By now, you’ve probably heard that the maker of the European emergency contraception pill NorLevo has changed its labeling to indicate that it is not effective in women weighing more than 80kg (176 pounds), and that it’s less effective in women who weigh 75 kg (165 pounds) or more.

What you may not have heard is that the NorLevo label was also updated to reflect the current scientific consensus on its method of action. The label now reads:

NorLevo works by stopping your ovaries from releasing an egg. It cannot stop a fertilized egg from attaching to the womb.

NorLevo is identical to Plan B One-Step, which is sold in the United States. The FDA should allow the manufacturers of Plan B, NextChoice, and other levonorgestrel emergency contraceptive pills to bring their labels up to date as well.

Our fact sheet, Emergency Contraception: The Facts Every Pro-Life Advocate Should Know, has been updated to include the news about NorLevo. Please share it with pro-lifers who are concerned about the possibility of emergency contraception acting as an abortifacient.

A February 2012 report from the Native American Women’s Health Education Resource Center details the barriers faced by women who need emergency contraception from the Indian Health Service. One in three Native American women has been a victim of rape or attempted rape, and yet women are often denied access to the care they need to prevent pregnancy.

The only pharmacist on most reservations is within the local Indian Health Service. Women who need Plan B report that IHS pharmacies often do not stock Plan B, refuse to provide it without a prescription, and sometimes shame women who ask for it.

Please ask IHS director Dr. Yvette Roubideaux to issue a directive to all service providers that emergency contraception be made available on demand — without a prescription and without having to see a doctor — to any woman age 17 or over who asks for it.

The New York Times ran a story today explaining that the best available scientific studies have found no abortifacient effect for emergency contraception. The evidence won’t be news to those who have been reading this site, but it’s a good layperson’s overview. It was also interesting to read about how the supposed anti-implantation effect made it onto the Plan B label in the first place. Spoiler alert: it wasn’t because there was any evidence for it.

It’s been a very busy week and I’ve mostly been working behind the scenes on the new web site, but I didn’t want to let these news items pass unremarked:

  • In Honduras, the president of the Congress declared on Wednesday that he has decided not to move forward on the bill that would have made use of the emergency contraceptive Plan B a crime subject to jail time. This bill was based on the mistaken belief that Plan B causes abortions.

  • The U. S. House of Representatives voted on H.R. 4970, a re-authorization of the Violence Against Women Act that contains none of the updated protections for LBGT people, Native Americans, or immigrants that were contained in the bill passed by the Senate. Advocates for victims of domestic violence considered H.R. 4970 a “fake VAWA” and promise to continue to work toward a final bill that contains the updated provisions.

  • Good news: New Report: Fewer Women Dying in Pregnancy, Childbirth

    The number of women dying in pregnancy and childbirth, worldwide, has decreased by almost half, over a twenty year period (from 1990 – 2010), according to a new report. It’s good news, says Dr. Babatunde Osotimehin, Executive Director of UNFPA. But there’s a lot more work to do. […]

    “We know exactly what to do to prevent maternal deaths: improve access to voluntary family planning, invest in health workers with midwifery skills, and ensure access to emergency obstetric care when complications arise. These interventions have proven to save lives and accelerate progress towards meeting the Millennium Development Goal 5,” said Dr. Osotimehin.

    Via Impatient Optimists, the blog of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. I highly recommend the blog to anyone concerned about maternal and child health and family planning. You can subscribe directly to the Maternal, Newborn and Child Heath topic using this RSS feed.

  • More good news: Education, Not Abortion, Reduces Maternal Mortality, Study Suggests

    A scientific analysis of 50 years of maternal mortality data from Chile has found that the most important factor in reducing maternal mortality is the educational level of women. “Educating women enhances women’s ability to access existing health care resources, including skilled attendants for childbirth, and directly leads to a reduction in her risk of dying during pregnancy and childbirth,” according to Dr Elard Koch, epidemiologist and leading author of the study. […]

    One of the most significant findings is that, contrary to widely-held assumptions, making abortion illegal in Chile did not result in an increase in maternal mortality. In fact, after abortion was made illegal in 1989, the MMR continued to decrease from 41.3 to 12.7 per 100,000 live births (69.2% reduction). “Definitively, the legal status of abortion is unrelated to overall maternal mortality rates” emphasized Koch.

    For those of us who consider abortion violence against a human being, it is always encouraging to see recognition of nonviolent ways to solve the problems that abortion is meant to solve. Educating women is the key to women’s health, their ability to care for themselves and children, their economic security, and even their countries’ development. Holding women back from education and self-care — including family planning if they desire it — is unjust and wasteful. It’s a disservice to individual women and their families, and to the entire world.

Today is the National Day of Action for the “Back Up Your Birth Control” campaign, which aims to increase awareness and use of emergency contraception (EC). Since there has been a lot of talk in pro-life circles about EC being “abortifacient,” and in particular about the Affordable Care Act “mandating the provision of abortifacients,” I thought this would be a good opportunity to discuss the mechanisms of action of emergency contraception pills and clear up some misunderstandings.

1. Plan B does not cause abortions.

The best available evidence indicates that levonorgestrel emergency contraception pills, often known as LNG ECPs or Plan B, have no mechanism of action other than prevention of fertilization. Plan B stops ovulation, and may also inhibit sperm transport. Studies designed specifically to test whether LNG ECPs prevent implantation found no evidence that they do.

