient, there is also
                         mounting concern over the fact that the RU-486 to be marketed in this country
                         actually is being manufactured in Communist China.

                         "The manufacturing label for RU-486 in the United States may soon read `Made
                         in China,'" said Father Matthew Habiger, president of Human Life International, in
                         an October 4th press statement. "It is possible that an agreement will be made by
                         the Population Council, owner of the patent rights to RU-486, with a large
                         pharmaceutical company in China to produce the drug for mass distribution in the
                         United States. This pact would constitute another terrifying chapter in the global
                         war against women and children."

                         "China is notorious for its wide-scale human rights and religious rights abuses,
                         as well as for its one-child policy implemented through forced abortion,
                         contraception, sterilization, and infanticide," charged Fr. Habiger. If the U.S.
                         RU-486 is being manufactured there, he says, there should be added concern
                         because "it is clear that Communist China's anti-life policy would be expanding
                         its grasp over the unborn children in the United States."

                         Claiming that it is keeping the manufacturer's identity confidential to protect the
                         company against potential violence by pro-life forces, the FDA has refused to
                         confirm whether or not RU-486 is being manufactured in China. However, an
                         October 12th report in the Washington Post vindicated Fr. Habiger's concerns.
                         The Post cited several Chinese officials and the head of a foundation who
                         confirmed that the Hua Lian Pharmaceutical factory near Shanghai is producing
                         the abortion pill for the U.S. market. Joachim Oehler, head of the Concept
                         Foundation, told the Post that his group, together with the World Health
                         Organization, World Bank, and Rockefeller Foundation, had helped get the
                         factory geared up for RU-486 production. The Rockefeller Foundation had
                         contributed $2 million to the project.

                         The Red China connection is a natural fit for RU-486, for a number of reasons.
                         The Population Council, which owns the rights to the drug, has long been an
                         ardent admirer and supporter of China's totalitarian population control programs.
                         When the United States cut off funds for the United Nations Population Fund
                         (UNFPA, formerly United Nations Fund for Population Activities) because of its
                         support for the Chinese population program, it was the Population Council,
                         together with the Population Institute, which sued to restore funding. The Council,
                         which is headquartered in New York, at Dag Hammarskjold Plaza, across the
                         street from the UN, and at Rockefeller University, works closely with the UN to
                         establish coercive population control programs throughout the world.

                         Nazi Ties

                         Founded in 1952 by John D. Rockefeller III, the Population Council also has
                         longstanding ties to the Nazi eugenicist movement, which, understandably, the
                         Council is none too anxious to advertise (see the article on page 19). Certainly
                         the pro-abortion lobby is not about to draw attention to the fact that the French
                         manufacturer of the abortion pill, Roussel-Uclaf ( the "RU" in RU-486), is a
                         subsidiary of the "reformed" Nazi chemical giant, I.G. Farben. Infamous for its
                         production of the cyanide gas Zyklon-B, and for other assistance it provided to
                         Hitler's murderous regime, I.G. Farben attempted to shake its abominable image
                         through corporate restructuring and renaming after World War II. One of its major
                         reincarnations is the Hoescht AG pharmaceutical giant, which owns
                         Roussel-Uclaf. So it would seem that pro-life advocates are not merely engaging
                         in heated rhetoric or seeing phantasms when they assert that there is a Nazi bent
                         to the "science" of abortion, and particularly as it pertains to RU-486.

                         RU-486 was invented by Dr. Etienne-Emile Baulieu, who states in his book The
                         "Abortion Pill" that he views the drug as an important adjunct to contraception
                         and surgical abortion. Moreover, he sees a "broader role" for the chemical in
                         helping "governments to dampen a population explosion which threatens to
                         outstrip the world's resources." The drug became legal in France in 1988 and is
                         available in China and a number of other European countries as well. However,
                         until now, its availability in the U.S. has been blocked by a number of
                         impediments. Although the FDA approval process was one roadblock, the pill's
                         advocates were also stymied by their own legal problems and the difficulty of
                         finding a manufacturer who would produce the controversial drug.

                         With the stigma of abortion hanging over the drug and U.S. right-to-life groups
                         threatening to boycott any company that produced or marketed the abortion pill,
                         Hoescht-Roussel-Uclaf decided against entering the U.S. market.

                         Three days after being sworn into office in 1993, President Clinton signed an
                         executive order directing the Department of Health and Human Services and the
                         FDA to take steps to promote the testing, licensing, and manufacturing of the
                         drug in the United States. The National Right to Life Committee points out that in
                         the course of carrying out the president's directive, the FDA:

                         • actively pressured French manufacturer Roussel-Uclaf to submit a marketing
                         application;

                         • helped negotiate the transfer of manufacturing and marketing rights from
                         Roussel-Uclaf to the Population Council of New York once it became clear
                         Roussel-Uclaf would not submit an application of its own;

                         • allowed the Population Council to use data from foreign studies in its marketing
                         application, rather than require the Council to wait until it was ready to submit
                         data from American studies;

                         • allowed the Population Council to submit its marketing application despite not
                         having a finalized deal with any manufacturer or having any finished chemical
                         product from its would-be manufacturer. The FDA allowed the Population Council
                         to use chemical and manufacturing data from Roussel-Uclaf as the basis of the
                         Council's application, knowing that Roussel-Uclaf would not be the manufacturer;

                         • submitted the application to an advisory panel stacked with known abortion
                         activists and RU-486 supporters; and

                         • processed the application for RU-486 in just six months, while potentially
                         life-saving drugs were taking as long as 17 months to be processed.

                         After receiving the U.S. rights to RU-486 in 1994, the Population Council hired
                         attorney Joseph Pike to set up a number of companies to handle various aspects
                         of the "killer pill" business. The companies in this confusing network of death
                         include Advances in Health Technology, Danco Laboratories, Neogen
                         Pharmaceuticals, Inc., N.D. Management, and Neogen Investors, Neogen
                         Holdings, L.P.

                         None of these companies was actually going to manufacture RU-486; that
                         function had been arranged with a Hungarian manufacturer, Gedeon Richter.
                         However, these well-laid plans began unraveling in 1996. As the old saying goes,
                         there's no honor among thieves. Well, there's even less among killers, particularly
                         the abortionist variety. The exposure of the Population Council's barrister, Mr.
                         Pike, as a disbarred lawyer and convicted felon (forgery), set off a number of
                         lawsuits between Pike, the Council, and investors. Those problems, though,
                         appear to be settled and the principals are proceeding with their grisly business.

                         False Panacea

                         All the hype and ballyhoo notwithstanding, RU-486, also known by its generic
                         name, mifepristone, and by its brand name, Mifegyne, is not the silver bullet its
                         pro-abort champions imagine it to be. It will not solve all their problems or
                         eliminate the "need" for surgical abortions. Its physical side effects for women
                         (which can be considerable, including death), and the potential for serious birth
                         defects for those children who survive this chemical killer, may end up
                         bankrupting the multi-billion dollar abortion industry, if the massive judgments
                         awarded in the tobacco and asbestos lawsuits are any indication of what lies
                         ahead.

                         RU-486 is a synthetic steroid that interferes with the action of progesterone, a
                         natural hormone vital to the early stages of pregnancy. Progesterone stimulates
                         and maintains the nutrient lining of the uterus, which nourishes the developing
                         child. It also suppresses normal uterine contractions that could detach the baby
                         implanted on the wall of the mother's womb. RU-486 fills the chemical receptor
                         sites normally reserved for progesterone, causing the baby to starve to death.
                         The baby is then discharged from the woman's body along with the decayed
                         uterine lining. This may occur in a matter of hours, days, or weeks. Or it may not
                         happen at all. In which case the woman will then be faced with the "need" for a
                         surgical abortion.

                         Used alone, RU-486 is successful in inducing an abortion only between 64
                         percent and 85 percent of the time. Which is why it is most frequently used in
                         conjunction with the prostaglandin misoprostol (trade name: Cytotec) to induce
                         uterine contractions to expel the baby's corpse. Because the use of a
                         prostaglandin (PG) is so regularly a part of the standard RU-486 abortion
                         procedure, it is frequently referred to in medical literature as an "RU-486/PG"
                         abortion.

