Archive for David and Lucile Packard Foundation

Who is footing the bill for ‘free’ abortion pills on California college campuses?

Posted in Abortion Pill Connections, Abortion Pill Horrors, Abortion Pills Campus, Buffett Foundation, California abortion stats, DANCO, self-managed abortion, Songs, TARA Health Foundation, Women’s Foundation of California with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on October 20, 2019 by saynsumthn

abortion pill

A measure to force public universities to offer dangerous abortion pills on college campus, recently signed into law by California Governor Gavin Newsom, will initially be set up using funds from pro-abortion groups. However, pro-life student group Students for Life of America (SFLA) notes that student fees will also be used to fund on-campus abortions, since those fees underwrite the costs of campus healthcare centers. SFLA also pointed out how the conscience rights of students and healthcare workers will be violated if forced to participate with abortions. “This law includes funds that can go to Planned Parenthood for ‘consulting’ and new funds for ‘security’, allowing the nation’s number one abortion vendor to sit back and cash checks, enjoying the chaos of abortions taking place at schools without any of the risk,” said SFLA president Kristin Hawkins.

The bill requires student health care services centers at the state’s 34 University of California (UC) and California State University (CSU) campuses to offer medication abortion on and after January 1, 2023. According to a Department of Financial Bill Analysis, SB 24 “establishes the College Student Health Center Sexual and Reproductive Health Preparation Fund under the administration of the Commission on the Status of Women and Girls.” It requires the Commission, whose current chair Alisha Wilkins previously worked for Planned Parenthood of the Pacific Southwest in Riverside, “to provide grants of $200,000 to each student health center, and a grant of $200,000 to both the UC and CSU system to become prepared to offer abortion by medication techniques and develop associated back-up medical supports.”

The abortion pill was brought into the U.S. by the Population Council, a eugenics organization which sought out investors to set up a highly secretive company — DANCO Laboratories — to manufacture the drug.

Investors included:

  • The Packard Foundation, which originally invested in 1996 to help keep DANCO afloat when it “ran short on funds”
  • The Buffett Foundation, identified by the Washington Post in 2000, writing, “The Buffett Foundation… made at least $2 million in interest-free loans to the Population Council… according to tax documents filed in 1995. That money was in turn used to conduct clinical trials of RU-486 [the abortion pill].”
  • George Soros (Open Society Foundations)
  • A number of other abortion pill investors chose to remain unnamed, according to internal documents reviewed by the Wall Street Journal
Packard Timeline shows it invested in abortion pill distributor

Packard Timeline shows it invested in abortion pill distributor

 

To update campus student health center procedures, provide training, and purchase equipment at UC, the Department’s analysis estimated:

  • One-time system wide readiness General Fund costs between $4.6 million to $7.8 million…
  • Ongoing General Fund costs of $2.2 million to $3.3 million commencing in 2023 to provide abortion by medication services in each campus student health center and provide access to 24-hour telehealth services.

At CSU, the initial costs were “unknown” but raised concerns it could likely range in the millions to low tens of millions of dollars.

Image: CSU on costs of law mandating abortion pills on California campuses (Image: CBS Sacramento)

CSU on costs of law mandating abortion pills on California campuses (Image: CBS Sacramento)

“While this bill and its sponsors indicate that private financing would cover all the costs associated with this bill, Finance notes this bill could create future General Fund cost pressures to the extent sufficient private funding cannot be raised to support readiness grants, the costs to comply with this bill’s requirements exceed the proposed grant funding, or to the extent the UC and CSU incur ongoing costs after January 1, 2023,” the analysis said.

zImage: Lila Rose on law mandating abortion pills on California campus (Image: Twitter)

Lila Rose on law mandating abortion pills on California campus (Image: Twitter)

According to a statement by the ACLU, a “[C]onsortium of funders, including the Women’s Foundation of California and Tara Health Foundation,” has raised the initial funds.

Tara Health Foundation (THF):

Image: TARA Health Foundation promotes abortion

TARA Health Foundation promotes abortion

The Women’s Foundation of California:

According to the Guttmacher Institute there were 132,680 abortions committed in California in 2017. A previous analysis by Live Action News revealed that taxpayers in the state paid over half a billion dollars (nearly $700 million) for abortions from 1989 to 2014. In 2017, the pro-abortion Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health (ANSIRH) — a research group at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF)’s Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, which trains abortion providers — estimated, “Approximately 23% of CSU students and 12% of UC students are enrolled in Medi-Cal.”

