The Risk of Mifepristone Ruling: How Ideologues Could Upend Our Health Care System

Key Highlights :

1. Anti-abortion activists are trying to restrict access to abortion in other states, and this could have serious consequences for patients' health.

2. The case in question is one of the most brazen attacks yet against reproductive health, and if the lower courts' rulings are not reversed, it could upend the Food and Drug Administration's drug regulatory process.

3. The anti-abortion activists are seeking to restrict access to abortion across the United States, which could have far-reaching consequences for the nation's health.

     The mifepristone ruling may have far-reaching implications for the health of Americans and our health care system. In their pursuit of overturning Roe v. Wade, anti-abortion activists, legislators, and litigants have proposed extreme measures that ignore medical science, increase the odds of maternal death, and insert government into the exam room. Now, the Supreme Court is tasked with a decision that could determine the future of the Food and Drug Administration's drug regulatory process.

     The Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. F.D.A. case, in which anti-abortion organizations and doctors argue that the F.D.A. did not properly follow protocol when approving the two-drug mifepristone regimen for abortion, is one of the most dangerous attacks on reproductive health yet. If the lower courts’ rulings on mifepristone are not reversed, it could upend the entire drug regulatory system and throw our health care system into chaos.

     The implications of this case extend far beyond abortion access. Upholding any part of the district court’s ruling would almost immediately prompt challenges to other F.D.A.-approved drugs, including vaccines for Covid-19, common types of birth control, medications used to treat cancer and arthritis, drugs to prevent or treat H.I.V., and gender-affirming care. It could also include widely used drugs sold over-the-counter, such as those used to treat pain, allergies, and heartburn.

     The American Medical Association, along with a dozen other leading medical organizations, have filed amicus briefs in opposition of this politically motivated attack on patient and physician autonomy. They argue that we cannot allow pseudoscience and speculation to override the substantial weight of scientific evidence from millions of patients that confirm the safety and efficacy of a drug or course of treatment.

     The mifepristone ruling could have devastating consequences on the integrity of the F.D.A. approval process, our access to medical advancements, and whether we want science or ideologues informing decisions about our health. We must protect our patients, public health, and the shared decision-making at the core of the physician-patient relationship. The stakes are simply too high to allow this ideologically driven case to upend our health care system.

Continue Reading at Source : nytimes