                         Contrary to the many inaccurate and favorable stories carried by much of the
                         pro-abortion media, RU-486 abortions are not as simple as popping a few pills
                         that can be obtained at the drug store. It is at least a three-step process (and may
                         take up to seven steps) and requires constant monitoring by a doctor. On the first
                         visit to the abortionist, the woman receives a pregnancy test and an ultrasound to
                         verify that she is three to nine weeks pregnant (the time period during which
                         RU-486 is deemed to be an "effective" abortifacient). If it is determined that she
                         is a suitable candidate for the abortion, she will sign for and ingest the
                         mifepristone (RU-486) pills.

                         After a two-day waiting period, the RU-486 protocol requires that the mother
                         return to the abortionist for a follow-up exam. According to studies on RU-486
                         conducted here and abroad, three percent of women will have experienced an
                         abortion at home during this 48-hour period. Those women who have not already
                         aborted their child will, at the second visit, be given the prostaglandin and will
                         remain in the doctor's office for four hours to be monitored for side effects as the
                         powerful (and painful) contractions begin. According to the studies, about half of
                         the RU-486 abortions take place in the doctor's office during this four-hour wait.
                         Another 26 percent of women deliver a dead baby on the way home, at home, or
                         wherever they may be over the next 20 hours after the prostaglandin is
                         administered. The rest who abort do so at various times during the following two
                         weeks. Between 8 percent and 23 percent (depending on how many weeks
                         pregnant the mother was) never completely abort or don't abort at all using the
                         drugs. Thus a third visit, usually two weeks after the second, is necessary in order
                         for the abortionist to confirm whether or not the process has been "successful." If
                         it hasn't, the abortionist will encourage the woman to undergo a surgical abortion
                         to guard against infection. If she chooses not to have the surgical procedure, the
                         possibility exists that she might give birth to a child who may have been harmed
                         by the drugs.

                         Side Effects

                         From studies conducted thus far, as well as from our experience with the duplicity
                         and deception of the abortion lobby over the past several decades, there is every
                         reason to believe that the new "miracle" abortion pill will yield a great many
                         physical and psychological casualties among women, in addition to the horrible
                         holocaust of babies killed and maimed.

                         In France, which has much more restrictive prescription and abortion procedures
                         than the U.S., a woman suffered heart failure and died from an RU-486/PG
                         abortion. In U.S. trials, 79 percent to 96 percent of women taking RU-486/PG
                         reported prolonged pain requiring some form of painkiller. Between 24 and 61
                         percent of RU-486/PG patients experienced nausea. Other side effects included
                         very heavy vaginal bleeding, diarrhea, vomiting, infection, fatigue, hot flashes,
                         fainting, anemia, heart palpitations, dizziness, mood changes, skin conditions,
                         and breast conditions.

                         G.D. Searle, the pharmaceutical company whose prostaglandin misoprostol
                         (Cytotec) is regularly used with RU-486, has opposed the use of its drug for this
                         purpose and warned that "serious adverse events" including "maternal and fetal
                         death" and "uterine hyperstimulation, rupture, and perforation" have been
                         associated with "off-label" uses of the drug. The company, which developed
                         Cytotec for the treatment of gastric ulcers, said in a March 13, 1993 letter to the
                         Wall Street Journal that "Searle strongly opposes any efforts to approve its use
                         with RU-486 in abortion, either in the U.S. or elsewhere." In a physician alert
                         dated August 23, 2000, Searle reminded doctors that it had not conducted
                         research on the use of the drug for abortions and warned that "in addition to the
                         known and unknown acute risks to mother and fetus, the effect of Cytotec on the
                         later growth, development, and functional maturation of the child when Cytotec is
                         used for induction of labor or cervical ripening has not been established."

                         The U.S. tests of the abortion pill have been conducted on "ideal" candidates
                         who have been carefully selected for the best results. Nevertheless, 2 percent of
                         these select participants in the RU-486 trials have hemorrhaged, with one
                         percent bleeding severely enough to require hospitalization. Some required
                         surgery and transfusions. Outside the strictures of a clinical trial, it is virtually
                         certain that we will see far higher rates of serious complications, and even deaths
                         of mothers from the drugs. In fact, it is altogether possible that women who
                         participated in the trials have already died from RU-486, but that such deaths
                         have not been reported. Consider that in Ohio it was reported that "no
                         complications" had occurred among the 238 women who had taken part in the
                         tests. That lie may well have gone unchallenged if not for Dr. Mark Louviere, who
                         treated one of the RU-486 test women - after she had lost one-half of her total
                         blood volume. According to the doctor, she probably would have died if not for
                         emergency surgery. "If near death due to the loss of half of one's blood volume,
                         surgery, and a transfusion of four units of blood do not qualify as a complication,"
                         Dr. Louviere told the Waterloo Courier, "I don't know what does."

                         Monstrous lies and coverups are to be expected from those who traffic in this
                         wretched business, as we have learned from Dr. Bernard Nathanson, Carol
                         Everett, Norma "Jane Roe" McCorvey, and other abortion insiders who have
                         turned against the bloody slaughter. In his powerful 1996 autobiography, The
                         Hand of God, Dr. Nathanson recalls, for instance, that he and his fellow
                         revolutionists at the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) regularly
                         lied with statistics. "There were perhaps three hundred or so deaths from criminal
                         abortions annually in the United States in the sixties," writes Nathanson, "but
                         NARAL in its press releases claimed to have data that supported a figure of five
                         thousand."

                         The pro-abortion Establishment press helped them foist this lie and many others
                         on an unsuspecting public. In like fashion, the pro-abort media repeatedly helped
                         them cover up the seamier aspects and scandals of the abortion trade, which
                         constantly burbled to the surface and threatened to discredit their "noble"
                         crusade. Their friends in the press reliably downplayed or completely spiked
                         stories about women who were killed, maimed, or rendered sterile by abortions,
                         and rarely acknowledged the health risks to the pregnant mother from the various
                         methods of abortion.

                         This pattern of lies and coverup is being repeated with regard to RU-486. Rare is
                         the story which mentions the caveats that many medical researchers have made
                         with regard to the drug. According to reports on RU-486 that have appeared in
                         The New England Journal of Medicine and other medical journals, the
                         RU-486/PG treatment could prove a serious danger to women with severe
                         asthma or adrenal failure, and those on glucocorticoid therapy. Researchers also
                         warned that the drugs could pose dangers to women with complicated diabetes
                         mellitus, severe anemia, hemorrhagic disorders, and those being treated with
                         anticoagulants. Other risk categories include high blood pressure, bronchitis,
                         menstrual irregularity, fibroids, endometriosis, recent use of IUD or oral
                         contraceptives, history of problem pregnancy, current ectopic pregnancy, pelvic
                         inflammatory disease, allergies, epilepsy, adrenal insufficiency, recent intake of
                         steroid or anti-inflammatory medication, or a history of liver, stomach, or intestinal
                         disease.

                         Psychological Toll

                         And those are just some of the areas where physical complications are likely to
                         pop up. Nobody in the media thought cartel is even considering the
                         psychological, moral, and spiritual toll this new technology of death will exact on
                         the survivors. It is not because they do not know. They have been told, in an
                         extraordinary admission against interest, by one of those who helped develop the
                         drug and who is profiting from its destructive efficacy, that it inflicts "an appalling
                         psychological ordeal" upon women who use it. That admission comes from Dr.
                         Edouard Sakiz, who was CEO of Roussel-Uclaf during the period when RU-486
                         was being developed. He now heads Exelgyn, a company set up specifically to
                         market this "human insecticide" or "new Zyklon-B," as some critics have aptly
                         dubbed it. In a surprising statement reported in the Boston Herald on July 31,
                         1992, Sakiz denied claims that the new abortion pill offered a painless alternative
                         to surgical abortion techniques. "In fact it is much more complex than the
                         technique of vacuum extraction," said Sarkiz. "True, no anaesthetic is required.
                         But a woman who wants to end her pregnancy has to `live' with her abortion for at
                         least a week using this technique. It's an appalling psychological ordeal."