Image: Medi-Cal FFS abortion expenditures in California 1989 to 2014 (Image: Live Action News)

Medi-Cal FFS abortion expenditures in California 1989 to 2014 (Image: Live Action News)

“Students across UC and CSU campuses obtain 1,038 abortions each month,” ANSIRH wrote adding, “[W]e estimate there would be between 322-519 medication abortions occurring across UC and CSU campuses every month.”

SFLA claims there was no need for the law because abortion facilities are less than 6 miles from every California public university and college campus. The group also claims there are no safeguards are in place to protect women who may be dosed with the drugs without their consent. Live Action News previously documented how many of those behind the push for these dangerous pills to be readily available on campus are also pushing for FDA safety requirements to be lifted. To date, at least 24 women have died from the abortion pill and literally thousands have been hospitalized with serious complications.

    • This article is reprinted with permission. The original appeared here at Live Action News.

Abortion groups tell women to lie about abortion pill, claim miscarriage

Posted in Abortion pill, Abortion Pills Illegal, DANCO, Packard Foundation, Self Managed Abortion, self-managed abortion with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on June 2, 2019 by saynsumthn

abortion pill

Just as abortion supporters rage over new pro-life laws in Georgia and Alabama, claiming that women could be investigated for miscarriages, comes proof that abortion supporters are actually advising women who experience complications from illegal use of the abortion pill to lie to health care providers and say they had miscarriages.

Currently, abortion insiders, many with ties to abortion pill manufacturer Danco, are pushing for expansion of the abortion pill, despite thousands of adverse effects and two dozen deaths. The abortion pill regimen consists of two drugs: Mifepristone  (or Mifeprex) and Misoprostol. The FDA has warned women against purchasing these dangerous pills online.

Dr. Daniel Grossman, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of California, San Francisco, who also teaches abortion allegedly told a reporter at The Atlantic that if women using these [self-managed abortion] regimens experience heavy bleeding or some other complication, they are generally advised to go to a hospital and say they had a miscarriage.

Grossman is behind clinical trials to expand the abortion pill for pharmacy dispension and is calling to remove important safety requirements put in place by the FDA, called REMS. This comes as no surprise, as one of the major original investors of abortion pill manufacturer Danco — The Packard Foundation — has funded other Grossman-authored studies. In other words, those behind the studies attempting to do away with FDA safety requirements for the abortion pill stand to gain a significant amount of money if those requirements are removed.

Image: Packard Foundation invested in abortion pill manufacturer DANCO (Image: David and Lucile Packard Foundation )

Packard Foundation invested in abortion pill manufacturer DANCO (Image: David and Lucile Packard Foundation )


If you think you might have a complication you should go to a doctor immediately. If you live in a place where abortion is a crime and you don’t have a doctor you trust, you can still access medical care. You do not have to tell the medical staff that you tried to induce an abortion; you can tell them that you had a spontaneous miscarriage. Doctors have the obligation to help in all cases and know how to handle a miscarriage.
The international abortion organization, Women on Web, advises women on its website to present to the ER and claim they are having a miscarriage if they experience complications from the abortion pill in a country where taking the drug is illegal:

The symptoms of a miscarriage and an abortion with pills are exactly the same and the doctor will not be able to see or test for any evidence of an abortion, as long as the pills have completely dissolved. 

Women on Web advises women lie about illegal abortion pill emergencies say miscarriage (accessed 5/14/2019)

According to a report from The Atlantic, Women on Web’s founder, Rebecca Gomperts, launched the site Aid Access to sell the abortion pill online, against FDA requirements. The FDA recently issued Aid Access a warning letter to cease its illegal activity. Last week, over 100 lawmakers sent a letter to the FDA, asking it to continue to monitor and crack down on dangerous websites like Aid Access.

But that has not stopped other proponents of self-managed abortion, who seem set on placing women in harm’s way. The website Plan C, founded in 2015 by Francine Coeytaux and Elisa Wells, tells women, “Those who choose to self-manage their abortion have no obligation to report that they have used misoprostol and there is no way it can be detected in the body, even if a blood test is taken. Scientists have found that there is no noticeable difference between a naturally occurring miscarriage and the bleeding that happens after taking misoprostol.”

