Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: marshmallow
Cardinal Meisner subsequently met with medical experts about the morning-after pill and they told him the latest research indicated the drug does not have anti-implantation effects.

I thought implantation-prevention was the whole point of the "morning-after" pill. If it doesn't have that effect, why administer it (not that I'm trying to make a case for it)?

3 posted on 02/08/2013 8:07:34 AM PST by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: DuncanWaring

I’m not expert, but the way I’m reading it is the difference between preventing fertilization and preventing implantation of the fertilized egg.

And, as a general rule, it’s best not to put much stock in mainstream media reports on the Church or Christianity in general until we get more facts or a transcript.


4 posted on 02/08/2013 9:56:18 AM PST by D-fendr (Deus non alligatur sacramentis sed nos alligamur.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: DuncanWaring

I believe that in some cases, morning-after pills can delay ovulation, which would reduce the change of conception from that act of intercourse. I wonder how they would find out the extent to which the pills prevent implantation of a fertilized egg, vs. how many times ovulation is affected. It seems like this would be all but impossible to test experimentally.


5 posted on 02/08/2013 2:12:17 PM PST by Tax-chick (Watch out for spiders.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson