McCollum blasts GOP plan to defund women’s health services

“Dumb.” That’s how Rep. Betty McCollum characterized proposed cuts to federal family planning funding and a Republican effort to defund Planned Parenthood. At a St. Paul Planned Parenthood clinic Thursday, she also noted that Republicans refused to cut Pentagon funding for NASCAR, but remain adamant about cuts she says could have devastating effects for Minnesota women and children.

Planned Parenthood of Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota president Sarah Stoesz introduced McCollum at the press event.

“It’s a challenging time for women’s health and for all of us who care about women in this country,” she said. “We’ve been under quite an attack,” referencing conservative bloggers’ campaign against the health care nonprofit as well as congressional actions to bar federal funds from going to its clinics.

“We do provide abortion services — that’s true we do — it’s about 5 percent of what we do, but primarily what we do is protect the lives and health of women,” she said.

To underscore that point, a clinic patient told the story of her sister, who lives in rural Minnesota near Mankato and whose life she says was saved by the health care group.

“Planned Parenthood is the reason my sister’s cervical cancer was found early and treated successfully,” she said. “My sister’s story has a very happy ending because of Planned Parenthood.”

GOP budget cuts in the U.S. House would eliminate federal Title X funding, a part of which helps support cancer screenings at clinics such as Planned Parenhood’s.

“Who would have though that we would have to be concerned about women’s reproductive rights, women’s rights in 2011 in America,” she said.

She said that the proposed cuts and calls to defund Planned Parenthood involve debates over abortion, but the services of Planned Parenthood are much broader.

“Yes, there are needed at times — it should be extremely rare and in a moment of difficult emotional crisis for women — to look at having an abortion, but that’s 5 percent of what Planned Parenthood does,” said McCollum.

“Ninety-five percent of what Planned Parenthood does is the first line of defense in women’s reproductive health and total overall health,” she added.

She continued, “We can make smart cuts or we can make dumb cuts — and cutting Title X is a dumb cut.”

In the Republicans’ proposed budget, Title X funding would be completely slashed from the federal budget, and those funds are used for health care screenings for women and birth control services. Under federal law, the funds cannot go to abortion services.

Republicans targeting WIC as well

The GOP is also proposing cuts to the Women, Infants and Children (WIC) nutrition program.

“We heard defense spending was off the table, that we could not cut defense spending, but what the House decided we needed were two different engines for one piece of military equipment and that we had to protect the military’s ability to purchase decals for NASCARs,” she said.

“I think there’s room to cut in the Pentagon. There should be room for children, and women who are expecting, to have access to basic nutrition in the United States of America.”

McCollum has been a major force in trying to cut NASCAR funding from the federal budget, a cause that resulted in death threats being sent to her office.

“And they are talking about more cuts,” she continued, adding that a government shutdown is looming. “No more of these stupid, dumb cuts that are going to hurt women, hurt families, and hurt communities. It’s so foolish to even talk about cutting nutrition for women who are either nursing or preparing to deliver a child.”

McCollum, who recently visited Yemen where citizens are calling for Democratic reforms and more rights for women, said she spoke with people who were surprised by Republicans’ plans to cut programs for women and children.

“When they pick up the paper and read that we are cutting it off, they said, ‘This isn’t the America we know,’” she said.

Ultimately, she said that the majority of Americans support Title X programs — even Republicans.

“There are a lot of Republicans and independents that support access to mammographies, cervical cancer screenings and ensuring families can plan by having access to birth control,” she said.

“We can’t let a small group of people hold us hostage on the way forward in the United States.”

Hot flashes at menopause may signal a lower risk for heart attacks and stroke

Hot flashes and night sweats at menopause are uncomfortable and annoying to many women. But they are also associated with a reduced risk of future heart attacks and strokes, researchers reported Thursday.

Hot flashes, which doctors call vasomotor symptoms, are a major issue in women’s health because there are so few effective remedies to relieve them. In recent years, however, some studies have suggested that hot flashes and night sweats may also be a sign of potential cardiovascular problems. The idea is that hot flashes may be a response to some type of dysfunction in blood vessels that could also raise the risk of heart attack and stroke.

