Alert: Women and Men who Care!!

by patio34 42 Replies latest social current

  • Sam Beli
    Sam Beli

    I find it disappointing that so many of you have accepted the indictment of this physician
    without any detectable verification. What corroborating evidence is there to support his
    condemnation? Have you sought the opinions of those who support him? Have you asked the
    man for his comments on these accusations? Not that I have seen. What we have seen here
    so far is little more than a smear campaign on the part of some writer who is unknown to
    most of us.


    This reminds me of how the judicial committees of the JW community operated: hear one side,
    make up one’s collective mind and proceed to a hearing (kangaroo court) followed by sentencing,
    followed by public disgrace.


    When will we learn to investigate the issues carefully, getting solid information from all sides,
    weighing the information carefully and only then coming to a reasonable and just conclusion?

  • patio34
    patio34

    Borgfree said:

    I have seen only good from the current President, certainly nothing like the last one.

    Cheers!

    Pat

  • patio34
    patio34

    Hi Sam,

    Thanks for your thought-provoking reply. Though the first few posts did verify the information thru the snopes website. For you, I pulled up the Time magazine article that was referred to. I don't know if that qualifies as verification for you, but here it is:

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Jesus and the FDA By KAREN TUMULTY


    Saturday, Oct. 05, 2002

    A quiet battle is raging over the Bush Administration's plan to appoint a scantily credentialed doctor, whose writings include a book titled As Jesus Cared for Women: Restoring Women Then and Now, to head an influential Food and Drug Administration (FDA) panel on women's health policy. Sources tell Time that the agency's choice for the advisory panel is Dr. W. David Hager, an obstetrician-gynecologist who also wrote, with his wife Linda, Stress and the Woman's Body, which puts "an emphasis on the restorative power of Jesus Christ in one's life" and recommends specific Scripture readings and prayers for such ailments as headaches and premenstrual syndrome. Though his resume describes Hager as a University of Kentucky professor, a university official says Hager's appointment is part time and voluntary and involves working with interns at Lexington's Central Baptist Hospital, not the university itself. In his private practice, two sources familiar with it say, Hager refuses to prescribe contraceptives to unmarried women. Hager did not return several calls for comment.

    FDA advisory panels often have near-final say over crucial health questions. If Hager becomes chairman of the 11-member Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee, he will lead its study of hormone-replacement therapy for menopausal women, one of the biggest controversies in health care. Some conservatives are trying to use doubts about such therapy to discredit the use of birth-control pills, which contain similar compounds. The panel also made the key recommendation in 1996 that led to approval of the "abortion pill," RU-486—a decision that abortion foes are still fighting. Hager assisted the Christian Medical Association last August in a "citizens' petition" calling upon the FDA to reverse itself on RU-486, saying it has endangered the lives and health of women.

    Hager was chosen for the post by FDA senior associate commissioner Linda Arey Skladany, a former drug-industry lobbyist with longstanding ties to the Bush family. Skladany rejected at least two nominees proposed by FDA staff members: Donald R. Mattison, former dean of the University of Pittsburgh School of Public Health, and Michael F. Greene, director of maternal- fetal medicine at Massachusetts General Hospital. Despite pressure from inside the FDA to make the appointment temporary, sources say, Skladany has insisted that Hager get a full four-year term. FDA spokesman Bill Pierce called Hager "well qualified."

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    I'm glad I looked up the article as it gives more information about this guy and his scanty credentials to be in such an influential position about women's health concerns. Thanks for the prod. The highlights are mine, of course.

    Pat

  • jst2laws
    jst2laws

    Borgfree,

    I personally would prefer, anytime, a Christian in office rather than a Godless man. . . .

    As Beryblue asked, you may have inadvertently implied that there are no Godly people other than Christians. There is a growing number of people here in the US and in Europe perhaps a majority who do not promote themselves as Christains. They are just none religious. But many are very educated and moral. Must we label them as "Godless"?

    Whatever, I might feel more comfortable with this type person in office because at least I would not fear that they might abuse their position with some Holy crusade based on their qwerky religious notions.

    but that does not mean the laws of the land should be based on that faith.

    What's so bad about that? What standards should be used in making laws? None? I think that is where we are heading.

    The problem is that Islam and others are asking the same question as far as basing laws of the land on their holy writings. We have to understand that while the US has been dominantly Christian for 200 years the founding fathers wisely forbid the involvement of any religion in government policy making. I will explain my feelings further if I can get together a post tomorrow on the religious roots of the United States.

    Jst2laws

  • Sam Beli
    Sam Beli

    Facts seem to be available on RU 486 here: http://www.ru486facts.org/

    There is a wealth of information here including a reference to the FDA’s web site.

    You can note that Dr Hagar is not alone among physicians in being concerned about this
    drug. Actually, it seems that he is in the majority. Look at the section on where
    you get the drug (The claim of the writer of this smear mail that RU486 is "a safe and early form of
    medical abortion" may only be the uninformed opinion of one dangerous person).

    Here is a small clip from that section:

    Few doctors offer RU-486

    According to a September 24, 2001 Kaiser Family Foundation survey, only 1% of general practitioners
    and 6% of gynecologists gave RU-486 to a patient in the first year that it was available in the
    United States. Among doctors who specialize in abortion, only 12% have offered RU-486

    Clinics which do a high volume of business are more likely to offer RU-486 abortions. The National
    Abortion Federation [NAF] estimates that half of NAF- member clinics offer mifepristone.

    Almost all college and university health centers will not dispense RU-486, because, they explain,
    "they can't meet FDA guidelines for administering it safely."

    Please read much more on this site and elsewhere before making up your minds.

