By Massachusetts Citizens for Life [MCFL]
The Worcester Telegram and Gazette covered “MCFL on the Move” in Worcester very well except that the author questioned our assertion that chemical abortions can be reversed. MCFL Board member, Dr. Mark Rollo, who is one of the doctors doing the procedure, responded with this excellent letter posted at WT&G on April 21, 2018:
The article “Citizens for Life cite progress in abortion battle at town-hall style meeting at the Worcester Library,” which published April 12, was certainly welcome news. The dramatic decrease in the number of abortions in Massachusetts is very encouraging.
However, the article wrongly called into question a new treatment to reverse medical abortion. The use of progesterone to counteract mifepristone, also known as RU- 486, or the “abortion pill,” is based on sound science.
Far from being unproven or unethical as the article contends, studies show that using progesterone after mifepristone but before the second pill, misoprostol (typically given 1-2 days after mifepristone) WILL save a pregnancy.
A study recently published in the journal Issues in Law & Medicine, Volume 33, Number 1, 2018 , demonstrates this. The authors, Drs. George Delgado and Mary Davenport, looked at 754 patients who changed their minds after taking mifepristone to abort their pregnancies.
Patients were given high dose progesterone intramuscularly or orally and the pregnancy was saved 64 percent and 68 percent of the time, respectively. Both rates are significantly better than the 25 percent survival rate if no treatment is offered.
Women often change their mind after starting the medical abortion process and it is unethical not to give these women the choice of reversal.
Consequently, it is now the law in five states that women be informed of the option of abortion pill reversal.
Mark J. Rollo, M.D.