+- Mock (https://mockforums.net)
+-- Forum: Serious Shit? (https://mockforums.net/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: Discussions, Opinions & Debate (https://mockforums.net/forum-11.html)
+--- Thread: MORNING AFTER PILLS (/thread-8957.html)
RE: MORNING AFTER PILLS - aussiefriend - 09-24-2012
(09-24-2012, 10:27 PM)Ilyanna Wrote: Right out of arguments, huh? It's ok, dear, we kind of figured that three or four posts of yours ago. Don't get your knickers in a twist over it, who knows what could happen if!
Right out arguments? OMG, you need to sit back and read more and learn before you post. Poor thing. This is my area of expertise douche.
RE: MORNING AFTER PILLS - FAHQTOO - 09-24-2012
How the fuck did you get a membership here?
RE: MORNING AFTER PILLS - Ilyanna - 09-24-2012
Because you know me so well that I have sent you my CV and you therefore know exactly what I do and have done in life, right? All I can say is - when this is your expert knowledge on the MAP, then, fuck, get another job before you hurt anyone.
RE: MORNING AFTER PILLS - HairOfTheDog - 09-24-2012
(09-24-2012, 10:07 PM)OnBendedKnee Wrote: Even if it is, so what?
In the context of this case, the schools wouldn't be able to distribute it. Even if there weren't the parents' moral and religious issues to consider, the first abortion pill has to be medically administered after a supervised pregnancy test confirms the age of the pregnancy. It's not over the counter and there are some potential serious side effects.
RE: MORNING AFTER PILLS - aussiefriend - 09-24-2012
(09-24-2012, 10:35 PM)Ilyanna Wrote: Because you know me so well that I have sent you my CV and you therefore know exactly what I do and have done in life, right? All I can say is - when this is your expert knowledge on the MAP, then, fuck, get another job before you hurt anyone.
Who the fucking hell are you anyway? I am very open and honest about who I am here in Mock, if you were here longer than 5 minutes you would know that. Trust you to think that I was bragging or boasting. I was stating facts, it might seem all big and important to the likes of you.
Stuff this for a joke, I have got assignments I should be working on, instead I am in here arguing with morons. I'm off like a brides nightie......
RE: MORNING AFTER PILLS - Ilyanna - 09-24-2012
Quote:I am very open and honest about who I am here in Mockyeah, but taking the MAP is not abortion.
Quote:Trust you to think that I was bragging or boasting.
What I was actually thinking was that if you are in healthcare and have to treat a woman who seeks medical advice about the MAP, she is screwed. Again.
Facts, uh? Let's see
it's abortion.
No, really, it's abortion.
I did it twice, it's abortion.
Fuck you, I am not giving a single scrap of medical evidence, but it IS abortion.
You suck at this, Aussie. Go and read up Morning-After-Pill in your medical books or whatever you get your medical knowledge out of. Then come back and discuss the pharmacological properties, effectiveness, and indications of Levonorgestrel, Ulipristral acetate, and Mifepristone like the grown-up you would so very much like to be.
RE: MORNING AFTER PILLS - username - 09-24-2012
(09-24-2012, 10:45 PM)aussiefriend Wrote: Stuff this for a joke, I have got assignments I should be working on, instead I am in here arguing with morons. I'm off like a brides nightie......
Your first assignment should be what constitutes an abortion. Reeeee-tard.
You'd have to argue against all forms of contraception if you consider the MAP an abortion.
RE: MORNING AFTER PILLS - nrkerr - 09-24-2012
[b]Emergency contraceptive pills (ECPs) are not to be confused with mifepristone (RU486, Mifeprex), which is used as an "abortion pill".[/b] The term "emergency contraceptive pill" does not refer to mifespristone, which is most commonly used in 200 or 600 mg doses as an abortifacient.[13] However, in China and Russia only,[11] mifepristone is available as either emergency contraception or as an abortifacient, depending on whether it is used before or after implantation. If used as emergency contraception, a low dose of mifepristone is slightly less effective than higher doses, but has fewer side effects.[14] As of 2000, the smallest dose available in the USA was 200 mg.[15] Mifepristone, however, is not approved for emergency contraceptive use in the United States.[16] A review of studies in humans concluded that the contraceptive effects of the 10 mg dose are due to its effects on ovulation,[17] but understanding of its mechanism of action remains incomplete. Higher doses of mifepristone can disrupt implantation and, unlike levonorgestrel, mifepristone can be effective in terminating established pregnancies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_contraception (feel free to read more, I am tired.)
