Birth Control - The Silent Abortion
 
"Pro-life" women using an oral contraceptive are committing abortions on themselves."
Different types of birth prevention pills (oral contraceptive), and how they work.
Oral Contraceptives (OCs).
(1) Suppression of Ovulation. When the female reproductive
system is functioning normally, the hypothalamus (the part of
the brain containing the vital autonomic regulatory centers)
controls the release of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH),
which signals the pituitary gland to secrete luteinizing hormone
(LH), which in turn assists ovulation and coordinates the
release of estrogen and progestin from the ovaries.
When a woman ingests birth prevention pills, they literally
hijack her reproductive system. The pills cause the ovaries
to maintain a steady high level of estrogen and/or progestin
production, depending upon the type and brand of pill being
used. Thus, the woman's body is essentially "tricked" into
acting as if it is continuously pregnant. The hypothalamus
adjusts to this high level of hormone secretion and essentially
shuts off GnRH production.
Therefore, the production of luteinizing hormone by the
pituitary gland is also inhibited, and ovulation either ceases
or is drastically curtailed. In those months that ovulation is
suppressed, the mode of action of the birth prevention pill
is contraceptive in nature.

  
(2) Cervical Mucus Effects. Oral contraceptives also cause
changes in the consistency and acidity of cervical mucus,
making it more difficult for sperm to penetrate and live in
the cervix, a second contraceptive effect.
(3) Endometrial Effects. The third effect of oral contraceptives on
the body is to cause certain changes in the endometrium
(lining of the uterus), making implantation more difficult. In a
cycle where ovulation was not prevented and fertilization takes
place,
the pill causes a "silent abortion."
Two-Fold vs. Three-Fold Action.
Most of the older "high-dose" birth prevention pills functioned
mainly by inhibiting ovulation and affecting the cervical mucus,
making them primarily two-fold in function.
Sometimes, however, breakthrough ovulation occurred, and so
the older pills were occasionally abortifacient in their
actions.
All of the newer birth prevention pills on the market today not
only often suppress ovulation and affect the cervical mucus,
they often make implantation of the developing human being
impossible. This three-fold mode of function means that all
of the newer birth prevention pills function at
least part of the time as abortifacients.

The Types of Oral Contraceptive.
Overview.
There are currently three general classes of birth prevention pill
manufactured in the United States and other countries and used
worldwide. These are the high-dose pill, the low-dose pill, and
the "mini-pill." The following paragraphs describe these pills and
their modes of action.
The High-Dose Pill.
The Searle Pharmaceutical Corporation developed the first oral
contraceptive, Enovid, in the late 1950s. In keeping with its
defensive anti-lawsuit strategy, the company tested the pill on
Puerto Rican women before concluding in 1961 that it was safe
for women on the American mainland to use. 1
1 Bogomir M. Kuhar, Ph.D. "Pharmaceutical Companies: The New Abortionists."
Reprint 16 from Human Life International, 4 Family Life, Front Royal, Virginia 22630.
Experimentation on foreign women is a typical tactic of the
major pharmaceutical companies. They often test birth
prevention chemicals and devices on poor women in developing
countries so any mistakes or serious health problems are easier
to cover up. Poor women on foreign countries have little recourse
when their health is destroyed or damaged by this kind of testing.
This is because the companies bring huge amounts of money to
their homelands, and protest against the programs can easily be
suppressed by local or national governments.

  
Enovid and other high-dose pills, which have generally fallen out
of favor in the United States but are still widely used in developing
countries, contained from 1 to 12 milligrams of progestin and/or 60
to 120 micrograms of estrogen, a natural female hormone. This high
dosage had a variety of effects, including blurred vision, nausea,
weight gain, painful breasts, cramping, irregular menstrual bleeding,
headaches, and possibly breast cancer.1
1 Bogomir M. Kuhar, Ph.D. "Pharmaceutical Companies: The New Abortionists."
Reprint 16 from Human Life International, 4 Family Life, Front Royal, Virginia 22630.
The high-dose pills were primarily two-fold in action. Their
primary mechanism suppressed gonadotropin production and
therefore ovulation. They also caused changes in the consistency
and acidity of cervical mucus, making it more difficult for sperm
to penetrate and live in the cervix. Finally, they occasionally
caused certain changes in the endometrium (lining of the uterus),
making implantation more difficult.
When the high-dose pill functioned by this last mechanism, it was
an abortifacient if the woman experienced a "breakthrough"
ovulation. Although this occurred only during about 1 to
12 percent of all cycles, it was not the primary intent of the
manufacturers.
Beginning about 1975, pill makers, in reaction to bad publicity
about the severe side effects of the high-dosage pills, steadily
decreased the content of estrogen and progestin in their products.

