In an effort to inform people that the Journal of Medical Ethics needs greater scrutiny in the peer review process, I’ve been scouring the net for mentions of "rhythm method", "Plan B", "embryo death", "Bovens", and related topics. In the process, I have come across some startling bad statements regarding the scientific study of fertility – on both sides of the political spectrum. Let’s start with some MSM headlines related to Bovens’ article about an alleged relationship between the "rhythm method" and embryo death.
Rhythm method kills more embryos than condom use
Controversial rhythm method study revealed
Rhythm method linked to massive embryonic death
How Vatican roulette kills embryos
‘Rhythm’ method a killer of embryos
Notice a trend in these headlines? They all assume two things: that Bovens published the results of a scientific study and that study clearly implicated the rhythm method with embryo deaths. IT’S NOT A STUDY! It’s a sloppy polemical essay. JME should be ashamed for publishing it.
In the wake of this publication, there have been numerous examples of folks showing a poor understanding of fertility and an unwillingness to be corrected. I am certainly no expert in fertility, but I have attempted to do my homework. If you believe my following observations are incorrect or misleading in any way, do not hesitate to let me know.
There has recently been a great push in the world of women's health to consider prescription birth control (oral contraceptives, IUD, DepoProvera, etc.) not only a "right" but indeed a necessity – the "standard of care," if you will. The fact that ever-growing numbers of registered pharmacists are refusing to fill legal prescriptions for such birth control has caught the attention of quite a few powerful pro-choice and "feminist" groups, who have made it their goal to force such professionals by law to fill all such prescriptions with no questions asked. As a practicing pharmacist, I would like to try to address this issue.