Attorneys general of 23 states have filed two amicus briefs in support of a lawsuit seeking the withdrawal of FDA approval of the drugs mifepristone (RU-486) and misoprostol for use in chemical abortions. Unfortunately, Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul is not one of them. Success in this suit could make chemical abortion illegal even in states where abortion access remains legal.

Our friends at Alliance Defending Freedom filed the original suit in November 2022 and represent over 30,000 medical professionals from four national medical associations, and several more independent doctors. ADF argues that because the FDA has never tested the drug on the pediatric population, there is no science backing its safety for use in young women.

Dr. Christina Francis, the CEO-Elect of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists and a party in the suit, stated in an interview that Mifepristone is not only untested, but dangerous. She reports that 1 in 5 women have serious complications following chemical abortions including hemorrhage, life-threatening infection and fertility issues.

The AGs Arguments Against Mifepristone

In their brief, the attorneys general argue in part that the FDA’s approval of mifepristone for abortion has two legal flaws. The first is that it defies the agency’s own regulations since the section the FDA first approved the drug under, Subpart H, “does not permit the agency to greenlight elective abortions on a wide scale.”

The second is that allowing abortion medication to be sent via the mail is in direct contrast to a federal law that prohibits “using the mail to send or receive abortion-inducing drugs such as mifepristone.” They go on to state, “The FDA and the Administration as a whole have no intention to respect the Constitution, the Supreme Court, or the democratic process when it comes to abortion.”

The lawsuit is asking the court to revoke the FDA’s approval of mifepristone completely. If this does not happen, they are asking that laws and regulations be followed at all stages in regard to reviewing, approving, prescribing, dispensing, and administering chemical abortion drugs. If the judge doesn’t rule against mifepristone entirely, the lawsuit asks that current laws and regulations be followed in regard to these chemicals.

Where The Case Stands

The State of Missouri filed its own brief on Friday, February 10th, while Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch filed a brief on behalf of her state as well as Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Montana, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, and Wyoming.

The U.S. Justice Department argued in its court filing this lawsuit “is extraordinary and unprecedented.” The United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas will hear the case first.  After this, an appeal would likely go to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, and if a ruling in that court were to be appealed, it could go to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Here in Illinois

Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul has made it clear that his office will not support efforts to restrict abortion or abortion-inducing drugs in our state.

Based on data from 2020 when there were 46,243 abortions reported in the state, and according to the Illinois Right to Life, “1,180 abortions were performed on minors and 88 were performed on girls younger than 15 years-old.”

Planned Parenthood’s own Guttmacher Institute released a report admitting that chemical abortions accounted for the majority of all abortions in the U.S.. According to this report, in 2020, abortion pills accounted for 54 percent of all U.S. abortions, an increase from 44 percent in 2019.

The Charlotte Lozier Institute reports that the percentage of chemical abortions in Illinois as of 2020 was 19.2 percent and trending higher. If this lawsuit results in the revocation of the approval of mifepristone, many lives will be saved. (20 percent of 46k abortions is 9,200.)

As of early January 2023, Danco Laboratories, the U.S. manufacturer of the abortion pill, announced that the FDA has made changes to its guidelines surrounding the abortion pill. These changes allow pharmacies, from large chains like CVS or Walgreens to small, locally owned businesses, to dispense the pill to anyone with a prescription.

Many women choose the abortion pill (also known as a chemical abortion) because they assume it’s safer and more natural. However, complications occur during chemical abortion four times more frequently than during surgical abortion. According to Dr. Christina Francis, “approximately one in five women will experience a significant complication,” which often must be treated by emergency surgery.

The abortion pill is actually a two-pill regimen made up of different drugs:  Mifepristone, also known as Mifeprex or RU-486, and Misoprostol. When a woman chooses to abort her pre-born baby through a chemical abortion, she first takes Mifeprex. This blocks progesterone, starving the pre-born baby of the nutrients needed to continue developing. One to two days later, she takes Misoprostol, which causes her to deliver her now-dead baby. This part frequently happens in the woman’s own home, so she is responsible for disposing of her pre-born baby’s body, often by flushing it down a toilet.

Unsurprisingly, this causes significant trauma for the woman involved in an abortion. Aside from the moral harm it does to her conscience, seeing her dead child covered in blood and floating in the toilet, often awakens her to the reality of what just happened, causing insurmountable emotional problems she will struggle with for years.

