Louttit Cameron
Charlotte Lozier Institute, Arlington, VA 22206, USA.
BioTech (Basel). 2025 May 24;14(2):39. doi: 10.3390/biotech14020039.
As part of the substantial public discourse surrounding the distribution and use of mifepristone, which is used with misoprostol to facilitate drug-induced abortions, claims comparing the safety of this regimen to that of common pharmaceuticals have emerged and proliferated. Offered in forums ranging from social media to the Supreme Court, these claims have so gained public acceptance that they are now echoed without scrutiny and, at times, reference. Yet the simplistic slogan that "mifepristone is safer than Tylenol", though easily disseminated, defies both an intuitive understanding of how we evaluate drug safety and our norms and regulations for doing so. Indeed, if such an assertion was attributable to the manufacturer, it would precipitate a reprimand by the FDA given the lack of specific, controlled, and head-to-head evidence rightly required for its support. To the extent that these claims persist, however, including among the outputs of medical societies, abortion centers, clinical researchers, and government officials, and to the extent that they aim to inform both individual and public decision-making, it is critical that the evidence offered for their support be thoroughly explored. Such examination reveals these claims to be wholly unfounded, offering deficient and disingenuous representations of safety for any of the drugs compared.
作为围绕米非司酮(与米索前列醇联合使用以促进药物流产)的分发和使用展开的大量公众讨论的一部分,将这种用药方案的安全性与常见药物的安全性进行比较的说法已经出现并不断扩散。这些说法出现在从社交媒体到最高法院的各种论坛上,已经如此获得公众认可,以至于现在人们不假思索地重复这些说法,有时甚至都不提及出处。然而,“米非司酮比泰诺更安全”这句简单的口号,尽管易于传播,却既违背了我们对药物安全性评估的直观理解,也违背了我们进行评估的规范和规定。事实上,如果这样的断言出自制造商,鉴于缺乏支持它所需的具体、对照和直接对比的证据,美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)会对其进行斥责。然而,只要这些说法持续存在,包括在医学协会、堕胎中心、临床研究人员和政府官员的言论中,并且只要它们旨在为个人和公共决策提供依据,那么就必须彻底探究为支持这些说法而提供的证据。这样的审查表明这些说法完全没有根据,对所比较的任何药物的安全性都提供了有缺陷且不真诚的表述。