  
The Low-Dose Pill.
Eventually, the older "high-dose" pills gave way to the new,
abortifacient "low-dose" pills. Ortho/Johnson & Johnson,
G.D. Searle/Monsanto, and Syntex, the three largest manufacturers
of OCs in the United States, voluntarily withdrew their "high-dose"
products from the U.S. market in 1988 on the advice of the U.S.
Food and Drug Administration (FDA). These were the last
commercially-available pills containing more than 50 micrograms
of estrogen. 1
1 Bogomir M. Kuhar, Ph.D. "Pharmaceutical Companies: The New Abortionists."
Reprint 16 from Human Life International, 4 Family Life, Front Royal, Virginia 22630.
The low-dose pills contain from 0.35 to 15 milligrams of progestin
in the form of norethindrone, norgestrel, ethyndiol diacetate, or
norethindrone acetate, and from 0.7 to 2.0 micrograms of
estrogen in the form of ethinyl estradiol or mestranol, a tremendous
drop in estrogenic potency compared to the high-dose pills.  2
2 Robert A. Hatcher, et. al. Contraceptive Technology (17th Revised Edition).
New York: Ardent Media, Inc., 1998. Table 19-1, "Relative Potency of Estrogens
and Progestins in Currently Available Oral Contraceptives Reflecting the Debate
About the Strength of the Progestins," page 407.
The low-dose pills work in essentially the same manner as the
high-dose pill. However, a much higher percentage of ovulation
occurs in women who use the low-dose pills, due to the much lower
estrogen dose. This means that women who use these pills frequently
conceive, and the low-dose pills prevent implantation of the new
human life, thereby acting more often as true abortifacients.
The Mini-Pill.
Scientists have not pinpointed the primary mechanism of mini-pills
(progestin-only pills), although women who use them frequently
ovulate. Therefore, these pills function primarily as abortifacients.
It is known that pills that contain only progestin alter the cervical
mucus. They also interfere with implantation by affecting the
endometrium (lining of the uterus) and suppressing ovulation in
some women by reducing the presence of follicle-stimulating
hormone (FSH).
This mechanism is confirmed by the Food and Drug Administration,
which has stated that "Progestin-only contraceptives are known to
alter the cervical mucus, exert a progestinal effect on the endometrium,
interfere with implantation, and, in some patients, suppress ovulation." 3
3 Federal Register, 41:236, December 7, 1976, page 53,634.
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), in its
1984 pamphlet "Facts About Oral Contraceptives," compared the
action of high-dose pills and mini-pills:
     It is possible for women using combined pills (synthetic estrogen
     and progestin) to ovulate. Then other mechanisms work to prevent
     pregnancy. Both kinds of pills make the cervical mucus thick and
     "inhospitable" to sperm, discouraging any entry to the uterus. In
     addition, they make it difficult for a fertilized egg to implant, by
     causing changes in Fallopian tube contractions and in the uterine
     lining. These actions explain why the minipill works, as it generally
     does not suppress ovulation [emphasis added].
The makers of the mini-pills also admit this mode of action. For
example, Syntex Laboratories announced that its progestin-only
pill Norinyl "... did not interfere with ovulation ... It seems
to affect the endometrium so that a fertilized egg cannot be
implanted." 4
4 United Press International news release in the Cincinnati Post, January 11, 1973.
In other words, the pill is now truly abortifacient "birth prevention"
-- not conception control, as may have originally been intended
when the first oral contraceptives were being developed.
"Emergency Contraceptives" - morning-after pills.
For 30 years, pro-abortionists and "family planners" have searched
for new and better ways to kill early preborn babies with chemical
compounds and devices already approved by the FDA. The
methotrexate/misoprostol combination described above is one of
the results of this ongoing search.
Anti-lifers have also promoted another type of abortifacient potion,
the "Yuzpe Regimen," which consists of women taking combined
ethinyl estradiol/levonorgestrel pills at a higher than normal dose.
This kind of abortifacient is ideal for women who are forgetful or
lazy about taking their pills. 5
5 "What are Legalities of Promoting ECPs?" Contraceptive Technology Update,
November 1995, pages 137 and 138.
Pro-abortionists dishonestly call this "emergency contraception,"
another attempt to erase the distinction between true contraception
and abortifacient action. Pills taken under the Yuzpe and similar
regimens are often called "emergency contraceptive pills (ECPs),"
"morning-after pills (MAPs)," and "postcoital contraception."

  
When pro-lifers hear pro-abortionists using these and similar
terms, they can be sure that they are referring to abortifacient
cocktails.
Pregnancies While Using the "Infallible" Pill.
From the very first day that it was introduced, the oral contraceptive
has been hailed as the solution to "unwanted pregnancies" and the
enabler of the Sexual Revolution. Continued allegations of high
efficiency, combined with the easy availability of abortion as a
"backup," have inevitably led to widespread careless use of the
pill.

  
Only about 11 percent of all women who use the pill do so correctly,
according to a 1989 study. 6
6 Kim Painter. "Most Users of the Pill Don't Follow Directions." USA Today,
February 21, 1990, page D1.

