Wednesday, March 08, 2006

Prescriptive Authority Agreements for EC in Washington

The more I dig into the EC/Plan B Prescriptive Authority Agreements that Planned Parenthood and Olympia sprang on us the more disgusted I get.

Here an article from the Journal of the American Medical Women's Association that explains the Prescriptive Authority Agreements and how they introduced EC to state, including the testing conducted on the women of Washington.

The David and Lucille Packard Foundation provided funding for the study. That's the same outfit that provided funding for developing and marketing Plan B. So the same foundation that worked to develop a product is the same one testing its market introduction. That doesn't seem like such a good idea.

Here's all the groups who thought it would be a great idea to basically let anyone in Washington get their hands on EC/Plan B:

Program for Appropriate Technology in Health (Also participants in bringing Plan B to market)
Washington State Pharmacist’s Association
University of Washington Department of Pharmacy
Washington State Board of Pharmacy
Elgin DDB

(Is there anyone left in the state who is independent of Planned Parenthood?)

Even the Washington State Trial Lawyers Association seemed to think passing these pills out was a good idea. When I looked at the form that women, or men for that matter, have to sign to get EC, I thought it was a trial lawyers dream come true.

Everyone of JAMWA's listed "benefits" of EC/Plan B could now be openingly questioned thanks to new studies and information coming out of Scotland and Finland where EC is widely available. (Scottish Council on Human Bio-ethics' "Briefing Paper on the Morning-After-Pill," Jan. 2002).

Knowing what we know now about EC/Plan B, it's time to revisit PAA for Emergency Contraception.

By the way, can we get the follow-up reports on unintended pregnancy (i.e. increased sexual activity) and abortion rates where they tested this pill? It would be good to see the STD rates as well.

No comments: