have never given birth] have a 30% increased risk compared with women who have had at least 1 full-term pregnancy. Additionally, an increasing protective effect was found with increasing number of full-term pregnancies. For each birth, the risk was reduced by about 7%
Some people might still decide to take the pill or to prescribe it in the name of “helping the womanavoid an onerous pregnancy”.
However, another aspect has to be taken into account. A third partyoutside of the doctor and of the woman: the possible presence of a child.The question of whether the pill is abortifacient [induces abortion or a miscarriage]or not is of inestimable significance, because the value of a human being cannot be measured.But the first question is: When does a woman have a child, another human, in her womb? Based on themost authoritative and unbiased sources, the most reliable answer is: at fertilization, when the humanmale sperm unites with the human female egg. This conclusion
was the “overwhelming agreement in
countless scientific writings”, and of most authoritative experts, including scientists from Harvard
Medical School and the Mayo Clinic that were gathered together in the US Senate in 1983. It is aposition upheld in 2011by the Philippine Medical Association in their pro-RH but anti-contraceptive
statement, which they said, is “
founded strongly on the principle that
ife or conception begins atfertilization
(bold letters in the original)Second question: Does the pill abort the human being at his or her embryonic stage? The answer is yes.Science has shown that t
he pill works to stop pregnancy by at least three ways: 1) to prevent thedischarge of female egg cells, a process called ovulation (no egg, no fertilization, no humanbeing) , 2) to change the cervical mucus which increases the difficulty of sperm entry into theuterus (no meeting of sperm and egg, no fertilization, no human being), and 3) cause changesin the lining of the uterus [called endometrium] that makes it hostile for the fertilized egg (the
human at the embryonic stage) to rest on the mother’s womb and obtain nutrition (no food,
death to a previously alive human being).
The third action, which was not widely known until recently, has been shown in many studies. The mostfamous of which is the study of Dr. Walter Larimore that was published in one of the scientific journalsof the American Medical Association in the year 2000. Dr. Larimore narrates:
“I have prescribed ‘the Pill’
since 1978. My wife and I used the Pill for years, having no moral concerns about it. Then, in 1995 myfriend
showed me a patient information brochure
that claimed the Pill had a post-fertilization effect[effect that could take place after conception] causing ". . . the unrecognized loss of preborn children."
its claims seemed to be outlandish, excessive, and inaccurate. So, I decided to begin a literature searchto disprove these claims to my partner, myself, and any patients who might ask about it.
” In the end, Dr.
Larimore found 94 studies that showed that the pill does indeed have a postfertilization effect. Fromthen on, he stopped prescribing the pill.Writing to the Inquirer in July 2011, Dr. Larimore and his co-author, Dr. Joseph Stanford, stressed that
this fact is now so well-established in medical literature that the United States Food and DrugAd
ministration says of the pill: ‘
Although the primary mechanism of action is inhibition of ovulation,
other alterations include… changes in the endometrium
[ lining for the uterus] which reduce the