However, a new study, published in the journal Menopause, suggests that idea is an over-simplification. Researchers analyzed data from 60,000 post-menopausal women who were part of the Women’s Health Initiative Observational Study. They found that the timing of hot flashes appears to matter greatly. Women who had hot flashes or night sweats at the start of menopause were actually at a slightly lower risk for stroke, heart disease and death compared with women who never had hot flashes or night sweats. The risk reductions were 17% for stroke, 11% for heart disease and 11% death.

“It is reassuring that these symptoms, which are experienced by so many women, do not seem to correlate with increased risk of cardiovascular disease,” Dr. Emily Szmuilowicz, a co-author of the study from Northwestern Memorial Hospital in Chicago, said in a news release.

However, women in the study who did not have hot flashes or night sweats at the onset of menopause but developed them later in menopause (they were having symptoms at an average age of 63) had a 32% higher risk of heart attack and a 29% higher risk of stroke.

Women who developed hot flashes and night sweats at the onset of menopause and continued to have them into later menopause had no increased or decreased risk.

It’s not clear why hot flashes at the time of menopause are linked to a lower risk of cardiovascular events. But the authors wrote: “One possibility is that perimenopausal vasomotor symptoms represent a physiologic response to the normal perimenopausal hormonal fluctuations, and the absence of these symptoms may signify a blunted vascular response to these hormonal changes.”

Far fewer women develop hot flashes years after menopause begins, the authors note. But more research should be devoted to the link between late symptoms and cardiovascular risk. Hot flashes occurring well after menopause may be a marker for instability in blood vessels, they wrote.

Va. OKs bill to likely close most abortion clinics

RICHMOND, Va. (AP) — Virginia took a big step Thursday toward eliminating most of the state’s 21 abortion clinics, approving a bill that would likely make rules so strict the medical centers would be forced to close, Democrats and abortion rights supporters said.

Gov. Bob McDonnell, a Republican and Catholic, supports the measure and when he signs it into law, Virginia will become the first state to require clinics that provide first-trimester abortions to meet the same standards as hospitals. The requirements could include anything from expensive structural changes like widening hallways to increased training and mandatory equipment the clinics currently don’t have.

While abortion providers must be licensed in Virginia, the clinics resemble dentists’ offices and are considered physicians offices, similar to those that provide plastic and corrective eye surgeries, colonoscopies and a host of other medical procedures.

Democrats and abortion rights supporters said the change would put an estimated 17 of the state’s 21 clinics out of business. Most of the clinics also provide birth control, cancer screenings and other women’s health services.

“This is not about safety for women. This is about ideology, and this is about politics,” said Tarina Keene, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Virginia. “The women of the commonwealth are going to be the ones left to suffer.”

Abortion rights supporters warned of legal challenges while supporters heralded it as a way to make the procedures safer.

“It is not about banning abortions,” said Sen. Jill Vogel, R-Winchester. “It is simply caring for women who are about to have an invasive surgical procedure and creating an environment for them where they have the opportunity to do that in a place that is safe.”

No other state requires clinics that provide early abortions to meet hospital standards.

Nineteen states, including Virginia, require an abortion to be performed in a hospital after 12 weeks, according to the Guttmacher Institute, which tracks abortions and laws concerning the procedures.

More than 27,000 of the 28,000 abortions performed each year in Virginia are completed during the first-trimester, Keene said.

“Does Virginia really want to take the lead in such obstruction?” asked Sen. Maime Locke, D-Hampton, who called the bill “draconian and patriarchal at best.”

Democrats argued it wouldn’t pass constitutional muster because it would put an undue burden on poor women and those in rural areas, where clinics likely would close. They also argued it would violate the equal protection guarantees of the Constitution by treating abortions differently than similar procedures.

“Absolutely all that will be accomplished by this vote is to restrict access to a safe and legal procedure to poor women,” said Sen. Mary Margaret Whipple, D-Arlington. “This does nothing to end abortions. It is purely discriminatory. It makes me heartsick.”

Laurence H. Tribe, professor of constitutional law at Harvard Law School, said the bill would likely be deemed unconstitutional “because its transparent purpose and effect would be to make such early abortions far more difficult if not impossible for many women to obtain.”

Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, who supported similar legislation as a state senator, said he believes the law would be constitutional.

“For over 25 years, Virginia abortion clinics have not been held to minimal health and safety standards,” he said. “As a result, women who walk into these clinics are often not treated with the care and respect that any human being deserves.”

