Reproductive Rights Blog

Things you should know - science

Not like you haven't heard it before (especially if you were hanging out with me this weekend) but vasectomies are totally safe.  And because this is my blog, I'll tell you my opinion on vasectomies: I'm all for them.  No one really wants me to go into it, but here's a quick rundown, from my perspective.  Heterosexual women have menstrual cycles, and all that brings.  They also bear the brunt of contraception, from what I gather.  Further, they are the ones carrying and birthing children, often breastfeeding them.  I don't feel it's an outrageous request for men involved with these women to consider vasectomies as fairly painless and totally reversible procedure.  The article talks about how men are squeamish about their boy parts, a concern for which I have little sympathy.  Somehow testicles became sacred, while women's fallopian tubes, uterii & etc became medically available.  It's a procedure that Jamaican men, for example, do not use.  You've heard it before.

Speaking of uteri, you may know my obsession with this from my previous posts, but the Picture of the Day from DCist a few days ago was a woman carrying three fetuses in her two uterii.  Awesome!

Gardasil, the HPV vaccine, hasn't been cleared for use in women 27 to 45.

Generic Yasmin available; Planned Parenthood going upscale, and that little Romanian girl finally got her abortion.

New way to freeze unfertilized eggs is better than the old way, in that eggs are more usable with this new method.  And scientists are saying they will be able to create sperm and eggs from stem cells in the next two decades.

And the animal story: coating birds' eggs with vegetable oil to keep them from hatching is a new method of population control in New York.

Choice USA Generation to Generation Celebration

Choice USA announced its awardees for the G2GC awards given out July 17.  There are awards for Challenging the System (Organizing, Policy and Elected Official), Setting the Message Straight, Leading by Example and Sharing the Legacy. 

The event is in the evening, at LeftBank, a bar on 18th Street in Washington, D.C. 

Get your tickets online for $50 ($35 if you're a student).

Women in Office

Last week, Donna Edwards was sworn into Congress as the 91st woman serving this session. 

At the same time, we found out that the House dropped a provision in a bill that would return the option of providing low cost or free birth control to pharmaceutical companies.  I think we've gone over this, but here's how it goes

• the 2005 Deficit Reduction Act provided that the government get the lowest cost of drugs, including nominal pricing
• pharmaceutical companies that manufactured birth control used to give places like university health centers and Planned Parenthood birth control at nominal prices (free or really inexpensive)
• these providers could then pass on the savings - college birth control prices are often free or a fraction of market price (using the term "market" very loosely as it applies to anything health-related)
• Eli Crowley (NY) and Barack Obama (IL) introduced a fix, which was then put in the War Supplemental bill moving through the House and Senate
• May 23, the provision was stripped, and many said that the President wouldn't sign the bill with the provision in tact

So what does Donna Edwards have to do with all this?  The United States is around 68th in international ranking for the proportion of women in office.  Women's issues, even if the Democrats purport to support them, just aren't a priority.  I don't know if it was Jill or Linda Hirschman who said it, but the Dems don't really support women's issues, since, well, where else are we to go?

This War Supplemental is a great example.  Are you kidding me that President Bush would veto the war funding bill with this small no-cost provision in it?  And then the Democrats back down?  Did they know that they're in charge?  If the Dems are in charge, and the Dems won't include this provision in a large bill that absolutely must go forward to fund the war effort, including the safety of the troops, why ever would the Dems back down on this?  Is President Bush really going to refuse to fund his own war, and pull the troops out?  Seems like a really good place to be, if you're a Democrat drafting this bill.

And so my point: I can't see good proof that folks in Congress care about the issues we do.  Which is why I'm involved in the Women's Campaign Forum.  Maybe you are involved in Emily's List or something similar for Republican women.  If you're not involved, why not?  Are you running for office?  Why not?  Women who run for office win at the same rates as men, but women are less inclined to run. 

If we want Congress to pay attention to our needs, we need to be in Congress; if we want the Board of Education to accurately represent our educational needs, including comprehensive sex ed, we need to be on the Board of Education; if we want the state to take action on abortion an health insurance laws, we need to be in state elected positions.

Movie on Genetics of Breast & Ovarian Cancer

Yesterday I was thrilled to go to a screening of In the Family, a documentary about being positive for the genetic mutation linked to breast and ovarian cancer (BRCA).  The movie was a compelling story about a young woman who found at age 27 that she had a deleterious mutation, meaning she was at increased risk for these cancers . Joanna has a more than 90% lifetime risk of getting breast cancer, and around a 50% risk of getting ovarian cancer.  Unfortunately, there's just no way to know when the shoe will drop.

Joanna spends the film dealing with her issues of being young and single, but also explores other people who may be genetically predisposed to breast and ovarian cancer.  So, for example, an unmarried young woman who wants to have children may wait to have an oophorectomy, but that doesn't necessarily mean that a woman who's had children wants to have the surgery.  It's intense, and there are horrible side effects.  But, as a woman whose breast cancer has metastasized to her brain says, at least it's life.

