- Registrado
- 2 de Ago, 2021
Bullshit again. Here’s what another peer review study, that was actually completed, had to say:I stand by what I say. Up to 30% of women will need to see a doctor after taking these drugs to remove all fetal tissue.
If 98% had complete abortions, that means 2% required further follow up. 2% is not 30%. You have yet to cite that claim.Over 99% of enrolled women completed follow-up (n = 600). Complete abortions occurred in 588 (98·0%) cases, with ten incomplete abortions and two continuing pregnancies.
According the the clinical trials.gov page you gave me, the research on that project concluded in 2017. And they did publish something with that dataset, but they don’t mention squat about mifepristone in urine. That would suggest they weren’t able to tell who used mifepristone based on urinalysis. That’s called a negative finding, aka: you are wrong!well within a window of needing emergency services, yet get your nickers in a knot over a legit ongoing urinalyses study which you claim is impossible in the first place
A previous collection of studies which you refused to read specifically addressed this. You’re wrong again. Nuff said.It’s not a ‘complication’ it’s a normal part of a process that should be medically supervised
The brick wall here is actually you. I am reading your studies and even looking for their findings for you. You refuse to read mine for dumb reasons like “PP are shills” and “cosmo” (which you seem to think can’t publish facts about abortion??I actually just don’t care about arguing about an off topic political subject with a brick wall hon. Especially based on your spergery earlier itt. You sent me a fucking Cosmo article, two shill articles, and a study specifically talking about blood detection,
Edit to add: Im up to 8 articles now, including peer review studies, and including a research finding from your side of the aisle that you were too dumb or lazy to find.)