By Dave Andrusko
Our last post for the day from the opening day of NRLC 2018 will be brief, not because the topic is unimportant (just the opposite) but because it’s late in the day.
One of the most exciting developments in the last few years is the growing evidence that not only does Abortion Pill Reversal (APR) work, it is safe for the mother and unborn child.
Dr. George Delgado, medical Director of APR and Culture of Life Family Services, told a packed auditorium in layman’s terms how a chemical abortion can be reversed. Very briefly, if the woman changes her mind after taking the first of the two drugs (mifepristone) but not the second (misoprostol), there is up to a 68% chance she can save her baby by having a vigorous regimen of progesterone administered.
Dr. Delgado laid out the “three pillars” that undergird the case that APR is successful, safe, and pleases mothers and tracked the history of APR. He gently pointed out how pro-abortion critics simply are not honestly explaining the numbers that document APR’s success.
For example, they inflate the number of pregnancies that will successfully go to term if the second drug is not taken but also in the case where no progesterone is administered. Why? To suggest the difference APR makes is far less than research have proven it to be.
Dr. Delgado alluded the research he and his colleagues published in Issues in Law and Medicine [http://bit.ly/2N7kaG0]. Among other important components to the study, it addressed a primary pro-abortion criticism—that previous studies were too small. This one followed 547 women.
Interesting enough, there are far fewer premature births with babies who are rescued using APR than is ordinarily the case. The incidence of birth defects, very small, is the same.
A fascinating general session which has enormous significance in light of the growing percentage of chemical abortions.