Plan C Website FAQ where get

Then, if something goes wrong (and it most likely will), the Plan C website, which is under the fiscal sponsorship of the National Women’s Health Network, advises women to present to the emergency room or other health care offices and simply claim they are experiencing a miscarriage.

PlanC website tells women aborting to present with Miscarriage, accessed 5/14/2019

Live Action News previously reported how abortion organization, Reproaction, purchased over $4,000 in ads to promote a push for self-managed abortion — something unapproved by the FDA. Reproaction also advises women to seek care by lying about their abortions.

A webinar published in 2018 states in part that women “need information to reduce the risk of arrest… what the signs of a complication are and most importantly what to say if one needs to go to the doctor…. [T]he symptoms of an abortion with pills and miscarriage are exactly the same and the treatment for any kind of complication is exactly the same…. It’s important for people to understand there’s no test for these pills in blood or urine so if they present with a miscarriage they can get the healthcare that they need….”

tweet from “Helen Bolton” — whose profile implies that he or she is with organized abortion groups “ and ” — reiterates the deception being proposed: “Misoprostol is basically OTC in a lot of the world and is regularly used to self-manage abortions in places where it’s illegal. Even with complications, the patient looks like they had a miscarriage, so people can go to a hospital (provided miscarriages aren’t investigated).”

Abortion supporter advises women lie about illegal abortion pill emergencies say miscarriage (Image: Twitter)

Others have made similar suggestions.

Abortion supporter advises women lie about illegal abortion pill emergencies say miscarriage (Image: Twitter)

FDA warns women: “Do Not Buy Mifeprex Over the Internet.

FDA warns consumers to not buy abortion pills over the internet

The FDA adds, “You should not buy Mifeprex over the Internet because you will bypass important safeguards designed to protect your health (and the health of others). Mifeprex has special safety restrictions on how it is distributed to the public. Also, drugs purchased from foreign Internet sources are not the FDA-approved versions of the drugs, and they are not subject to FDA-regulated manufacturing controls or FDA inspection of manufacturing facilities.”

According to the FDA’s adverse effects reports through 2018, there have been reports of 24 deaths associated with Mifeprex since the product was approved in September 2000, as well as 4,200 reported adverse effects, including hospitalization and other serious complications.

  • This article is reprinted with permission. The original appeared here at Live Action News.

Taxpayers send millions to abortion training program at UCSF

Posted in Abortion Pill Connections, Abortion Pill Study, Abortionist, Abortionist Training, Bill Gates, Fellowship in Family Planning (FFP), Hewlett Foundation, Innovating Education in Reproductive Health, National Abortion Federation, Packard Foundation, Philip Darney, Ryan Residency, Uta Landy with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on April 23, 2019 by saynsumthn

Who’s paying millions for this abortion training program? Taxpayers.

third trimester abortion, abortion training

Abortion training is being orchestrated out of a University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) program which receives millions in government dollars. UCSF trains abortion providers through their Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health , which claims to be “one of the few research institutions to unflinchingly address abortion, investigating multidimensional aspects of abortion care in the United States and globally.” Bixby claims their work has:

According to Bixby’s annual reports, in 2014, nearly $22 million dollars (52 percent) of Bixby’s revenue came from the taxpayer, although the report does not specify whether the funds were state or federal. By 2015, although Government dollars made up only 18 percent of Bixby’s revenue, it totaled over $18 million in taxpayer dollars. Bixby is conveniently located in California, which permits millions in taxpayer dollars to fund abortions and has no requirement that abortion numbers be reported to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) for data analysis.

UCSF Bixby Gov Funding 18 million in 2015 to 2016 AR

Taxpayer dollars sent to UCSF for fetal research include millions from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). A recent report published by CNS News breaks down the dollars of the multi-year contract:

[T]he Department of Health and Human Services has granted contracts to UCSF to make “humanized mice.”… According to contract information published on the Federal Procurement Data System, the new three-month extension will pay UCSF $521,082—bringing the total payments the federal government has made to UCSF for this contract to $10,596,960. If the government continues renewing the contract through Dec. 5, 2020, HHS would end up paying UCSF a total of $13,799,501.

In addition to government (taxpayer) dollars, Bixby receives funding from a number of organizations collaborating to expand abortion, such as:

UCSG Bixby trains abortion to increase access (Image: Twitter)

According to Bixby, which was created to address a shortage of abortionists dating back to the mid 1980’s, the number of US abortion providers decreased by 38% between 1982 and 2005, and some 87% of US counties do not have an abortion provider.

