- A Texas judge ruled Friday overturning the FDA’s approval of an abortion drug.
- Not only did it contain inaccuracies, but many erroneous studies were cited, experts say.
- A study was written by an author who was retracted from a reputable journal.
In an unprecedented ruling late Friday night, a federal judge in Texas sided with conservative anti-abortion activists in seeking to strip FDA approval of the leading abortion drug mifepristone.
A 67-page document written by right-wing judge Matthew Kaksmalik, citing Wikipedia, is inaccurate and full of lies about the health effects of medical abortion, an expert told an insider on Friday. rice field.
In his judgment, Kacsmaryk cited multiple studies to support claims that have been widely scrutinized or do not maintain scientific consensus.
“When making decisions that affect people across the country, we want to make sure that the decisions are evidence-based and focus on the body of evidence rather than on hand-picked studies that don’t really fit the criteria. There’s a scientific consensus on this topic,” M. Antonia Biggs, Ph.D., a social psychologist at ANSIRH, previously told Insider.
For example, one study in partnership with the Charlotte Rozier Institute, an anti-abortion non-profit organization, was based on users’ anonymous experiences on a particular website. The research uses 98 of his blog posts created over a decade. The authors note that the small sample group is one of the limitations of this study.
There were 620,327 legally induced abortions performed in 2020 compared to this study Reported to CDC.
However, despite the limited scope of research, conservative Christian judges found that “83% of women reported that chemical abortion had 77% reported negative changes.” 98 anonymous blog posts.
In another, the judge cited an analysis written by abortion researcher Priscilla Coleman that suggested a link between negative mental health outcomes and abortion. been criticized for years By abortion researchers, other studies have previously Retracted by a major journal.
Julia Steinberg, a mental health and abortion expert, told Reuters in 2012 Most of the women in this study who experienced mental health problems after abortion also experienced them before the abortion. The Guttmach Institute was also exposed. Research by letter.
Another 2002 study based on Medi-Cal insurance records, California’s Medicaid program, argued that low-income women who had abortions were more likely to commit suicide or die after the abortion.
a 2008 American Psychological Association Task Force One of the multiple limitations of the 2002 insurance study was that it did not take into account low-income women, sickly If you already have results, you may be more likely to opt for an abortion. The study also did not say whether the abortion was done for health reasons or was an elective abortion.
“What we do know is that abortion does not increase people’s risk of depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress, suicidal ideation, or substance use disorders. completely contrary to the People never come to regret abortion.”
Dr. George Benjamin, executive director of the American Public Health Association, an advocacy group of public health professionals, intended to undermine 20 years of clinical data on the safety of mifepristone and the FDA’s safety. The ruling was “troubling,” he told Insider.Expertise in drug approval.
“I think this opens the door to other people who are unhappy with the proper, science-based decision,” Benjamin told Insider.
Benjamin said the legal community “gets the best of science” and “utilizes a very unique theory of agency authority” in making decisions about judgments that affect people’s health. approach,” he said.
“If the judge had determined that there was something administratively not done right, he could have identified it, and the management could certainly have fixed it. But that’s what he did. No. He actually endangered his patients.He caused a lot of confusion.And we know the plaintiff had a reason for asking the judge.He for the opinion of
Benjamin stressed to insiders that mifepristone is safe and hoped people would take Kaksmalik’s background into consideration when reading Friday’s ruling.
“The judge went to law school. The judge did not go to medical school. He is not licensed to practice medicine. is outside lane-making, essentially a medical judgment informed by really, really bad information.”
On Monday, Justice Department attorneys filed an emergency motion with the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals to suspend Kacsmaryk’s judgment pending the appeal process, arguing that the case should never have moved forward.
The DOJ argued that the plaintiffs in the lawsuit – a group of anti-abortion physicians – were ineligible because they neither used nor prescribed mifepristone.
Instead, their claims are speculative and ludicrous. We will do so in sufficient numbers to burden plaintiffs’ medical practice.”
Kacsmaryk’s office did not immediately respond to Insider’s request for comment. Coleman and other researchers did not immediately respond to Insider’s request for comment.