Online supplier of abortion pills defies FDA order to stop providing them in US
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
As abortion becomes increasingly inaccessible in parts of this country, a Dutch physician is defying the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s order to quit providing abortion pills using the internet and the mail. The doctor, Rebecca Gomperts, has for years run Women on Web, a Netherlands-based nonprofit that ships mifepristone made in India to women in countries where abortion is illegal. Last summer, she launched Aid Access to provide the same pills to U.S. customers. Aid Access claims to be growing quickly, with more than 21,000 U.S. orders in the last six months, according to the Guardian newspaper. The organization filled between a third and half of the requests, despite shutting down for 10 weeks after the FDA sent a warning letter on March 9. The warning letter said Aid Access was violating U.S. law and endangering customers by selling “misbranded and unapproved new drugs."
In response, the organization’s Idaho-based lawyer, Richard Hearn, who is also a physician, sent a letter to the FDA on May 16. ″Because access to medical abortions in the U.S. has been so restricted by the FDA," he wrote, “women have been forced to attempt to exercise their right to abortion by way of the Internet.” Aid Access resumed service the next day. The FDA declined to discuss its next step. “We cannot comment on a potential future action at this time,” the agency emailed, “but we remain very concerned about the sale of unapproved mifepristone for medical termination of early pregnancy on the Internet, because this bypasses important safeguards designed to protect women’s health.” The abortion-pill regimen, which is effective through the first nine weeks of pregnancy, actually involves two drugs. Mifepristone, sold in the U.S. by Danco Laboratories and branded Mifeprex, disrupts the pregnancy, then misoprostol triggers uterine contractions and expulsion of the grape-size fetus.
The FDA requires women who want the regimen to make two visits to the doctor, and they can’t get mifepristone from pharmacies. It can only be dispensed in clinics or medical offices by specially certified health-care providers. Aid Access, in contrast, provides pills after a woman consults online with the prescribing doctor and gets a blood test. She receives instructions for taking the drugs, what to expect, and when to see a doctor if a problem occurs. Numerous other international websites ship abortion pills — without prescription or any medical oversight. That’s why a group of researchers who support abortion rights created Plan C, a website with a “report card” that rates such websites on product quality, price, and shipping time. "The combination of very safe and effective medication abortion, and the pervasiveness of global commerce, make Internet access virtually unstoppable,” said public health researcher Elisa Wells, codirector of Plan C.
She believes the proliferation of ultra-restrictive state abortion laws is fueling demand for online abortion pills. Earlier this month, Plan C’s web traffic spiked from 1,000 hits a day to eight times that many after Alabama’s governor signed a law that bans abortions in almost all cases, including rape or incest. Governors in Kentucky , Mississippi , Ohio, and Georgia have recently approved bans on abortion once a fetal heartbeat is detected, which can happen in the sixth week of pregnancy, before many women know they’re pregnant. Missouri’s governor on Friday signed a law outlawing abortions after eight weeks. Other states are considering similarly restrictive measures. Although the laws are not being enforced because of legal challenges, abortion foes hope this sets the stage for the U.S. Supreme Court to revisit and even overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 case that legalized abortion nationwide.
Tags
Who is online
433 visitors
If certain states did not attempt to severely restrict or ban abortion, then perhaps many women would not feel the need to resort to such measures. This is reminiscent of women having "back alley" abortions pre-Roe v. Wade. Sadly, there are those that seem to want to turn the clock back nearly 50 years.
Oh please, stop the melodramatics. You should know better. Abortion has not been outlawed but the time has come to put a few common sense restrictions in place that will stop abortions up to the "4th Trimester". Abortions should be done as early as possible. Abortions for rape or incest are extremely rate, and in truth, most women have them done because they were careless or lazy in preventing conception.
Your comments don't make sense
Oh the irony
Here ya go Greg...common sense abortion law...
"If you don't like abortions, don't get one."
Talk about melodramatics. Less than 1% of abortions occur in the 4th trimester, so reducing access to abortion by closing clinics across a State has ZERO to do with stopping that 1% and everything to do with religious conservatives forcing their religious beliefs on the 99% that occur before viability.