  
This carelessness is the major contributor to an incredible number
of unintended pregnancies, especially among younger women.
There are about 630,000 pregnancies annually among U.S. women
who are on the pill, and more than 80 percent of these occur among
women 15 to 24 years old.
Among women in this age group, the method effectiveness of the
birth prevention pill is 96.2 percent per year, significantly lower than
the effectiveness for older women. This percentage still sounds very
high indeed; but the method effectiveness refers to the efficiency of
the pill when a woman is in very good health and uses the pill without
error. When user error is factored in, the result is the actual user
effectiveness rate, also known as the overall effectiveness rate. 6
6 Kim Painter. "Most Users of the Pill Don't Follow Directions." USA Today,
February 21, 1990, page D1.
The overall effectiveness rate for the low-dose pill is 89 percent
per year. 6
6 Kim Painter. "Most Users of the Pill Don't Follow Directions." USA Today,
February 21, 1990, page D1.
This still sounds high until you calculate the probability of a woman
15 to 24 years old becoming pregnant over an extended period of time
when using the pill.
In summary, if a fornicating girl of 15 starts using the pill, and
uses it continuously, there is a better than 50 percent chance that
she will become pregnant by the time she is 22!
This statistic is verified by pro-abortionists, including Planned
Parenthood abortion statistician Dr. Christopher Tietze, who said
that "within 10 years, 20 to 50 percent of pill users and a substantial
majority of users of other methods may be expected to experience at
least one repeat abortion." 7
7 Christopher Tietze, quoted in the National Abortion Rights Action League's
A Speaker's and Debater's Guidebook. June 1978, page 24.
Note that Tietze is speaking about repeat (second or more) abortions
here. These statistics are significant when one considers that one of
the primary goals of school-based clinics (SBCs) is to distribute
contraceptives and abortifacients to teenagers without parental
consent or knowledge.
Implications for Pro-Life Activists.
Millions of women in the USA and all over the world use oral
contraceptives. Many women who would never even consider
a surgical abortion now use low-dose birth prevention pills
that cause them to abort a new life an average of once or twice
every year. A large number of women who say that they are
pro-life use these pills. Many at the urging of their husbands.
These are usually the women who are ignorant of the pill's
abortifacient mode of action, those who think that their way
of life requires that they use the pill, or those who cannot mentally
make the connection between contraception and abortion.
Some researchers (using very conservative figures) have calculated
that the birth prevention pill directly causes between 1.53 and 4.15
million chemical abortions per year in the United States -- up to two
and a half times the total number of surgical abortions committed
every year! 8
8 S. Killick, E. Eyong, and M. Elstein. "Ovarian Follicular Development in Oral Contraceptive
Cycles." Fertility and Sterility, September 1987, pages 409 to 413.


 
This means that "pro-life" women who are using an oral contraceptive
or some other means of abortifacient birth control are committing
abortions themselves on a frequent basis. These abortions are "silent"
and unseen, but they are no less abortions in the eyes of God than are
gruesome third-trimester D&X abortions. There are many "pro-lifers"
who are using these pills and who are involved in their promotion and
distribution. These people must consider whether they can, in good
conscience, criticize women whose action differs from their own
only in that they have to drive to an clinic mill to commit it.
  
 
1 Bogomir M. Kuhar, Ph.D. "Pharmaceutical Companies: The New Abortionists." Reprint 16 from Human Life
International, 4 Family Life, Front Royal, Virginia 22630.
2 Robert A. Hatcher, et. al. Contraceptive Technology (17th Revised Edition). New York: Ardent Media, Inc., 1998.
Table 19-1, "Relative Potency of Estrogens and Progestins in Currently Available Oral Contraceptives Reflecting the Debate
About the Strength of the Progestins," page 407.
3 Federal Register, 41:236, December 7, 1976, page 53,634.
4 United Press International news release in the Cincinnati Post, January 11, 1973.
5 "What are Legalities of Promoting ECPs?" Contraceptive Technology Update, November 1995, pages 137 and 138.
6 Kim Painter. "Most Users of the Pill Don't Follow Directions." USA Today, February 21, 1990, page D1.
7 Christopher Tietze, quoted in the National Abortion Rights Action League's A Speaker's and Debater's Guidebook.
June 1978, page 24.
8 S. Killick, E. Eyong, and M. Elstein. "Ovarian Follicular Development in Oral Contraceptive Cycles." Fertility and
Sterility, September 1987, pages 409 to 413.
Back to Birth Control is a Sin homepage.
To view helpless babies murdered by BABYKILLING ABORTIONISTS
  
Back to Army of God homepage.
To contact e-mail: Glory2Jesus@ArmyofGod.com
Telephone 1-757-204-4454
 Or write to: Rev. Donald Spitz
                    Glory to Jesus Ministries
                    P.O. Box 16611
                    Chesapeake VA 23328