But the emotional trauma resulting from the use of the abortion pill isn’t why it was under guidelines that prevented it from being sold in retail pharmacies. Mifeprex, the first drug in the regimen, is dangerous enough that the FDA gave it REMS status. REMS stands for Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy, which is described by the FDA as, “a drug safety program that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) can require for certain medications with serious safety concerns to help ensure the benefits of the medication outweigh its risks. REMS are designed to reinforce medication use behaviors and actions that support the safe use of that medication… REMS focus on preventing, monitoring and/or managing a specific serious risk by informing, educating and/or reinforcing actions to reduce the frequency and/or severity of the event.”

Mifeprex is often dangerous. A few of the possible side effects include:

• Death (a tragic example is this 19-year-old who died after taking the abortion pill)
• Flu or fever-like symptoms
• Hemorrhage
• The need for surgical completion afterwards (the baby didn’t die, or the remains and/or placenta are retained, resulting in a need for surgery)
• Pain in the chest, lower back, side, arms, jaw, or neck
• Infection and possible sepsis
• Prolonged bleeding, from several hours to as long as 30 days

Under the previous REMS guidelines for Mifeprex, women could only receive the pill in person at approved clinics or hospitals that could provide certain medical and safety procedures. But as of January 3rd, 2023, the guidelines have been amended by the FDA so that retail pharmacies who “become certified in the Mifepristone REMS Program” can dispense this highly dangerous pill to anyone with a prescription.

Women in hopeless situations, who believe the lie that the abortion pill is a safe and effective way to deal with a difficult circumstance, are unwittingly walking into a deadly situation. These women desperately need Jesus. This world desperately needs Jesus. The culture of death is so insatiable in its thirst for blood that it’s willing to bypass any concern for human life, and any idea of the sacredness of human life, solely to make death easier, more accessible, and more desirable.

Read more:

Four Doctors Groups Tell Federal Court to Pull Abortion Pill From Market, It’s Dangerous for Women (LifeNews.com)

As society decays and moves away from God, morality, and truth, more and more people — especially children — are being put on dangerous psychiatric drugs such as antidepressants. Meanwhile, a new study confirms once again that there is a strong correlation between school attendance and child suicide. What is going on?

A leading expert in the field who spoke with the Illinois Family Institute, Harvard-trained psychiatrist Dr. Peter Breggin, is sounding the alarm about these escalating crises and the enormous threat they represent. The world-renown author and critics also warned that leaving public schools was now the “only real hope” for families concerned about the horror.

The data from across the Western world paint a troubling picture no matter how you look at it. The numbers consistently show, for instance, that prescriptions for antidepressant drugs have surged in recent years. In fact, data shows more than one in six Americans now take psychiatric drugs, mostly antidepressants, with numbers continuing to rise.

According to data highlighted by the American Psychological Association, the number of Americans on antidepressants surged by almost two thirds in just fifteen years. The rate of suicides among American children is soaring, too. The phenomenon was almost unheard of prior to a few decades ago, and yet now it is a leading cause of death in American children and still surging.

In a wide-ranging interview with the Illinois Family Institute, Dr. Peter Breggin, a psychiatrist trained at Harvard who is also one of the world’s leading critics of the psychiatric industry, said Americans should be very concerned about what is happening. “I think it’s terrible in every way,” he said about the growing use of antidepressant drugs.

“Antidepressants cannot change a person’s attitude toward life or how they treat other people, it can’t change or improve their capacity to love or make them more concerned parents, or more well-disciplined children,” he explained. “Almost all psychoactive substances have one common effect: they blunt the emotional response of the individual.”

The problems that are being diagnosed psychiatrically, Dr. Breggin continued, “are never biochemical in origin,” something that runs counter to conventional wisdom. “The problems we call psychiatric are based on our human experiences — our suffering, our loves and hates. They are psychological, spiritual, political, and emotional issues: the stuff of life.”

Psychiatrists, continued Dr. Breggin, “are unfit to deal with these complex problems.” In fact, the prominent expert compared the field to a “biological, materialistic, humanistic religion — in the worst sense of humanistic.” This is why psychiatry and its tools “are so beloved by communists to control people, because they have the same godless materialistic religion,” he added.

Speaking of how the drugs work, Dr. Breggin, who served as an expert in multiple high-profile cases involving antidepressants, said they “cause multiple biochemical imbalances where there were none before.” Beyond that, these chemicals are basically classes of “neurotoxins” that cause long-term harm to the brain, he added.

