Solely 41% of Ladies Suppose the Abortion Tablet is Protected

“KFF,” formerly “known as The Kaiser Family Foundation or The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation,” has a richly undeserved reputation as an “independent source for health policy research, polling, and news.” In truth, it toes the pro-abortion line with both feet and provides cover for even the most transparently biased “studies.”

Having said that, I could not believe the results I found in “KFF Health Tracking Poll: Knowledge and Views of Medication Abortion” that appeared last Friday.

• While the public is much more likely to say abortion pills are safe (42%) when taken as directed than unsafe (18%), four in ten say they are not sure about mifepristone’s safety. Results are similar among women of reproductive age (18 to 49), with about four in ten (41%) viewing the pills as safe, one in five (21%) saying they are unsafe, and 37% saying they are not sure.

Later, we get an historical perspective:

Among women of reproductive age, the share viewing the pills as safe decreased from 59% to 41%, while larger shares now view the pills as unsafe (from 12% in 2023 to 21% now) or say they are not sure if abortion pills are safe (from 29% to 37% now).

That’s an 18-point decrease (59% to 41%) in just two years. Given KFF’s investment in the “safety” of medication abortion (they mean primarily Mifepristone), you knew the remainder of the article would be excusing away the finding. And, of course, that’s what Audrey Kearney, Ashley Kirzinger, Alex Montero, Mardet Mulugeta, and Liz Hamel precede to do.

Follow LifeNews on the MeWe social media network for the latest pro-life news free from Facebook’s censorship!

But first, a word from NRLC’s expert on chemical abortions, Dr. Randall K. O’Bannon, Director of Education & Research.

“The abortion industry and its institutional and media allies are flummoxed that their propaganda campaign promoting the safety and efficacy of Mifepristone has been upended by the truth,” Dr. O’Bannon told NRL News Today. “Despite their best, concerted efforts, word has leaked out and gotten around that these chemical abortions are painful, bloody, and dangerous.  And no matter how they spin them, they’re still abortions; they still take the lives of innocent unborn children and put the lives of their mothers at risk.”

He concluded, “Even the most persistent PR ultimately can’t mask that reality.”

Just how do the five researchers do to mitigate the disastrous (from their perspective) findings?

First, they correctly note that the public at large does not know the rising percentage (over 60%) of abortions that employ chemical abortifacients. As you proceed, you’re supposed to understand if the public did understand, their rising resistance to mifepristone would recede. That doesn’t follow at all.

“The public is also largely unaware of the medication’s long-established safety record” they write. Well, perhaps that’s because the medical establishment dutifully trumpets mifepristone’s “long-established safety record” and the effect of the media blackout of any negative news about mifepristone’s many complications.

However, a recent study from Ethics and Public Policy Center (EPPC) found that “10.93% of the 865,727 women prescribed chemical abortions using the drug mifepristone suffered a serious adverse event like sepsis or hemorrhaging within 45 days after taking the drug,” according to Ashley Sadler. “That number is significantly higher than the rate currently reported on the drug’s label.”

Studies from Europe show even more complications. Back to the KFF survey.

One other survey question near the end. Respondents were asked would they support or oppose laws that would “make it a crime for health care providers to mail abortion pills to patients in states where abortion is banned.”

This is a classic pro-abortion polling technique: add to the question “make it a crime” and “where abortion is banned.” Neither makes the respondent aware that states who use so-called “shield laws” are in conflict with the historic principle that states must honor each other’s laws and judicial proceedings under the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the Constitution. And, of course, there is no mention of why you “ban abortion”: to protect unborn children.

Important news from “KFF’s signature survey project that provides up-to-date data on the public’s health care views.”

LifeNews.com Note: Dave Andrusko is the editor of National Right to Life News and an author and editor of several books on abortion topics. He frequently writes Today’s News and Views — an online opinion column on pro-life issues.