Emergency Contraceptive Pill should be sold ‘over the counter’

[Wednesday]

Out of curiosity - have any women posted on the topic yet?

Yes.

Doesn't the 'morning after pill' basically have the same potential medical problems as the regular contraception pill? Which isn't available OTC.

The regular pill is available OTC in some countries. Spain for one, and it's being discussed in the US and Canada too. This article suggests the main reason for it not being OTC is that doctors think keeping it prescription-only forces women to have regular smears, though it's questionable how effective that tactic actually is.

[niropiro]

And what about the "moral" aspect? Does this not advocate the practise of off-the-bat, unprotected sex with any person that takes ones fancy, at any time one fancies?

What business is that of yours? Prude.

[Mossy Heneberry]

Tell you what, let's compromise. As long as they don't receive one cent from the state, from the medical card medicines or from the free drug scheme, or any other scheme, or any other type of state assistance, then they should be free to sell or not sell what they want.

Fair enough but now that’s after opening up another can of worms.

Looking at this issue from a Free Market point of view, taking your religious beliefs into the pharmacy trade is akin to a vegetarian opening up an abattoir.

How many customers would a Jehovah Witness chemist have? 0

You open up a business, any business and the way you conduct that business will determine if it is a success or failure. Let it be on their heads. That is how the free market works.

A pharmacist has to move with the times rapidly to stay in business. New medicines and pharmacy products hit the market rapidly. 1 of them is the morning after pill. Its the same debate as there was with condoms in the 70s.

Again let the pharmacist decide on whether he wants to sell those products or not and let him take the consequences for it.

This product should be available over the counter, and if a pharmacist is prejudice against that "sort of drug", than they are in the wrong profession.

They should take up politics.

What’s a pharmacist prejudices got to do with you? It’s his private business and he should be allowed to run it in a way he sees fit.

[Kevin Doyle]

As a private business owner they have the right not to sell whatever contravene's their religous or ethical beliefs. Or do you think it's acceptable ramming your particular beliefs down other peoples throat?

* missing?

Isnt that what the pharmicist is doing by denying people a service? In any case Pharmacies have to supply drugs under contract from the HSE, they dont have a choice in that matter, well they do, close shop and enter some other profession. But all pharmacies at present carry the morning after pill. The issue under discussion here is whether you need a prescription for it or not.

[myksav]

Nonsense. Your posts reek of moral disapproval hiding behind spurious medical concerns that have already been answered by others. The concerns about STIs are up to individual responsibility.

No, medical concerns were not answered on this thread, medical concerns were commented on, citing one (or two) doctors on tv chat show.

I didn't mention anything about culture or religion.

You didn't have to, it was in the OP.

I must say it's amusing to be called a prude, though. (different poster) The "lit match and petrol" still works.

[Cato]

No, medical concerns were not answered on this thread, medical concerns were commented on, citing one (or two) doctors on tv chat show.

You may have missed that we have a doctor posting here. You are also ignoring the vast numbers of other countries that make the MAP available OTC.

You didn't have to, it was in the OP.

Fair enough, but religion should have nothing to do with this or any other area of public policy.

[Baron von Biffo]

No, medical concerns were not answered on this thread, medical concerns were commented on, citing one (or two) doctors on tv chat show.

The doctor on the radio was quite emphatic and unequivocal that there was no medical reason to prevent the OTC sale of this product. She specifically answered the question of blood pressure and contra indications to other medications.

You're perfectly entitled to have and express moral reservations but if you want to claim that there's a medical justification for objecting to OTC sales you have a huge mountain to climb in terms of burden of proof.

[nozzferrahhtoo]

A poster who is a doctor, who may know more about this than you, has already stated that he sees no compelling medical argument against having it available OTC.

I agree with the poster you refer to on this but it is worth mentioning...

I would not be so quick to assume that posters on forums such as this are really in the profession they claim to be or anyone else posting on the same forum claims them to be, even though in this case I do agree with the poster you refer to and what they said.

I learned this rule the hard way after someone who claimed to have a PhD in physics went on to tell me that everyone knows that we on earth have gravity due to the spinning of the earth and cetrefugal forces.. an error even a Junior Cert Science student would spot.

[nozzferrahhtoo]

Does this not advocate the practise of off-the-bat, unprotected sex with any person that takes ones fancy, at any time one fancies?

No I do not see why it would. At least I do not see a single reason why it would any MORE than any other contraceptive. And I can see reasons why it would do so LESS than other contraceptives (given it does nothing for STIs at all for example.

The question was asked in Britain though when it became an over the counter drug there. I suggest as a good reading material a paper "Impact on contraceptive practice of making emergency hormonal contraception available over the counter in Great Britain: repeated cross sectional surveys"
- Cicely Marston, lecturer in social science and public health
- Howard Meltzer, senior scientist
- Azeem Majeed, professor of primary care

where they studied and found no increase in the use of the drug since it became "OTC" and no parallel changes in the usages of other contraception. The only change observed was, as you would expect, WHERE people were getting this pill.

"I can shag anyone I want/fancy, any time I want because I can always get the MAP any time I do."

There may be some people somewhere who have thought so once. However having used the drug once most people swear they will never use it again unless they really really have to. Even the milder side effects of it can make your worst hang overs seems like a pleasant holiday.

off-the-bat, unprotected sex

You do realise that a great number, if not possibly the majority I do not know, of the people who use this pill do so not because they had unprotected sex, but because they realised for one reason or another said protection failed?

[nozzferrahhtoo]

the abortion pill

I am afraid you need to work on your medical terminology, but thankfully your error here does not require much medical knowledge to repair.

“Abortion” refers to termination after “implantation” has occurred, which occurs in the "blastocyst" some time after “fertilisation”.

ECPs such as being discussed here prevent…. depending on the drug…. ovulation, fertilization and/or implantation.

So given implantation has not occurred, referring to it as an “abortion” drug is about as accurate as calling eating from a packet of roast sunflower seeds “Digging up seedlings”.