Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Threat to Women's Health

Expand Messages
  • Bell, Elizabeth
    Hello Ujeni-ers, I have not personally investigated the assertions below, but it has me worried enough to do so. Suggestions for action are at the end of the
    Message 1 of 3 , Feb 10 7:31 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Hello Ujeni-ers,

      I have not personally investigated the assertions below, but it has me
      worried enough to do so.

      Suggestions for action are at the end of the e-mail.

      Liz


      ----------------------


      PRESIDENTIAL APPOINTMENT

      Whether you're Right or Left on the issue of women's reproductive

      rights, please consider the following...



      President Bush has announced his plan to select Dr. W. David Hager to

      head up the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Reproductive Health

      Drugs Advisory Committee. The committee has not met for more than two

      years, during which time its charter has lapsed. As a result, the

      Bush Administration is tasked with filling all eleven positions with

      new members. This position does not require Congressional approval.



      The FDA's Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee makes crucial

      decisions on matters relating to drugs used in the practice of

      obstetrics, gynecology and related specialties, including hormone

      therapy, contraception, treatment for infertility, and medical

      alternatives to surgical procedures for sterilization and pregnancy

      termination.





      Dr. Hager's views of reproductive health care are far outside the

      mainstream of setback for reproductive technology. Dr. Hager is a

      practicing OB/GYN who describes himself as "pro-life" and refuses to

      prescribe contraceptives to unmarried women. Hager is the author of

      "As Jesus Cared for Women: Restoring Women Then and Now."

      The book blends biblical accounts of Christ healing women with case

      studies from Hager's practice. In the book Dr. Hager wrote with his

      wife, entitled "Stress and the Woman's Body," he suggests that women

      who suffer from premenstrual syndrome should seek help from reading

      the bible and praying. As an editor and contributing author of "The

      reproduction Revolution: A Christian Appraisal of Sexuality,

      reproductive Technologies and the Family," Dr. Hager appears to have

      endorsed the medically inaccurate assertion that the common birth

      control pill is an abortifacient.





      Hagar's mission is religiously motivated. He has an ardent interest

      in revoking approval for mifepristone (formerly known as RU-486) as a

      safe and early form of medical abortion.



      Hagar recently assisted the Christian Medical Association in a

      "citizen's petition" which calls upon the FDA to revoke its approval

      of mifepristone in the name of women's health.Hager's desire to

      overturn mifepristone's approval on religious grounds rather than

      scientific merit would halt the development of mifepristone as a

      treatment for numerous medical conditions disproportionately

      affecting women, including breast cancer, uterine cancer, uterine

      fibroid tumors, psychotic depression, bipolar depression and

      Cushing's syndrome.



      Women rely on the FDA to ensure their access to safe and effective

      drugs for reproductive health care including products that prevent

      pregnancy.



      For some women, such as those with certain types of diabetes and



      those undergoing treatment for cancer pregnancy can be a

      life-threatening condition. We are concerned that Dr. Hager's strong

      religious beliefs may color his assessment of technologies that are

      necessary to protect women's lives or to preserve and promote women's

      health.



      Hager's track record of using religious beliefs to guide his medical

      decision-making makes him a dangerous and inappropriate candidate to

      serve as chair of this committee. Critical drug public policy and

      research must not be held hostage by antiabortion politics.



      Members of this important panel should be appointed on the basis of

      science and medicine, rather than politics and religion. American

      women deserve no less.



      WHAT CAN YOU DO?



      1. SEND THIS TO EVERY PERSON WHO IS CONCERNED ABOUT WOMEN'S
      RIGHTS.



      2. OPPOSE THE PLACEMENT OF THIS MAN BY CONTACTING THE WHITE
      HOUSE AND

      TELL THEM HE IS TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE ON ANY LEVEL.





      Please email President Bush at president@...
      <mailto:president@...>

      or call the White House at (202) 456-1111 or (202) 456-1414 and say

      "I oppose the appointment of Dr. Hager to the FDA Reproductive
      Health

      Drugs Advisory Committee.

      Mixing religion and medicine is unacceptable. Using the FDA to

      promote a political agenda is inappropriate and seriously

      threatens women's health."



      Please take the time to take some action on this. It is very

      important..
    • Vyrle Owens
      10 February 2003 Dear Elizabeth, Thanks for passing this along. Seems like we can trust our President and his administration and advisors to do only one
      Message 2 of 3 , Feb 10 8:20 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        10 February 2003

        Dear Elizabeth,

        Thanks for passing this along. Seems like we can trust our President
        and his administration and advisors to do only one thing: That is to get
        someone upset about something.

        His national security advisor is a woman. So why should the head of the
        Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory
        Committee be a man?

        In any case, the US constitution achieved a major step forward in
        civilization when it mandated the separation of church (religion) and
        state. Certainly each individual, citizen or government officer, can
        have a religion and/or religious point of view. Using a government
        position to promote that point of view seems to me to be
        unconstitutional and I believe, illegal. Living by that point of view
        is a first amendment right. Forcing others to live by your point of
        view is unconscionable.

        Let him write his book and practice his beliefs in the company of
        willing partners, patients, and fellow believers. Let him not be in the
        position to restrict the rights and freedoms of others, or the open and
        clear examination of either religious or scientific study regarding
        women, health, medicine, or any other field of human endeavor.

        Enjoy the day,

        Vyrle

        -----Original Message-----
        From: Bell, Elizabeth [mailto:eib6@...]
        Sent: Monday, 10 February, 2003 07:31
        To: Ujeni (ujeni@egroups.com)
        Subject: [ujeni] Threat to Women's Health

        Hello Ujeni-ers,

        I have not personally investigated the assertions below, but it has me
        worried enough to do so.

        Suggestions for action are at the end of the e-mail.

        Liz


        ----------------------


        PRESIDENTIAL APPOINTMENT

        Whether you're Right or Left on the issue of women's reproductive

        rights, please consider the following...



        President Bush has announced his plan to select Dr. W. David Hager to

        head up the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Reproductive Health

        Drugs Advisory Committee. The committee has not met for more than two

        years, during which time its charter has lapsed. As a result, the

        Bush Administration is tasked with filling all eleven positions with

        new members. This position does not require Congressional approval.



        The FDA's Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee makes crucial

        decisions on matters relating to drugs used in the practice of

        obstetrics, gynecology and related specialties, including hormone

        therapy, contraception, treatment for infertility, and medical

        alternatives to surgical procedures for sterilization and pregnancy

        termination.





        Dr. Hager's views of reproductive health care are far outside the

        mainstream of setback for reproductive technology. Dr. Hager is a

        practicing OB/GYN who describes himself as "pro-life" and refuses to

        prescribe contraceptives to unmarried women. Hager is the author of

        "As Jesus Cared for Women: Restoring Women Then and Now."

        The book blends biblical accounts of Christ healing women with case

        studies from Hager's practice. In the book Dr. Hager wrote with his

        wife, entitled "Stress and the Woman's Body," he suggests that women

        who suffer from premenstrual syndrome should seek help from reading

        the bible and praying. As an editor and contributing author of "The

        reproduction Revolution: A Christian Appraisal of Sexuality,

        reproductive Technologies and the Family," Dr. Hager appears to have

        endorsed the medically inaccurate assertion that the common birth

        control pill is an abortifacient.





        Hagar's mission is religiously motivated. He has an ardent interest

        in revoking approval for mifepristone (formerly known as RU-486) as a

        safe and early form of medical abortion.



        Hagar recently assisted the Christian Medical Association in a

        "citizen's petition" which calls upon the FDA to revoke its approval

        of mifepristone in the name of women's health.Hager's desire to

        overturn mifepristone's approval on religious grounds rather than

        scientific merit would halt the development of mifepristone as a

        treatment for numerous medical conditions disproportionately

        affecting women, including breast cancer, uterine cancer, uterine

        fibroid tumors, psychotic depression, bipolar depression and

        Cushing's syndrome.



        Women rely on the FDA to ensure their access to safe and effective

        drugs for reproductive health care including products that prevent

        pregnancy.



        For some women, such as those with certain types of diabetes and



        those undergoing treatment for cancer pregnancy can be a

        life-threatening condition. We are concerned that Dr. Hager's strong

        religious beliefs may color his assessment of technologies that are

        necessary to protect women's lives or to preserve and promote women's

        health.



