Pack my bags and move me to Canada
Sep. 25th, 2003 04:50 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
judecorp(I copied and pasted this from ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
reveries's LJ because hers is friends-only.)
FDA APPT. OF DR. HAGER
President Bush has announced his plan to select Dr. W. David Hager to head up the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee. The committee has not met for more than two years, during which time its charter has lapsed. As a result, the Bush Administration is tasked with filling all eleven positions with new members. This position does not require Congressional approval.
The FDA's Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee makes crucial decisions on matters relating to drugs used in the practice of obstetrics, gynecology and related specialties, including hormone therapy, contraception, treatment for infertility, and medical alternatives to surgical procedures for sterilization and pregnancy termination.
Dr. Hager's views of reproductive health care are far outside the mainstream of reproductive technology. Dr. Hager is a practicing OB/GYN who describes himself as "pro-life" and refuses to prescribe contraceptives to unmarried women. Hager is the author of "As Jesus Cared for Women: Restoring Women Then and Now." The book blends biblical accounts of Christ healing women with case studies from Hager's practice. In the book Dr. Hager wrote with his wife, entitled "Stress and the Woman's Body," he suggests that women who suffer from premenstrual syndrome should seek help from reading the Bible and praying. As an editor and contributing author of "The Reproduction Revolution: A Christian Appraisal of Sexuality Reproductive Technologies and the Family, "Dr. Hager appears to have endorsed medically inaccurate assertion that the common birth control pill is an abortifacient.
Hager's mission is religiously motivated. He has an ardent interest in revoking approval for mifepristone (formerly known as RU-486) as a safe and early form of medical abortion. Hagar recently assisted the Christian Medical Association in a "citizen's petition" which calls upon the FDA to revoke its approval of mifepristone in the name of women's health. Hager's desire to overturn mifepristone's approval on religious grounds rather than scientific merit would halt the development of mifepristone as a treatment for numerous medical conditions disproportionately affecting women, including breast cancer, uterine cancer, uterine fibroid tumors, psychotic depression, bipolar depression and Cushing's syndrome.
Women rely on the FDA to ensure their access to safe and effective drugs for reproductive health care including products that prevent pregnancy. For some women, such as those with certain types of diabetes and those undergoing treatment for cancer, pregnancy can be a life-threatening condition. We are concerned that Dr. Hager's strong religious beliefs may color his assessment of technologies that are necessary to protect women's lives or to preserve and promote women's health. Hager's track record of using religious beliefs to guide his medical decision-making makes him a dangerous and inappropriate candidate to serve as chair of this committee. Critical drug public policy and research must not be held hostage by antiabortion politics. Members of this important panel should be appointed on the basis of science and medicine, rather than politics and religion. American women deserve no less.
What can you do?
1. Copy and send this to every person who is concerned about women's rights.
2. Oppose the placement of this man by contacting the white house and tell them he is totally unacceptable on any level.
E-mail President Bush at president@whitehouse.gov and say "I oppose the appointment of Dr. Hager to the FDA Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee. Mixing religion and medicine is unacceptable. Using the FDA to promote a political agenda is inappropriate and seriously threatens women's health."
reveries's LJ because hers is friends-only.)FDA APPT. OF DR. HAGER
President Bush has announced his plan to select Dr. W. David Hager to head up the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee. The committee has not met for more than two years, during which time its charter has lapsed. As a result, the Bush Administration is tasked with filling all eleven positions with new members. This position does not require Congressional approval.
The FDA's Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee makes crucial decisions on matters relating to drugs used in the practice of obstetrics, gynecology and related specialties, including hormone therapy, contraception, treatment for infertility, and medical alternatives to surgical procedures for sterilization and pregnancy termination.
Dr. Hager's views of reproductive health care are far outside the mainstream of reproductive technology. Dr. Hager is a practicing OB/GYN who describes himself as "pro-life" and refuses to prescribe contraceptives to unmarried women. Hager is the author of "As Jesus Cared for Women: Restoring Women Then and Now." The book blends biblical accounts of Christ healing women with case studies from Hager's practice. In the book Dr. Hager wrote with his wife, entitled "Stress and the Woman's Body," he suggests that women who suffer from premenstrual syndrome should seek help from reading the Bible and praying. As an editor and contributing author of "The Reproduction Revolution: A Christian Appraisal of Sexuality Reproductive Technologies and the Family, "Dr. Hager appears to have endorsed medically inaccurate assertion that the common birth control pill is an abortifacient.
