Women as guinea pigs

I’ve talked to countless women who believe abortion has no risks whatsoever. And yes, the charge is very real that somehow when I come up with valid, peer-reviewed studies showing otherwise it’s a pro-life conspiracy. Preterm birth the result of a prior abortion is very real. Read about it here.

__________________________

Andrea adds: I addressed this issue before here. And I will repeat: Information is not a scare tactic. It is information, pure and simple, that women are not getting. I wonder if those working in clinics even know. They should of course, and I hold them fully and completely accountable for lying to women through their silence. Save for really seeking this information out, it is almost impossible to get. And once one finds it, the accusations of it being false or used to “trick” women into not getting an abortion begin.  

__________________________

Tanya adds emphasis: The above article states:

The Nuremberg Code was adopted in 1964. The code insists on animal studies before exposing human beings to any procedure. All surgical procedures in Canada have been tested on animals. Except one. There are no published animal studies on vacuum aspiration abortion.

I feel like this is something we should be yelling from rooftops. How can the issue of informed consent even be addressed when all the information has yet to be collected? Vacuum aspiration abortion is literally and indisputably inhumane according to Canadian standards of medicine. It’s anti-woman!

__________________________

Patricia says: It’s interesting to note which community provides a disproportionately high number of these “guinea pigs”, at least in the US. Kay writes: “Black American women, although only 12% of the American population, undergo 35.2% of all abortions.” Again, shouldn’t feminists be screaming from the rooftops (to quote Tanya) about this misuse (abuse) of a vulnerable population?

by