One of the things that was interesting was the discussion about choices - what to do, when, and when to disclose this information.  Should a teenager be tested?  What if you don't want to know?  What should you do?  Are you to blame if you don't take preventive measures?  Sharon Terry, from the Genetic Alliance, spoke about this issue as it relates to many other genetic issues, especially in terms of screening of embryos.  Why bother screening for Down's Syndrome if folks are going to continue the pregnancy (although I'm sure some preparation could be helpful).  Is it useful to know information, like genetic information, on which you cannot act? 

With respect to the BRCA mutations, some people do act.  In the UK, it's been approved that people can screen embryos with pre-implantation genetic diagnosis for the BRCA mutations that cause breast and ovarian cancer, or the onces that cause colon and other cancers.  Other people may screen embryos for other mutations or conditions, including deafness and sex.

Access to Birth Control

You probably saw yesterday's Post article on contraceptive-free drug stores.  This, in response to pharmacists who are fired for refusing to fill such prescriptions, create stores that don't put pharmacists or owners in any ethical jam.  Unless you think that not having access to birth control or the Morning After Pill is unethical. 

The fight over access to birth control has come a long way, and it's apparently not over.

First, there was the invention of the Pill, and the fact that it was a pill for women (where was the men's pill, many asked), and the nod to the Catholic Church in creating a 28 day cycle, not to mention the dangers of taking the Pill.  Then, there was a question of legal access for unmarried women.  More recently, we've seen problems with insurance coverage for the Pill, as well as a recent unintended price increase for contraception.

And, frankly, there are still some health concerns re: contraceptives.  For example, the Ortho Evra patch, sold by J&J, has a higher risk of clots than previously believed.  Now, I'm not saying the Patch is necessarily dangerous, but it's more dangerous than we thought.  And part of that is because J&J, according to litigants, hid information about the risk of the Patch.  Now, it's using that preemption argument I mentioned last week to defend itself from lawsuits.

There are an increasing number of reports on a Pill for men, and always new thoughts on contraceptives for women, but they all seem like incremental changes to me.

News you should know

 It's going to take me a long time to catch up, but here's some cool stuff I've been saving:

Really, the first good pictures and view of ovulation.

Also, you know how I've been talking about HPV and other cancers, besides cervical, for like, a billion years now?  My sister sent me an e-mail today saying that my theory re: anal cancer might be right. (I told her that, um, it's not a theory, it's just not common knowledge)  She sent me an article from an Australian paper on oral cancer and HPV.  Again, it's not news, but whatever.  The Canadian government is now thinking about vaccinating men against HPV too. 

Speaking of HPV, y'all know that I have ties to Qiagen, which makes the only HPV test on the market in the US.  Anyway, Qiagen is appealing a patent loss which would allow another company to make an HPV test.

Should we talk more about patents?  Barr won a patent suit against Bayer for Yasmin.  Since this happened months ago, you probably already have a generic pack of Yasmin in your hands if you want one.  Bayer stock fell after the news. 

I'm really not going to talk about FDA preemption here, but I do want to let you all know what's going on in the courts.  Here's the quick and dirty version of the recent Supreme Court case: This guy had a balloon angioplasty, and depending upon which case you read, his doctor either did or did not inflate the balloon properly.  In any case, the thing blew up in his heart, almost killing him (but didn't).  He sued the manufacturer of the balloon catheter, and in February the Supreme Court ruled that federal FDA law didn't allow for state tort suits, which is how you sue someone when crap like this happens.  There is a Supreme Court case coming up testing the same law, but with respect to drugs, not devices.  The reason I'm telling you this is that it's J&J's defense for suits regarding Ortho-Evra, the patch.  Plus, it's one of the things I've been geeking out about lately.

Have you or anyone you know had a hard time paying for an abortion?  A clinic in Iowa wants to know.

We don't have a lot of deaths from abortion anymore, thanks, largely, due to legal abortions and antibiotics.  Occasionally, we do, and it's just tragic.  Of course, there's more here than just a teenager dies of abortion.  She had a legal abortion and bled to death waiting for a transfusion, and, it sounds like it was also an incomplete abortion.  Plus, she didn't want to have an abortion, but her boyfriend (and maybe his family) wanted her to. 

Okay, I'm going to have to sort through a whole lot of stuff, and figure out how to use this upgraded software. 

Love,
C

I'm Back

I took a few weeks off.  Months, maybe.  It's been busy over here, what with the election, abortion fundraisers, and, you know, my day job.  So anyway, I'm back.

Yesterday I was out with a friend for lunch - both of us have spent time at NARAL, and we are both so pissed about the NARAL endorsement of Barack Obama.  Not because he's particularly BAD on choice, but because it was a shitty thing to do to Hilary Clinton, who has been great on choice.  As faithful readers know, I have seen them both speak on choice at a Planned Parenthood event, and she seemed to know everything there is to know.  Also, if I was at NARAL, I would have wanted some sort of value for my endorsement.  Like a mutual admiration society.  I may have missed it, but I haven't heard Mr. Obama talk about how much he admires NARAL, and how he's going to use NARAL as a resource in the future. 

I liked Emily's List's response.  And I loved Ilana Goldman's letter to Mrs. Clinton when she suspended her campaign (which means she quit, right?)