Hager's mission is religiously motivated. He has an ardent interest in revoking approval for mifepristone (formerly known as RU-486) as a safe and early form of medical abortion. Hagar recently assisted the Christian Medical Association in a "citizen's petition" which calls upon the FDA to revoke its approval of mifepristone in the name of women's health. Hager's desire to overturn mifepristone's approval on religious grounds rather than scientific merit would halt the development of mifepristone as a treatment for numerous medical conditions disproportionately affecting women, including breast cancer, uterine cancer, uterine fibroid tumors, psychotic depression, bipolar depression and Cushing's syndrome.
Women rely on the FDA to ensure their access to safe and effective drugs for reproductive health care including products that prevent pregnancy. For some women, such as those with certain types of diabetes and those undergoing treatment for cancer, pregnancy can be a life-threatening condition. We are concerned that Dr. Hager's strong religious beliefs may color his assessment of technologies that are necessary to protect women's lives or to preserve and promote women's health. Hager's track record of using religious beliefs to guide his medical decision-making makes him a dangerous and inappropriate candidate to serve as chair of this committee. Critical drug public policy and research must not be held hostage by antiabortion politics. Members of this important panel should be appointed on the basis of science and medicine, rather than politics and religion. American women deserve no less.
What can you do?
1. Copy and send this to every person who is concerned about women's rights.
2. Oppose the placement of this man by contacting the white house and tell them he is totally unacceptable on any level.
E-mail President Bush at president@whitehouse.gov and say "I oppose the appointment of Dr. Hager to the FDA Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee. Mixing religion and medicine is unacceptable. Using the FDA to promote a political agenda is inappropriate and seriously threatens women's health."
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2003-09-25 01:51 pm (UTC)Bush's advisers are religious propagandists and spin doctors. He has the absolute record for non-expert and non-scientist appointees.
[*]
no subject
Date: 2003-09-26 05:56 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-09-25 01:55 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-09-25 02:01 pm (UTC)You can check it out on Snopes.
no subject
Date: 2003-09-25 02:38 pm (UTC)if I disappear, you'll know it's because the Republicans kidnapped me in my sleep, and I'm afraid you'll never see me again
remember Chandra Levey?
and the generic response
Date: 2003-09-25 02:43 pm (UTC)important to him.
Because of the large volume of e-mail received, the President cannot personally
respond to each message. However, the White House staff considers and reports
citizen ideas and concerns.
In addition to President@WhiteHouse.gov, we have developed White House Web
Mail, an automated e-mail response system. Please access
http://www.whitehouse.gov/webmail to submit comments on a specific issue.
Additionally, we welcome you to visit our website for the most up-to-date
information on current events and topics of interest to you.
I'm sure my comments are just so important to him...
Re: and the generic response
Date: 2003-09-25 05:47 pm (UTC)Re: and the generic response
Date: 2003-09-25 05:52 pm (UTC)funny. I picutre him in one bedroom and his wife in the other... after the Clinton's, isn't that the way all politicians do it?
Re: and the generic response
Date: 2003-09-26 05:56 am (UTC)Blah blah blah.
no subject
Date: 2003-09-28 09:38 am (UTC)Where on snopes is this? I couldn't find it..
no subject
Date: 2003-09-28 12:09 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-09-25 05:37 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-09-26 05:57 am (UTC)(But you'd look HOT in a burqua.)
Snopes link
Date: 2003-09-26 07:00 am (UTC)He was appointed in December 2002. To quote from Snopes if you don't feel like reading the whole thing:
"The appointment is a done deal, and Dr. Hager is now part of this committee (although, perhaps as a result of the controversy raised by this message, he was not appointed to chair the committee). Whether he can be objective remains to be seen."
Sigh. I agree, we don't need 4 more years of stuff like this.
Re: Snopes link
Date: 2003-09-26 08:06 am (UTC)there is an option
Date: 2003-09-26 08:32 am (UTC)Re: there is an option
Date: 2003-09-26 02:37 pm (UTC)