"in truth, most women have them done because they were careless or lazy"
Really? Please do site this research you've done that proves all these "careless and lazy" women exist, otherwise why not try to keep your ridiculous, callous, disgusting opinion to yourself instead of making shit up and calling women who are having to make some the hardest decisions in their lives "careless and lazy". "In truth" my ass. And the religious conservatives wonder where all the anger towards them comes from and seem surprised when they get their pathetic haughty holier than thou bullshit shoved back in their faces.
I assume the average woman in America has an ob/gyn doctor.
I also assume the average woman would know by nine weeks if she is pregnant.
Wouldn't the pill procedure be a lot easier than an actual abortion much later on.
I ask this question of those men who assume to know all about women's health
No melodramatics, just simple facts. This is supported by history too.
I didn't say it was. But some states are clearly trying to severely limit abortion.
What exactly is a "4th trimester" abortion?
Most are. Usually within the 1st trimester. But some states are trying to outlaw abortion even before a woman realizes she's pregnant or put unrealistic and unconstitutional restrictions on it.
So what? That's a woman's choice and her business. A woman need not justify her reasons to anyone.
Your lack of comprehension is your problem, not mine.
Early abortions are typically done pharmacologically.
And yet, here you are making assumptions about women's health.
" a few common sense restrictions "
I don't trust so called common sense restrictions on gun rights or abortion rights
That's the other thing I forgot to address: what exactly are the "common sense restrictions" one has in mind?
Where is this occurring, or legal?
I suspect that is a question to be answered by the sound of crickets.
It was the last time I asked, too.
Somehow, I am not surprised.
You assume wrongly
My thoughts exactly Gordy.
Great minds think alike, right?
Rebecca Gomperts
She deserves...
I was under the impression that RU-486 prevents conception? How is that violating even the most ridiculous of fascist anti-abortion laws?
No, it is an abortifacient. It actually terminates a pregnancy that has occurred. It's a pharmacological means of abortion, which is quite effective.
Thanks for the info Gordy, I stand corrected.
Anytime.
" RU486 blocks the progesterone receptors in your body (the hormone that is in charge of causing the uterine lining to build up and prepare for pregnancy). So, RU486 (mifepristone) basically causes the lining of your uterus to shed -- so your pregnancy can no longer continue because the egg will have nothing to stay attached to."
I think Jim Carrey said it best.
.
They shouldn't, because this can't realistically be called an abortion.
Neither can a baby close to being born realistically be called a fetus.
What do you think an abortion is or entails?
No, it's still a fetus. That is the correct term.
Totally agree,
I did some research and it definitely is abortion
Again research disagrees with your statement, the cutoff line between fetus and baby is the act of being born
I suppose they could have any packages from addresses linked to her intercepted. But that's about it. I can't see her being extradited on charges related to shipping meds.
There is no reason to prohibit them
Of course not. Women are going to have abortions regardless. So it's better to make sure they are available and safe. If a woman wants an abortion, let her have one. Who cares? How is it anyone else's concern or business? Some anti-choicers seem incapable of seeing the bigger picture.
lurking down the road is the growing problem of overpopulation. In all the discussions here. I have never heard an anti choice person say how we are going to handle all these people.
Not their concern, the only concern is that they get born.
It's been a problem for quite a while and sadly, I doubt there is any solution.
I've heard some deny there's an overpopulation problem or that the Earth can support tens of billions of people. Talk about a disconnect from reality.
Indeed. To some, it's quantity over quality.
Wasn't that scenario a Star Trek episode?
It was indeed.
The Mark of Gideon
That's the one. One again, ST was ahead of its time. The Gideons were so hung up on "life," they never bothered to consider the quality of that life. Never mind the sociological, environmental, economic, ect. impacts of overpopulation. Sound familiar?
Way too familiar, my friend.
God will take care of it.
Like many millions, I have a heart condition, for which I regularly take three different meds... each of them deadly in case of overdose.
My meds are subject to less hassle than this, while ensuring that I am safe because I know what I'm doing.
The FDA rules are clearly an obstacle course rather than a safety net.
I have been pondering things for awhile now. I have to wonder: if I go to my doctor's office to have a procedure done, should that be public knowledge? If I order diet pills and they come in the mail, should that be public knowledge? Does the public have a right to know what goes on between me and my doctor or what is shipped to me via mail? Have to wonder if freedom is still a thing.
Only if you make it public knowledge. Privacy laws protect that information from leaving the doctor's office.