RE: MORNING AFTER PILLS - aussiefriend - 09-24-2012
(09-24-2012, 11:05 PM)username Wrote:(09-24-2012, 10:45 PM)aussiefriend Wrote: Stuff this for a joke, I have got assignments I should be working on, instead I am in here arguing with morons. I'm off like a brides nightie......
Your first assignment should be what constitutes an abortion. Reeeee-tard.
You'd have to argue against all forms of contraception if you consider the MAP an abortion.
Look you are making it political I am not. I am simply stating facts, biologically.
If people want to do it, like I said, that is their business. If people want to go and have an abortion then go and do it, I can not stop you. However, you should know what you are doing. That is all I am saying. I am not being self righteous. You are taking it that way because of my personal beliefs. Yes, I do have personal beliefs but I wouldn't impose them on others.
I am not going to pull up my human bioscience books to show you how it works User. Contraception is completely different to the MAP. Once the sperm and egg meet, its conception. As I believe we are spiritual beings, yes then, life begins at conception.
(09-24-2012, 10:58 PM)Ilyanna Wrote: You suck at this, Aussie.
You suck at Mock. Forming an alliance with RG was your first fail with me.
RE: MORNING AFTER PILLS - Ilyanna - 09-24-2012
OK I am stumped. Help, please? Anybody?
Is that woman drunk, trolling us, or in terrible need of reading comprehension?
ETA: "Forming an alliance with RG"....
RE: MORNING AFTER PILLS - username - 09-24-2012
The MAP prevents conception, Aussie. Ergo, there is no pregnancy. It's no different from taking b/c pills to prevent pregnancy.
RE: MORNING AFTER PILLS - OnBendedKnee - 09-24-2012
Getting a good night's sleep prevents morning crankiness- is the same as: MAP preventing a pregnancy.
Neither is morally wrong.
RE: MORNING AFTER PILLS - Midwest Spy - 09-24-2012
Umm... Aussie used douche and moron in consecutive posts.
She's the winner in my book!
RE: MORNING AFTER PILLS - Ilyanna - 09-25-2012
Crikey, you mean I should have used cursewords? Like moo, or something? But that would be beyond rude, wouldn't it? I am not sure my 5 minutes at Mock have already provided enough expertise to pull off a proper flame battle (?) yet!
RE: MORNING AFTER PILLS - HairOfTheDog - 09-25-2012
I've seen a lot of debate over this same issue in the press and in politicians' literature since the MAP hit the US market. It's a hot topic of debate between pro-life and pro-choice advocates. I don't have any medical education, but here's what I understand from previous readings and some research tonight.
The MAP is labeled as acting in one of three 3 modes to prevent pregnancy:
1.The normal menstrual cycle is altered, delaying ovulation
2.Ovulation is inhibited, meaning the egg will not be released from the ovary
3.The lining of the uterus (endometrium) is irritated so as to inhibit implantation
These modes are included in literature that comes with the product and the FDA labeling.
In modes 1 and 2, the egg is blocked from being fertilized. In mode 3, the egg is fertlized, but is blocked from being implanted or attached to the uterus and therefore cannot get nutrients it needs from the woman in order to develop.
For someone who believes that life begins at fertilization, the MAP could be considered a potential chemical abortion (because it may act in mode 3 by denying an already fertilized egg implantation). Pro-life advocates have taken this stance in much of their literature.
For someone who believes that life begins later, with implantation, the MAP would simply be a contraceptive like any other and not an abortion pill under any of the action modes. Pro-choice advocates have taken this stance in much of their literature.
Looks like it may be a moot point anyway. I found this recent article (linked below) suggesting that more advanced science has determined that the MAP does not inhibit implantation after all. The scientific studies are convincing and the FDA is considering removing the "implantation" wording from the product label/literature (it was originally included because the pill was new and the manufacturers couldn't prove that blocking implantation wasn't one of the modes by which the pill worked at that time). Some anti-abortion groups are claiming that the scientists are operating under pro-life agendas.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/06/health/research/morning-after-pills-dont-block-implantation-science-suggests.html?pagewanted=all&_moc.semityn.www
RE: MORNING AFTER PILLS - HairOfTheDog - 09-25-2012
∧ Oops, that last line should say that some anti-abortion groups claim that scientists behind the latest studies are operating under "pro-choice" agendas...
RE: MORNING AFTER PILLS - Duchess - 09-25-2012
Pregnancy is not as instantaneous as most people think. Sperm can remain viable up to three days (sometimes longer) waiting patiently for ovulation to occur.
RE: MORNING AFTER PILLS - Ilyanna - 09-25-2012
HotD, thanks for posting the NY article.
As for your excellent explanation, I would like to add one thing if I may (it gets a bit technical/pharmacological, ymmv. If it's tl&dr for you, check the cliff's note at the end
):The modes you listed are dependant on the hormonal active ingredient that is used. There currently are three different emergency contraceptive pills, containing:
levonorgestrel (progestin),
- mono-preparation containing only progestin, as used in the OTC brands Next Choice One Dose©, and Plan B One-Step©
-> a variety of studies over the years have shown no effect on the endometrial growth. Its method of action lies solely in the prevention of fertilization/ovulation.
- combined preparation (progestin and estrogen), the so-called Yuzpe regimen, which is pretty much outdated by now due to the mono-preparation.
OR
mifepristone (antiprogestin)
- high dose abortion pill, aka the "infamous" RU486© and Mifeprex©, not FDA approved
- low dose Emergency contraceptive Pill, not FDA approved (I've not found any brand name)
ulipristol acetate (antiprogestin)
- as used in Ella© -> a second generation antiprogestin, (or successor of mifepristone, if you will)
As for the methods of actions:
- a variety of studies over the years have shown no effect of levonorgestrel on the endometrial growth. Its method of action lies solely in the prevention of fertilization/ovulation.
- as for ulipristol acetate, to date, there is no backed scientific evidence that its effect is caused by interference with the nidation of a fertilized egg.
- mifepristone, however, does effect endometrial growth, at least when administered in high doses. Since it is not approved as an ECP in the US nor Australia (afaik), though, it does not count into this debate.
So, cliff's notes:
if the ECP used is levonorgestrel-based as in the OT, science says that no abortion (as per definition of "post-fertilization"!) occurs.
if the ECP used is ulipristol acetate -based, science says it hasn't found proof of post-fertilization effects, but can't completely disprove it yet.
if the ECP used is mifepristone-based - you are probably currently residing in China or another country where it is approved, or are participating in a clinical trial.
A most excellent scientific report on this matter can be found
here
RE: MORNING AFTER PILLS - Ilyanna - 09-25-2012
@ Duchess, yeah. That is one of the reasons why I never felt brave enough to solely rely on the temperature-measuring methods
RE: MORNING AFTER PILLS - LuciferLynn - 09-25-2012
I've never had cause to use these so I have no experience with them. I also don't have daughters and I think people with daughters may react differently to this being available in schools. I would be one of the parents that wants to be notified if my child came to the nurse or whatever to get this medication. At the very least so I can have "the talk" with her again and discuss birth control options. Now that my son has started high school, the idea of him getting a girl "in trouble" has started to creep up on me, becoming something I'm worried about. He's had the talk, I try to be open and honest about sex and I can only hope he's responsible enough to know how to keep himself safe. Its probably a good idea to make them readily
available to students, but it feels wrong on some level. If I had a daughter, I
wouldn't want her ruining her life at 17 by having a baby. I know some will say she shouldn't have gotten pregnant in the first place, but a baby shouldnt be viewed as a punishment, as an ill-teach-you-to-have-sex tool, which is so often what happens when young girls have babies. Id rather have the medicine available to her, at the least. The fact that they gave out over 500 pills already, though, concerns me. That's a lot of young women that either aren't knowledgeable enough to know how to protect themselves, or don't care enough to try, or just figure they can get the pill from the school nurse.