Quote:
Originally posted by FoolThemAll
Interesting. And a good question. My preliminary answer would be, "It isn't as obvious." A second answer would be, "Effective legal prevention of this side-effect would extend well beyond the government's proper power."
|
It's not obvious because the Pro-Life supporters don't have the label "birth control" or "contraceptive" to jump on in order to miscontrue the effects of a drug. We would absolutely hear about the real abortive dangers of an allergy medicine if there actually were any. Emergency contraceptive, with equally small effects on implantation, however is likened to evil voodoo medicine simply because of its name.
Quote:
|
My apparent misconception was that these 800,000 prevented abortions still resulted in the death of the z/e/f through the prevention of implantation. If it's all contraceptive, I retract my previous statement.
|
I'm glad you can listen to reason.
Quote:
|
Does this mean that prevention of implantation is impossible if taken in the 0-72 hour time period, or that it is rare? If the latter, is there a figure available?
|
Like both sources state, preventing implantation is not how the drug operates especially given the time period in which it is used. Even if were taken AFTER pregnancy, it would not abort a child. I do not have a figure to quote but the statements extrapolated from data seem to clearly indicate that implantation prevention is exceedingly rare.