Washington Post Calls Abortion Pill Reversal Process “Junk Science.” Does This Baby Look Like Junk?

Opinion   |   Micaiah Bilger   |   Feb 28, 2017   |   11:28AM   |   Washington, DC

The growing debate about a new abortion pill reversal procedure shows just how pro-abortion, and not merely pro-choice, abortion activists really are.

Abortion activists are bashing states that want to require abortion facilities to inform women of the new abortion pill reversal procedure, and attacking the procedure itself as “junk science.” The choice to reverse their abortion and save their baby’s life is one that abortion activists don’t seem to want women to have.

As currently administered, a chemical abortion involves taking the drug mifepristone (RU-486), which blocks the hormone progesterone and makes the uterus inhospitable to new life. One or two days later, a second drug is taken to induce contractions and expel her baby. The reversal process can counteract the first drug by giving the woman doses of progesterone, which allow the baby to continue normal development.

Dr. Matthew Harrison performed the first-ever reversal in 2007. At a press conference in 2015 sponsored by Priests for Life and the American Association of Pro-life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Dr. Harrison said the baby who was saved is now a healthy and happy 8-year-old girl.

In 2015, Harrison reported more than 213 babies have been saved so far.

Though the abortion pill reversal technology is new, early results show it appears to be safe and effective for both mother and child. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists reported in a practice bulletin that the abortion pill has not led to birth defects.

Abortion activists, however, are attempting to discredit the procedure based on the fact that the current research is minimal. The Washington Post published a very biased article this week, wrongly calling the procedure “junk science.”

It reported:

The notion that it works stems from a 2012 research paper by George Delgado published in the Annals of Pharmacotherapy that describes four of six women who took the first of two abortion pills, were injected with progesterone shots and had healthy babies.

Since then, Delgado has claimed that the procedure produced a 60 to 70 percent success rate among several hundred other women.

SUPPORT LIFENEWS! If you like this pro-life article, please help LifeNews.com with a donation!

But according to the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Delgado’s research is not scientifically sound because the sample size is small, there was no comparison group and the women’s hormone injections were not consistent. The study was not overseen by an institutional review board, according to ACOG, or an ethical review committee.

Because of the loose parameters of Delgado’s research, there is also no way to ascertain if it was indeed the progesterone shots that halted the abortion process. A medication abortion requires the two-pill regimen, so “many women will not abort just from using the first medication,” according to ACOG. In 30 to 50 percent of women who take only the first pill, the pregnancy will continue.

It is true that research so far is limited, but what has been done and observed has been safe and effective. Hundreds of babies are alive and well today, and hundreds of mothers are happy that they found a way to save their babies’ lives, according to the abortion pill reversal team.

Summer is one of them. Still a teenager, Summer said she quickly regretted her abortion, and her boyfriend even called the abortion clinic to ask if there was a way to stop it. The abortion clinic told them no, but the young couple found another option online, the abortion pill reversal website. Summer was connected with a doctor who began the reversal process, and, as a result, her baby daughter, Finley, was saved.

“After searching the technician found what she was looking for and shrieked, ‘Your baby is alive! See the heartbeat?! God must be whispering  to your baby to move because we have never seen such an active 9-week old baby!’ Jason and I immediately burst into tears of joy and relief,” Summer said.

Rebekah Buell is another. A young, single mother struggling through a messy divorce, she discovered she was pregnant and decided to have an abortion.

“I got into my car and thought, ‘Oh Lord, what did I just do?’ I started thinking about my son at home that I adored. I started thinking about the baby I was carrying and what that pill was doing to the baby at the moment. I started crying and praying,” Buell said.

Buell also found the abortion pill reversal website, and immediately visited a doctor to begin the process to save her baby’s life. She gave birth to a healthy baby boy, Zechariah, more than two years ago. Now, she testifies to legislators about the value of the abortion pill reversal information.

“I’ve met so many women who regretted having abortions but never met a woman who regretted having her child,” Buell said. “Abortion is so permanent. It’s forever. It’s going to change your life.”

If abortion activists are so concerned about giving women healthy choices, why are they so quickly trying to discredit the procedure? If they truly support a woman’s choices about her pregnancy, they should be welcoming these success stories and calling for more research.

Anyone who has taken the first abortion pill and wishes to stop the abortion is urged to immediately visit www.abortionpillreversal.com or call the Abortion Pill Reversal hotline at 877-558-0333.