Perhaps even more alarming, there is “no question” that the drugs “increase rates of violence and suicide, in every age group, not just children,” continued Dr. Breggin, who wrote the hugely influential book Talking Back To Prozac and led the push to end psychiatric lobotomies. He also served as medical expert in multiple cases involving antidepressants and murder, and “the cover up is just amazing.”

Asked why rates of antidepressant use were increasing so rapidly, he said it was not clear to what degree there was, in fact, a “mental health” crisis ripping through the U.S. population in recent decades. While he acknowledged that the actions of “predators” during COVID caused widespread disturbances, Dr. Breggin pointed to public schools and Big Pharma as potential sources of what is being observed.

Among other concerns, the psychiatrist suggested marketing and advertising by the pharmaceutical industry was a big part of the problem. “A lot of fear and turmoil is created by elites, and then those same elites turn around and make a lot of money selling drugs to deal with that,” he said, blasting Big Pharma and the industry’s “indifference” to the harm caused. The FDA serves as the industry’s “accomplice,” Breggin argued.

Interestingly, two separate studies in recent years have found a very strong link between attending school and suicide. The latest, from the National Bureau of Economic Research, noted that child suicides surge when children are back in school, and slow down by large margins when school is out for the summer. Covid lockdowns and re-opening confirmed the trends.

Dr. Breggin was blunt. “I do believe the only real hope is for families to get out of the public school system,” he said, noting that parents could do a far better job of providing or securing education with the money spent by the state on schools. “We’ve got to get people out of the public schools and into institutions that support God, their religious beliefs, the Constitution, and so on.”

But the problem goes far beyond just public schools. “Right now all institutions serve Mammon, the totalitarians, and Big Government,” he said, noting that he “did not talk like this before I started studying what was going on with COVID.” The institutions, he added, “are designed to serve the rich and powerful and make them more rich and powerful.”

Dr. Breggin, who forced authorities and the industry to investigate the link between antidepressants and suicide and violence, is hardly the only expert sounding the alarm. In fact, a report by the Citizens Commission on Human Rights citing dozens of examples and over 30 studies concluded that psychiatric drugs “create violence and suicide,” including school shootings.

The epidemic of mental and spiritual issues plaguing America went into overdrive in the 1960s, as Bible and prayer were expelled from school. Today, by throwing fuel on the fire in the form of dangerous “medications” to deal with the fire this created, a raging inferno threatens to consume even more lives and families.

Reports on the internet and social media of infertility problems and changes in women’s menstruation abound. Popstar Nicki Minaj has recently stated her hesitancy with the vaccine due to an anecdotal story about a friend of her cousin who suffered impotency following the vaccine. Leftists who usually celebrate Minaj’s debauchery now view her as a social pariah as she questions the vaccine’s safety. However, her acquaintance is not the only individual reporting reproductive issues, making her questions valid.

Reports from women experiencing menstruation changes following receiving the vaccine are growing. In the United Kingdom, there have now been over 30,000 women reporting changes to their menstrual cycles. These changes include extreme bleeding, pain, and skipping cycles. As reports spread through the U.K. and the U.S., some young women are concerned that the vaccines could affect their reproductive ability.

Despite these reasonable concerns, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and their mainstream media sycophants have dismissed any possibility of reproductive or menstruation problems occurring following the vaccines. However, as the CDC publicly dismisses claims, the National Institute of Health (NIH) awarded $1.67 million to five institutions to research links between the coronavirus vaccines and changes in women’s menstruation. The NIH announced on August 30th that researchers with Michigan State University, Boston University, Harvard Medical School, Johns Hopkins University, and Oregon Health and Science University, in coordination with NIH Office of Research on Women’s Health, would research reported menstruation problems in vaccinated women.

Reports of vaccine side effects are made to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), a reporting site co-managed by the CDC and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). However, numerous problems exist within the system. Healthcare providers are only required to report side effects if they are listed by the manufacturer or appear on the VAERS Table of Reportable Events Following Vaccinations.

Unfortunately, there is no list on the Table that refers directly to any of the COVID vaccinations. Nor are menstruation or reproductive issues recognized as a side effect by manufacturers.

There is a list for “New Vaccines,” which specifies required adverse reactions to report. Those reactions include: shoulder injuries following the vaccine, vasovagal syncope (fainting) within seven days of inoculation, any acute complication including death, or any side effect listed in the manufacturer’s insert information. There is no indication that healthcare workers are required to report possible links to changes in menstruation or reproductive health.