                         Even more appalling is the campaign of misinformation, lies, and deceit that is
                         being waged to promote this latest abomination in the ongoing war against the
                         most innocent and helpless members of our society.

                                                                                Order this issue



                                                 The Facts of Life

                         A popular pro-life bumper sticker proclaims: "Abortion Stops a Beating Heart."
                         That is certainly true. But what about the baby - or "fetus" or "embryo" - in an
                         RU-486 chemical abortion? What is his or her developing status during the
                         early weeks of pregnancy? The following is taken from The Facts of Life: An
                         Authoritative Guide to Life and Family Issues by Brian Clowes, Ph.D.

                         3 weeks: Your early forming baby has a beating heart.

                         4 weeks: He has developing muscles, and his arm and leg buds are visible. His
                         first neocortal cells appear. He has grown in size by a factor of 10,000 [since
                         fertilization]. Blood flows in his veins, separate from your blood.

                         5 weeks: Her pituitary gland is forming, and her mouth, ears, and nose are
                         taking shape.

                         6 weeks: His cartilage skeleton is completely formed and ossification begins.
                         His umbilical cord has developed. His brain coordinates movement of muscles
                         and the involuntary movement of organs. Reflex responses are present. At 43
                         days, his brain waves can be recorded.

                         7 weeks: Your early forming baby girl has lips that are sensitive to touch, and her
                         ears resemble her family's pattern. The first fully developed neurons (nerve cells)
                         appear on the top of the spinal cord, beginning construction of the brain stem.

                         8 weeks: He is well proportioned, about 11/2 inches long. All his organs are
                         present, complete and functioning (except the lungs). His fingerprints have been
                         engraved.

                         9 weeks: She will bend her fingers around an object placed in her palm. Her
                         fingernails are forming, and she sucks her thumb.

                                                                                Order this issue



                         Hold Congress Accountable

                         Congress has been derelict in its oversight of the FDA in allowing the agency to
                         approve the RU-486 killer pill for use in the United States. In addition to opening
                         the way for the chemical murder of many innocent babies, the legalization of this
                         powerful drug poses grave health risks to the women who use it, including
                         serious physical and psychological harm - and possibly even death. Congress
                         has allowed the federal courts to usurp State powers and to strip the States of
                         most of their abilities to outlaw or regulate abortions, so the State governments
                         will have little ability to stop the RU-486 slaughter. Congress can and must
                         reverse this travesty by overturning this FDA approval. Write to your U.S.
                         Representative and Senators, urging them to do this.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Drug Used in RU 486 Abortions Linked to Eight Deaths, Major Health Concerns

San Francisco, CA -- The pro-abortion magazine Mother Jones has obtained FDA

figures listing 30 cases of uterine rupture associated with the use of the

drug Cytotec to induce labor in expectant mothers, including 8 cases in which

the fetus died in utero. Even so, the FDA recently approved the RU 486

chemical abortion regimin that includes misuse of Cytotec in the abortion

process.

In spite of the fact that Cytotec is only FDA approved for treating peptic

ulcers rather than for inducing labor, it is now "the predominant agent of

choice" for inducing labor, according to Dr. Charles Lockwood, chairman of

obstetrical practices for the American College of Obstetricians and

Gynecologists (ACOG).

Mother Jones contributing writer David Goodman reports that deaths resulting

from the "off-label" use of Cytotec have become the subject of several

lawsuits, including two in Oregon and others in Texas and Connecticut. After

being named as a defendant in a Portland, Oregon, suit, the drug's

manufacturer, G.D. Searle Corporation, sent a letter to 200,000 health care

providers warning them that "Cytotec administration by any route is

contraindicated in women who are pregnant because it can cause abortion."

The drug is, in fact, used in combination with RU-486, for this specific

purpose. The company also noted that off-label use of the drug has resulted in

reports of uterine rupture, hysterectomy, and the death of mothers and

infants.

According to one informal survey, reports Mother Jones, at least a third of

hospitals have restricted the use of the drug because of health and safety

concerns for women, but other hospitals stand by it. Dr. Luis Sanchez-Ramos,

professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Florida, insists

the drug is safe and told Goodman that the warning "hasn't impacted us at

all."

Critics such as Dr. Marsden Wagner, formerly with the World Health

Organization, argue that doctors are using Cytotec to help abnormally fit

deliveries into a daytime schedule.  Wagner notes that Cytotec is not used to

induce labor in Europe because of health concerns and chides American

physicians for what he calls "vigilante obstetrics." "Whatever the drug's

dangers," concludes Goodman, "most women who receive it have no idea that it

is not approved for use during pregnancy."

rockforlife@all.org

Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 15:08:15 -0700

From: "SueW" <gswidemark@home.com>

To: "Cinlife_mailing list" <cinlife@cin.org>

Subject: Drug used in RU 486 abortions linked to eight deaths

Message-ID: <017001c07f3f$a89b6f80$7be70118@phnx1.az.home.com>

*   *     *     *     *     *     *     *

RU 486 Dangers Seen Firsthand by South African Doctors

South Africa -- Last year, when the Food and Drug Administration approved
use of the dangerous RU 486 abortion pill, many saw the agency's action as
hasty. Now comes news from overseas that there is reason for that concern.

Before the Food and Drug Administration gave its blessing last September
to the abortion pill RU-486, the manufacturer of a drug used in
conjunction with RU-486 raised concerns.

That drug, called misoprostol, was developed in order to treat ulcers.
Yet, an unintended side effect of the medication is that it can cause
women to have abortions. G.D. Searle, which developed misoprostol, refused
to sanction usage of its product for use in inducing abortions, citing its
lack of safety for off-label use.

Nevertheless, it is now being used and promoted to developing nations as
an abortifacient. Professor Steffan Bergstrom heads a Swedish institute
that promotes misoprostol in Africa for abortion. But even he has
concerns.

"Once women in need of interruption of pregnancy, unwanted pregnancy, know
that this drug is available somewhere, they will try to get it," Bergstrom
said. "I am the first to say that there should be no self-medication at
all of this drug and it should be used very carefully."

Indeed, in South Africa the death toll of women from drug-induced abortion
is growing.

"This is something we've always feared," said Dr. Albu van Eeden, a South
African physician. "The use of this drug (misoprostol) has just got
totally out of hand. It's being dished-out like Smartees at clinics."

Van Eeden, a member of the group Doctors for Life, said the off-label use
of misoprostol has reached crisis proportions and is causing a growing
number of deaths from hemorrhage and uterine rupture due to its casual
use. Even when women don't die, usage of the drug is still placing
pro-life physicians in a bind.

"This really caused an ethical dilemma for pro-life health professionals
already, because these women come in bleeding and you are ethically
obliged to attend to them," van Eeden said. "You can't just leave them.
And so you end up, in the end, completing the abortion for the
abortionist."

Van Eeden said the South African government is standing aloof from the
problem. "Up 'til now they haven't responded to what we've said."

The actual death toll from chemical abortions both from Africa and
worldwide is unclear, due to poor reporting procedures.

From:  The Pro-Life Infonet <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>
Reply-To:  Steven Ertelt <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>
Subject:   RU 486 Dangers Seen Firsthand by South African Doctors

Source:   Focus on the Family; February 21, 2001

*   *     *     *     *     *     *     *

San Francisco, CA -- The pro-abortion magazine Mother Jones has obtained

FDA figures listing 30 cases of uterine rupture associated with the use of

the drug Cytotec to induce labor in expectant mothers, including 8 cases

in which the fetus died in utero. Even so, the FDA recently approved the

RU 486 chemical abortion regimin that includes misuse of Cytotec in the

abortion process.

In spite of the fact that Cytotec is only FDA approved for treating peptic

ulcers rather than for inducing labor, it is now "the predominant agent of

choice" for inducing labor, according to Dr. Charles Lockwood, chairman of

obstetrical practices for the American College of Obstetricians and

Gynecologists (ACOG).

