FDA flawed oversight: Soaring birth complication risks in abortion pill emergencies

• New study reveals 10 percent of abortion pill users face severe complications, 22x higher than FDA’s 0.5 percent claim.
• Mifepristone’s 2000 approval, pushed by Clinton, tied to population control groups and eugenics-linked past.
• At least 36 U.S. deaths linked to abortion pills since 2000, with rising ER visits for hemorrhaging and infections.
• FDA relaxed restrictions despite risks, enabling online distribution and lack of medical oversight.
• Pro-life advocates demand immediate review, stricter regulations and congressional oversight.

When former President Bill Clinton weaponized abortion as a tool for population control, he set in motion a deadly agenda that now claims lives under a veneer of “choice.” A groundbreaking study reveals that one in 10 women suffer severe complications—including infections and hemorrhaging—from the abortion pill regimen (mifepristone and misoprostol), contradicting the FDA’s dismissive 0.5% risk estimate. With abortion pills now accounting for 63% of U.S. abortions, the agency’s partisan-driven decisions, rooted in a dark history of eugenics, have prioritized ideology over millions of women’s health.

Historical context: From Nazi ties to political maneuvers

Mifepristone’s journey to U.S. shelves began in the 1990s amid a covert push by Clinton’s administration, despite ethical red flags. The drug’s French manufacturer rejected domestic sales over its disturbing parent company’s ties to I.G. Farben, which produced Zyklon B gas for Nazi death camps. Undeterred, Clinton’s appointee FDA Commissioner David Kessler pressured Roussel-Uclaf and German owners to transfer patent rights to the Population Council—a nonprofit founded by eugenicist John D. Rockefeller III, whose original mission was to “reduce fertility” among marginalized populations.

Key architect Ron Weddington, co-strategist of Roe v. Wade, even advocated in a 1993 letter to Clinton to use abortion to “eliminate the barely educated, unhealthy and poor segment of our country.” The FDA, heeding these dark motives, ignored standard protocols, using emergency channels meant for life-threatening illnesses to fast-track approval—despite pregnancy not being an illness.

New evidence exposes 10 percent severe risk — a fatality flaw

The Foundation for the Restoration of America (FROA) study of 865,727 mifepristone abortions found a 10.93 percent rate of severe complications, including 11.2 percent in 2023 alone. Cases like Holly Patterson, who died in 2003 from a C. sordellii infection, and 2021’s Candi Miller, whose autopsy revealed both a botched abortion and drug overdose, underscore systemic failures.

FDA-commissioned trials lacked blind, randomized control groups, per Dr. Donna Harrison of the American Association of Pro-Life OB-GYNs. “They rely on dose comparisons—not the gold standard of placebo controls,” she said. Worse, the FDA removed safeguards like mandatory ultrasounds and ER reporting, enabling a black market where 40,000+ women have faced severe outcomes, including coerced abortions by criminals.

Political negligence: From Clinton’s liars to Biden’s backdoor relaxation

Despite rising deaths, every White House since 2000 has expanded mifepristone access. The Obama administration doubled the gestational age limit to ten weeks and slashed required doctor visits. In 2021, the Biden FDA allowed mail-order abortion pills without supervision—a policy linked to the 2021 death of Nevada’s Alyona Dixon, who bled nearly to death alone.

“And it’s not a stretch to say political pressure outweighed science at every turn,” noted Dr. Harrison. “This drug has been grandfathered in by presidents who want to erase hurdles to abortion, no matter the cost.”

Time for the FDA to choose women over agenda

At least 36 women have died, with over 4,000 enduring severe harm, since the FDA approved mifepristone. The agency’s silence on real-world data and its reversal of safety protocols underscore a failure of ethical responsibility. As pro-life advocates demand congressional hearings and reinstated restrictions—like mandatory ultrasounds and in-person dispensation—the question remains: How many more mothers will they sacrifice to an agenda forged in the shadows of eugenics and elitism?

Sources for this article include:

YourNews.com

PubMed.com

AmnionPregnancyCenter.com