Bixby runs two flagship programs, which “provide the opportunity to develop high-level research and clinical skills in abortion and contraception:”

FFP was established by Dr. Philip Darney, and as previously reported, FFP’s website makes it clear that abortion is their mission, stating that the family planning fellowship is a “two-year fellowship focused on subspecialist training in research, teaching and clinical practice in abortion and contraception… and they play an active role in discussions in the media related to family planning access and advocate for their patients in popular media outlets.”

Fellowship in Family Planning FFP FB Page (Image credit: Facebook)

Live Action News also previously reported how the Kenneth J. Ryan Residency Training Program in Abortion and Family Planning was founded in 1999 by Dr. Uta Landy, a former director of the National Abortion Federation and a recipient of Planned Parenthood Federation of America’s infamous Margaret Sanger Award. According to the Bixby Center, Landy established “one of the first abortion clinics in New York after legalization in 1970, and became the first executive director of the National Abortion Federation in 1979.” Landy was recently caught in undercover footage from the Center for Medical Progress talking about late-term abortions.

Philip Darney and Uta Landy at UCSF abortion training

The Ryan program is now at 70 major medical schools in the US and Canada, according to their website.

The Bixby Center was originally founded as the Center for Reproductive Health Research & Policy in 1999 by Philip Darney, MD and Nancy Padian, who were shortly thereafter joined by Claire Brindis, DrPH, MPH, and Felicia Stewart, MD, according to their report. The Center offers online abortion training courses and lectures through its Innovating Education in Reproductive Health which is described as “a digital hub that highlights innovative family planning and abortion curricula, tools, teaching techniques and research from educational leaders around the world.”

Innovating Education at UCSF abortion training

The group’s week by week abortion course, “Abortion Quality Care and Public Health Implications,” has a stated goal to destigmitize abortion, among other things. The “career planning brochure” instructs graduates to “moonlight” at abortion facilities and to “highlight [their] abortion training as a special skill set” when they apply to a practice.

Innovating Education Abortion Career Planning Brochure

The abortion training course is introduced by Jody Steinauer, Associate Professor at UCSF. The course is “directed at health care students and professionals.”

The video lectures lead up to the topic of  “abortion after the first trimester,” in week four, where Steinauer admits that later abortions “can be a difficult topic to discuss for many due to feelings about a more developed fetus.”

Jody Steinauer at UCSF abortion training

Despite the abortion industry’s frequent denial of facts about fetal development, Bixby’s TEACH Program (Training Early Abortion for Comprehensive Healthcare) workbook acknowledges that the fetal heartbeat can be detected very early, around six weeks gestation (dates used are gestational, which is measured at two weeks more than the date of fertilization):

The embryo follows a predictable path of development and therefore can be used to date a pregnancy based on its size. The embryo appears at approximately 6 weeks and grows 1 mm per day thereafter until 12-14 weeks. After 12 weeks, fetal flexion and extension make measuring length more challenging and using the fetal biparietal diameter (BPD) is preferred. Cardiac activity appears around 6 ½ weeks.

Bixby abortion training workbook TEACH

The workbook then gives suggestions on how to speak to an abortion patient about the baby. But because this is about ending the life of a developing human person in the womb, the workbook suggests abortion providers use euphemisms like “pregnancy” instead of scientifically correct terminology such as fetus or baby.

“Your pregnancy is 8 weeks along,” instead of  “Your baby is 8 weeks old.”

Bixby abortion training workbook TEACH communication

In upcoming Live Action News articles, we will highlight various teaching lectures published by the UCSF abortion training program.

    • This article is reprinted with permission. The original appeared here at Live Action News.

Media ignores profit motive of researcher attempting to discredit abortion pill reversal

Posted in Abortion pill, Abortion Pill Connections, Abortion Pill Study, Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health (ANSIRH), Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, Clinical Trial APR, Contraception Journal, DANCO, Daniel Grossman, Mitchell D. Creinin, Population Council, Reproductive Health Professionals (ARHP), RU-486, University o California San Francisco (UCSF), University of California, University of California Davis with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on April 23, 2019 by saynsumthn

abortion pill birth control

 

The principal investigator of a study seeking to disprove the legitimacy of abortion pill reversal has direct ties — including financial ties — to abortion pill manufacturer Danco, which was formed by the eugenics-founded Population Council. This potential conflict of interest should demand scrutiny from the media — but instead, the media willingly questions abortion pill reversal based upon a single “expert” that receives compensation from Danco. This “expert” is Mitchell D. Creinin, a professor at University of California, Davis, sponsor of the study.