Mother Jones contributing writer David Goodman reports that deaths

resulting from the "off-label" use of Cytotec have become the subject of

several lawsuits, including two in Oregon and others in Texas and

Connecticut. After being named as a defendant in a Portland, Oregon, suit,

the drug's manufacturer, G.D. Searle Corporation, sent a letter to 200,000

health care providers warning them that "Cytotec administration by any

route is contraindicated in women who are pregnant because it can cause

abortion."

The drug is, in fact, used in combination with RU-486, for this specific

purpose. The company also noted that off-label use of the drug has

resulted in reports of uterine rupture, hysterectomy, and the death of

mothers and infants.

According to one informal survey, reports Mother Jones, at least a third

of hospitals have restricted the use of the drug because of health and

safety concerns for women, but other hospitals stand by it. Dr. Luis

Sanchez-Ramos, professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of

Florida, insists the drug is safe and told Goodman that the warning

"hasn't impacted us at all."

Critics such as Dr. Marsden Wagner, formerly with the World Health

Organization, argue that doctors are using Cytotec to help abnormally fit

deliveries into a daytime schedule.  Wagner notes that Cytotec is not used

to induce labor in Europe because of health concerns and chides American

physicians for what he calls "vigilante obstetrics."

"Whatever the drug's dangers," concludes Goodman, "most women who receive

it have no idea that it is not approved for use during pregnancy."

From:  The Pro-Life Infonet <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>

Reply-To:  Steven Ertelt <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>

Subject:  Drug Used in RU 486 Abortions Linked to Eight Deaths, Major

Health Concerns

Source:   Mother Jones; December 20, 2000

*     *     *     *     *     *    *     *     *     *

Patient Who Died From Part of RU 486 Drug Receives Settlement

Portland, OR -- Recently the drug manufacturer Searle issued a warning
letter to doctors nationwide urging their drug Cytotec to not be used as
the second part of the two-part RU 486 abortion process. The drug, made
only as an ulcer treatment, is being used in abortions in a way that is
medically dangerous to women.

Before its misuse as part of the RU 486 abortion process, Cytotec was
wrongly used by doctors to induce labor, Searle says. Now, a
recently-settled lawsuit in Portland sheds light on the dangers of misuse
of the drug.

The undisclosed settlement, reached in December after a 2-year trial in
Mulnomah County Circuit Court, went to Michael O'Connor of Portland,
Oregon. On Jan. 28, 1997, O'Connor lost his wife Margaret an hour after
she gave birth to their third child at Legacy Emanuel Hospital in
Portland.

Margaret O'Connor was admitted to the hospital for what appeared to be an
"unevenful" labor, but was prescribed misoprostol (Cytotec) to hurry the
birth. However, after delivering the child, she began bleeding profusely
and died.

FDA figures show 30 cases of a rupture of the uterus related to the use of
misoprostol. In eight cases, the unborn child died even though abortion
was not the intent. In the Portland case, the mother died.

Gale Attebarry, executive director of Oregon Right to Life, told the
Catholic Sentinel, Portland's archdiocesan newspaper, that O'Connor's
death "tragically proves" that the pro-life community is right about
RU-486. Said Atteberry, "The pro-life community has always warned that
RU-486 abortions are deadly not only to the unborn but to the women."

From:  The Pro-Life Infonet <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>
Reply-To:  Steven Ertelt <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>
Subject:   Patient Who Died From Part of RU 486 Drug Receives Settlement
Source:   National Catholic Register; January 21st Issue

The Pro-Life Infonet is a daily compilation of pro-life news and
information. To subscribe, send the message "subscribe" to:
infonet-request@prolifeinfo.org. Infonet is sponsored by Women and
Children First (http://www.womenandchildrenfirst.org). For more pro-life
info visit http://www.prolifeinfo.org and for questions or additional
information email ertelt@prolifeinfo.org

*     *     *     *     *     *

RU 486:  A Psychological Nightmare for Women

Washington, DC -- When Rachel heard that RU-486 had been approved, she

dropped the laundry basket and ran downstairs to turn on the TV. As the

newscaster announced the "breakthrough," Rachel was thinking: "If I hadn't

taken it, right now I'd have a newborn in the house; which room would he

or she sleep in?"

Those broadcasts Rachel saw last month described the Food and Drug

Administration's approval of the dangerous abortion drug RU 486. Its very

nickname -- "the abortion pill" -- supposedly implies convenience and

ease, liberation from the hassles and stigma of surgical abortions.

However, as Rachel and other women who've taken the dangerous abortion

pill can vouch, there's little that's easy about RU-486. American women

who've used the drug describe as it as less convenient and more messy, and

sometimes more painful, than surgical abortion, according to those who

have conducted trials on 9,000 women so far.

Yet many chose it not despite those obstacles, but because of them. The

pain factor made it seem more "natural," some abortion practitioners

claim. Taking the abortion drug at home gave them a greater sense of

control. And some even said the control and suffering served as a way to

confront their own moral dilemmas.

"When I'm doing the initial counseling and a woman says she really wants

[the pregnancy] over with quickly or if she has a very busy schedule, she

will generally not end up using [RU-486]," said Kathy Rogers, a researcher

at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, one of 18 sites for the latest

clinical trials. "Because it's not just a pill; it's a process. And it's

not going to be easy or fast or simple."

In demographic terms Rachel -- who agreed to be interviewed if her name

were not disclosed -- is not the prototype RU-486 user. She is six years

older than the average age of 28, and is married, with two children. But

judging from interviews and published studies, her reactions are quite

typical.

She absorbed her nurse's warning that taking RU 486 would be "more

painful, with all the bleeding and cramping." Still, she chose it because

"it gave me a sense of control. Because it's something that I choose to

do, rather than something that's done to me."

By that she means common medical concerns about invasive surgery, and the

physical trauma to the body. But she also means something more personal,

more emotional--a feeling the pill's advocates don't like to talk about

but which nonetheless seems common to the women who take RU 486.

It served for her as a form of penance, a way of grappling with her

ambivalence over any kind of abortion and killing her unborn child.

"It was like, if I'm going to do this I have to take the responsibility

and do it myself, and I have to put myself through something hard," she

said. "It would have been cowardly to have someone fix it for me in some

easy, safe way. It would not have felt right.

"You know, I still think about it almost every day," she continued. "I

will always wonder what this baby would have been like. I still don't

think I did the wrong thing, but I wish the whole thing had never come

up."

As post-abortion experts point out, the stigma and pain of the of abortion

is kept alive whether the abortion is surgical or chemical in nature.

However, abortion advocates refuse to call it guilt. "That's a red flag

for us, if a woman is overwhelmed by guilt," Rogers said.

"The logic is, even if takes longer, even if it hurts more, there's a

sense of doing it yourself, rather than being done unto," said Carolyn

Westhof, who conducted the trials at the Columbia Medical School in New

York. "Often it's not really a medical decision, but a psychological one."

Yet much about Rachel's experience suggests that RU-486 may not change the

abortion climate in America quite as much as expected. Not at the

political level, between abortion advocates and pro-life advocates, and

especially not at the personal level, where a woman confronts her

neighbors, her family and her conscience by virtue of what she's done.

When Rachel found out she was pregnant just before New Year's Day 2000 she

decided to have an abortion.

"When I discovered it I thought, 'Oh my God I can't do this,' " she

recalled. "My second child turned out much more demanding; I scream at her

almost every day. And I thought, what's the next step? I'll start hitting

somebody. I was really concerned I might become an abusive mother."

She stayed up until 3 a.m. talking it over with her husband, and by the

end of the second day they'd made up their minds.

The next morning she immediately called her obstetrician, who had seen her

through two pregnancies. This is the stage were pro-life advocates can

hold out hope; namely, that doctors will refuse to hand out RU 486 because

they are unwilling to perform surgical abortions when RU 486 fails to kill

the unborn child because it is taken too late into the pregnancy.

Here Rachel encountered frustration because her doctor refused to hand out

RU 486 or perform an abortion.

Rachel looked up Planned Parenthood in the phone book. She called, and the

counselor on the phone pointedly affirmed her decision to have an

abortion. Once she determined that Rachel was in the first weeks of

pregnancy, she directed Rachel to a local facility conducting RU 486

trials.