The CDC claims that “VAERS is not designed to determine if a vaccine caused a health problem,” asserting that a determination of that sort is not the purpose of the site. Rather, they claim their main objective is to “assess the safety of newly licensed vaccines.”

How can the CDC claim a vaccine is not causing women’s reproductive issues if VAERS cannot determine health problems? If they cannot determine if a vaccine has caused a health issue, how can they assess the safety of vaccines? Women should demand answers to these serious questions.

Another issue with VAERS is that many physicians say it is a complex reporting process that is time-consuming. Doctors have objected to filling out the report in the past, and even the CDC has recognized its limitations. In the CDC’s Manual for the Surveillance of Vaccine-Preventable Diseases, the authors state that:

“A survey was conducted in 2005 to assess the knowledge, attitudes, and practices among healthcare providers about reporting to VAERS. Data indicated that although 71% of respondents were familiar with VAERS, only 17% said they were very familiar with it. Approximately 37% of healthcare providers had identified at least one adverse event after immunization, but only 17% stated that they had ever reported to VAERS.”  

Drastic underreporting limits our knowledge of the type of side effects the COVID vaccine is causing. Taking these factors into consideration, it is highly likely that few doctors actually report the impact of the vaccine on menstruation and reproduction.

Although the NIH is investigating the possibility of problems with women’s menstruation following the vaccine, other medical agencies are charging ahead with vaccine approval. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) is urging FDA approval of vaccines for children under the age of 12. Not only are they recommending approval, but Pfizer has now claimed that the vaccines are safe for ages 5-11 when reduced to one-third the standard adult dosage. If adults are potentially experiencing reproductive and menstruation issues due to the vaccine, the question remains: how will it affect children’s reproductive development?

This ramrod, rushed dispersion of the COVID vaccines without resources to report adverse effects is complete lunacy. Reported side effects are essentially ignored. When confirmed, manufacturers quietly add side effects to the manufactures’ list without any public notification. Pfizer recently added myocarditis risks to their growing list of side effects. Will manufacturers do the same if it is determined that menstruation and reproductive problems are linked to their product? If given to young children, could side effects lead to sterility in these children? There are more questions than answers currently, and the federal government prefers avoiding any scrutiny.

However, it may be possible that the CDC, FDA, NIH, and vaccine manufacturers will have to answer questions. Project Veritas recently released a video from Jodi O’Malley, a registered nurse employed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) in Arizona. O’Malley recorded herself speaking with fellow employees, including an emergency room doctor, who felt the federal government was not adequately tracking side effects from the COVID vaccines. The medical staff lamented that they had seen numerous people suffering from side effects. O’Malley forwarded the video to Project Veritas and has become a whistleblower to report on the federal government’s failures related to the vaccines’ adverse reactions. The failure of the government to report on side effects may mean vaccine related-problems with reproductive health and menstruation could be widespread. Perhaps if more whistleblowers come forward, the public will finally be made aware of existing adverse reactions.

If you are concerned about the lack of data collected and the lack of informed consent regarding the side effects of the COVID vaccine, please contact your U.S. Representative and ask him/her to force the CDC and the FDA to collect and publicly report all side effects of vaccines. If you feel you have suffered any type of side effect from the COVID vaccine, you can report the issue to the CDC HERE.

After years of lobbying by homosexual activists, the FDA has lifted its lifetime ban on “men who have sex with men” (MSM)—which is the Centers for Disease Control designation—from donating blood. Homosexual activists view the ban as unjustly discriminatory, a relic from the beginning of the AIDS crisis when testing was far less effective. The change means that donations from MSM who claim not to have had homoerotic encounters for one year will be now be accepted.

While many homosexuals claim the lifetime ban was based on “homophobia,” they can’t explain why it didn’t apply to lesbians. Facts are such stubborn and inconvenient things.

While many cheer this decision as a victory for science, others are wondering if it’s a political victory for male homosexual activists.

The FDA explains that “its policies to date have helped reduce HIV transmission rates from blood transfusions from 1 in 2,500 to 1 in 1.47 million.” Further, the FDA cites an Australian study that showed no increase in HIV/AIDS transmission rates following their switching from a lifetime ban to a one-year deferral period.

News reports cite similar policy shifts in other developed countries. For example, the United Kingdom, Australia, Sweden, and Japan all have one-year deferral periods, and Canada and New Zealand have five-year deferral periods. It is interesting to note, however, the HIV/AIDS adult (ages 15-49) prevalence rates in these countries as compared to the United States:

• United Kingdom: .3%
• Australia: .2%
• Sweden: .2%
• Japan: <.1%
• New Zealand: .1%
• Canada: .2%
• United States: .6%

The United States has twice the HIV/AIDS prevalence rate as the country with the next highest rate.

