Nichols said that conclusions are in fact “far from unanimous regarding the effect of oral contraceptives on unintended pregnancy and abortion rates.”
Meanwhile, in regard to emergency contraception in particular, “the data are homogeneous … and point to a conclusion directly opposed to that of the Institute of Medicine committee.”
“While there are many 'professional and editorial opinions' that emergency contraception should be made readily available, and 'professional projections' that it could reduce unintended pregnancies, I have been unable find a single study indicating that it is actually effective in reducing unintended pregnancies or abortions in real population groups,” Nichols stated.
He also found that a critical portion of the committee's argument, regarding the allegedly “minimal” side effects of oral contraception, relied largely on “educational” material written at an eighth-grade level.
“The public was repeatedly assured, upon Sebelius’s passage of the mandates recommended by the IOM, that the report was an 'exhaustive review of the scientific evidence,'” Nichols recalled. “Yet one of the cruxes of the committee’s argument—and one which directly impacts the health of millions of American women—is sustained by educational pamphlets” along with “one other dated study.”
“Interestingly, the pamphlets themselves state that 'the average readability level of the series … is grade 6–8.' These promotional brochures do not cite even one study.”
The Institute of Medicine committee, Nichols said, ignored “peer-reviewed studies published in the most prestigious medical journals,” indicating that oral contraceptive users experience significantly higher rates of breast cancer, while possibly quadrupling their chances of suffering a stroke.
“We do not expect completely disinterested policymaking in our democracy,” Nichols observed. “What is surprising, however, is the audacity with which the committee circumvented professional research practices in order to arrive at the conclusions they held at the outset.”
“In fact, according to information available from the public record, these committee members have donated a total of $116,500 to pro-choice organizations and candidates. Public records show that not one of the fifteen committee members has financially supported a pro-life political candidate.”
Among the committee's members were a member of the Board of Directors of the NARAL Pro-Choice America Foundation, and a former board member of Physicians for Reproductive Choice and Health.
Other members included the current chairwoman of Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts, and the former chair and vice chair of Planned Parenthood of Nebraska and Council Bluffs.
(Story continues below)
Subscribe to our daily newsletter
“Whatever one thinks of the relevant issues, one would be hard-pressed to argue that this Institute of Medicine committee is politically nonpartisan,” said Nichols.