Yes, Ted Cruz, pregnancy can be a life-threatening condition. Especially in America.
Wikimedia Commons, Senator Ted Cruz/Twitter

I tend to avoid addressing specific politicians and prefer to stay out of the partisan political fray. But occasionally a politician will say something so silly, absurd, or flat-out wrong in an attempt to support a position that it needs to be called out.

For the record, I consider myself personally anti-abortion and politically pro-choice. I wrote a whole article explaining that stance, which you can read here. But on a basic level, I am sympathetic to the folks who want to stop abortions. I want there to be as few abortions as possible (which is why I support legislation that has actually shown to reduce them, such as easy, affordable access to birth control and universal healthcare).

So when I say that Senator Ted Cruz's tweet about the abortion pill is a big pile of hooey, understand that I'm not coming from a super pro-abortion stance. I'm coming from the let's-do-what-makes-the-most-sense stance. And this tweet does not make sense.


Alright, let's break this down. First of all, no, pregnancy is not a life-threatening illness because it's not an illness at all. It is, however, a medical condition that can indeed be life-threatening. Most pregnancies are not, of course, but that doesn't mean it never is.

In fact, the U.S. has the worst maternal mortality rate in the entire developed world, and it's not even close. We're also the only nation in the developed world where that death rate is rising.

Officially, more than 650 women die from pregnancy-related causes in the United States in 2018, but experts say that estimate doesn't even capture all such deaths. And how many don't die because they are able to terminate a pregnancy that would have killed them? Because yes, sometimes people have to make terrible choices between continuing a pregnancy and saving their own life.

The claim that Mifeprex is dangerous is also not particularly convincing, using Cruz and his colleagues' own numbers. In their letter to the FDA, they state that this pill has resulted in 24 deaths out of 3.7 million uses. Considering the fact that there approximately 3.8 million babies born every year, with more than 650 maternal deaths, it would appear that statistically speaking pregnancy is far more "dangerous" for women than the abortion pill.

As Dr. Eugene Gu pointed out, serious complications are also more likely for pregnancy than for use of Mifeprex.

Of course, Cruz's real beef with Mifeprex is that it induces abortion, which in his view is synonymous with murder. So, of course he's going to make any argument he can against it.

If he wants to make the murder argument, he's more than welcome to do that and let people debate it. But to represent pregnancy as non-life-threatening while trying to paint an abortion pill as dangerous is either ignorant or dishonest or both.

This is why so many of women don't think the government—which is still mostly made up of men who are not doctors—has any business making medical decisions for us. Let the FDA make its own determinations based on science and data, without being pushed by what a group of senators believe.

True
Back Market

Between the new normal that is working from home and e-learning for students of all ages, having functional electronic devices is extremely important. But that doesn't mean needing to run out and buy the latest and greatest model. In fact, this cycle of constantly upgrading our devices to keep up with the newest technology is an incredibly dangerous habit.

The amount of e-waste we produce each year is growing at an increasing rate, and the improper treatment and disposal of this waste is harmful to both human health and the planet.

So what's the solution? While no one expects you to stop purchasing new phones, laptops, and other devices, what you can do is consider where you're purchasing them from and how often in order to help improve the planet for future generations.

Keep Reading Show less

The recent passing of Ruth Bader Ginsburg not only marked the end of an illustrious life of service to law and country, but the beginning of an unprecedented judicial nomination process. While Ginsburg's spot on the Supreme Court sits open, politicians and regular Americans alike argue over whether or not it should be filled immediately, basing their arguments on past practices and partisan points.

When a Supreme Court vacancy came up in February of 2016, nine months before the election, Senate Republicans led by Mitch McConnell refused to even take up a hearing to consider President Obama's pick for the seat, arguing that it was an election year and the people should have a say in who that seat goes to.

Four years later, a mere six weeks before the election, that reasoning has gone out the window as Senate Republicans race to get a nominee pushed through the approval process prior to election day. Now, they claim, because the Senate majority and President are of the same party, it makes sense to proceed with the nomination.

Keep Reading Show less
True

$200 billion of COVID-19 recovery funding is being used to bail out fossil fuel companies. These mayors are combatting this and instead investing in green jobs and a just recovery.

Learn more on how cities are taking action: c40.org/divest-invest


Former CBS News anchor Dan Rather has become a beloved voice of reason, knowledge, and experience for many Americans on social media the past few years. At 88, Rather has seen more than most of us, and as a journalist, he's had a front row seat as modern history has played out. He combines that lifetime of experience and perspective with an eloquence that hearkens to a time when eloquence mattered, he called us to our common American ideals with his book "What Unites Us," and he comforts many of is with his repeated message to stay "steady" through the turmoil the U.S. has been experiencing.

All of that is to say, when Dan Rather sounds the alarm, you know we've reached a critical historical moment.

Yesterday, President Trump again refused to commit to a peaceful transfer of power after the election when directly asked if he would—yet another democratic norm being toppled. Afterward, Rather posted the following words of wisdom—and warning—to his nearly three million Facebook fans:


Keep Reading Show less

"Very nice!" It appears as though Kazakhstan's number one reporter, Borat Sagdiyev, is set to return to the big screen in the near future and the film's title is a sight to behold.

Reports show that the title submitted to the Writer's Guild of America, "Borat: Gift Of Pornographic Monkey To Vice Premiere Mikhael Pence To Make Benefit Recently Diminished Nation Of Kazakhstan" is even longer than the first film's, "Borat: Cultural Learnings Of America For Make Benefit Glorious Nation Of Kazakhstan."

As the title suggests, the film is expected to feature an encounter with U.S. Vice President Mike Pence as well as President Trump's TV lawyer, Rudy Giuliani.

Keep Reading Show less