Mitchell Creinin has long history with abortion. He is an abortionist who was involved in clinical trials of RU-486 at Magee-Women’s Hospital Dept. of OB/GYN Pittsburgh, PA. He was the previous medical and lab director of Planned Parenthood of Western Pennsylvania, as described by Oxford University Press. He worked on an abortion training publication for the National Abortion Federation (NAF). He has served on the Board of Directors for the Association for Reproductive Health Professionals (ARHP). He is also listed among the advisory counsel for the early abortion training guide published by Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health (ANSIRH), part of UCSF’s Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health.

As I detailed in a Twitter thread shown below, Creinin’s abortion history and connections to the abortion pill’s manufacturer are deep and worth mentioning. This calls into question the validity of his study into abortion pill reversal. Creinin has financial incentive to make sure the abortion pill remains in demand, as do the study’s sponsors. This is a blatant conflict of interest.

Carole Novielli@CaroleNovielli

Person behind “Clinical Trial” to attempt to disprove abortion pill reversal (APR) – connected to abortion and takes money from abortion pill manufacturer- can you say CONFLICT? https://www.liveaction.org/news/whos-who-abortion-pill-reversal-study/ 

The who’s who (and who not to trust) behind an abortion pill reversal study

Abortion advocates want broad access to the abortion pill, and are pushing studies funded by people who stand to gain financially from abortion pill sales.

liveaction.org

See Carole Novielli’s other Tweets

 

See Carole Novielli’s other Tweets

Carole Novielli@CaroleNovielli

3/ Mitchell D Creinin is Professor at University of California, Davis (UCD) – the anti-APR study’s sponsor more here https://www.liveaction.org/news/whos-who-abortion-pill-reversal-study/  pic.twitter.com/ceovZv7Uqr

See Carole Novielli’s other Tweets
View image on Twitter

Carole Novielli@CaroleNovielli

4/ Mitchell D Creinin is a consultant for abortion pill manufacturer, receiving consulting fees $$/ honorarium f/ DANCO https://www.liveaction.org/news/whos-who-abortion-pill-reversal-study/  pic.twitter.com/GZ4s3kfmSp

See Carole Novielli’s other Tweets

Carole Novielli@CaroleNovielli

5/ Mitchell D Creinin provided “third-party telephone consults,” for pill (Mifeprex or RU486) DANCO – formed by Population Council
More here https://www.liveaction.org/news/whos-who-abortion-pill-reversal-study/  pic.twitter.com/MsAH2mXW7v

See Carole Novielli’s other Tweets

Carole Novielli@CaroleNovielli

6/ Creinin founding member of Society of Family Planning (SFP) began w/ Packard Foundation $$ – which is funding abortion pill studies/ publications. SFP funding study- granted UC Davis $401,764. https://www.liveaction.org/news/whos-who-abortion-pill-reversal-study/  pic.twitter.com/FTtWWM90gm

See Carole Novielli’s other Tweets

Carole Novielli@CaroleNovielli

7/ Creinin, deputy editor SFP’s journal Contraception, publishes Packard-funded reports promoting self-managed abortion. Funds Gynuity which sponsors abortion pill expansion studies https://www.liveaction.org/news/exposed-conflicts-interest-abortion-pill/  more here https://www.liveaction.org/news/whos-who-abortion-pill-reversal-study/  pic.twitter.com/CarYNczMXg

See Carole Novielli’s other Tweets

Carole Novielli@CaroleNovielli

8/ Packard’s investment seeded abortion pill MFG, DANCO including a $14 million loan as early as 1996 to bring drug RU486 (Mifepristone) to US Packard funds UC Davis sponsor of study https://www.liveaction.org/news/secrecy-abortion-pill-maker-investors/  More here https://www.liveaction.org/news/whos-who-abortion-pill-reversal-study/  pic.twitter.com/SYzUaTfwHV

See Carole Novielli’s other Tweets

Carole Novielli@CaroleNovielli

9/ Creinin is Principal Investigator (PI) in another clinical trial by abortionist on pharmacy dispension of abortion pill https://www.liveaction.org/news/this-abortionist-claims-abortion-pill-doesnt-need-regulations-hes-wrong/ 
More here https://www.liveaction.org/news/whos-who-abortion-pill-reversal-study/ 

