|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
by Joshua Arnold, for The Daily Signal
The abortion drug mifepristone will finally receive much-requested scrutiny by the Trump administration, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Marty Makary promised Republican attorneys general. After decades of pro-abortion administrations gradually loosening every last safeguard, the Trump administration’s FDA will conduct “its own review of the evidence, including real-world outcomes and evidence, relating to the safety and efficacy of the drug,” the Sept. 19 letter stated.
The letter comes in response to 22 state attorneys general who asked the FDA to review the drug. These officials cited concerns over new studies showing much higher rates of adverse events than the studies which were used to justify the drug’s initial approval. For instance, a major study published by the Ethics and Public Policy Center (EPPC) earlier this year showed that nearly 11% of women who take mifepristone experience serious adverse effects, including sepsis, infection, and hemorrhaging.
Notably, Kennedy and Makary’s letter struck a sympathetic tone to the state officials’ misgivings. “The concerns you have raised in your letter merit close examination. This Administration will ensure that women’s health is properly protected by thoroughly investigating the circumstances under which mifepristone can be safely dispensed,” they wrote.
The Trump administration has largely tried “to get out of the culture war side of the abortion issue,” as Vice President JD Vance put it, arguing that “abortion policy should be made by the states” after the Dobbs decision.
However, the Trump administration has so far left in place the federal abortion policy created by the FDA, approving the abortion drug mifepristone without any safety guardrails, such as an ultrasound to screen for gestational age or ectopic pregnancy. The Trump administration has also declined thus far to alter the federal abortion policy, pursued by the Biden administration, of not enforcing an abortion policy passed by Congress, which prohibits any product used for an abortion from being shipped through the mail.
These federal abortion policies create a loophole through which abortionists evade state laws that protect unborn life. These abortionists are located in pro-abortion states like New York, but they willingly ship abortion pills to women in other states, usually after a single telehealth consultation. According to an August study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), 84% of the chemical abortion pills shipped by one of the largest suppliers go into pro-life states.
Consequently, the Trump administration has not yet extricated itself from the abortion “culture war” as much as it had hoped. In effect, its policy of nonaction meant perpetuating Biden-era abortion policies that have used mifepristone to undermine state efforts aimed at protecting unborn life. The Trump administration cannot implement a truly “abortion-neutral” federal policy until it unwinds Biden-era (and Obama-era) actions to remove safeguards from the abortion pill.
Naturally, pro-life advocates were keen to see the Trump administration reverse its activist predecessor’s federal interference with pro-life state laws. Pro-life leaders have consistently lobbied on this point; as recently as late July, dozens of Baptist leaders urged “immediate action to stop the mail-order distribution of the abortion drug mifepristone, which now accounts for more than 60% of all U.S. abortions” and “has caused serious adverse events in nearly 11% of users and poses grave risks to women—especially when dispensed without in-person screening or ultrasound evaluation.” The recent letter by 22 state attorneys general continues the trend as evidence of the widespread momentum for restoring common sense safety precautions on mifepristone.
At first, Commissioner Makary would give no firm commitment to revisit mifepristone. On April 24, he said the FDA had no plans to limit access to mifepristone, although “if the data suggests something or tells us there’s a real signal, we can’t promise we’re not going to act on that data.”
Shortly afterward, the EPPC study revealed a shocking number of adverse events across an enormous body of data, and Secretary Kennedy admitted it warranted review.
Members of Congress kept up the pressure on Makary to initiate a review. In a letter responding to Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), Makary wrote on June 2 that he was “committed to conducting a review of mifepristone and working with the professional career scientists at the Agency who review this data.” This was a start, although it gave no firm timeline, nor did it suggest what the outcome of that review might be.
The administration’s latest response to the coalition of attorneys general provides the firmest commitment to date from the Trump administration that it will follow through on a robust review. “Through the FDA, HHS will conduct a study of the safety of the current [safety protocol], in order to determine whether modifications are necessary,” Kennedy and Makary wrote. They added, “This Administration will ensure that women’s health is properly protected by thoroughly investigating the circumstances under which mifepristone can be safely dispensed.”
Unsurprisingly, abortion activists like the National Abortion Federation (NAF) immediately attacked this commitment, falsely dismissing the EPPC study as “junk science” and questioning the legitimacy of the FDA’s review (the NAF put “review” in scare quotes).
Also unsurprisingly, many mainstream media mouthpieces have taken their cues from this baseless attack. In an Axios article on the FDA’s proposed study of mifepristone, both the title and the first sentence place the word “study” in scare quotes, disparaging the review before it even begins.
Ironically, such news reports accidentally make the case for the review’s necessity by juxtaposing safety and access. “Federal agencies are studying safety of abortion drug mifepristone, driving new concerns about limits on access,” warns CNN’s title. If mifepristone is not safe, then it should not have access to the market. That’s the whole point of the FDA’s pharmaceutical review process.
Pro-life advocates are confident that an abundance of data demonstrates the dangers of the abortion drug, especially if prescribers are allowed to dispense it without restriction and ship it through the mail across state lines. All they want from the FDA is to give that data an honest review.
Originally published by the Washington Stand.
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Life&Death, National News










Because Planned Parenthood was in favor of passage, the Vermont Legislature passed S.28 (now Act 20). Passage means that the abortion drugs can be obtained by filling out an online form and without a face-to-face visit with a health care professional to assure it safe use.
It is important to know if the pregnancy is ectopic and how far along in gestation a pregnant woman is for HER OWN SAFETY. The provision was opposed by Vermont Right to Life AS WELL AS the Vermont Medical Practice Board.
But no one listened. A man can fill out the online questionnaire with no direct contact with the provider, obtain the drugs and slip them into his pregnant partner’s drink to get rid of the “problem.” The “problem” being that she wants to carry the baby and he does not want her to. This is an increasingly familiar scenario. So much for “choice.”
If Vermont’s young girls and women are injured, the blame goes to those who voted in favor of risking their lives for political favor, and to the Governor who signed on.
Mary, we just need to explain the law they wrote and allow them to suffer in their own consequences.
What their law states is there is no baby in the womb, but a product of conception. Therefore, there should no longer be any child assistance, child support or expensive prenatal care and early birth medical procedures. A man would only be on the hook for 1/2 of an abortion expense, because they would only be one half responsible for the product of conception. I bet people would immediately change their tune.
This is what their law states, if we just call them out, enforce what is clearly insanity, they might change their ways. Until then we are trapped by narcissistic men and women who want to do whatever the hell they want and suffer no consequences.
A person with two brain cells can easily identify that what is in the womb is baby, a human baby at that early on, which is why you can’t use prop’s in debates or have ultrasounds done prior to abortions, because the truth is so plainly visible, nobody can deny.
Give them what they want, what they passed for a law, what the law state. Then you will hear the gnashing of teeth.
When they fight their own law, in upper courts is when the fun will really start, the law that Vermont passed, if brought up the court system, will be the law the permanently overturns Roe v Wade across the United States.
They will do all the fighting and bringing it up the court system, we only need to stand by the truth, which again is plain for all to see.
It would be sweet justice, that Vermont law would be the law banning all abortions, no? That’s how God works….he takes the ugliest things and makes things righteous.
Give them what they want and watch them overturn legal abortions for the entire United States, now that would be fun, no?
May the book of Esther be revealed real time for all to see and witness God’s glory in 2025, I ask in Jesus name. Please hear our plea.
Mifepristone is not safe, all babies support this science, by personal experience. Science supports this for the babies. Just think if 100% of the people taking a drug died, how could you say it’s safe? See twisted and narcissistic their logic truly is?
You only need to let the narcs hang by their own doing. It takes awhile, but it happens quicker if you just let them have more rope. TGBTG