Anti-abortion bills typically die in a Democrat-controlled Senate committee, but Republicans in the House tacked it onto a bill that already had passed the Senate. Doing so allowed the bill to sidestep the committee and forced a vote on the Senate floor, where Democrats hold a 22-18 majority.

Two anti-abortion Democrats voted with Republicans, and Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling, a Republican, cast the tie-breaking vote after hours of debate.

After it becomes law in July, the state Board of Health will take public comments before issuing the guidelines. The board is appointed by the governor.

Attacks on Planned Parenthood and Title X threaten women’s health care

Using a crisis as cover to achieve a controversial policy goal is a tried and true political tactic. That seems to be the game plan of the GOP House leadership, which under the guise of reducing the deficit has launched an attack on Planned Parenthood, a major provider of family planning services for women in this country.

The organization has long been a target of anti-abortion groups because about 3 percent of the health services it provides nationwide at more than 800 clinics involve abortion. Federal law prohibits the expenditure of public funds for abortions, and Planned Parenthood officials say no state or federal money is used for abortion procedures. Opponents counter that the federal funding frees up private donations that are used for abortions.

A bill passed by the Republican-controlled House last week would cut $75 million in funding to Planned Parenthood that is spent for family planning assistance. A broader, related assault would totally eliminate Title X, a $317 million family planning program enacted in 1970 and signed by President Richard Nixon. Neither proposal is likely to make it through the Democrat-controlled Senate.

In response, Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards denounced the measures as the most dangerous legislative assault on women’s health in Planned Parenthood’s 95-year history.

According to Richards, “It is difficult to understand why people who say they are opposed to abortion would do so much to undermine the family planning and contraception that helps prevent the need for it.”

Although the alleged motive for the cuts is deficit reduction, a clear aim is to cripple a leading provider of abortion services — and at high cost of essential medical care for Houston-area women.

Here’s what we’d lose if the House majority gets their way. Last year Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast, which serves Southeast Texas and Louisiana at 12 health centers, provided for more than 110,400 health care visits. Services dispensed included tests for sexually transmitted diseases, cervical cancer screenings and family planning counseling. The agency estimates that more than 18,000 unwanted pregnancies were prevented through contraceptives.

On a national scale, Title X services are credited with preventing 973,000 unintended pregnancies and 406,000 abortions each year. Family planning is the most effective way to reduce abortions.

According to estimates of the Guttmacher Institute, a research center focused on sexual and reproductive health, a dollar spent on family planning saves taxpayers more than $4 down the road. That’s why the effort to cast these bills as deficit reducers is such a bad joke.

In recent weeks, an anti-abortion group, Live Action, has attempted to smear Planned Parenthood’s operations with a series of video stings in which a man posing as a sex trafficker attempted to solicit advice on getting abortions for underage prostitutes. Despite making more than a dozen visits to clinics, they have produced only one inappropriate exchange with an employee, who was later fired by Planned Parenthood.

Agency officials said that a number of the visits were reported to state and federal authorities before it became clear that they were a politically motivated sham.

Such tactics must not be allowed to justify an ideologically based effort to shut off essential federal funding for Planned Parenthood clinics as well as other health care sources for millions of American women who cannot otherwise afford family planning services.

Diabetes Risk in Older Women not Linked to Vitamin D Levels

Low vitamin D levels are not linked to an increased risk of type 2 diabetes, according to a study published in Diabetes Care. In the study Dr. Jennifer G. Robinson, a professor of epidemiology and medicine at the University of Iowa, and researchers followed women participating in the Women’s Health Initiative Clinical Trials and Observational Study (a racially and ethnically diverse population of postmenopausal women) who were free of diabetes. Diabetes was defined as self-report of physician diagnosis and receiving insulin or oral hypoglycemic medication.

Of 5,140 women who were free of type 2 diabetes at the start of the trial, 6 percent developed the disease over an average of 7 years.

The researchers found no clear link between the women’s blood levels of vitamin D at the outset and their risk of developing type 2 diabetes later on.

Women with mental health issues not seeking help

A Newcastle University study has found women with lower incomes and education levels are less likely to seek help for mental health issues.

