lifenews.com
2025-11-15
When the FDA approved mifepristone twenty-five years ago, it did so with full awareness that the drug carried serious risks--risks significant enough to warrant a special safety program known as a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS). Yet reading recent headlines, one might think the abortion pill had achieved something close to sainthood.
In late September, STAT News marked the anniversary by calling mifepristone a "hero" of modern abortion care--safer, they claimed, than Viagra or even pregnancy itself. Within days, The Guardian, NPR, PBS NewsHour, and Scientific American joined the chorus, publishing nearly interchangeable pieces that hailed the drug's "exceptional safety" and dismissed any dissent as "junk science" or "conservative backlash."
Not one of these outlets seriously engaged with the growing evidence--or the real experiences of women--that challenge this carefully curated narrative. Rather than functioning as skeptics, which is what reporters are supposed to do, too many journalists have become defenders of the abortion industry's narrative.