She made an appointment for the first day she could, the Tuesday after New

Year's. There she listened to an explanation of the differences between a

surgical and chemical abortion -- an apparently was given no encouragement

to choose abortion alternatives.

She first sifted through her emotional state. "Finding out I was pregnant

and not wanting it made me feel I was losing control of my life. All New

Year's I kept thinking of the same sentence: 'Stop the train, I want to

get off.' "

RU-486 seemed the way to "regain that control," she said. "I thought about

the differences; about going into a room in a paper gown and having

someone do something to me with instruments. Ugh. As opposed to keeping my

clothes on and taking the pill myself. Me doing it, to myself."

>From the counselor's descriptions, Rachel concluded RU-486 "was just like

having a miscarriage. It might be painful, I might bleed," she thought,

"but it will be more natural; my body will be doing it to itself." And

then her final thought before she gave her answer: "I thought the least I

could do was suffer a little."

She took the first of two drugs at Planned parenthood that day and "felt a

huge weight lifted off my shoulders. I could literally feel it. It was the

first time I understood what that phrase meant."

But no moment since has been quite so weightless. What happened to Rachel

afterwards was nothing short of a horrific nightmare.

She still hasn't told anyone except her husband about what she did. Not

her best friends, not her two children, certainly not her mother who, like

Rachel herself, "would spend the rest of her life wondering what this

child would have been like."

Her heart still jumps every time she passes the house next door, the house

of a man "who is very religious and I don't want to think about what he

would do if he knew I'd had what I'm sure he considers just plain old

abortion."

She considered going public until she scanned the Internet the day the

news broke and read the reactions of abortion opponents: "They talk like

we make this decision so cavalierly. Yeah, right. Like they need to make

us feel guilt. Like there isn't plenty of that already."

And she still remembers most vividly the last moment of the whole ordeal;

when she woke up for the millionth time and went to the bathroom the

morning after taking the second part of the dangerous abortion drug,

feeling crampy and achy. She looked down and saw the unborn baby.

She looked at the baby for a long time because the baby was bigger than

she expected. She stared for what seemed like an hour--frozen, tired.

"It seemed rude to flush it," she thought to herself. "I should be having

a burial or something." But then she heard her daughter awaken and

thought: "Well, you have to get on with your day."

From:  The Pro-Life Infonet <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>

Reply-To:  Steven Ertelt / Sally Winn <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>

Subject:   RU 486:  A Psychological Nightmare for Women

Source:   Washington Post; October 15, 2000

*     *     *     *     *     *     *

One stumbling block to manufacturing the baby kill pill, the RU486 has been

that American pharmaceuticals didn't want to touch it for fear of boycott by
pro lifers. That problem has now been solved, the press revealed today because
they will buy the RU486 from a pharmaceutical company in China.

A media article said that the population 'control' people were not releasing
the name of the company for fear of 'violence' by pro lifers.  But of course,
it's not violence they fear at all but rather the fact that a boycott can
drastically cut into the profits of whomever offers the pill.

The Right To Life bulletin was more specific on the details - here it is:

Abortion Drug Will Be Imported from Chinese Government Factory That Plays Key
Role in Population-Control Program

WASHINGTON -- The RU-486 abortion drug that will be sold in the United States
will be manufactured in a factory operated by the government of the People's
Republic of China, the Washington Post confirmed in a page one story published
today.

The Post article reveals that the Hua Lian Pharmaceutical Plant in Shanghai
will manufacture the drug for Danco Laboratories, the U.S. patent holder. The
article also reveals that the RU-486 produced in that factory and two others
is now used for about one-half of the estimated 10 million abortions annually
in China. Many of those abortions are forced on women under the
government-enforced "birth-quota" program.

"The fact that the abortion pill will be imported from the People's Republic
of China is both a public health issue and a human rights issue," commented
Douglas Johnson, legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee
(NRLC). "It is a public health issue because China is a major source of impure
drugs -- and the FDA cannot possibly monitor a Chinese factory effectively. It
is a human rights issue because Hua Lian Pharmaceutical is a major component
of the Chinese government's population control program, which relies heavily
on compulsory abortion."

Johnson also commented, "In pursuit of American dollars, the PRC is allowing
itself to be dragged into the middle of one of the most controversial issues
in America. This will refocus the American public's attention on China's
horrendous forced-abortion practices."

On September 18, Senator Jesse Helms (R-NC), chairman of the Senate Foreign

Relations Committee, sent letters to Secretary of State Madeline Albright and
Secretary of Health and Human Services Donna Shalala, raising a number of
pointed questions regarding the association of the Chinese facility (which at
that time was still unidentified) with China's population-control program and
other human rights problems.

Among Sen. Helms' questions: "Does the management of the facility enforce the
birth-quota system, which involves the monitoring of all female employees'
menstrual cycles for unauthorized pregnancies -- and if so, what threats or
penalties are applied to female employee of the facility who becomes pregnant
without a permit? (For example, is she threatened with the loss of her
position unless she submits to an abortion?) Are abortion-inducing drugs
already produced by the factory utilized as part of the nationwide birth-quota
enforcement system, which has been well documented to rely heavily on many
forms of coercion? Does the facility produce the anti-coagulation drugs that
are reportedly given to some condemned prisoners prior to their execution, in
order to facilitate immediate harvesting of their organs, which are sometimes
provided to Party officials or to foreign buyers?"

As of today, staff to Senator Helms say that the senator has not yet received
responses to his letters.

NRLC's Johnson said, "The FDA's refusal to reveal or confirm that RU-486 will
be imported from China shows that the FDA has enlisted as a partner in Danco's
public relations program."

For further information on the abortion pill, see the NRLC website at
www.nrlc.org/RU486/index.html.

The National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) is the nation's major pro-life
organization, representing 50 state right-to-life organizations.

National Right to Life
419 7th St. NW  Suite 500
Washington, DC  20004-2293
202-626-8800
NRLC@nrlc.org

*    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *

RU 486: A rush to market, not a remedy
by Teresa Wagner

Teresa R. Wagner is an analyst for human rights and life issues at the
Family Research Council.

Distribution of the controversial abortion pill RU-486 to doctor's offices
began last week. The many media reports about the Food and Drug
Administration's September approval of this drug omitted one rather
significant detail. Approval of the drug occurred pursuant to "subpart H"
of FDA regulations, which allows fast-track clearance of experimental
drugs intended for "serious or life threatening illnesses." Accelerated
approval means less testing of drugs before they're available. It also
means drug companies may be able to avoid strict liability for injuries
resulting from their use, since it is understood "there is no assurance of
safety" for new and experimental treatments. (This is called "comment k"
immunity, and is described in section 402A of the Restatement of Torts,
accepted in most states.)
    
Subpart H was drafted in 1992 as a result of lobbying efforts by AIDS
patients, many of whom wanted access to new medications, even if they were
experimental. For dying patients, this is understandable, since existing
treatment cannot cure them. But how do pregnancy and abortion fit in? Is
pregnancy now considered a "life threatening" illness for which chemical
abortion is a needed medication?
    
In short, yes. An FDA office memo to the Population Council, RU-486's
sponsor in this country, states that the "FDA has determined that the
termination of an unwanted pregnancy is a serious condition within the
scope of subpart H." Never mind that pregnancy "termination" is not a
"condition."
    
The FDA abused its own procedures by classifying pregnancy as a "life
threatening illness" and then by using an "accelerated approval" process
intended for experimental drugs in the treatment of AIDS and other
life-threatening illnesses. In addition to being dishonest, this action
shortchanges women, since subpart H protects the marketers of RU-486
rather than the women and children who may be injured by its use.
    
The FDA's action is troubling on a number of fronts. First is the obvious
violation of public trust by an agency founded to protect consumer and
patient health. Researcher Vivian Orlando, who has written on the FDA's
new approval process, repeatedly describes Subpart H drugs to be of
"limited safety" or actually responsible for "creating safety hazards."
The process bypasses some testing (phase 2 and 3 clinical trials) and
reduces opportunities to discover serious side effects or
contraindications (health conditions that recommend against a drug's use).
    
Those dying of cancer or AIDS may well be willing to assume risks from
such fast-track clearance. But the woman in an unintended pregnancy
probably is not. At the very least, if she is contemplating use of RU-486,
she should know it was approved under subpart H, that is, as an
experimental drug with unknown risks. She should also know that its makers
and sellers cannot be found strictly liable for injuries she sustains from
its use.
    
But nowhere in the many pages of "warning" and "labeling" submitted for
RU-486 is this information included.
    
Second is the FDA's bad faith. According to Vivian Orlando, critics of the
new approval process worried about the potential for abuse --specifically,
that the FDA would expand the number of conditions eligible for subpart H
drug approval. (Some even proposed that subpart H be limited to drugs for
terminal illness.) The FDA itself assured critics that approval would not
be expanded to cover non-serious or non-life-threatening diseases. But now
we are supposed to believe pregnancy qualifies.
    
Is it any wonder the public is cynical about what happens in Washington,
D.C.?
    
One can't help but marvel at the audacity of the abortion lobby and its
lackeys in this administration. The approval of RU-486 was extremely big
news. Those involved in the process must have known that this abuse of
process would be made public. But no matter: They saw a need for
accelerated clearance, given a close presidential race and the possibility
of a new administration with reservations about abortion-on-demand. What's
a little abuse of process to further the cause?
    
Besides, pro-abortion forces complain they have been waiting years for
this drug, though they fail to mention the delay was due to infighting on
their side about a patent, and the inability to find a U.S. manufacturer
for such a controversial product. Eventually they found a Chinese
manufacturer --with a record of tainted drug production. This raises even
more safety issues, as well as the more obvious problem of the need to
collaborate with a country notorious for human rights abuses --rather
fitting for the making of an abortion pill.
    
That the FDA is so willing to put women at risk-to the point where it
protects drug companies more than an injured woman plaintiff should bother
all concerned. It has never been so clear that the interests of the
abortion lobby are at odds with the interests of women.

*    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *
WASHINGTON, Oct. 13 /PRNewswire/ -- "Why is the FDA promoting the use of a
drug they have not approved to end a pregnancy? A drug that causes uterine
rupture, severe bleeding, shock and maternal death?" asked Judie Brown,
president of American Life League. "It's because the FDA is embroiled in the
promotion of the Big Abortion industry."

An August 23, 2000, letter from Searle -- the US manufacturer of misoprostol
(Cytotec), the second chemical used in the RU-486 regimen to expel the dead
child from her mother's uterus -- warns doctors nationwide not to use
misoprostol for abortions.

Brown pointed out that the FDA's recent approval of RU-486 (Mifeprex) does not
include approval of the second chemical, misoprostol, to induce contractions.
Yet the FDA gives doctors and women instructions for this kind of off-label
use from its website.

The FDA's website states: "Patients taking Mifeprex must take 400 mg. of
misoprostol two days after taking mifepristone unless a complete abortion has
already been confirmed before that time."

"Clearly these are grounds for Congress to mandate oversight hearings on the
FDA and the RU-486/Cytotec regimen," Brown said. "The FDA has exhibited
flagrant disregard, not only for the well-being of preborn babies, but for
maternal health as well. The FDA's feigned ignorance and pro-abortion ideology
has opened the door for litigation against Big Abortion."

American Life League

*     *     *     *     *     *
Baby Born After Chemical Abortion Makes for Special Mother's Day

Hernando, FL -- Nicole Saia believes she is celebrating her first Mother's
Day by the grace of God. The birth of Alexandria Nicole Saia on April 5
was, she says, a miracle.

When 18-year-old Nicole learned that she was pregnant, she followed the
urging of the baby's father to have an abortion. The unmarried couple
traveled to an abortion facility in Gainesville, Florida where the young
woman received an injection of methotrexate, part of the RU 486 chemical
abortion process. She was told it would kill the fastest-growing cells,
which would be the placenta, and was given suppositories with the
instructions to take them five days later to cause the contractions that
would expel the dead baby.

Two days later, Nicole said, she realized that she did not want to abort
her baby, so she told her parents what she had done. The three discussed
the problem and then Nicole's mother made a suggestion.

"I said, "The first thing we're going to do is pray and put you into
Jesus' hands, because this is definitely out of ours,' " said Joan Saia.
"Next day, Nicole got on the phone and called the abortion clinic. They
told her the embryo was dead and there was nothing to do. She called the
pharmacy and they said the drug could cause deformities, but the baby may
still be alive. They didn't know."

Nicole wanted to find out more about methotrexate. When she called Citrus
Memorial Hospital, she was advised to call the Genesis Women's Center in
Inverness. She explained her situation and received a call back with a
message from Dr. Steven Roth telling her to come right in.

An ultrasound was performed, and on her 19th birthday, Nicole found out
that her baby was alive.

"I guess the way (Dr. Roth) felt about it was, if I would have a change of
heart, he was going to do everything in his power to help me," said
Nicole.

"That's exactly what I told her," said Roth. "I said, 'If you're not going
to go through with this, I'll do whatever I can.' I had her take
Leukovorin (a drug given in cancer treatment along with methotrexate to
protect normal cells) to overwhelm the chemical she took."

"I had never written a prescription for Leukovorin in my life. I had to
call somebody else to find out what the dosage was. I think God had a hand
in opening up my mind in using that as a possible treatment option and
certainly in just protecting that baby. Even having Nicole come to us and
just the way it worked out that day. He was in it from the very
beginning."

Nicole took the prescription until the following Monday when a second
sonogram showed that the baby was still alive. She had passed the crisis
period.

The growth of the baby was carefully monitored and in early November
Nicole found out through a sonogram that she was carrying a little girl
who had no visible deformities. In April, she went into labor three weeks
early and delivered a 4-pound, 7-ounce girl, whom she named Alexandria.

"I watched the birth through the mirror. It was strange," said Nicole.

"It was the most wonderful feeling in the world, but having her early made
me nervous and with her being so small, I was really scared. When she was
in the nursery, every two hours I was in there feeding her, and at night I
couldn't sleep, so I'd stay in there, and all the time that I was spending
with her I was realizing she was mine."

Nicole, who will soon complete her bachelor's degree in business
administration at Saint Leo University's Ocala campus, says it hasn't been
easy being a single mom. She lives at home with her parents and younger
sister, and her grandmother is right next door to help.

"I love her, but it's hard. I'm a single mom and I had to finish out
school this semester. I'm going back to work, so it's hard doing it by
myself, and even now I still worry that something may be wrong."

She acknowledges a local crisis pregnancy center for their help.

"I wouldn't trade her for anything in the world. My whole family has been
wonderful along with all the outside support. The Life Choice Care Center
helped me emotionally through my pregnancy. My church, my college. I
couldn't ask for a better family or a better support system."

"My main concern was that God's will be done," said Joan Saia. "I wanted
my daughter to be safe. I wanted the baby to be safe. I just go with
what's handed to me. When I feel it's completely out of my hands, I just
put it into God's. I have a very strong faith and the power of prayer, I'm
a very strong believer in that."

Her own mother, Vivian, passed that faith onto Joan.

"It's a miracle," said Vivian about the baby's birth. "It's really what
God wanted, because in the beginning we were all concerned that the baby
would be not perfect in some way. But she is absolutely perfect, a little
bit small, but she's got all her fingers and toes. I know she hears
because she winces when there's a big sound, and we know she sees because
when we take a picture, a flash will cause her eyes to blink open and
close."

As for Alexandria's father, he knows that Nicole did not go through with
the abortion and that she gave birth, according to Mary Lou Hendry,
director of the Life Choice Care Center.

Nicole said she wants to tell her story to save other girls from the
emotional strain she endured.

"When I went to the abortion clinic, I talked to the counselor. I was
crying and I told her that I didn't want to do this and that I wasn't
ready to do it, but she told the doctor that I was fine and to go in for
the procedure. If I had taken the suppositories, I would have miscarried,
but it would have been a live baby and there's no way I would have known.
So some of these people who are getting the two-process chemical abortions
might actually be aborting a live child, because the first shot doesn't
always work."

Roth said he thinks Nicole is a hero.