The report in the Medical Journal of Australia shows despite improvements in mental health services, women with depression were unlikely to seek counselling or psychotherapy.
The study of almost 15-thousand women across Australia is part of a 20-year nation-wide investigation into women’s health.

Lead researcher, Professor Julie Byles says while it seems there is still a stigma attached to mental health, it’s likely women think they’re too busy to seek help.

“I think sometimes we don’t like to admit we need help” she said

“I think sometimes it’s an issue of the pressures on our lives as well and taking time out to go and talk to someone about your problems might seem to be too tall an order when we’ve got a lot of pressure on our lives”

Professor Byles says women who are socio-economically disadvantaged are even less likely to seek help.

“Their knowledge of whether these services are available, how they’re feeling about accessing counselling.” She said

“Maybe women who have higher levels of education are more open to talking about their problems with people whereas other people might not feel it’s so easy to express how they’re feeling”

Family Health History is Important Screening Tool

Washington, DC — All women should have a family health history on file and it should be reviewed and updated regularly, according to The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (The College). Family history screening is especially important in reproductive planning.

“Our goal is to help improve our patients’ health by promoting family history as a screening tool,” said W. Allen Hogge, MD, chair of The College’s Committee on Genetics. Certain diseases and conditions run in families, such as breast and colon cancer, heart disease, type 2 diabetes, depression, and thrombophilias (blood clotting conditions). “If we know about the family history, then we can better help our patients identify their own risk factors, decide on certain screenings, and modify their lifestyle to prevent or minimize the problem.

“When a woman is planning a pregnancy, it’s an ideal time to review her family history as well as her partner’s,” said Dr. Hogge. In addition to obtaining the family and medical history of the woman and her male partner, it’s also important to include their ethnic backgrounds, any family or personal negative pregnancy outcomes they’ve had separately or together, such as miscarriages, preterm birth, or birth defects, and any known causes for infertility. Some couples may decide against pregnancy after genetic counseling and testing, choose to use donor sperm or eggs, or opt for preimplantation genetic testing of the embryos.

There are a couple of standard methods that physicians can use to obtain family health histories: a questionnaire or checklist, and a family pedigree. A common screening tool is the family history questionnaire. Patients can fill them out at home which gives them extra time to contact family members and provide more accurate information. The other family history tool is known as a ‘pedigree’ that ideally goes back three generations. The pedigree indicates the ages, health histories, and ethnicities of each family member, as well as dates and causes of death. Of course, family history screening tools can be difficult or impossible to obtain for adopted individuals and their usefulness may be limited for people with very small families.

Although many adult-onset health problems have complex genetic and environmental interactions, obtaining that information in a family history can help patients modify their diet, lose weight, or exercise to improve their outcome or delay the onset of symptoms. “For instance, if you are at high risk for developing heart disease, then you need to watch your blood pressure and keep your cholesterol levels in the healthy range,” said Dr. Hogge.

Committee Opinion #478, “Family History as a Risk Assessment Tool,” is published in the March 2011 issue of Obstetrics & Gynecology.

# # #

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists is the nation’s leading group of physicians providing health care for women. As a private, voluntary, nonprofit membership organization of approximately 55,000 members, The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists strongly advocates for quality health care for women, maintains the highest standards of clinical practice and continuing education of its members, promotes patient education, and increases awareness among its members and the public of the changing issues facing women’s health care.

Hidden Health Risk For Women No. 3

If you’re in the habit of popping a Tylenol or two in your mouth every time you have a headache, a hangover or some muscle pain, you need to be more careful.

According to a report in Harvard Women’s Health Watch, “Each year, overdoses of acetaminophen (sold as Tylenol and other brands) account for more than 56,000 emergency room visits and an estimated 458 deaths from acute liver failure.”

The publication acknowledges that the drug is not harmful when the proper directions are followed. However, experts also warn acetaminophen users to be careful about combining the drug with other over-the-counter or prescription drugs. They also say that it should never be taken with alcohol, or when alcohol is still in the bloodstream, like when you have a hangover.

Interestingly, there is something even more common that you likely ingest every day that could be a major hidden health risk.

Planned Parenthood takes advantage of women, taxpayers

The president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Hudson Peconic bemoans the current bills of U.S. reps. Mike Pence, R-Ind.; Christopher Smith, R-N.J.; and Joe Pitts, R-Pa., stating that they undermine women’s health and access to health care.