Washington, DC Opportunity

I'm going to leave this at the top for a few days...

In an effort to expand outreach to potential pro-choice women political leaders nationwide, the Women’s Campaign Forum and the new regional co-chairs are looking to recruit 8-10 creative and energetic young women to be part of the newly established Washington DC Junior Advisory Board. This board will be  responsible for developing and implementing ways to facilitate the goals of the Women’s Campaign Forum--to recruit phenomenal pro-choice women to political leadership positions nationwide!

We are looking for board members who are collaborative and creative, and have a wide network of contacts.  Candidates must have an active interest in promoting the representation of women in government.  Political and campaign or fundraising experience is a plus.

If you or someone you know is interested in becoming a member of the DC Junior Advisory Board, please send your resume and a statement of interest to womenscampaignfund at gmail dot com.  We will be holding a meeting in the next several weeks to provide additional details on board member duties.

About: Women's Campaign Forum is a non-partisan pro-choice, national membership organization dedicated to ensuring women become leaders in public life. We want to help build a nation where pro-choice women have and use power equal to their population.  For more information see http://www.wcfonline.org

Eli Stone - TV takes on ab-only education

Did y'all catch last night's Eli Stone (3/27)?   So the back story is that the main character is an attorney with a brain aneurysm that's basically inoperable, and he's been having vision of things, including George Michael.  So Eli is a bit incredulous when George Michael actually shows up, in the flesh, wanting to hire Eli Stone. 

The story this week is that a high school senior, I think, is unhappy with the fact that her school has an abstinence only education program because it gives students inaccurate information.  The program includes a school assembly (with, according to the girl, an expert on not doing it).  She's talked to principal about it before, but it's the only kind of sex-ed that is federally funded, so the principal can either have no sex-ed, or ab-only.  In protest she sneaks into the school's office and plays "I Want Your Sex" over the loudspeaker, for which she is expelled.

George Michael hires Eli Stone to get her reinstated in school, and there's some sort of hearing and it's all fun and first amendment rights and protected speech, and how student speech is limited when it interferes with the learning process and then the girl says something like "that assumes that there's any learning going on" which was amazing.  (I don't have the right media player, and I'm not installing it at work, so please correct me if I'm wrong).  She says that she was personally affected by the ab-only education because her lab partner got pregnant and then her friend "got gonorrhea...in her mouth."

Then George Michael gives a little speech on how great America is but this ab-only thing is b.s. and then he gives a concert to raise money for a real sex-ed program in that school.  Oh, and the school settles and lets her back in and stops taking money for the ab-only program. 

IVF, Multiple Births and Preemies

Even though we don't really know what causes miscarriage or how to avoid it, we are learning more and more about reproduction, pregnancy and childbirth all the time.  For example, that whole thing about women's spines being different than men's, necessary for carrying a fetus.

We've also been able to use science to go around some natural barriers (or use science to create barriers!) regarding pregnancy.  IVF is a great example of that - egg and sperm are fertilized outside of the body, and embryos are implanted in a woman's uterus.  What normally happens is that a few embryos are introduced, in the hopes that at least one will take.  This can be used if there's a problem with fertilization due to either issues with the woman or man's body.  We're seeing an increase in multiple births because of IVF and other fertility treatments.

There are also many who will do pre-implantation genetic diagnosis on the resultant embryos to screen for genetic diseases.  If the diseases are mitochondrial, it appears there is a new way to do IVF that involves two women's DNA, and one man's.  Mitochondrial DNA is matrilineal, like the Y-chromosome is patrilineal: one can trace a man's genetic line through his Y-chromosome, and woman's through her mitochondrial DNA.

So after IVF, any embryos not used are frozen or thrown out (or adopted, but that's another story) rather than being used for research.  At least that's the case for federally funded research in the U.S.  With private funds, and in other countries, embryos may not only be researched, but hybrids are developed.  Legislators in the U.K. are currently considering allowing human-animal hybrid embryos to be...built?  (There are other good points in the article - scroll down to the bullets in the middle.) 

Anyway, yesterday the news was full of stories about how prematurely born babies have health problems throughout childhood, and may also have preemies themselves.  What the articles mostly focus on is the risk of death throughout childhood - higher for males than females - but not any other particular issues.  Do these children, and adults, have more lung problems?  Lower cognitive function?  Lag in fine motor skill development?   You know what else I'd be really curious to know - what's the overall lifetime earnings of these folks?  I'm seeing small references to educational problems, so I'm curious about what that toll is, quantifiably.

Multiple births are not only dangerous for the woman, but can also be very dangerous for the babies.

Selective reduction (or selective abortion) is one way to lessen the number of developing fetuses.  This, of course, raises some people's ire, and Italy has tried to address the issue through legislation.New ways to perform IVF that don't result in multiples can be incredibly helpful. 

IVF also makes for some wacky developing law - when is a person pregnant?  Who's a dad?  Who's a mom?  Can a person be forced to implant an embryo or be estopped from such action?  One women in the E.U. is arguing that she was protected by pregnancy laws when her embryos were developing in the clinic, but were not implanted. 

Infertility, dangerous pregnancies, sick children, moral and legal ambiguity - fun times.