关于米非司酮安全性的无根据比较的起源和扩散。

IF 2.7 Q3 BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY
BioTech Pub Date : 2025-05-24 DOI:10.3390/biotech14020039
Cameron Louttit
{"title":"关于米非司酮安全性的无根据比较的起源和扩散。","authors":"Cameron Louttit","doi":"10.3390/biotech14020039","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>As part of the substantial public discourse surrounding the distribution and use of mifepristone, which is used with misoprostol to facilitate drug-induced abortions, claims comparing the safety of this regimen to that of common pharmaceuticals have emerged and proliferated. Offered in forums ranging from social media to the Supreme Court, these claims have so gained public acceptance that they are now echoed without scrutiny and, at times, reference. Yet the simplistic slogan that \"mifepristone is safer than Tylenol\", though easily disseminated, defies both an intuitive understanding of how we evaluate drug safety and our norms and regulations for doing so. Indeed, if such an assertion was attributable to the manufacturer, it would precipitate a reprimand by the FDA given the lack of specific, controlled, and head-to-head evidence rightly required for its support. To the extent that these claims persist, however, including among the outputs of medical societies, abortion centers, clinical researchers, and government officials, and to the extent that they aim to inform both individual and public decision-making, it is critical that the evidence offered for their support be thoroughly explored. Such examination reveals these claims to be wholly unfounded, offering deficient and disingenuous representations of safety for any of the drugs compared.</p>","PeriodicalId":34490,"journal":{"name":"BioTech","volume":"14 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12191252/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Origins and Proliferation of Unfounded Comparisons Regarding the Safety of Mifepristone.\",\"authors\":\"Cameron Louttit\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/biotech14020039\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>As part of the substantial public discourse surrounding the distribution and use of mifepristone, which is used with misoprostol to facilitate drug-induced abortions, claims comparing the safety of this regimen to that of common pharmaceuticals have emerged and proliferated. Offered in forums ranging from social media to the Supreme Court, these claims have so gained public acceptance that they are now echoed without scrutiny and, at times, reference. Yet the simplistic slogan that \\\"mifepristone is safer than Tylenol\\\", though easily disseminated, defies both an intuitive understanding of how we evaluate drug safety and our norms and regulations for doing so. Indeed, if such an assertion was attributable to the manufacturer, it would precipitate a reprimand by the FDA given the lack of specific, controlled, and head-to-head evidence rightly required for its support. To the extent that these claims persist, however, including among the outputs of medical societies, abortion centers, clinical researchers, and government officials, and to the extent that they aim to inform both individual and public decision-making, it is critical that the evidence offered for their support be thoroughly explored. Such examination reveals these claims to be wholly unfounded, offering deficient and disingenuous representations of safety for any of the drugs compared.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":34490,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BioTech\",\"volume\":\"14 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12191252/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BioTech\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/biotech14020039\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BioTech","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/biotech14020039","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

米非司酮与米索前列醇一起用于促进药物流产,作为围绕米非司酮的分配和使用的大量公众讨论的一部分,将该方案的安全性与普通药物的安全性进行比较的主张已经出现并激增。在从社交媒体到最高法院的各种论坛上,这些说法已经获得了公众的认可,现在它们在没有经过仔细审查的情况下得到了呼应,有时还会被引用。然而,“米非司酮比泰诺更安全”这种简单的口号虽然很容易传播,但却违背了我们对如何评估药物安全性的直觉理解,也违背了我们评估药物安全性的规范和法规。事实上,如果这样的断言是由制造商造成的,由于缺乏具体的、可控的和直接的证据来支持它,它将会引起FDA的谴责。然而,如果这些主张仍然存在,包括在医学协会、堕胎中心、临床研究人员和政府官员的产出中存在,并且这些主张旨在为个人和公共决策提供信息,那么彻底探索支持这些主张的证据至关重要。这样的检查表明,这些说法是完全没有根据的,对所比较的任何药物的安全性提供了不充分和不诚实的陈述。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Origins and Proliferation of Unfounded Comparisons Regarding the Safety of Mifepristone.

As part of the substantial public discourse surrounding the distribution and use of mifepristone, which is used with misoprostol to facilitate drug-induced abortions, claims comparing the safety of this regimen to that of common pharmaceuticals have emerged and proliferated. Offered in forums ranging from social media to the Supreme Court, these claims have so gained public acceptance that they are now echoed without scrutiny and, at times, reference. Yet the simplistic slogan that "mifepristone is safer than Tylenol", though easily disseminated, defies both an intuitive understanding of how we evaluate drug safety and our norms and regulations for doing so. Indeed, if such an assertion was attributable to the manufacturer, it would precipitate a reprimand by the FDA given the lack of specific, controlled, and head-to-head evidence rightly required for its support. To the extent that these claims persist, however, including among the outputs of medical societies, abortion centers, clinical researchers, and government officials, and to the extent that they aim to inform both individual and public decision-making, it is critical that the evidence offered for their support be thoroughly explored. Such examination reveals these claims to be wholly unfounded, offering deficient and disingenuous representations of safety for any of the drugs compared.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BioTech
BioTech Immunology and Microbiology-Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
51
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信