Pharmaceuticals and Government

This case of Novo Nordisk providing funds for the Tasmanian Liberal senator's forum discussing obesity issues does not sound as bad as it could. There is no direct conflict of interest, and we should be happy to hear of money donated for public health awareness. We should be more concerned about the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), which is funded by pharmaceutical companies. How can it be advocates for safe therapeutic goods when its operations are funded exclusively by the makers of those goods?

Morning after pill inefective??

So a New Zealand pharmaceutical recently admitted that RU-486 (aka the morning after pill or Plan B) Plan B is an abortificent. Now a scientific study published in the Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology strongly suggests that RU-486 the "morning after pill" "has not been shown to reduce unintended pregnancy rates." What does it mean, then? Well apart from robbing consumers blind, it provides that nasty false sense of security to fool around, setting couples up for heartache and the possibility (a strong one, since they already ignore abortificent warnings about Plan B) of subsequently opting for clinical abortion. The winners are the pharmaceuticals who earn money for nothing, and abortion clinics who earn millions from abortion procedures. The losers are the unborn as well as the women who risk their health and lives from the potentially fatal complications of RU-486 chemical and clinical abortions.

Update: My apologies for errors, now edited above. Plan B (the morning after pill, progestin-based) is not equivalent to RU486 (mifepristone, the chemical abortion pill). Although both substances can prevent fertilized eggs to implant successfully on the uterine lining.

Truth in advertising

Plan B (RU486) is an abortificent. That's what the manufacturer in New Zealand says. So will the peddlers of contraception and abortion please stop lying about it?

[Via LifeSite.net]

Further reading: The RU-486 Files.