ProWomanProLife

  • The Story
  • The Women
  • Notable Columns
  • Contact Us
You are here: Home / All Posts / Extraordinarily useful

Extraordinarily useful

January 26, 2012 by Andrea Mrozek 9 Comments

WECARE for “World Expert Consortium for Abortion Research and Education” is going to be very useful, indeed.

Today, WECARE posts an assessment of the “abortion is safer than childbirth” study.

Excellent assessment, worth reading in full. It gives a sense of just how politicized the research around abortion is.

 

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Filed Under: All Posts

Comments

  1. Mary says

    January 26, 2012 at 12:15 pm

    Yes, the site is very useful. Even more so since Priscilla K. Coleman has also been quoted by pro-abortion people for pointing out problems with studies used to support the Pro-Life position.

    http://www.equityfeminism.com/articles/tag/priscilla-coleman/

    This woman is clearly more interested in the truth, whatever it is, than an agenda.

    I wish I could spend my time fact-checking and crunching numbers for the pro-life cause. One of the things I love about your site is all the references to hard data.

    Reply
  2. fern hill says

    January 28, 2012 at 2:11 pm

    In fact, Coleman’s work has been thoroughly trashed by real scientists, not necessary pro-choicers.

    http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/12/bad_science_in_the_british_jou.php

    But, I guess you get what you pay for.

    Reply
  3. fern hill says

    January 28, 2012 at 2:12 pm

    In fact, Coleman’s work has been thoroughly trashed by real scientists, not necessarily pro-choicers.

    http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/12/bad_science_in_the_british_jou.php

    But I guess you get what you pay for.

    Reply
  4. fern hill says

    January 28, 2012 at 5:27 pm

    Sorry about that double post. I thought I caught change from ‘necessary’ to ‘necessarily’ before it went through.

    Reply
  5. Dan says

    January 30, 2012 at 1:18 pm

    Since fern has no scientific credentials, I assume she is using the term “real scientist” to mean someone who agrees with her ideology, and also happens to do science.

    Reply
  6. fern hill says

    January 30, 2012 at 2:07 pm

    Hm, my bad, I thought people would know who P.Z.Myers is.

    How about a whole bunch of real scientists arguing in the pages of the same journal, trashing her methodology, her logic and her bias.

    http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/199/3/180.short

    Only two ‘scientists’ defend her. Interestingly, one is a co-author of hers, the other is published by the de Veber Institute, a ‘prolife’ fake science org.

    http://www.deveber.org/what-we-do

    Seriously, you people want to debate, you need to stop supporting B.A.D. (biased, agenda-driven) science. There is no abortion-breast cancer link; there is no abortion-insanity link; there is no abortion-infertility link. And to keep claiming that there are just means you will be dismissed by thinking people.

    Do you seriously believe, as Coleman states, that fully 10% of ALL mental illness is directly linked to abortion? Really?

    Why can’t you make your arguments without relying on bogus ‘science’?

    Reply
  7. Dan says

    January 30, 2012 at 5:24 pm

    There you go using that term “real scientist” again. My comment was really about *your* credibility, fern. Unlike you, the people who run the de Veber institute have sound scientific credentials, and it is really quite pathetic how you attempt to dismiss those credentials just because their conclusions do not align with your blind ideology.

    Reply
  8. fern hill says

    January 30, 2012 at 6:39 pm

    Ok. Of all the anti-choice blogs I’ve visited, this one is the sanest. I’ve tried to engage, but if I’m going to get attacked for no reason (Did you even try to read the links, Dan?), I’m outta here. Good luck with that ‘no abortion by choice’ dealie, if you can’t/won’t engage in a civil manner.

    Reply
  9. Dan says

    January 30, 2012 at 8:48 pm

    You aren’t really trying to engage when you use a term like “real scientists” to refer to those with whom you agree on matters of ideology, while conveniently dismissing other scientists as “fake”.

    By the way, I am only an occasional commenter here, with no connection to the blog owners. Don’t blame them if I have offended you.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrssby feather

Notable Columns

  • A pro-woman budget wouldn't tell me how to live my life
  • Bad medicine
  • Birth control pills have side effects
  • Canada Summer Jobs debacle–Can Trudeau call abortion a right?
  • Celebrate these Jubilee jailbirds
  • China has laws against sex selection. But not Canada. Why?
  • Family love is not a contract
  • Freedom to discuss the “choice”
  • Gender quotas don't help business or women
  • Ghomeshi case a wake-up call
  • Hidden cost of choice
  • Life at the heart of the matter
  • Life issues and the media
  • Need for rational abortion debate
  • New face of the abortion debate
  • People vs. kidneys
  • PET-P press release
  • Pro-life work is making me sick
  • Prolife doesn't mean anti-woman
  • Settle down or "lean in"
  • Sex education is all about values
  • Thank you, Camille Paglia
  • The new face of feminism
  • Today’s law worth discussing
  • When debate is shut down in Canada’s highest places
  • Whither feminism?

Categories

  • All Posts
  • Assisted Suicide/Euthanasia
  • Charitable
  • Ethics
  • Featured Media
  • Featured Posts
  • Feminism
  • Free Expression
  • International
  • Motherhood
  • Other
  • Political
  • Pregnancy Care Centres
  • Reproductive Technologies

All Posts

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

Copyright © 2023 · News Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in