Skip to Main Content
Contribute Try STAT+ Today

WASHINGTON — When anti-abortion demonstrators numbering in the tens of thousands join the March for Life, an anti-abortion protest set to take place Friday on the National Mall here, many will tout signs bearing a new slogan: “Pro-life is pro-science.”

Much of the country’s mainstream scientific community would argue the opposite.

Unlock this article by subscribing to STAT+ and enjoy your first 30 days free!

GET STARTED

What is it?

STAT+ is STAT's premium subscription service for in-depth biotech, pharma, policy, and life science coverage and analysis. Our award-winning team covers news on Wall Street, policy developments in Washington, early science breakthroughs and clinical trial results, and health care disruption in Silicon Valley and beyond.

What's included?

  • Daily reporting and analysis
  • The most comprehensive industry coverage from a powerhouse team of reporters
  • Subscriber-only newsletters
  • Daily newsletters to brief you on the most important industry news of the day
  • STAT+ Conversations
  • Weekly opportunities to engage with our reporters and leading industry experts in live video conversations
  • Exclusive industry events
  • Premium access to subscriber-only networking events around the country
  • The best reporters in the industry
  • The most trusted and well-connected newsroom in the health care industry
  • And much more
  • Exclusive interviews with industry leaders, profiles, and premium tools, like our CRISPR Trackr.
  • I welcome this “pivot to science”. If the fertilized egg is so special that the woman in whose body it resides must be compelled by law to do nothing to prevent it from being born, anyone with a working knowledge of biology must also realize that the unfertilized egg and the lucky sperm targeting it are equally precious. If they are not allowed to unite, society experiences exactly the same deprivation as when the fertilized egg is aborted. Scientific “pro-lifers” have two ways of solving this scientific dilemma: either quit opposing abortion or mandate sex at every ovulatory cycle.

  • What does the anti-abortion crowd have against women? And, if they are religious, why do they fund se crimes against children? Does the anti-abortion crowd have trouble getting dates with the opposite sex – meaning they never risk getting pregnant? Is it true that Russia is funding the anti-abortion movement to create a divide?

  • This article meandered a bit, but interesting none the less. The anti-choicers don’t seem to grasp that the cells will exist regardless & if you have them you can put them to good use in research or you can dispose of them for no good reason. It be like saying someone isn’t allowed to donate their dead body to science. Plus, abortions will happen no matter what you can stack the courts & try to make it illegal but people will have them anyways. & people will die having them illegally. & I don’t know why those lives aren’t important too. If you care about life, there’s a bunch of kids in concentration camps to worry about at our boarder.

    • Your point on how abortions will always happen is true but these people are marching because it is legal for a woman to have one. Unfortunately it’s become more of a political issue and doesn’t become a moral one, where it should lie. It needs to be focused in that position where if it is that we’re we can deal with the problem politically for as politics should not only hold the voice of the people but also the morality. We need that in politics today for it blinds them from their own and fall with bad choices. The question on asking the movement if it is ignoring all other children in the world, well clearly that is not the case. They care for those children, and hope for the best, which really is all we can do if not call for justice. Though I see the movements priorities in such if giving a voice to the voiceless, where is in the right mind to give up a potential human life for the sake of your own. That’s the problem, that’s the moral issue and that is what I fight for.

  • You sound really misguided adn full of Alternate facts. A lot of women die, and are afraid to carry a fetus to term. The media and anti women extremists have suppressed information about deht in childbirth. The rates of infant and maternal deaths have been increasing here in the US, due to this extremism, and limitations on women’s healthcare. The US is the only wealthy developed nation, where infant and maternal deaths are rising. There have been cases where women were forced to carry dead fetuses in their uteruses, because of the anti abortion exptremism. This raises their risck of death and infection. As usual the men withing in on this topic are seriously misnformed and have no knowledge of human reporoduction or female anatomy.
    I haae not seen any of these extremsits express any concern about the children who died in custody of our Border Patrol. That shows how hypocritical and misinformed they are.

  • Yup, you hit the exact talking points from the abortion fans. It’s over. Majority of people in US know consider abortion to be wrong. Best to error on the side of the most vulnerable, those yet to be born.

  • Science and stats? You lost me immediately when you start the article with: When anti-abortion demonstrators numbering in the tens of thousands join the March for Life, an anti-abortion protest set to take place Friday”. Check the real numbers and photos… During March for Life week in DC the numbers are in Hundreds of thousands. Hundreds of thousands of people protesting in broad daylight every single year and yet mainstream media can not seem to record this reality on their cameras, but the counter protesters..magnified photo and audio coverage abounds. Broad daylight, hundreds of thousands visible with a naked eye if you are not blind. Get your numbers straight if you want any credibility in science.

  • If American were not mislead with so much misinformation, this would not even be an issue. Teh media has not covered Facts about human reproduction, like the number of adverse events during childbirth. Perhaps protecting women’s rights to healthcare should include instructional materials with facts on childbirth deaths, fistulas and and other complications. The healthcare industry and our complict media does not cover the facts anymore.

    • So in your fact based opinion, death of a mother during childbirth is an adverse event? And the risk of a fistula is cause enough to abort a viable fetus. Following your lead the human race would be extinct. Please share more of your facts that justify avoiding pregnancy.

    • Um, are you arguing that the death of a mother during childbirth is *not* an adverse event?

      The point is that if more people were aware of how dangerous pregnancy and childbirth is- and yes, women are much more likely to die during childbirth than abortion, statistically speaking- they would stop pushing this “women just don’t want to be inconvenienced by giving birth” narrative.

      Obviously, this is not going to lead to the extinction of the human race; those who feel that having a child is worth those risks are free to take them. I certainly felt it was worth the risk with my two children. But that doesn’t mean we get to force women to risk their health and lives to give birth to children they do not want to have.

  • Is this statement is your article “But as of now, most experts agree there aren’t existing alternatives that can serve all the same functions as fetal tissue” support by any facts? What is the meaning of “most”? Why didn’t your article just as easily state state the “most experts agree there ARE existing alternatives….”? We will all be better off in the short run and the long run if we respect all life from conception until natural death. Stating that the embryonic tissue is just medical waste so what’s the big deal is intellectually lazy.

    • The only reason that the Fetal Tissue questions are even being asked is due to a Fake Video, producted by Project Veritas, an underhanded group that makes big money misleading gullible people. Unfortunately their Fake News video about ‘Baby Parts” was a big hit, promoted by the Russians and certian extremeists here in the US, in an attempt to frighten people, and lie to them. The Mysogynists, liars and a criminal regime in Washington are still promoting the lies spread to gullible people.
      No media outlet corrected any of that with Facts, they allowed people to beleive that this Fake News was credible.

  • It’s not that the pro-lifers oppose scientific research; they oppose how these tissues are generated. The slant in this article suggests that it is noble to abort a baby in the name of scientific research. That doesn’t sound scientific at all.

    • Jesus Christ, nobody’s aborting babies to be used for scientific research. The abortions are going to happen regardless, the issue is whether we can put any of the fetal cells to good use, or if we’re going to be forced to just dispose of them.

  • Sad to see the bias by STAT in presenting an important scientific conversation. Quoting ACOG? Maybe at least provide a financial conflict of interest statement given the members’ revenue from abortion-on-demand, which is a key issue supported by the College’s million dollar lobbying arm.

    • Why on earth wouldn’t you quote ACOG? They’re experts in the field. Just because experts disagree with you and your ilk doesn’t make them wrong.

Comments are closed.