\n<\/p>\n
Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., recently announced that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration will launch a review of the safety of the abortion pill, mifepristone. Health researchers say they\u2019re concerned that the review will be politicized and based on flawed reports. More than 100 studies published over the past few decades have shown that the drug, which was approved by the FDA in 2000, is safe and effective at ending a pregnancy.<\/p>\n
Given Kennedy\u2019s history of misrepresenting scientific evidence about vaccines, autism and Tylenol, some scientists say they worry that the health secretary will base the FDA report on unreliable sources.<\/p>\n
\u201cBased on what we have seen from this administration to date,\u201d says Peter Lurie, the FDA\u2019s former associate commissioner for public health strategy and analysis, \u201cthere is every reason to fear that this study will be a cherry-picking, data-contorting exercise designed to support a predetermined conclusion of lack of safety.\u201d<\/p>\n
If you’re enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.<\/p>\n
In a statement to Scientific American, Department of Health and Human Services spokesperson Emily Hilliard said the agency \u201cis conducting a study of the reported adverse effects of mifepristone to ensure the FDA\u2019s risk mitigation program for the drug is sufficient to protect women from unstated risks,\u201d echoing an earlier statement from HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon.<\/p>\n
Kennedy has frequently promoted the FDA review when addressing conservative critics who are impatient for the Trump administration to outlaw or dramatically limit abortion. Antiabortion groups were infuriated by the FDA\u2019s recent approval of a second generic version of mifepristone.<\/p>\n
In a post on the social media site X, Kennedy pledged to \u201creview all the evidence\u2014including real-world outcomes\u201d for mifepristone, which is currently used in almost two thirds of abortions in the U.S.<\/p>\n
Kennedy has provided no timeline for the review\u2019s release and few details about what it will encompass. But in a September 19 letter to state attorneys general, Kennedy cited a report from the Ethics and Public Policy Center, a conservative think tank, that claims mifepristone is more dangerous than FDA analyses suggest and calls for ending telehealth prescription of the drug. The availability of mifepristone via telehealth has contributed to an increase in abortion nationwide in spite of total bans on abortion in 12 states.<\/p>\n
That report has serious methodological flaws, says Ushma Upadhyay, a professor of reproductive sciences at the University of California, San Francisco, who dismisses it as \u201cjunk science.\u201d She notes that the think tank report was neither peer-reviewed nor published in an established medical journal. The report also does not disclose the specific source of its data, which makes it impossible for other scientists to verify or try to reproduce its findings, she adds. In addition, it provides a false picture of mifepristone\u2019s safety by misclassifying routine follow-up procedures as \u201cserious adverse events,\u201d Upadhyay says.<\/p>\n
Kennedy has signaled that the president will be making final regulatory decisions about mifepristone. At a Senate budget hearing in May, Kennedy told lawmakers that \u201cthe policy changes will ultimately go through the White House, through President [Donald] Trump.\u201d He said the think tank report \u201cindicates that, at very least, the [drug] label should be changed.\u201d<\/p>\n
Some scientists are concerned about Kennedy\u2019s role in the review. When talking about autism and vaccines, Kennedy has often bolstered his arguments with \u201cquestionable sources that merely look real,\u201d says Timothy Caulfield, research director at the Health Law Institute of the University of Alberta, who studies health misinformation. \u201cHe seems to do this mostly with wedge issues\u2014vaccines, abortion, etcetera\u2014that play to a political agenda.\u201d<\/p>\n
Kennedy has succeeded in raising doubts about the safety of proven interventions, including Tylenol, Caulfield says. \u201cDoubt mongering is a very effective strategy, especially in the health space,\u201d he says. \u201cOnce that doubt is present, it can have a large impact on the public\u2019s health beliefs and behaviors.\u201d<\/p>\n
Kristan Hawkins, president of Students for Life of America, a leading antiabortion group, said in a statement on the group\u2019s website that the FDA review \u201crepresents an historic opportunity\u201d to reduce the use of the abortion pill \u201cif handled thoroughly.\u201d The group wants the FDA to conduct an \u201coriginal investigation\u201d rather than review published studies. It claims that there\u2019s not enough evidence to show that the availability of mifepristone by mail is safe and that previous studies on the drug were written by people who favor wide distribution of the pill.<\/p>\n
The Center for Reproductive Rights, a nonprofit global human rights organization that advocates for abortion access, filed a lawsuit in September against the HHS and the FDA in an attempt to force the Trump administration to reveal the process and sources it will use to review mifepristone\u2019s safety. \u201cThe public deserves to know what and who is behind decisions being made about their health and access to vital medications,\u201d says Liz Wagner, a senior federal policy counsel at the organization.<\/p>\n
Basing the FDA review on the conservative think tank\u2019s report on mifepristone would produce misleading results, Upadhyay says. A wealth of research has found mifepristone to be safe\u2014so safe that the FDA under the Biden administration began allowing it to be dispensed via telehealth instead of requiring that pregnant people see doctors in person. Prescribers and pharmacies must meet special certification requirements to dispense the drug, and pregnant people are required to sign a patient agreement, Upadhyay says.<\/p>\n
\u201cIf the FDA were to do an actual review based on gold-standard science, I think they would actually end up removing the barriers that remain on mifepristone,\u201d she says.<\/p>\n
The think tank report found that 4.7 percent of women who use mifepristone make abortion-related trips to the emergency room. But Upadhyay says this is misleading: many pregnant people who take mifepristone at home go to the emergency room simply to ask if the amount of bleeding they\u2019re experiencing is normal. Others go to the ER to confirm that the abortion was effective, given that over-the-counter pregnancy tests aren\u2019t reliable until four to five weeks after termination, she says. Research shows that only about half of postabortion ER visits lead to medical treatment, Upadhyay says.<\/p>\n
One of mifepristone\u2019s risks is sepsis \u2014a life-threatening condition in which the body\u2019s immune system overreacts to an infection, according to the Ethics and Public Policy Center report. Yet the report finds that the risk of sepsis is just 0.1 percent, a rate even lower than that listed on mifepristone\u2019s label. The report uses this statistic and others to argue that the FDA should require people who are prescribed mifepristone to make \u201cat least three in-person office visits,\u201d including a first visit to receive the mifepristone, a second visit two days later for a dose of misoprostol (a medication used to complete the abortion) and a third visit two weeks later for follow-up. These visits were required when the pill was originally approved in 2000.<\/p>\n
The think tank report \u201cwould not hold up in any medical or public health journal,\u201d says Jessica Mitter Pardo, a family medicine physician and abortion care provider in New York City and a fellow with Physicians for Reproductive Health, an advocacy group. Yet it might be \u201cused to influence this country\u2019s public health policy and medicine,\u201d she warns.<\/p>\n
Trump\u2019s record on abortion has been mixed, leaving some to wonder how his administration will handle the mifepristone review.<\/p>\n
The president takes credit for appointing the Supreme Court justices who overturned Roe v. Wade, the landmark decision that had protected the right to abortion. Trump won praise from conservatives in January when he pardoned antiabortion activists who were arrested for blocking the entrances of reproductive health clinics. And in August the Trump administration proposed barring doctors at the Department of Veterans Affairs from performing abortions, even in cases of rape and incest, with an exception only to save a pregnant person\u2019s life.<\/p>\n
By commissioning the FDA to review mifepristone\u2019s safety, \u201cit\u2019s possible that the Trump administration is laying the groundwork for changes to the mifepristone rules, especially because all but two GOP senators signed a letter asking the FDA to remove mifepristone from the market,\u201d says Mary Ziegler, a professor at the University of California, Davis, School of Law, who studies the history of abortion.<\/p>\n
The Trump administration has not publicly committed to changing mifepristone\u2019s use, and it has taken several actions that have upset antiabortion groups.<\/p>\n
In May the Department of Justice asked a judge to dismiss a lawsuit from Idaho, Kansas and Missouri that aims to restrict mifepristone use, arguing that the states did not have standing to bring their case in a Texas court.<\/p>\n
And during his presidential campaign, Trump said that he does not support a federal abortion ban. Almost two thirds of adults say abortion should be legal in most cases. Voters in 13 states have supported initiatives to keep abortion legal, sometimes by enshrining abortion rights in their state constitution and other times by rejecting proposals to curtail abortion.<\/p>\n
Commissioning an FDA review of mifepristone could be a delaying tactic meant to deflect criticism from antiabortion groups without triggering a backlash from voters who support reproductive rights, says David S. Cohen, a professor at Drexel University\u2019s Thomas R. Kline School of Law.<\/p>\n
Trump may be especially leery of antagonizing voters who care about abortion\u2014both on the right and the left\u2014before next year\u2019s midterm elections, Ziegler says.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt\u2019s possible that this is just the Trump administration trying to get antiabortion people to leave them alone,\u201d Ziegler says of the mifepristone review. The study could just be a stalling tactic to buy more time, she suggests. \u201cThere\u2019s no reason not to think this study couldn\u2019t last three years.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., recently announced that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration will launch a review of the safety of the abortion pill, mifepristone. Health researchers say they\u2019re concerned that the review will be politicized and based on flawed reports. More than 100 studies published over the past<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":31693,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[50],"tags":[5457,7155,249,7474,18418,934,629,7333,5634],"class_list":{"0":"post-31692","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-environment","8":"tag-abortion","9":"tag-decades","10":"tag-fda","11":"tag-investigating","12":"tag-mifepristone","13":"tag-pill","14":"tag-safe","15":"tag-showing","16":"tag-studies"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/naijaglobalnews.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/31692","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/naijaglobalnews.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/naijaglobalnews.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/naijaglobalnews.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/naijaglobalnews.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=31692"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/naijaglobalnews.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/31692\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/naijaglobalnews.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/31693"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/naijaglobalnews.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=31692"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/naijaglobalnews.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=31692"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/naijaglobalnews.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=31692"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}