Use our account feature to register for a free CLI account. Your new account will allow you to bookmark and organize articles and research for easy reference later - making it simple to keep track of the research that's important to you!
Register / Sign in
close-panel

Charlotte Lozier Institute

Phone: 202-223-8073
Fax: 571-312-0544

2776 S. Arlington Mill Dr.
#803
Arlington, VA 22206

Get Notifications

Sign up to receive email updates from Charlotte Lozier Institute.

Become A Defender of Life

Your donation helps us continue to provide world-class research in defense of life.

DONATE

Charlotte Lozier Institute

Phone: 202-223-8073
Fax: 571-312-0544

2776 S. Arlington Mill Dr.
#803
Arlington, VA 22206

Chemical Abortion

CLI Scholars React to Nature Medicine Study

Following the release of a study in Nature Medicine, which discussed the “safety and effectiveness” of abortion drugs acquired through telehealth, Tessa Longbons Cox, senior research associate at the Charlotte Lozier Institute, made the following statement:

Once again, the abortion industry is relying on patchwork, piecemeal survey data to conclude that abortion drugs are “safe and effective,” but there are key gaps in the study that should call into question this conclusion. With a 74% follow-up rate, we don’t know what happened to a quarter of the women in the study. We know that the women who feel the most negative reactions following their abortions are least likely to participate in follow ups, and FDA data shows that women who have been harmed by abortion frequently end up seeking care from another doctor. Those missing voices are a crucial piece to the clinical puzzle as we can’t assume that those women had a positive outcome.

Ingrid Skop, M.D., FACOG, a board-certified OB/GYN who has practiced in Texas for nearly 30 years and vice president and director of medical affairs at the Charlotte Lozier Institute, added the following:

As a practicing OB-GYN who frequently sees women in the ER following the use of abortion drugs, I’m deeply troubled by the authors’ definition of a “serious adverse event” as the only endpoint worth considering. They define it as a complication requiring a blood transfusion, intra-abdominal surgery (for ectopic pregnancy), overnight stay in hospital, and death, appearing to dismiss any other events as minor inconveniences. I have treated women who:

  • Required emergency surgery to remove dead tissue from the child or placenta that her uterus was unable to expel.
  • Bled heavily for six to eight weeks, becoming chronically fatigued by anemia but not reaching a blood count low enough to require transfusion.
  • Contracted an intrauterine infection requiring additional medical care and antibiotics, which could possibly lead to future infertility from scar tissue of the reproductive organs.

According to these authors, my patients’ experiences would not qualify as a “serious adverse event.” It’s extraordinary to see these serious complications dismissed and considered not worthy of discussion, when I know these women felt otherwise.

Latest Posts

April 22, 2024 A Fact-Free Campaign Against Parents and Unborn Children in Alabama April 17, 2024 Fact Sheet: Planned Parenthood’s 2022-23 Annual Report April 10, 2024 New Study: Abortion Increases Risk of Cardiovascular Diseases New Study: Abortion Increases Risk of Cardiovascular Diseases

You Might Also Be Interested In

Fact Sheet: Three Problems with the FDA’s Abortion Drugs Complications Data

Filed: CLI Amicus Brief in SCOTUS Case FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine

charlotte-lozier-institute Charlotte Lozier Institute
March 21, 2024
ClosePlease login
Scientists to SCOTUS: FDA Harms Women & Doctors by Allowing Dangerous Mail-Order Abortion Drugs

Scientists to SCOTUS: FDA Harms Women & Doctors by Allowing Dangerous Mail-Order Abortion Drugs

charlotte-lozier-institute Charlotte Lozier Institute
March 21, 2024
ClosePlease login

Become A Defender of Life

Your donation helps us continue to provide
world-class research in defense of life.

BECOME A PARTNER
cta-image