"She's the one who had to go through the whole pregnancy not knowing if
her baby was going to be deformed or what might happen. It was a very
brave and wonderful decision that she made, and I'm just so excited for
her."
You can see a picture of Nicole, Alexandria and Nicole's mother and
grandmother at http://www.sptimes.com/News/051301/photos/cit-mom.jpg

From:  The Pro-Life Infonet <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>
Reply-To:  Steven Ertelt <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>
Subject:   Baby Born After Chemical Abortion Makes for Special Mother's Day
Source:   St. Petersburg (FL) Times; May 13, 2001

*     *     *     *     *     *
NRLC Official Appaluds RU 486's Lack of Popularity

Charlotte, NC -- The director of research for the National Right To Life Committee's
Educational Trust Fund said Thursday the demand for the abortion pill "RU-486," also known as
"mifepristone," has slowed because pro-lifers have been successful in educating the American
people about the drug's dangerous side effects.

"The reality is...it's not selling. It's not been welcomed on college campuses. Princeton,
Boston University, Michigan State University, University of Virginia, Vanderbilt, University of
Oklahoma, Florida State University, UCLA, University of North Carolina- Chapel Hill don't offer
it," said Dr. Randall O'Bannon during the NRLC's convention in Charlotte.

The reasons those universities don't offer RU-486 is because O'Bannon believes, "they don't
have an ultrasound machine. They are saying 'we really need to have an ultrasound machine to
make sure that we are safe.' They don't have the capacity to deal with the problems."

O'Bannon also thinks many women call abortion facilities inquiring about the drug, but in the
end don't buy it.

"Most of the orders that are coming in from the drug (to the RU-486 marketers) are from clinics
that already offer abortion," he said.

"But doctors are also showing some hesitation. Even among the doctors that are offering it,
they are telling their patients that they consider surgical abortions quicker, less painful and
fewer office visits," O'Bannon added.

He also quoted a San Diego, California doctor as saying "there are a lot more problems with
using that drug than the public's been led to believe."

"We've (pro-lifers) been telling the truth about this all along. But there must be more
education and information. It's still an abortion pill. A lot of people are forgetting that,"
O'Bannon said.

He added, "But ultimately, though, we are going to need to overturn Roe v. Wade. Because even
if this gets pulled off the market, there will be another one. Until abortion itself is
stopped, they will keep coming up with something else."

However, Kate Michelman, president of the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights League,"
believes that RU-486 should continue to be available to American women."

"Mifepristone has been available to women in Europe for over a decade. It has been shown to be
a safe and effective alternative to surgical abortion following extensive clinical trials in
France, Great Britain, and Sweden," Michelman said in a statement on the NARAL website.

Michelman added, "Mifepristone must be administered by a woman's doctor and requires three
visits" to an abortion facility or abortion practitioner.

From:  The Pro-Life Infonet <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>
Reply-To:  Steven Ertelt <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>
Subject:  NRLC Official Appaluds RU 486's Lack of Popularity
Source:  Cybercast News Service; June 29, 2001

*     *     *     *     *     *
RU-486 Abortion Pill Hasn't Caught on in U.S.

Los Angeles, CA -- George Kung believes RU-486, the dangerous abortion
pill approved for sale in the United States last September, is an
important milestone. But the San Diego abortion practitioner does not use it.

He has little incentive to do so. Few women have asked him for the
abortion drug, which pro-life advocates fought for years to bring to this
country. A pill-induced, or chemical, abortion can take several days and
is less reliable than a surgical abortion, which is over in minutes, he
said.

"It is a major development in political terms," Kung said of the pill. "In
practical terms, it is of small value."

Economic and medical realities are weighing heavily on the introduction of
the dangerous RU-486 abortion pill in the United States. High prices --
the drug usually costs more than surgical abortions -- and the reluctance
of doctors and even many abortion facilities to offer it have slowed the
revolution that many expected.

Private physicians have shunned the pill because it is a costly medication
they must be trained to use. Some abortion facilities are offering the
drug, also known as mifepristone, but an informal survey suggests they
haven't fully accepted it either.

Of 53 places in California contacted by the Los Angeles Times, 43% said
they do not use the abortion drug. Among them was a Northern California
clinic that talks women out of trying the drug; a receptionist described
RU 486 as a "Third World method" used when surgery isn't available.

To abortion advocates who pushed the drug through a regulatory thicket and
funded a company to market it, mifepristone held great promise. The
Feminist Majority Foundation, the Population Control Council and other
abortion supporters had expected the drug to expand abortion beyond
abortion facilities to the offices of legitimate doctors. Abortion would
become more available.

Because no special equipment is required to administer the drug, anyone,
in theory, can offer it. Eleanor Smeal, a Feminist Majority co-founder,
predicted that once the Food and Drug Administration approved
mifepristone, "the number of abortion providers will double overnight."

"It is not turning out to be the social revolution many predicted," said
Ronald Fitzsimmons, executive director of the National Coalition of
Abortion Providers, which represents less than 10% of abortion facilities
in the U.S. "It is happening slowly."

Some advocates for the abortion pill believe it is too early to write it
off and that it will eventually gain wider acceptance. Mifepristone has
been available in this country for only about six months, they say, and it
is unrealistic to expect physicians -- who tend to be conservative with
new treatments --to embrace it immediately.

The company that markets the drug in the United States will not disclose
sales data and no information is available on what portion of abortions it
accounts for. Annually, more than 1.3 million abortions are performed in
the U.S.

In places where mifepristone is available, demand from women has been
mixed. Some abortion facilities report strong interest, said Fitzsimmons,
while others report none.

Abortion facilities typically charge $75 to $100 more for a pill-induced
abortion than for surgical abortion, putting the method beyond the reach
of some women, especially in states where Medicaid does not cover
abortion, abortion advocates noted. And a medical abortion can be a
prolonged ordeal, involving cramping and bleeding for up to two weeks and
it has numerous dangerous side effects and problems.

To those who do not perform surgical abortions, mifepristone presents
obstacles that pro-abortion activists didn't fully anticipate as the drug
made its way through the government approval process:

Legal restrictions. UC Davis sociologist Carole Joffe said private doctors
have been discouraged by state laws that entangle abortion in red tape.
Some states have 24-hour waiting periods or require minors to obtain
parental consent, she said. Doctors may need to examine fetal tissue.

Business burdens. Dr. Richard G. Roberts, president of the American
Academy of Family Physicians, said a typical family doctor can expect one
to two cases a year, too few for a physician to become comfortable with
mifepristone. Add to that the cost of abortion drugs that might expire
before being used and the paperwork and training required. Most who
support abortion will refer women to abortion facilities, he said.

To those who already do surgical abortions, mifepristone has other
drawbacks. Medical abortions can take place at any hour. This means one
must be on call to answer questions and handle emergencies should a women
bleed heavily or react badly to the abortion drug. They also must follow
up with women to make sure the drug worked -- and in many cases the drug
fails to complete the abortion.

Mifepristone "involves too many appointments and too much counseling,"
said a San Diego man who does surgical abortions but does not offer the
abortion pill. "It isn't worth it."

Kung, president of the gynecological society in San Diego, has sent the
few women who have asked for mifepristone to Planned Parenthood, which
operates 83 abortion facilities nationwide, including three in San Diego,
that dispense the dangerous drug. "If a patient doesn't keep her
[post-abortion] appointment . . . if she cramps in the middle of the
night, I don't want to deal with that," Kung said. "I don't want to be
responsible around the clock, seven days a week."

Smeal of the Feminist Majority said she understands the reluctance of some
abortion practitioners, who had been expected to lead acceptance of the
drug. But she thinks they will offer mifepristone in time. "A surgical
abortion is a two-minute procedure. They can do them easily and fast,"
Smeal said. "There is a natural lag to try something new."

But Diane Maracich, who manages the mifepristone program for Long
Beach-based Family Planning Associates, the nation's largest for-profit
abortion chain, doesn't expect much competition from private individuals.

"It is not that simple. It isn't, 'Take this pill and see you in a week,"
she said.

Along with Planned Parenthood, which accounts for 20% of abortions
nationally, Family Planning is one of the largest providers of
mifepristone in California. To Family Planning the abortion pill offers
advantages.

A medical abortion is "slightly more profitable" than a surgical abortion,
depending on how it's done, said Family Planning President G. Michael
Lyon. Though the FDA-approved procedure calls for three tablets
administered up to the seventh week of pregnancy, Family Planning uses one
pill given up to the ninth week -- even though the FDA has only approved
the drug for up to the seventh week of pregnancy. The abortion chain
charges $500 for a pill-induced abortion, $130 more than for a first
trimester surgical abortion--in part to cover the second office visit and
the $90 cost of a mifepristone tablet.

Family Planning said the lower dosage is equally effective; it claims only
one "failure" in its first two months with the drug. And by giving out
mifepristone up to the ninth week of pregnancy, Family Planning obtains a
competitive edge over Planned Parenthood, which stays within the
seven-week guideline.

"You can catch a lot of women in those two [extra] weeks," Maracich said.

Family Planning declined to say what percentage of women choose the
abortion drug; Planned Parenthood abortion facilities in Southern
California say acceptance is low.

At Planned Parenthood of Los Angeles, the percentage of women choosing the
abortion drug was "way less than 1%" in January and February, according to
director Nancy Sasaki, who is mystified as to why the percentage is low.
Half of the women who express interest in the abortion drug do not go
through with it, said Mary Kelly, who runs the mifepristone program for
Planned Parenthood in San Diego and Riverside counties.

Some women are more than seven weeks pregnant, and therefore ineligible
for it. Others decide they do not want a prolonged ordeal, Kelly said. And
since the abortion occurs outside a doctor's office, it isn't appropriate
for teenagers who may not want their parents to know, she claimed. No more
than 3% of women at abortion facilities she supervises choose the abortion
drug.

Experts believe cost plays a role in which abortion method women choose.
The price of a chemical abortion using a single tablet, the practice at
many clinics, is $75 to $100 more than a surgical abortion, which
typically costs from $325 to $350, according to the National Abortion
Federation.

Most women who get abortions are poor, according to research by the Alan
Guttmacher Institute. Only 16 states, including California, use Medicaid
funds to pay for so-called medically necessary abortions. The remaining
states pay for abortions only in the rare cases of life-endangerment, rape
or incest.

"There is no question cost can make a difference, especially to a young
woman," said Dr. Felicia Stewart, a public health expert at the UC San
Francisco Center for Reproductive Health. "If one costs $75 more, which
one are you going to choose?"

Danco Laboratories, the New York company that markets the abortion drug,
priced it to bring it "within range of a surgical abortion." Danco charges
providers $270 for the recommended, three-pill dose. That price, Danco
spokeswoman Heather O'Neill said, makes the abortion drug "a viable option
in the marketplace" and allows Danco to recoup the cost of bringing the
drug to market.

The same dosage costs the equivalent of $40 in France, where the drug was
developed by a unit of Hoechst of Germany and has been available for 13
years. A surgical abortion in France costs $130.

There is anecdotal evidence that more women may choose chemical abortion
if it is priced more competitively with surgical abortion. At Planned
Parenthood of New York City, which charges $375 for a first-trimester
abortion regardless of method, about 12% of abortions from January through
April used mifepristone.

But that Planned Parenthood affiliate also ran a highly visible
advertising campaign for the drug in the city's subway system from the
beginning of January through mid-March, which Planned Parenthood believes
stirred interest. Posters showed a pill held between a thumb and
forefinger, and claimed: "The choice is now in your hands." The $50,000
campaign has been the biggest consumer push to date for the otherwise
poorly promoted drug -- although the National Abortion Federation is
planning to spend millions in a new one.

Danco, backed by such pro-abortion foundations as the David and Lucile
Packard Foundation, said it lacks the resources to advertise the abortion
drug to consumers. It has promoted the drug in medical journals, where it
hopes to reach doctors.

In February, NAF distributed pro-abortion postcards on 50 college campuses
that showed a small white tablet next to the caption: "In the history of
abortion in America, this is not a pill, it's a milestone." The cards
prompted calls to the advocacy group's hotline, where 35% of inquiries are
about the abortion drug.

From:  The Pro-Life Infonet <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>
Reply-To:  Steven Ertelt <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>
Subject:   RU-486 Abortion Pill Hasn't Caught on in U.S.
Source:   Los Angeles Times; May 31, 2001

*     *     *     *     *     *
Iowa Gov. Signs Bill Limiting RU 486 at Iowa Colleges

  Iowa's pro-abortion Governor surprised many by signing a bill
  prohibiting the distribution of the dangerous Ru 486 abortion pill on
  college campuses. Kim Gordon, executive director of the Iowa Right
  to Life Committee, was surprised that Vilsack signed the provision
  prohibiting student health centers from using state money to provide
  RU-486, also called mifepristone. "But the fact is, the school could use
  other funding to buy the killing pill," Gordon said.
  (Des Moines Register; May 25, 2001)
http://www.dmregister.com/news/stories/c4780934/17000050.html

*     *     *     *     *     *
New Zealand Approves Dangerous RU 486 Abortion Drug

  The New Zealand Ministry of Health has approved the RU 486
  abortion drug for use. After a lengthy evaluation process the
  abortion drug, called Mifegyne, has been approved -- although it
  will only be available to those licensed to perform abortions.
  The ministry's senior medical advisor, Dr. Stewart Jessamine, claims
  Mifegyne meets all international standards of safety and effectiveness
  required for medicines.
(TVNZ, RNZ, Reuters; August 30, 2001)

*     *     *     *     *     *
Georgia U. Health Centers See Low Demand for RU 486

  University health centers across Georgia say they have not had
  a single student inquiry about RU-486 despite a steady flow of
  requests to abortion facilities by Georgia women about the dangerous
  abortion pill. ''To my knowledge, no students have come in to request
it,''
  said Liz Rachun, the communications coordinator for the University of
  Georgia's student health center. Representatives of the Georgia
  Institute of Technology and Georgia State University reported similar
  stories. ''We get a lot of calls about it,'' said Mary Beth Pierucci, a
  spokeswoman for Planned Parenthood of Georgia. The University of
  Georgia clinic offers a pamphlet to those asking about abortion
  including the phone numbers for two abortion facilities in the Atlanta
area.
  One of those, the Atlanta Women's Medical Center, confirmed it will
start
  using RU-486 later this year. Georgia Tech officials verified they
refer
  students is the Feminist Women's Clinic, an Atlanta-area abortion
facility.
  (Morris News Service; August 30, 2001)

*     *     *     *     *     *
Dutch Government:  Abortion Ship is Illegal

The Hague, Netherlands -- A pro-abortion gorup that has launched an
abortion ship off the coast of Ireland has no license for their floating
abortion facility the Dutch government said Tuesday.

The Dutch-registered Aurora left the Netherlands Monday with staff from a
pro-abortion activist group. They planned to administer abortion pills in
international waters outside the 12-mile territorial limit of Ireland,
where abortion is illegal.

Health Minister Els Borst told Parliament that the Women on Waves
Foundation, which chartered the ship, had applied for an abortion facility
license but had not yet received it.

Justice Minister Benk Korthals then told the legislature that ``abortions
are illegal without a license'' and the abortion advocates faced up to 4
1/2 years imprisonment. But he said he didn't have the authority to act
against the crew since no crime had been committed yet.

``We will undertake action, as soon as we know that Dutch law has been
violated. But we cannot do that until the boat has returned to the
Netherlands,'' Korthals said.

The ship was expected to reach Dublin later this week.

A spokeswoman for Women on Waves said Tuesday the pro-abortion group will
``obey Dutch law,'' but didn't say the crew would refrain from doing
abortions.

Before leaving the Netherlands, the group said it planned to give out the
dangerous RU 486 abortion drug, but did not expect to do surgical
abortions. A Justice Ministry spokesman said he was not aware of any legal
difference between the two abortion methods.

From:  The Pro-Life Infonet <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>
Reply-To:  Steven Ertelt <infonet@prolifeinfo.org>
Subject:  Dutch Government:  Abortion Ship is Illegal
Source:   Associated Press; June 12, 2001

*     *     *     *     *     *