The reason for a one-year deferral period is that during what is called the “eclipse” phase” or “window period,” the HIV virus has infected the first cell but is present at levels undetectable by current testing. The eclipse phase is estimated to last from 7-90 days. Therefore, the one-year deferral period is viewed as more than sufficient.

The ban on donations from MSM grew out of concern not just for HIV/AIDS transmission but also for the transmission of hepatitis. According to the CDC the risk of transmission of acute hepatitis, which is caused by the hepatitis C virus, is just under “1 chance per 2 million units transfused.” It has also been reported that the rate of hepatitis C among MSM is approximately 5%, whereas the rate among the general population is .78%. Since the rate of hepatitis C among MSM is over 500% higher than the rate among the general population, will the lifting of the ban on this high-risk group donating blood increase the number of people infected by hepatitis C?

The CDC also reports that “[a]mong adults, an estimated 10% of new hepatitis A cases and 20% of new Hepatitis B cases occur in MSM.” So, 10% of new hepatitis A cases and 20% of new hepatitis B cases come from a demographic group that the CDC claims constitutes 2% of the population. A 2011 study reports that the level of Hepatitis B infections per donations is “1:500,000 to 1:1,000,000.” Will this rate remain steady or increase now that MSM are permitted to donate blood?

The FDA assures the public that “[m]oving forward, the FDA will continue to reevaluate and update its blood donor deferral policies as new scientific information becomes available.” Let’s hope and pray that the new scientific information does not include an increase of even a small percentage in the HIV/AIDS or hepatitis transmission rates. And let’s hope and pray that when screened, men who have sex with men will be truthful about the duration of time since their last homoerotic encounter.

Support IFI

Please consider supporting IFI’s ongoing work to educate, motivate and activate Illinois’ Christian community.  Your donation will help us stand strong in 2016!  To make a credit card donation over the phone, please call the IFI office at (708) 781-9328.  You can also send a gift to:

Illinois Family Institute
P.O. Box 88848
Carol Stream, Illinois 60188

On Wednesday, May 8th, the bill to legalize marijuana as “medicine” was heard in the Senate Executive Committee.  The bill, sponsored by State Senator William Haine (D-Alton), passed by a vote of 10-5, and now advances to the full Senate for consideration.  It has already passed in the House.  (See how your state representative voted HERE.)

Legitimizing the use of marijuana for medical purposes will encourage and increase destructive behavior, especially among young people. Marijuana is the most widely used illicit drug in the United States. Research has found that adolescent and teen drug use rises as the perception of harm diminishes.

The FDA classifies marijuana as a Schedule 1 controlled substance because it has a high potential for abuse and there are currently no acceptable medical uses for treatment. Schedule 1 controlled substances are determined by an eight-factor analysis:

1. Its actual or relative potential for abuse

2. Scientific evidence of its pharmacological effects

3. The state of current scientific knowledge regarding the drug

4. Its history and current pattern of abuse

5. The scope, duration, and significance of abuse

6. What, if any, risk there is to public health

7 .Its psychic or physiological dependence liability

8. Whether the substance is an immediate precursor of a substance already under control

If marijuana is classified as medicine, marijuana use among youth will increase. Colorado has seen an explosion of adolescent and youth entering addiction facilities while California saw admissions for drug treatment more than double, according to the federal government’s first-of-its-kind report.

These potential harms were pointed out at a conference held at Moraine Valley Community College on April 15th to sort fact from fiction about how marijuana impacts health and safety, Illinois’ youth, drugged driving, the workplace while creating a law enforcement nightmare. 

In the video below, Peter B. Besinger, former Drug Czar of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) under Presidents Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan, warns against legalizing marijuana as medicine and the implications for everyone in the state if this legislation is approved.    For example, Bensinger pointed to Colorado as a state that legalized “pot” as medicine as an example of why the drug is dangerous.

Quoting the Colorado Department of Transportation, he said the number of motor vehicle fatalities in accidents where the driver had used marijuana has more than doubled from 23 in 2007 to 52 in 2011.  Besinger asserts that “marijuana has psychoactive ingredients that effect judgment, time, coordination and depth perception.”  Illinois’ HB 1 would allow a “medical” marijuana patient to operate a motor vehicle at their own discretion, even though research shows that a single marijuana joint with moderate levels of THC can impair a person’s ability to drive for more than 24 hours.

