By GARDINER HARRIS
Published: June 17, 2010
Please read this report. It is fascinating that the author saw fit to mention, “The committee spent the day in a cold discussion of the sobering realities that follow moments of passion, a discussion punctuated by the clacking of knitting needles from Dr. Paula Hilliard, a committee member and professor of gynecologic specialties at the Stanford University School of Medicine.”
I think somebody is confused. The report about this new “morning after” pill states, “Ella blocks the effects of progesterone, a female hormone that spurs ovulation. “
In reality, ovulation – and the resultant corpus luteum left behind when the mature egg is released – stimulates the production and release of progesterone, which the woman’s body uses to prepare for a pregnancy. Without sufficient progesterone, the uterus will not accept implantation of a fetilized egg. The corpus luteum eventually looses its ability and progesterone levels fall – thus beginning a period (a time wher uterine contents are flushed in preparation for the nest cycle). If a pregnancy occurs, the new baby contnues the stimulation of progesterone.
Blocking progesterone activity essentially makes the woman’s body inhospitable to implantation. The fertilized egg is lost from the body before it can implant.
I have to wonder how much of the company literature I can believe if they begin by improperly stating the role of progesterone in pregnancy. The end result of low progesterione is an inhospitable womb. That much is true. The stepwise process is misrepresented. From my perspective, the chicanery is in place to confuse the already confused regulators into approving their drug. I would hope that FDA panels have a better understanding of basic hormne physiology and pregnancy.
Am I actually dreaming in stead of hoping?