Good news for everyone who's ever been too lazy to make it to the pharmacy. Yesterday, the FDA unanimously endorsed ellaOne - a new contraceptive pill that helps prevent pregnancy for up to five days after unprotected sex, condom breakage, or other birth control fails. Previously - the best option was Plan B, which provides about three days - not too shabby, but we're still not going to argue with giving people a little more breathing room in the holy-shit-we-may-have-just-made-a-baby department.
Of course, there are some naysayers - primarily wacky pro-life groups that believe ellaOne is an abortion pill disguised as something preventative. In response, Jezebel quotes
"Since it takes five to seven days for the fertilized egg to implant itself in the uterus and begin to grow, any actions taken before that time are preventing pregnancy. Unlike [some pro-lifers], who believes that the moment the egg is fertilized, pregnancy has begun, [Lauren Streicher from the Northwestern Medical School] argues that pregnancy is not simply the meeting of sperm and egg, but the meeting of sperm, egg, and uterus."
In the end though, we tend to think the whole "when exactly does fertilization occur" is kind of like having anal sex in high school to "maintain your purity." In other words, stupid. The point is if you're only pregnant because the condom broke, there's no harm in giving you a few more days to figure it out.
Comments ( 8 )
That is so awesome! ...Not that I've ever needed Plan B. But, just in case. I wonder if 17-year-olds have access to this pill as well?
They certainly should.
As someone who got pregnant even though I took Plan B, I would just like to point out that this pill is not 100% effective as well. It just gives you a few more days to have a chance to not get pregnant but doesn't guarantee that you won't get pregnant.
Regardless of your political views, that last paragraph has a ton of flaws in it.
There's too much name calling in a lot of articles on Scanner, especially the ones that involve abortion and gay rights. When someone calls someone else even a mildly derogatory term in an argument, it dehumanizes the other person and makes it possible to ignore their motives and their rationality. A great example of this is calling illegal immigrants "illegals." It takes away their humanity and sums them up into the nice, neat category of "wrong." Obviously, calling pro-lifers "wacky" is way less extreme, but it's the same principal. Scanners, and pretty much anyone who wants to comment on politics, should generally be respectful when disagreeing with an ideology.
(I don't think this respect need carry over with public officials, though. Some good old fashioned satire and ridicule keeps them honest.)
I tend to agree with Me. Those sorts of ad hominem characterizations weaken your own argument, because it makes it seem like a personal grudge rather than a reasoned disagreement.
This article is a FAIL in so many ways. The FDA panel endorsed the drug, not approved it.
confirmation depends world
Add a Comment