After watching the video, you will want to take action!  Please do so this week. The bill has already passed in the Illinois House.

Take ACTION: Click HERE to send an email or a fax to your state senator today to ask him/her to vote NO to HB 1.  You can call IFI for their name and phone number at (708) 781-9328, or call the Capitol switchboard at (217) 782-2000 and asked to be connected to their office.

Click HERE to download the American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) White Paper on State-Level Proposals to Legalize Marijuana.

Contact your state senator now!

Click HERE to make a donation to the Illinois Family Institute.

Lawmakers in the Illinois House, most if not all knowing little or nothing about medicine or disease, may be voting to legalize so-called marijuana as “medicine” in Illinois on Wednesday.

This bill allows a “qualified” patient to have 2.5 ounces of marijuana every 14 days (183 joints, 13 per day).  Even the most experienced user smokes an average of three or four joints a day, potentially allowing the surplus to be sold on the streets. Moreover, “medical” marijuana laws normalize marijuana use, which significantly decreases the perception of harm especially among adolescents and teens.

“The key to it is medical access, because once you have hundreds of thousands of people using marijuana under medical supervision the whole scam is going to be bought. Once there’s medical access…then we will get full legalization.” ~Richard Cowan, former director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana.

Take ACTION: Click HERE to send your state representative an email or a fax to tell him/her that you do not want marijuana sold in your neighborhood for any purpose.  You can also contact your lawmakers through the Capitol switchboard at (217) 782-2000.

Andrea G. Barthwell, MD, FASAM, recently spoke to a large assembled group at Moraine Valley Community College at a conference on the consequences of marijuana as medicine.  She made it perfectly clear, smoked marijuana does not meet the standards of modern medicine. There is no scientific research on marijuana’s effectiveness as a medicine, interactions with other drugs, and impact on pre-existing conditions. There are no studies on marijuana that can be used to establish safe dosing levels, frequency and duration of administration, route, or method of administration for any medical condition.

The Federal Drug Administration (FDA) lists marijuana as a Schedule I drug because it has no accepted medical value and has a high potential for addiction. There is no scientifically documented benefit for the use of crude marijuana for any medical purpose. In fact, crude smoked marijuana has been rejected by major reputable national medical associations in the country including the American Medical Association, the American Ophthalmic Association, the National Multiple Sclerosis Society, and the American Cancer Society.

Take a moment now to let your state representative know that you want him/her to vote NO to HB 1, the “medical” pot bill.

Read more:

Why Marijuana Legalization Would Compromise Public Health and Public Safety

Medical Marijuana Poses Critical Concerns to Prevention

Doctors Supporting FDA Process for Medical Marijuana

Christian Medical & Dental Association Letter to Lawmakers on HB 1

 Click HERE to make a donation to the Illinois Family Institute.

In many places of employment a gigantic board is posted listing the shortages and outages of essential medications, such as antibiotics, pain relievers, anesthetics and drugs for sedation. This problem has been significant for years, and has worsened considerably in the last year, impeding pharmacists’ ability to provide vital care for our patients. The FDA has placed the approval of this “chemical cousin” analog of mifepristone (sometimes known by its antiquated experimental name, RU 486) ahead of the need to address this severe health care issue.

Our disgust for the deadly FDA action is profound and beyond the ability to verbalize. Ulipristal acetate, according to its own developers, can kill embryos and feti. It is marketed in Europe as EllaOne® . The low dose 30mg form of Ella®, has been prioritized for approval by the US FDA, which would have served the citizens of the US better by adequately addressing the current, rolling shortages of truly lifesaving and essential medications, rather than chemicals whose main intent is to snuff out a nascent life in the first few weeks of existence.

The embryocidal doses of ulipristal acetate may now be stockpiled and accumulated by prescribers or patients for “medical” chemical abortions at home, sidestepping the so-called regulation of mifepristone/misoprostil (the other abortion drug brought to the US in the 1990s by the Population Council and whose $4 million experimentation bill was entirely footed by mega-billionaire Warren Buffett). This will lead to additional life-endangering problems for the targeted adolescent girls and women, as well as giving continued cover for sexual predators of underage girls and incestuous abusive relationships.

The FDA is expected to continue in its long tradition of relegating females to lowest class health care status. PFLI rounded and vehemently denounces and condemns the FDA for this inappropriate use of its drug regulatory power to destroy life rather than approve and regulate medicines which actually are life-saving and preserve health.