The who’s who (and who not to trust) behind an abortion pill reversal study

Abortion advocates want broad access to the abortion pill, and are pushing studies funded by people who stand to gain financially from abortion pill sales.

liveaction.org

See Carole Novielli’s other Tweets

Carole Novielli@CaroleNovielli

10/ Creinin previous medical/lab director Planned Parenthood of Western Pennsylvania – and an abortionist involved in original clinical trials of RU-486 abortion pill

See Carole Novielli’s other Tweets

Carole Novielli@CaroleNovielli

11/ In summary- FOLLOW THE MONEY – something this @VICE report FAILED to do – https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/j5wqqp/theres-no-proof-abortion-reversals-are-real-this-study-could-end-the-debate 
These abortion “studies” are tied together by $$ from / Danco support from

There’s no proof “abortion reversals” are real. This study could end the debate.

Four states already mandate that doctors advise women their abortions can be reversed.

news.vice.com

See Carole Novielli’s other Tweets

As shown in the Twitter thread above, Creinin serves as consultant for abortion pill (Mifeprex) manufacturer, Danco, and receives consulting fees and compensation from the company. In addition, he receives honorarium from Danco. Creinin also provides “third-party telephone consults” for Danco. Creinin’s study sponsor is financed by the Packard Foundation, one of Danco’s major financial investors.

If this all weren’t enough to show a major conflict of interest, Creinin is also a founding member of the Society of Family Planning, which is collaborating on the study. This organization’s mission is to support abortion research, it, too, is funded by the Packard Foundation. Creinin is also the deputy editor of SFP’s official journalContraceptionPackard-funded studies in this journal unsurprisingly support the pro-abortion cause, claiming self-managed abortion is safe, and urging the undoing of current FDA safety standards restricting dispensation of the abortion pill (known as REMS). The Journal’s editorial board has been stacked with abortion industry insiders, including a National Abortion Federation board member and members of the Population Council (responsible for bringing the abortion pill into the US and forming DANCO, the manufacturer of the pill).  Obviously, the journal is pro-abortion.

Creinin is also the principal investigator in another clinical trial run abortionist/researcher Daniel Grossman (professor at University of California, San Francisco) on pharmacy dispension of the abortion pill.

Despite the fact that this conflict exists between the study’s “investigator” and Danco, media outlets ignore it. Such was the case over at Vice, which published the latest attack against abortion pill reversal, highlighting Creinin’s study without drawing one line to his connections to the abortion pill’s manufacturer. Vice headlined their hit piece: “THERE’S NO PROOF ‘ABORTION REVERSALS’ ARE REAL. THIS STUDY COULD END THE DEBATE,” in spite of the fact that Creinin’s study is only at the recruiting stage, and hasn’t reached any conclusions yet.

Or has it?

Creinin makes no secret that he doesn’t believe in abortion pill reversal  — and his profitable relationship with Danco should give any critically thinking person reason to question the motivations behind this push to “test” the effectiveness of the abortion pill reversal protocol.

    • This article is reprinted with permission. The original appeared here at Live Action News.

Conflicts of interest? Abortion pill investor funds study claiming women want expanded distribution

Posted in Abortion pill, DANCO, David and Lucile Packard Foundation, George Soros, Journal Contraception, Population Council, RU-486, self-managed abortion, Warren Buffet with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on November 30, 2018 by saynsumthn

EXPOSED: Massive conflicts of interest found in new abortion pill study

abortion pill

Abortion industry insiders insist that there is a large public interest in expanding distribution of the abortion pill by lifting safety requirements for the drug regimen. Now, right on cue, a study done by abortion industry insiders and funded by a large investor of the abortion pill’s manufacturer purports to show that women want “alternative models” for obtaining the abortion pill. But the move is anything but organic and is being strategically driven by abortion industry insiders.

Published by the Journal Contraception, the study claims that women support obtaining abortion pills “(1) in advance from a doctor for future use, (2) over-the-counter (OTC) from a drugstore and (3) online without a prescription.” But there is more beneath the surface at play here. Not only are the Journal and its authors deeply embedded in the abortion industry, but the funding for this study also came from the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, a major investor in Danco, the manufacturer of the abortion pill.