2. Whatever definition of pregnancy or abortion is being used, Plan B still does not cause abortions.

Abortion advocates often dismiss claims that EC is abortifacient by saying that it does not disrupt an “established pregnancy,” meaning that it has no effect upon an implanted embryo. The definition of “pregnancy” used by the American Medical Association and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, among other medical authorities, refers to the specific physical relationship between a woman and the child she’s carrying that begins when the embryo implants. Some have charged that this definition of pregnancy is politically motivated. Whether or not that is the case, it is nonetheless the definition that’s currently in use. (The ACOG actually argues that “conception” should be defined as successful implantation, but that definition hasn’t really caught on.)

Although the term “abortion” is often used in everyday language to refer to the killing of an embryo or fetus, in medical terminology it specifically means the ending of a pregnancy with resulting death of the embryo or fetus. To aid in communication, it might be helpful to use the term “contragestive” when referring to a substance or device that prevents gestation of an already-conceived embryo. Contragestives are not abortifacient in the strictest sense of that term, but neither are they contraceptive by most people’s definition. And of course, it is the induced death of the embryo or fetus, not the ending of the pregnancy per se, that pro-lifers object to.

What you need to know is that there is no evidence that EC does anything but prevent fertilization. In fact, there is strong evidence that Plan B can only prevent fertilization. It is not abortifacient by anyone’s definition. It is not contragestive. It is contraceptive.

3. Product labeling which states that Plan B may inhibit implantation is based on out-of-date information.

Opponents of EC often point to the product labeling that says “In addition, it may inhibit implantation (by altering the endometrium).” However, that language is based on what was known at the time that the product and labeling were submitted to the FDA for approval. At that time, there was still speculation that it might prevent implantation. Subsequent research has found no post-fertilization mechanism of action for LNG-ECP. The product labeling is simply not up to date.

4. Emergency contraception works after intercourse because fertilization does not take place immediately, and can be prevented if ovulation is prevented.

Contrary to popular belief, a woman does not have to be ovulating at the time of intercourse in order to conceive. Sperm can live up to five days in a woman’s reproductive tract. Thus, conception can take place even if a woman ovulates several days after intercourse. EC works by preventing ovulation if it has not already taken place.

5. ella has not been studied as extensively as Plan B, but has not been shown to prevent implantation at the dosage used for EC.

Ulipristal acetate, also known as UPA or by its brand name of ella, is effective for a longer period of time after intercourse than Plan B. The reason is that UPA is capable of delaying ovulation even after the luteinizing hormone (LH) surge, when ovulation is imminent, whereas Plan B is only effective when taken before the LH surge.

UPA is chemically similar to mifepristone, also known as RU-486. Because of this, many people have assumed that it must also induce abortion. Drugs in this class administered at high or repeated doses cause changes to the endometrium that may theoretically impair implantation. However, ella is a relatively low dose of ulipristal administered once. One study has shown that if administered shortly after ovulation, UPA can decrease endometrial thickness by 0.6 ± 2.2mm. Although some researchers who consider prevention of implantation to be contraception viewed that as an indication that ulipristal could be used as a “contraceptive,” in fact it has not been demonstrated that this relatively small effect on the endometrium is enough to inhibit implantation. Only one of the 61 women in the study, on a dose more than 3 times that used in ella, had what was considered a thin endometrium (less than 6 mm).

Concerns have also been expressed about the possibility that ella could cause miscarriage. So far, women taking ella have been found to have miscarriage rates in line with the rate in the general population.

The mechanism of action of UPA has not been thoroughly described and women who are unwilling to risk even the possibility of a contragestive effect should avoid it. However, it cannot be factually stated that a single dose of 30 mg of UPA, as used in ella, is known to have any mechanism other than the prevention of fertilization.

6. That UPA could theoretically be used off-label in higher doses to induce abortions doesn’t mean that it can’t be used for legitimate purposes.

Methotrexate can be used to induce abortion. Does that mean that it shouldn’t have been approved to treat cancer and autoimmune diseases? And of course, sleeping pills — even ones sold over the counter — can be used to commit suicide. The possibility that a drug can be abused doesn’t mean that it should never be used.

Following a Supreme Court decision in February which inaccurately declared that emergency contraception is abortifacient, the Honduran Congress is poised to make distribution or use of levonorgestrel emergency contraception (LNG EC) a crime punishable by jail time. Once again, we see that misinformation about EC has severe consequences. The best available research shows that LNG EC has no mechanism of action other than the prevention of fertilization. The blog Feministas en Resistencia Honduras has more information (English translation).

 

Please sign this petition to the President of the National Congress of Honduras urging him not to criminalize the use of emergency contraception. Please also continue to educate governments, media, and pro-life or pro-choice organizations wherever you live on the facts about emergency contraception.

Elise Hilton is the mother of an intellectually and psychiatrically disabled young woman who was recently raped. As Meghan discussed in a recent post, women with disabilities are at pronounced risk for sexual abuse and assault.

It fell upon Hilton to decide whether or not her daughter should take Plan B emergency contraception. As LifeSiteNews.com reports, Hilton decided against Plan B for her daughter on the grounds that the drug may "take the life of an innocent child."

But up to date, correct scientific information about Plan B probably could have saved Hilton a lot of her agony over this decision and alleviated her fears of endangering a very young grandchild. Levonorgestrel type emergency contraceptives work entirely before conception. In fact, they have no possible mechanism for hindering implantation or otherwise working after sperm meets egg.

How often do rape victims and their loved ones suffer unnecessarily because of the myths out there-spread by prolifers and prochoicers alike-about emergency contraception and how it does and doesn't work? How many unintended pregnancies and abortions happen?

We wish Hilton and her daughter healing. We call for people to rise up against the rape and abuse of human beings with disabilities and bring an end to it. And we will work all the more to replace misinformation about Plan B with the facts that rape survivors and their loved ones need and deserve to know in the midst of a crisis.