U.S. District Judge Daniel Domenico said in an opinion on Saturday that a Colorado law banning so-called medication abortion reversal treatment likely violates the U.S. Constitution’s guarantee of religious freedom. His order stops the state from enforcing the law against Bella Health and Wellness, which sued to block it, or against anyone else working with Bella Health, while he considers the medical center’s challenge to the law.

The office of Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser, which defended the law, declined to comment.

Medication abortion begins with the drug mifepristone, which blocks the action of the hormone progesterone, crucial for sustaining pregnancy, and is completed with a second drug, misoprostol. Proponents of the so-called medication abortion reversal say that if a woman changes her mind after taking mifepristone but before taking misoprostol, the pregnancy can be continued by administering a high dose of progesterone.

There are no large controlled studies of the treatment, and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has said that its safety and efficacy are unsupported by science.

  • girlfreddy@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    101
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Someday it would be nice to see judicial decisions on women’s healthcare be supported by science instead of a Constitution written by mostly men.

          • LazaroFilm@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            It should say right on the top of the box.

            FAITH ITEM - NOT MEDICINE

            or something like that.

            • littletoolshed@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              Are you suggesting that a massive dose of progesterone should not be considered medication? Because that’s what this article is about.

              • grue@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                12
                ·
                1 year ago

                He’s suggesting that “medicine” has effects backed by some reasonable amount of scientific study. Telling people to ingest random substances that don’t have that is essentially witchcraft, not medicine.

                • littletoolshed@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  But if you want to label progesterone as “faith items”, don’t they become even less controlled? If they are labeled as a medical item (or whatever makes sense to keep nut jobs from ‘prescribing’ it) wouldn’t they fall under more observation and inspection and control? The whole reason I’m asking these questions is because it seems like you all want to give religious nut jobs the ability to dose people with hormones as part of a religious ritual. Is that what you all are saying? I did say at the beginning that I might be misunderstanding.

                  • grue@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    I see your point, but I’m pretty sure there’s a legal way to both prohibit doctors from prescribing it and from witch-doctor nutjobs from “prescribing” it.

                • littletoolshed@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Yeah, it’s a hormone. Which is why I imagine any synthesis of it would be controlled like a medication and not declared as a faith item. But maybe I misunderstand

                  • TheDoozer@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    It shouldn’t be able to be marketed as medicine, because medicine is held to a higher standard. Kind of like how supplements and naturopathic stuff can’t claim to be medicine.

      • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, imagine if it was any other religion. Hell I’m not dumb enough to throw money at fighting for proven medical procedures that my religion blesses

    • PrefersAwkward@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      1 year ago

      If biology for humans were such that both participants had an unpredictable, uncontrollable, 50/50 chance to carry the baby, abortion access for all and would be a non-issue.

      Alternatively, if Jerry Falwell never existed, it still wouldn’t be nearly as contentious an issue.

      • AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        Humans in any meaningful numbers never fail to find a group of their own to single out, marginalize, and persecute out of schadenfreude.

    • quindraco@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      You’re supposing the judge obeyed the Constitution here. He did not; freedom of religion is not freedom to defraud, and the people selling this drug are committing fraud.

    • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      *mostly white men who would be rather confused by the whole thing.

      Partly because abortions were common if not particularly talked about.