        Hager's track record of using religious beliefs to guide his medical

        decision-making makes him a dangerous and inappropriate candidate to

        serve as chair of this committee. Critical drug public policy and

        research must not be held hostage by antiabortion politics.



        Members of this important panel should be appointed on the basis of

        science and medicine, rather than politics and religion. American

        women deserve no less.



        WHAT CAN YOU DO?



        1. SEND THIS TO EVERY PERSON WHO IS CONCERNED ABOUT WOMEN'S
        RIGHTS.



        2. OPPOSE THE PLACEMENT OF THIS MAN BY CONTACTING THE WHITE
        HOUSE AND

        TELL THEM HE IS TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE ON ANY LEVEL.





        Please email President Bush at president@...
        <mailto:president@...>

        or call the White House at (202) 456-1111 or (202) 456-1414 and say

        "I oppose the appointment of Dr. Hager to the FDA Reproductive
        Health

        Drugs Advisory Committee.

        Mixing religion and medicine is unacceptable. Using the FDA to

        promote a political agenda is inappropriate and seriously

        threatens women's health."



        Please take the time to take some action on this. It is very

        important..




        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
        http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      • sgeibel@netscape.net
        This is just the latest salvo by the administration and the religous right in the assault on reproductive health rights. To make a long story short, the
        Message 3 of 3 , Feb 10 10:17 PM
        • 0 Attachment
          This is just the latest salvo by the administration and the religous right in the assault on reproductive health rights. To make a long story short, the political climate on this is bad and getting worse. This is also greatly affecting international health and HIV programs as well, as the administration has been convinced that abstinence works, therefore, condoms encourage sex and should not be promoted. As Liz and others can probably attest; the CDC, NIH, USAID and others are being forced to 'tow the line' on this. Article below is a bit biased, but right now we need all we can get:


          The Free Lance-Star, Fredericksburg, VA
          Religious right should put aside theology to fight AIDS pandemic

          Washington's HIV/AIDS policies should not be determined by theology.

          THERE'S ALWAYS plenty going on at the Nairobi Youth Center in Mathare, a slum area on the edge of Kenya's capital city. On a recent day when I paid a visit, boys were gathered around a pool table and huddled in the television room watching a British soccer match, while girls, spending their time more productively, sat at sewing machines honing their seamstress skills.
          Geoffrey Maina's mission is to reach out to these young people. The fresh-faced 22-year-old volunteers 40 hours a week teaching Nairobi youth how to avoid contracting HIV, which has infected about one in eight Kenyan adults nationwide and at least one in five in Nairobi.
          A big part of his message, Maina told me, is abstinence--a claim borne out by the center's literature and posters. However, as he was leading me on a tour of the facility, he took a moment to stop and gesture toward a condom dispenser on a wall. "We have this for those who say they can't really abstain," he said.
          Most religious and social conservatives would have been appalled at this point in the tour. In Kenya, after all, Catholic church leaders have organized rallies where they burn condoms.
          Back in the United States, the religious right's attacks on condom use take different forms. Lately, they have included distorting the work of groups that promote condom distribution as one of the ways to combat HIV/AIDS. In a letter sent to the head of the U.S. Agency for International Development in October, Rep. Jo Ann Davis, R-1st District, and nine other members of Congress--including the influential Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J.--protested an allocation of funds to a reproductive-health organization called the Population Council. The conservative lawmakers claimed the group's strategy for fighting HIV/AIDS "focuses only on condom promotion."
          Dr. Sam Kalibala, a medical associate for the Population Council, said Davis and the others are spreading misinformation. "They say if you have the word condom anywhere in your program, you don't promote abstinence," he said.
          Kalibala and other reproductive-health professionals I spoke with in Kenya insisted that they teach the "ABCs" of HIV/AIDS prevention: abstinence, being faithful, and condom use. "We talk about abstinence," Kalibala said of his organization, which specializes in research on reproductive-health issues. "We talk about reduction of partners. And we promote use of condoms."
          But some religious and social conservatives don't want to hear about the ABCs of prevention. Take Dr. Stephen Karanja, an obstetrician/gynecologist who runs a family-owned, Catholic-based clinic in Nairobi. Condom distribution "is not only bad policy, it is bad science, very bad science indeed," said Karanja, who was invited to Washington a few years ago by the Front Royal-based group Population Research International to speak out against the reproductive-health policies of the Clinton administration.
          "We have a brush-fire type of scenario here because our people are using condoms because our doctors say it's all right," he told me in an interview in his office at St. Michael's Medical Care. Public-health experts, he continued, "have refused to see the obvious thing: that you give these gadgets to these people, and more and more of them are going to say, 'Now I'm protected.' In fact, they even call it 'protected sex.' They use that term and you want to fall down."
          ABCs of prevention in UgandaAbstinence supporters in the United States point to Uganda as an example of how a strong abstinence message can help reduce HIV-infection rates. Claude Allen, the Bush administration's point man for promoting abstinence education, said in a recent radio interview that Uganda is "the only country in Africa that has had a positive increase in its life expectancy, and that's because they focused on young people remaining abstinent until they were married."
          USAID confirms that HIV prevalence has dropped significantly in Uganda, especially among youth. It's reasonable to assume that abstinence education has played a big role in that decline. However, abstinence is not the only element involved. A fact sheet on the USAID Web site credits the ABC approach--that is, abstinence, fidelity, and condom use--with altering "community norms and rules of behavior."
          Dr. Josiah A. Onyango, senior program officer for service delivery for the Family Planning Association of Kenya, endorses the ABC approach. He believes the abstinence-only tack won't work for all youth. "Those who are able to abstain, let them do so. But young people are not homogeneous," he said.
          Kalibala stresses that public-health workers must be concerned about "the implications of people who fail to do what is right, and what implications they have for the rest of the public."
          "Religious leaders don't do surveys to find out how many people are sinning," he said. But the Population Council does conduct research, and it reveals "a percentage of people who are not complying" with the abstinence message. "That percentage of people concerns us," he said, "because when we put that percentage in our scientific models, we find that that percentage can potentially cause an exponential epidemic."
          A step in the right directionThe Bush administration has displayed ambivalence on the question of condom use. Critics of the administration point to its decision to amend a condoms fact sheet on the Centers for Disease Control Web site; the revised information emphasizes that condoms may not work.
          The administration's squeam-ishness about condoms was also evidenced at a population conference in Bangkok in December. The U.S. delegation, which included former Vatican diplomat John Klink, demanded a rewrite of a passage in an international family-planning agreement because it contained the phrase "consistent condom use." The U.S. contingent also extolled the virtues of "natural" family-planning methods, which eschew all forms of contraception.
          On the other hand, the president's recently unveiled proposal to spend $15 billion over the next five years to combat AIDS in Africa and the Caribbean includes additional money for condoms.
          That's a hopeful--and much-needed--step in the right direction. According to the group Population Action International, a minimum of 8 billion condoms would have been needed in 2000 to significantly reduce HIV-infection rates in the developing world and Eastern Europe. Donors supplied just 950 million condoms that year, less than one-eighth of the number needed.
          While it is true that condoms are not very effective in preventing some sexually transmitted diseases (as Davis once rightfully pointed out in a congressional hearing on AIDS), those who are not theologically driven acknowledge that condom use helps stem the spread of HIV/AIDS among high-risk populations.
          Kalibala and others I spoke with in Kenya believe public-health workers and faith-based organizations can work together to battle HIV/AIDS.
          "The virus is wiser than us," Kalibala said, "but we're trying to get a handle on it. Everybody should use their tools." The faith-based folks, he said, have the tool of what is right and what is wrong, which "can be synergistic with the tool of damage control."
          The religious right would do well to put aside theology and listen to the doctor.

          RICK MERCIER is Viewpoints editor for The Free Lance-Star. His visit to Kenya was made possible by a World Affairs Journalism Fellowship awarded by the International Center for Journalists and the World Affairs Council. The fellowship is funded by the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation.
          Date published: 2/9/2003

          __________________________________________________________________
          The NEW Netscape 7.0 browser is now available. Upgrade now! http://channels.netscape.com/ns/browsers/download.jsp

          Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.