  • patio34
    patio34

    Thanks for the web address, Sam. I'm off to bed now, but will look at it more tomorrow. I wouldn't want to be hasty in forming my opinions. However, that wasn't the only, or even main, issue. It was that he doesn't prescribe birth control for unmarried women and seems to be of the opinion that women's medical issues can be handled well by Bible reading and prayer. Not that those are the issues, but seem to give an overview of an inappropriate worldview in a decision-making capability. Well, I'm rambling because I'm almost asleep. Night all!

    -- Pat

  • obiwan
    obiwan

    refuses to prescribe contraceptives to unmarried women.

    Now dammit, If I want to get it on with an unmarried woman and not get her pregnant that should be our right......shoot, take all the fun out of it!

    (sorry, I can't get the yellow highlight to turn off)

  • closer2fine
    closer2fine

    I posted this on another board I visit, below are some of the reactions I got:

    You have stated your opinion and I have the right to do the same. I am excited about this appointment. I know a lot of you have different religious beliefs than I do, but as a Christian woman, this is fantastic. I don't like the fact that it will effect studies for other medical needs. But I don't see why we shouldn't have an antiabortionist appointed. OUR PRESIDENT IS AGAINST ABORTION TOO. Why not have someone appointed with Christian beliefs, that's what our country was founded on. GO BUSH!

    Ok so now I have said my peace. I didn't do so to start a riot or to get flamed, but just another opinion. You don't have to agree with it nor do I with yours, Have a great day, ladies.

    I guess I have to stand up with you. I read it and was wondering what the problem was. LOL I am pro-life and proud of it, however I don't neccessarily agree with no contreceptives for unmarried women.

    The wonderful thing about America is that we are all free to have our own views and I am very excited about this.

    By the way I have found relief from PMS through prayer. But so have people who do yogo and other things. To each his own.
    Doesn't bother me abit, and I do believe this article is slanted and inaccurate
    Amen

    the pill causes>>>insufficient thickening of the endometrium, which prevents attachment of the egg<<<

    The word they fail to include in this statement is "fertilized", since non-fertilized eggs do not attach to the endometrium.

    Many people would argue that preventing a fertilized egg from implanting is the same as abortion.

    Now, I'm not as eloquent as many of you here, but this frustrates me to no end. The FDA's reproductive health department being run by someone who uses his religion to make medical decisions. That's fine and good if he wants to do that in a practice. If my OB/GYN refused to give me the pill when I was unmarried (in my case it was for medical reasons), I could simply go to another doctor who WOULD give it to me. However, when he's in a position to influence what is FDA-approved and what is not, and is (from what I understand) using his religion to make changes...that's scary. I am not a Christian, and I do not want my reproductive rights, health, etc., to be affected because someone who IS a Christian is in a position of power to do so.

    His advice for reading the Bible for PMS is great for people who want to come to his practice. However, reading a book I don't believe in sure as heck isn't going to make MY unbearably painful cramps go away, so I hope he doesn't mind if I stay on the pill (sarcasm).

    Anyway...I guess we'll see what happens now. I respect those who want to practice their beliefs, I just hope that this man doesn't use HIS to try to affect MY reproductive rights, since I do NOT share his beliefs.

    Anyone have anything to add before I respond to these women??????? Mind you, it isn't a debate board or anything, just some mommies posting.

    Thanks,

    closer

  • teenyuck
    teenyuck

    Getting good OB/GYN care is hard enough.

    I have never had children. As a woman who just needs gyno care and birth control, the docs I have seen treat me like a second class citizen. Since we have relocated to 5 citicies in 12 years, I have had 6 different gynos. (1 moved to a farm to be closer to nature and her own 7 children)

    Anyway, my periods have been 2-3 weeks long, I called and was told to go see an endocrinologist...it must be my hormones.

    I saw the endo yesterday. The endo asked if the gyno checked for fibroids, did a D & C or any other thing to look for *thngs* inside of me to make my periods last 2-3 weeks long. No, I said...the doc looked at her intern and shook her head. Clearly now I have to call the gyno and ask *whats up*?

    I have a FEMALE gyno. They just are too busy and too strectched to really care. And she understands women. She is one. (I think/hope)

    A man who thinks prayer will work on PMS is an ass. He has no right pushing his stupid, F-upd, bible-thumping agenda on women.

    His priority should be women's health and what is the best for the patient. Only that. If that means pregnancy prevention, he has an obligation to help.

  • Sam Beli
    Sam Beli

    Re: Dr Hager, you can read about his faculty appointment here:
    http://www.mc.uky.edu/obg/People/Faculty/Genl/Hager%20WD%20.htm

    You will note that he has worked at a couple of impressive insitutions,
    The Centers for Disease Control, and Emory University. The U of K is
    no slouch either.

    Read about where he works here: http://www.centralbap.com/

    This is an impressive facility with 25 OB/GYN surgeons on staff. That is a huge number
    of doctors for the average hospital, so their practice and experience must be extensive.
    His own group consists nine (9) physicians from what I can tell, again a huge group.

    There is no way from here for me to tell what he prescribes and what he does not offer
    to his patients. It is not unusual for any given doctor to use or not use certain
    treatment modalities. One of the finest physicians that I have known advised his patients
    to wait until married to have sex. Like most physicians he did not go around preaching
    abstanance, but when asked he offered his opinion. Perhaps Dr Hager has done the same thing.
    We just do not know from what has been offered here so far.

    In my experience, professionals usually have high moral standards, contrary to what the
    WTS would have us believe. Nevertheless, they usually do not use "strong arm tactics"
    to impose their preferences on others. Lets give this guy the benefit of the doubt until
    we know more about him.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit