Science

The Family Research Council has produced a superb primer on Ella, the so-called “morning-after pill” that could cause a skyrocketing in chemical abortions. It begins:

As we previously reported, on August 13th the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) quietly announced approval of a new prescription abortion drug called “ella,” allowing Watson Pharmaceuticals to market this drug in the U.S. as an “emergency contraceptive” (EC). While proponents of ella claim that it is more effective than the so-called “morning-after-pill,” Plan B, ella can also function as an abortion drug (more like RU-486) [emphasis added].

Ella is similar in its chemical make-up to RU-486 and therefore can destroy an implanted embryo, in addition to other such effects as preventing fertilization or preventing implantation. Until now, the FDA has drawn the line between EC and abortion based on whether a drug prevents or ends an established pregnancy. Therefore, approving ella as an EC even under its own definition of an abortifacient is doubly misleading.

Due to the FDA’s approval of “ella” as an EC, pharmacists may believe they must cover ella as a prescription drug. However, many pharmacists do not know about the dangers of this drug or that it functions like an abortifacient. Many pharmacies may not know ella can cause an abortion, and need to be aware of these concerns before they begin stocking this abortion drug.

Read the rest here.

The site OurAmazingPlanet (about which I know nothing, never having heard of it until I found this article) has an interesting piece entitled, “Parting of Red Sea Jibes with Natural Laws.” It’s an interesting article that discusses how wind might have caused the parting of the Red Sea that we read about in the Exodus account. Read the rest of this entry »

For those of you that love when archeology and Christianity intersect, you’ll love the images found in this CNN piece, Vatican: Oldest known images of apostles Andrew and John found.

Extremely fascinating!

“About 80 unborn babies conceived by in vitro fertilization (IVF) are eliminated by abortion each year in Great Britain, according to a new report.”

Read more here.

“I commend President Obama for forcing the issue of health-care reform into the public debate,” says Chuck Colson in a new article. “Our present system, still the best in the world, needs to expand coverage to the uninsured.”

The question is how to do it and “who will decide who gets medical care.” The most helpless in society should not be forgotten in the President’s plan. By this I mean the pre-born and very elderly. Read the rest of Colson’s thoughts here.

Moreover, our newer system must focus more on “health” than “health care,” shifting away from predominantly curative to preventative measures. Mike Huckabee explains it better than I could. That being said, I am grateful that the President is calling for action. Just hope he remembers to “do no harm.”

From WORLD magazine:

Planned Parenthood researchers report in the New England Journal of Medicine that a revised method of conducting drug-induced abortions has allegedly reduced the risk of serious complications by 93 percent. Previously Planned Parenthood diverged from the FDA’s recommended guidelines for RU-486 by administering an oral dose of mifepristone followed by a vaginal dose of misoprostol. But the 2005 deaths of four American women and one Canadian woman from bacterial infections spurred Planned Parenthood to conform to FDA standards and instead have women dissolve the misoprostol pill in their mouths, followed by a precautionary course of antibiotics.

As a result, Planned Parenthood said the number of serious infections resulting from drug-induced abortions has declined to one-16th of the original rate. Experts say the latest research will likely spark a future increase in chemical abortions, although Family Research Council spokesman Chris Gacek said, “It’s hard to know whether this increases the (total) number of abortions.” Last year, approximately a quarter of all U.S. abortions were performed with drugs rather than surgery.

Me: As we celebrate the closing of abortion clinics and the sunset of surgical abortions, let us stay aware that the Brave New World of abortion in a bottle is only dawning.

I am not a scientist. I am not a doctor. In fact, I do not even own a white coat. But I can recognize unethical science when I see it, and embryonic stem cell research (albeit with noble intentions) fits in this category.

That is why I was aggravated to see that Gov. Henry vetoed a bill that would have essentially banned the practice in Oklahoma, while encouraging adult stem cell research. The latter is reported to have proven, positive results. The former does not, which is why it is surprising that the Greater Oklahoma City Chamber of Commerce lobbied against the bill. You would think business executives would want to invest in the type of research that provides results.

Be that as it may, a veto-override in the Oklahoma State Senate has failed. To read more about the legislators who changed their vote, click here. I am not alone in my view, as more important people, such as Joni Eareckson Tada, oppose the use of embryonic stem cell research on ethical grounds.