This scientific journal just retracted chemical abortion pill studies for one shocking reason

Photo by Pixabay from Pexels

The so-called scientific community has become nothing more than an arm of the radical Left.

And once-respected scientific organizations are working overtime to censor any scientific facts that disprove their Leftist theories.

That’s why this scientific journal just retracted chemical abortion pill studies for one shocking reason.

Two studies cited by both plaintiffs and a federal Judge in Texas that clearly showed the harms of the chemical abortion pill mifepristone have now been retracted by the publisher of the scientific journal in which they first appeared.

Censoring the dangers of chemical abortions

Sage Publications recently said it had retracted three studies about the dangers of mifepristone. 

Two of the studies were cited heavily by Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk last year when he sided with a group of pro-life physicians and revoked the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the deadly and dangerous chemical abortion pill. 

A federal appeals court later overturned parts of Kacsmaryk’s ruling, and the Biden administration is appealing the case to the U.S. Supreme Court. 

Oral arguments in the Biden administration’s appeal are scheduled for March 26. 

In their statement announcing the retraction, Sage said the authors of the three articles supposedly had “undeclared conflicts of interest.” 

Sage also claimed the authors used unreliable methodologies to misrepresent their conclusions.  

“Following Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines, we made this decision with the journal’s editor because of undeclared conflicts of interest and after expert reviewers found that the studies demonstrate a lack of scientific rigor that invalidates or renders unreliable the authors’ conclusions,” Sage said in the statement.

Of course, none of these concerns were brought up when Sage first published the articles.

Sage only raised the concerns after they realized they were doing damage to the pro-abortion lobby, especially the purveyors of deadly chemical abortion drugs. 

The studies were first published in the journal “Health Services Research and Managerial Epidemiology,” and the lead author for each was James Studnicki, a vice president at the Charlotte Lozier Institute. 

Sage now claims Studnicki, and the other authors declared they had no conflicts of interest when they submitted the article for publication.

Using questionable “experts” to refute science 

The publisher says after a reader contacted the publisher with concerns about the studies, they decided to have two subject matter experts undertake an “independent post-publication peer review” of the three articles. 

The alleged experts found “fundamental problems” that “invalidate the authors’ conclusions in whole or in part,” Sage said. 

In one study, Studnicki pointed out that abortions using mifepristone were followed by a high rate of emergency room visits compared to surgical abortions. 

The study examined Medicaid patients’ visits to the emergency room within 30 days of having an abortion. 

Judge Kacsmaryk cited that study when he found that a group of pro-life providers had standing to sue over mifepristone’s approval, because he said it proves they would be harmed by having to treat patients who may suffer complications after taking mifepristone. 

Another of the studies found that those post-chemical abortion complications are frequently misclassified as miscarriages. 

Kacsmaryk also cited that study when he wrote that the true rate of complications from mifepristone is underreported. 

Studnicki and one of the other authors released a statement in response to the retractions, defending their work. 

They said their affiliation with pro-life groups was “fully known and identified to Sage” when the articles were submitted, and the company has “no justification for this decision to retract any of the three papers, much less all three.” 

But to the radical pro-abortion lobby no justification for censoring science is needed, as long as doing so props up the abortion industry. 

Pro-Life Press will keep you up-to-date on any developments to this ongoing story.