In 1998, according to reports, Packard seeded Danco with $10 million, and Packard also currently funds Gynuity Health Projects, which conducts abortion pill clinical trials. Packard’s investment in Danco included a $14 million loan as early as 1996 to bring the drug to the US, as well as additional grants made in 2000, 2004, and 2009. And yet, the Journal claims there are no conflicts of interest.

Image: Packard Foundation self managed abortion pill study (Image: 2018 study from Journal Contraception)

Packard Foundation self managed abortion pill study (Image: 2018 study from Journal Contraception

Additional investors in Danco include George Soros (Open Society), Warren Buffet (Buffet Foundation) and the California-based Kaiser Family Foundation.

Image: Packard Foundation invested in abortion pill manufacturer DANCO (Image: David and Lucile Packard Foundation )

Packard Foundation invested in abortion pill manufacturer DANCO (Image: David and Lucile Packard Foundation )

Journal Contraception  

Authors

Image: Journal Contraception 2018 study on self managed abortion

Journal Contraception 2018 study on self managed abortion

 

Image: Author Sarah Raifman Tweet June 2018 SB320 (Image: Twitter)

Author Sarah Raifman Tweet June 2018 SB320 (Image: Twitter)

  • Author Diana G. Foster is another ANSIRH staffer who opposes late-term abortion restrictions. She sits on the board of the Later Abortion Initiative (LAI), a group with the mission of “increas[ing] the number of sites where later abortion is available” and “expand[ing] the number of physicians who can perform later abortion, especially at 20 weeks’ gestation and beyond.” Foster has been applauded by the abortion advocacy group, NARAL.
Image: Author Diana G Foster applauded by NARAL 2016 tweet

Author Diana G Foster applauded by NARAL 2016 tweet

READ: Amazing: Over 500 babies saved thanks to abortion pill reversal

The abortion pill regimen, RU486, is made up of two drugs: Misoprostol and Mifeprex. This regimen is currently regulated by the FDA under a system known as REMS. As Live Action News previously explained, taking the abortion pill regimen isn’t just a simple thing — if a woman is too far along or if her pregnancy is ectopic, these factors put women at additional risk. There have been 22 reported deaths and thousands of hospitalizations since the abortion pill’s approval in 2000.

Live Action News has previously documented how:

  • Abortion insiders brought RU486 to the US.
  • Abortion insiders are conducting clinical trials for “home-use” and “self managed” abortions.
  • Abortion insiders collaborated to push “home use” abortions.
  • Abortion insiders recently coordinated a Tweetfest to promote “self-managed” abortions.
  • And now, abortion insiders conveniently roll out a study claiming women support “alternative models of medication abortion provision.”

Despite the clear conflicts of interest surrounding this study about the abortion pill, it and other studies like it are likely to go unchallenged by the mainstream media, just as abortion industry leader Planned Parenthood’s claims continue to go unchallenged. This does a grave disservice to women.

Fake ‘pregnancy center’ learns women want parenting help, not abortion

Posted in ANSIRH, Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, Contraception Journal, David and Lucile Packard Foundation, Fake Pregnancy Center, Feminist Womens Health Center, Planned Parenthood Employee with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on September 7, 2018 by saynsumthn

Image: All Options abortion billboards (Image credit Facebook)

The profitable abortion lobby with their language of “choice” has for years lashed out against pro-life pregnancy resource centers (PRC), falsely labeling them “fake” and “dishonest.” However, one pro-abortion referral service has chosen to masquerade as a PRC in Indiana. All-Options was specifically modeled after pro-life pregnancy centers, according to a blog post at the Abortion Gang (written by Catrina Otonoga, whose LinkedIn page states she works at the Preterm abortion facility). But one glaring difference is seen on the All-Options billboard below, where “abortion access” is listed as the first service:

Image: All Options billboard (Image: Facebook)

All Options billboard (Image: Facebook)

All-Options began in 2004 as Backline in Portland, and expanded to several other states, with its Talkline “counseling” number offering women the opportunity to speak to counselors who are “not licensed healthcare providers or mental health specialists.”

Image: All-Options Talkline no licensed counselors

All-Options Talkline

In 2014, All-Options created a GoFundMe page to raise money for a brick and mortar in Bloomington, Indiana, where it planned to offer “free pregnancy tests and condoms… Concrete resources like diapers, baby clothes, care packages, and educational materials… Referrals to pregnancy, birthing, abortion, adoption, parenting, and contraceptive providers and community resources.”

All-Options told supporters, “It is time to demonstrate that anti-abortion organizations do not have a monopoly on supporting parents and people who are continuing their pregnancies.” But is “All-Options” really about all options for women?

While All-Options advertises itself as a PRC, its stated goal is “to increase the availability of nonjudgmental pregnancy options counseling and to break down the silos that separate providers of abortion, adoption, pregnancy, and parenting services.”

In other words, All-Options openly supports abortion.

Image: All Options PRC (Image: All Options Facebook )

All Options PRC (Image: All Options Facebook )

As seen below, the center’s executive director “serves on the steering committee of All* Above All” — a group seeking to “build support for lifting bans that deny abortion coverage” — and ran the California Coalition for Reproductive Freedom:

 

Image: Parker Dockray (Screenshot: All Options website)

Parker Dockray (Screenshot: All Options website)

The center is so pro-abortion that, according to the social media posts below, it sued the state of Indiana over its abortion regulations:

Image: Shelly Dodson center director All Options abortion fake PRC (Image credit: Twitter)

(Image credit: Twitter)

In 2015, the All-Options Pregnancy Resource Center launched in Indiana, offering diapers and access to abortion funds are offered as “services.”

Image: All Options PRC services include abortion funds

All Options PRC services include abortion funds

And this “PRC” has a very cozy relationship with the profitable abortion industry.

  • Wanda Savala, public affairs manager for Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky, is currently on the board of All-Options.
  • Some All-Options volunteers also serve at Planned Parenthood.
  • Treasurer Kwajelyn Jackson currently serves as Community Education & Advocacy Director at the Feminist Women’s Health Center in Atlanta, Georgia.

On its website under “resources,” All-Options recommends that women contact the National Abortion Federation and Planned Parenthood, among others, for abortion.

Image: All Options PRC Refers to Planned Parenthood NAF for abortion

All-Options PRC refers to Planned Parenthood, NAF

A study, “What Women Seek from a Pregnancy Resource Center,”  funded by the pro-abortion David and Lucile Packard Foundation and published in 2016 in the pro-abortion journal Contraception, analyzed “survey data from first-time clients” of All-Options “between July and December 2015 on their reason(s) for seeking services….” Contraception is the official journal of the Association of Reproductive Health Professionals and the Society of Family Planning (originally founded as The American Association of Planned Parenthood Physicians by Alan Guttmacher). It is run by abortion supporters, and its 2018 editorial board consists of several high ranking abortionists and abortion advocates. It was no different in 2016, when the above study was published.

Author Katrina Kimport is on the faculty and staff of Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health (ANSIRH), a group which publishes workbooks on abortion training… and which is behind a host of questionable and discredited studies. Kimport is also with the Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, which is involved with “pioneering new methods of abortion, expanding the ranks of doctors specializing in abortion, and bolstering awareness of the positive impact of abortion on women’s lives.”

Also listed as authors are the aforementioned J. Parker Dockray and Shelly Dodson of All-Options PRC. The data, of course, came from a survey of All-Options PRC clients.

Dockray has been quoted as saying, “The prochoice movement is not always great about visibly supporting parents.” No argument there. And yet, it seems, according to the pro-abortion organization’s own survey, it was parenting support that was most sought out at All-Options… not abortion access.

 

Image: Fake PRC All Options promotes abortion

All-Options promotes abortion

The data compiled from the All-Options PRC survey of 270 clients, found that women using the All-Options PRC came to them for:

  • Free diapers (87%)
  • Baby clothes/items (44%)

In peer counseling, the clients most frequently discussed:

  • Parenting resources/referrals (55%)
  • Pregnancy options (6%)
  • Abortion (2%)

The study’s pro-abortion and highly biased authors admitted, “PRC clients largely sought parenting, not pregnancy, resources. The underutilization of pregnancy-options counseling and high demand for parenting materials and services point to unmet needs among caregivers of young children, particularly for diapers.” The authors concluded that the study’s results “suggest the need to rethink the allocation of resources toward funding or eliminating PRCs solely for the purpose of influencing women’s decisions about abortion.”

With thousands of legitimate pregnancy resource centers operating nationwide, why would Contraception focus on this fake “pregnancy center”? Perhaps they thought it would show a demand for more “abortion access.”

They thought wrong.