We've known for a long time that low doses of mifepristone, the active drug in the abortion pill RU-486, can help treat various health problems in women. Now a new study shows it may also effectively shut down the breast cancer gene.
Aside from being great news about a potential new treatment for a deadly disease, an FDA approval of mifepristone as a cancer treatment could help safeguard the option of medication abortion.
Women who choose the abortion pill actually take two different drugs -- mifepristone to stop the fetus from growing and misoprostol to induce the cramps that expel it. Even though misoprostol can be taken on its own to induce abortion, it's much safer for women to have a dose of mifepristone (sold in the U.S. as Mifeprex) first.
For various reasons, RU-486 has long been a target of anti-choicers. They were incensed that Clinton ended a decade of FDA foot-dragging and shepherded the drug's approval as one of his first acts in office. Anti-choice leaders said over and over that this drug was dangerous because it would make having an abortion "just like popping an aspirin" -- though we all know that's certainly not true.
For all their concern about RU-486, the antis pay much less attention to the second drug in the two-drug combo, the misoprostol -- even though this drug can be used alone to cause an abortion, whereas mifepristone (RU-486) cannot. Misoprostol flies under the radar because it never went through a complicated FDA approval process for use in abortions. The drug has long been used to treat certain types of ulcers, so pro-choicers never had to push for FDA approval to use it in abortions. Doctors simply prescribe it off-label, which is perfectly safe seeing as how a wealth of medical research supports the use of misoprostol in abortions.
Back to today's news about mifepristone and breast cancer. If we can get the FDA to approve this drug to treat illness, not only could it save women's lives, it could ensure medication abortion will always be an option for women. The antis may be able to get the FDA to take mifepristone off the market as an abortion pill, but doctors will still be able to safely prescribe it off-label for that purpose. It will become like the other drug, misoprostol.
This is especially important because it's clear the anti-choice movement sees RU-486 as an easy target. After several women died from a rare bacterial infection after taking the abortion pill, even pro-choice doctors were concerned, and rightly so. Anti-choicers seized the opportunity, all of a sudden claiming to be concerned about women's health rather than fetal rights. They held congressional hearings and convened a CDC conference on the issue, all with an eye toward getting the FDA to revoke its approval for the drug. Though it's certainly important to find out whether the women's deaths were caused by the abortion pill or some other factor entirely, all of the "inquiries" into the safety of medication abortion were rooted in taking the pill off the market, not making its use safer. And as it turns out, the rare bacteria in question probably affects women who are pregnant, not specifically those who have taken the abortion pill.
The antis also loved to hype the possibly RU-486-related deaths because of common confusion of RU-486 and Plan B. Coverage of the bacterial deaths often said it was caused by the "morning-after pill," which is flat-out wrong. So it's a win-win for the antis: they can target an abortion method while at the same time making the public think emergency contraception is unsafe.
So my prediction for the next feminist battle with the FDA? Approval of mifepristone for a non-abortion purpose. Maybe we can save the lives of women with breast cancer and protect this abortion option at the same time.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: RU-486 as breast cancer treatment? A win-win for feminists.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/4395
Weekly Feministing Newsletter
Feministing RSS Feed
I saw something about this on the news. Kinda puts a damper on the theory that abortion increases your risk for breast cancer when one of the medications is now looking to be preventing it.
Afaeyre, just what I was thinking. Kind of ironic -- I can't count the number of times I've heard the anti-abortion folks claim abortion increases your risk of breast cancer.
Note that the article says "No one is suggesting women use the abortion pill that way," in regard to using RU486 to prevent breast cancer. This is interesting, but not taking us very far down the road toward treatment at this point.
I disagree. It makes perfect sense that they'd dissuade women from taking Mifeprex (a dose of mifepristone designed to induce abortion) to combat breast cancer. Most proposed alternate uses of mifepristone (as a contraceptive, to treat illnesses or depression, etc.) require a MUCH lower dose than women take to terminate a pregnancy.
Most proposed alternate uses of mifepristone (as a contraceptive, to treat illnesses or depression, etc.) require a MUCH lower dose than women take to terminate a pregnancy.
Yeah, but you could hoard it and take several lower doses at once, and as stated, doctors could prescribe it in higher doses off-label.
I actually wouldn't be surprised if the reverse happened; women we denied the drug to cure breast cancer because it could be used to induce abortion. Doctors are already telling women not to drink, to take certain vitamins etc, "just in case" they get pregnant.
dhsredhead:
Don't you think it might not be a bad idea to avoid heavy drinking if you are likely to become pregnant (have unprotected sex)?
And you can drink *small* amounts of alcohol when you're pregnant without risk of FAS.
Bearcat, don't you think it's more relevant to urge women to have protected sex (against unwanted pregnancies but also against STDs) rather than to tell them not to drink too much "just in case they might get pregnant".
Besides, many doctors (at least, it is the general tendency in France) now recommend for pregnant women to AVOID alcohol altogether because they don't know the exact level at which alcohol consumption can become a threat to the foetus. So they recommend a "no alcohol rule", just to be on the safe side.
Not to start the "pre-pregnant debate" all over again, but I find it extremely insulting when doctors behave like I might become pregnant at any moment, even though I clearly state that I take every possible precaution to avoid it and, in case of accidents, I would just take the decision to abort. I find that many doctors are quite patronizing in that respect.
"Don't you think it might not be a bad idea to avoid heavy drinking if you are likely to become pregnant (have unprotected sex)?"
The problem with the current recommendations is that it treats women as if they are eternally pregnant. Even if we have no intentions of having children doctors are apparently now being told to instruct women to take folic acid supplements on a daily basis, not smoke, and not drink. I don't think anyone should smoke or drink, but I also don't think it's a doctor's place to instruct us on how to care for our own bodies when we are not pregnant.
I agree that doctors should listen to patients when they say that they don't have unprotected sex, but if you are having unprotected sex, it's a good idea to avoid alcohol.
Also, I just read on Slate that mifepristone might not be the best choice for breast cancer prevention. Long term use can cause immune deficiency. The good news is that, since we know how it works, we can look for another drug that works in a similar way.