What is blatantly missing from this opinion piece is that nationally, Planned Parenthood receives $350 million annually from various federal, state and local taxes and made a profit of $21,773,569 in 2009. As a matter of fact, the writer receives more than $300,000 annually in salary and personal benefits for her role at PPHP. While playing on our emotions by attempting to make it seem these bills care little about women, she fails to mention the lack of concern by Planned Parenthood itself for minor girls, as evidenced by the recent release of a number of undercover videos by a group called “Live Action.” These videos show seven Planned Parenthood facilities throughout the country, including one in New York, protecting child sex trafficking. An earlier video also shows Planned Parenthood protecting purported child rapists who impregnated underage girls.

Americans are finally learning the truth about Planned Parenthood instead of believing what they say. Actions speak louder than words. Planned Parenthood has:

• Opposed laws that would give parents the right to know if a minor daughter (even as young as 12 years of age) is about to undergo a potentially dangerous abortion “procedure.”

• Opposed laws that would require abortion facilities to give pertinent information to women before they consent to an abortion.

• Terminated more than 325,000 pregnancies in the first and second trimester last year alone (while the national abortion rate has steadily declined, the rate of abortions at Planned Parenthood facilities has rapidly increased) and supports unrestricted abortion throughout the entire nine months of pregnancy.

• Gives lip service to sexual abstinence for teens while promoting a philosophy in its teen resources that any consensual sexual activity is valid for teens. While Planned Parenthood tries to promote itself primarily as a health agency, it is actually promoting an extremely radical, left-wing ideological shift in traditional American values in regard to family, the value of human life and sexuality.

Planned Parenthood would like us to believe reps. Pitts, Smith and Pence have no regard for women and are determined to cut off health care to those who cannot afford it, as if Planned Parenthood was a savior for women. Strange coming from an organization that remains silent when women are hurt or even die from what it continues to call “safe, legal” abortions.

I hear no outrage in this Community View over the events in the undercover videos, a failure to immediately report illegal activity involving minor girls, or the fact Planned Parenthood gave instructions on how to beat the system and even advice as to what sexual acts the minors could continue to perform the two weeks following abortion when they are unable to have intercourse.

Planned Parenthood plays on our sympathies. The writer calls to mind the poor rural women for whom, she says, Planned Parenthood is their only source of health care. But she obviously has no sympathy for women who are hurt as a result of abortion or for girls who are returned to their abusers because of a failure to report the sexual abuse of minors to authorities.

Reps. Pitts, Pence and Smith care for women enough to expose the deceit and lies of Planned Parenthood. They are heroes to many women who have experienced the harm of abortion and to children whose abusers are protected instead of them, and they know most Americans do not want their tax dollars paying for abortion. As the group’s actions continue to be exposed, I have no doubt more Americans want to stop funding them. That is the real motivation for the calls to defeat these bills. During a time of out-of-control and questionable governmental spending, frightening deficits and burdensome tax increases, the last thing Americans want to see is having their hard-earned tax dollars funneled to a dubious organization such as Planned Parenthood. The attempt of congressional members to defund Planned Parenthood does absolutely nothing to restrict abortion. It simply puts the group on an even playing field with all other nonprofits.

HOUSE CALL: Yearly exam important in detecting cancer

SAN ANGELO, Texas — According to the American Cancer Society, in 2010 the United States reported 12,200 new cases of cervical cancer and just over 4,200 deaths related to this disease.

These numbers have decreased more than 50 percent over the last 30 years, due in large part to the availability of cervical cancer screening tests, also known as the Pap smear. The methods of cervical cancer screening have progressed significantly over the last few years, with advances in Pap smear testing and the addition of HPV DNA tests. Screening and treatment guidelines have changed as well.

Routine Pap smear and/or HPV DNA testing can greatly decrease a woman’s risk for developing cervical cancer. It is important for all women to know these screening guidelines, risks for developing cervical cancer as well as ways to protect themselves from this preventable disease.

Cervical cancer is linked to the human papillomavirus (HPV), which is found in sexually active women. The risk of transmission of HPV is directly related to the number of sexual partners that a woman has in her lifetime. A woman having only one sexual partner can still be at risk for cervical cancer, depending on her partner’s past sexual activities. There are multiple strains of HPV, and a persistent infection with specific high risk strains of this virus is crucial to the progression to cervical cancer.

While all sexually active women are at risk for contracting HPV, not all infections will lead to cervical cancer. It is estimated more than 50 percent of all young sexually active women are infected with HPV at any given time. The body’s immune response plays an active role in clearing the virus from the cervix, and most women will clear the HPV infection within two years. Cigarette smoking increases the risk of developing cervical cancer.

There are now two available immunizations that help build the immune system against the more common types of HPV. One immunization, Gardasil, is recommended for all males and females ages nine through twenty-six, preferably before the onset of sexual activity, although everyone should consider the immunization series regardless of past sexual activity.

New cervical cancer screening guidelines recommend that Pap smear testing begin at age 21, with HPV DNA testing, with or without Pap smear, beginning at age 30, as endorsed by the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ACOG). Frequency of testing depends on age, sexual activity, health status, and previous pap testing results. Even though pap testing is not recommended until the age of 21, all sexually active women should be seen by a health care provider to talk about the risks of sexually transmitted infections, contraception and other gynecologic issues. Treatment guidelines for abnormal Pap smear testing have changed, as well, and depend on age, sexual activity, health status and previous pap testing results. These guidelines can be discussed with any health care provider that offers gynecologic exams.

While the number of cervical cancer cases has greatly decreased over the last several years, there are still too many preventable deaths associated with this disease. Women need to take control of their gynecologic health and find out how to prevent developing cervical cancer. All women should talk to their gynecologic health care provider to discuss risks and the current guidelines regarding cervical cancer testing.

Abbott Releases Rulings on Abortion “Affiliates”

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott just released two opinions that could force Planned Parenthood out of the state’s Women’s Health Program, which provides family planning, but not abortions, to Medicaid patients.

In the first opinion, Abbott said that under state law, the Health and Human Services Commission “may not contract with entities that are affiliates of entities that perform or promote elective abortions.” (This means, effectively, that HHSC can’t provide women’s health services through a Planned Parenthood branch — even if that branch doesn’t perform abortions — because it’s “affiliated” with clinics that do.)

In his second opinion, Abbott said HHSC has the authority to define the key word here: “affiliate.” With such strong Republican leadership at the helm, it’s likely HHSC will define affiliate in a way that excludes Planned Parenthood.

The rulings stem from a request made by Sen. Bob Deuell, R-Greenville, who has not hidden his desire to get Planned Parenthood clinics out of the state’s Women’s Health Program. Deuell says the 2005 law that created the program should exclude them already. It says that participating clinics can’t “perform or promote election abortions” or be “affiliates” of those that do.

But HHSC has for years overlooked the rule, fearing that barring Planned Parenthood clinics might be unconstitutional. After Deuell asked the AG for an opinion, HHSC Commissioner Tom Suehs sent in his own request for an opinion, asking the AG if HHSC had the authority to define the term “affiliate.”

Abbott says there’s no constitutional problem, and that the state is within its rights to exclude certain types of providers from Medicaid programs. He also said HHSC is within its rights to define the word “affiliate.”

While some Planned Parenthood clinics in Texas do perform abortions, those that provide family planning services under Texas’ Women’s Health Program do not — they screen Medicaid patients for breast and cervical cancer, STDs and prescribe birth control, among other services. Since 2007, 40 Planned Parenthood clinics have received a combined $17.6 million through the Women’s Health Program, according to HHSC records.

With Abbott’s opinion, HHSC spokeswoman Stephanie Goodman said, “We can now move forward to adopt a rule that restricts affiliates of abortion providers from getting Women’s Health Program funding.”

Planned Parenthood calls for support against GOP attack

As the struggle to keep the doors open at the legendary women’s clinic, Lyon-Martin Health Services, continues here in San Francisco, yet another blow to women’s health care at the national level has advocates sounding the alarm. Planned Parenthood has issued a call for help defeating a federal bill it’s calling “the most dangerous legislative assault on women’s health and Planned Parenthood in our 95-year history.”

Congress is gearing up to vote on the Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act, which would eliminate federal funding for all health-care services provided by any clinic that offers abortion services. The legislation places Planned Parenthood, a leading national provider of reproductive health care serving primarily low-income and uninsured women, squarely in the crosshairs.

The bill was proposed by Rep. Mike Pence (R-IL), who apparently has serious beef with Planned Parenthood.

While Pence has sought to convince lawmakers that the bill would eliminate federal funding only for abortions, its reach is actually much broader than that, and it would deliver a devastating blow to basic reproductive health services for millions of women.

“This bill would eliminate all federal funding for Planned Parenthood health centers — including funding for birth control, cancer screenings, HIV testing, and more,” notes a statement on Planned Parenthood’s website. “The consequences of this bill are clear — and they would be devastating. More women would have unintended pregnancies. Cancer would develop, undiagnosed, in countless women. There is no doubt: cutting off millions of women from care they have no other way to afford places them at risk of sickness and death.”

Even Cosmo has weighed in, noting that this federal funding is helping millions of women stay healthy or detect early stages of disease: “Last year, that money (which would dry up completely if the bill is passed) went towards 2.2 million Pap tests, 2.3 million breast exams, and over six million tests for STDs.”

City Attorney Dennis Herrera has joined in the calls for defense of Planned Parenthood, issuing an email blast as part of his mayoral campaign asking voters to sign a petition against the Pence legislation. “New efforts by the far right to eliminate funding from all Planned Parenthood health centers nationwide pose a dangerous and immediate threat to women’s health,” Herrera wrote in the campaign message.

A number of other online petitions are circulating on this issue as well. Go here or here to learn more.

Southern Ocean County Hospital to Host 19th Annual Women’s Health Night

Online PR News – 17-February-2011 –Manahawkin, NJ – On Wednesday, October 27, the women of southern Ocean County will once again be treated to an evening devoted to their personal health and wellness. During the hours of 5:00 through 9:00 pm, the first floor of Southern Ocean County Hospital (SOCH) will be transformed into one of the region’s most comprehensive health events, featuring free health screenings, literature, educational seminars, and opportunities to meet SOCH physicians, interactive displays, free gifts and more!

It’s all part of Southern Ocean County Hospital’s 19th annual Women’s Health Night, scheduled for Wednesday, October 27, from 5:00 to 9:00 pm.

“Last year, nearly 400 women attended the event, demonstrating just how important these health services are to women in our community.” says Carol Schoenberger, RN, BSN, CDE, director of health resources at SOCH.

Registration begins at 5:00 pm, and guests are asked to enter through the main entrance and register at the Women’s Health Night Registration Desk in the main lobby.

Prior to the event a free lipid profile (cholesterol screening) will take place. Women who would like to take part in the lipid profile should come to the Beach Plum Conference Room at SOCH at 1140 Route 72 West on Monday MORNING, October 25 from 7:00 am to 9:00 am. Fasting for 12 hours is required prior to having blood drawn. That is why the blood draw will take place in the morning. The lipid profile results will be available during Women’s Health Night on October 27.

A variety of health screenings are also planned for the evening. The free screenings include: blood pressure, blood sugar, body fat analysis, bone densitometry, colorectal cancer, Dermascan, foot screenings, hearing screenings, pulmonary function and pap smears. Participants wishing to have a free pap smear are required to schedule an appointment through 1-800-DOCTORS.

In addition to the free lectures and health screenings, Women’s Health Night 2010 at Southern Ocean County Hospital also features a wealth of information on maternity services (http://www.jerseyshoreuniversitymedicalcenter.com/JSUMC/services/maternity/index.cfm), nutrition, fitness, cancer, cardiology and other health issues related to women. Women will enjoy the dozens of interactive educational displays hosted by healthcare professional representing SOCH services and community organizations:
SOCH is located at 1140 Route 72 West in Manahawkin.

Eliminating Abortion or Women’s Reproductive Freedom?

Correction: Some early versions of this story may have erroneously attributed a quote to Reina Schiffrin, who is the President/CEO of Planned Parenthood Hudson Peconic.

U.S. Democrats and local women’s health care providers are calling on Republicans to stop pursuing legislation that they say would create historically drastic cuts in women’s health services and reproductive freedoms.

“Since the beginning of the year the Republicans haven’t put a single bill on the floor that would create a single job,” said U.S. Congresswoman Nita Lowey (D-NY) at a press conference in White Plains Monday. “Instead, Republicans, the majority in the house, have prioritized an extremist agenda that seeks to roll back women’s reproductive rights.”

Bills H.R. 3, H.R. 358 and H.R. 217—titled “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act,” the “Protect Life Act,” and the “Title X Abortion Prohibition Act”—will make it more expensive to pay for healthcare from providers who cover abortions and would eliminate the Title X federal funding program that funds healthcare providers who offer full reproductive services.

Democrats and women’s advocates say the bills would allow hospitals to leave pregnant women to die; prevent the funding of abortions for rape and incest victims; and block crucial preventative care services, like birth control and STD screenings. Republicans say the legislation will make abortion inaccessible, which will reduce the number that occur in the United States each year.

At the press conference, Reina Schiffrin, President/CEO of Planned Parenthood Hudson Peconic, called the bills “the most devastating legislative assault on women’s health care in American history.”

“It’s not just about terminating pregnancies,” Lowey said. “These women who are struggling in the economy will have no place to go for their health care.”

U.S. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand and several other Democratic senators also have spoken out against the bills and what they view as the Republican Party’s misplaced priorities.

“This agenda disregards women’s rights and restricts the ability of women to access affordable health care,” Gillibrand said in a press release. “Clearly, the Republican House is not focusing on creating jobs or growing our economy, but making the degradation of women’s health care a top priority.”

According to the press release, the bill would:
Redefine the definitions of rape and incest, according to the National Women’s Law Center. This would mean that states would no longer be required to offer abortions to poor women who were raped, were victims of incest or need the abortion to save their lives.
No longer require hospitals to save the life of a pregnant woman if it meant the fetus would die.
Eliminate Title X funding, which funds places like Planned Parenthood that provide abortions in addition to preventative services like mammograms and other cancer screenings, birth control, HIV and STD testing and treatment, and annual check-ups.
Restrict women from deducting the cost of purchasing health insurance that offers certain reproductive services.
Would prevent women and families from using pre-taxed dollars (via Flexible Spending Accounts) to pay for certain health care from providers who offer abortions.
Prevent small businesses from receiving tax credits if they choose providers who offer abortions.

Though federal law prohibits taxpayer money from directly funding abortions, federal funds can give aid to providers who offer a range of health care services, including abortion.

Congressman Chris Smith (R-NJ) said the bill he sponsored, H.R.3, “is designed to permanently end any U.S. government financial support for abortion, whether it be direct funding or by tax credits or any other subsidy.”

Smith says the abortion industry is a “multimillion dollar business,” and that Planned Parenthood raked in $1 billion in fees, local, state and federal subsidies, while killing 324,000 babies in 2008.

Congressman Fred Upton (R-MI) says H.R. 358 aims to ensure that private insurance companies and families aren’t forced to cover abortion if they don’t want to.

“Individuals who have strong moral objections are thereby forced to directly finance abortion coverage in order to purchase a health care plan they believe best provides for their needs and the needs of their family members,” said Upton, in a Feb. 9 committee meeting. “This is wrong and the legislation proposed by Mr. Pitts [Congressman Joseph Pitts (R-PA)] corrects this injustice.”

Smith said abortion is harmful to women, and that studies show women who get abortions are at higher risk for suicide and depression.

“The ugly truth is that women are victimized by abortion—wounded and hurt physically and emotionally,” said Smith, on Jan. 20. “Women deserve better than abortion.”

UCSF/UC Hastings Forum to Address Role of Hormones in Women’s Health

The UCSF/UC Hastings Consortium on Law, Science and Health Policy and the Hastings Women’s Law Journal will host an upcoming symposium titled “Frontiers in Women’s Health: The Role of Hormones in Aging and Disease.”

The symposium will take place on Friday, Feb. 25, 2011, at the University of California, Hastings College of the Law in San Francisco. Admission is free. Continuing Medical Education credit is available.

This unique event will draw together speakers and attendees from the medical, legal and policy communities, and will present opportunities for members of each community to interact with and understand the perspectives of the others.
Malegra Fxt
The morning will begin with an overview of the now-familiar topic of hormone therapy in peri-menopausal and menopausal women, with an in-depth discussion of the Women’s Health Initiative hormone trial data and the controversies the data have engendered since the trials were halted. This topic will be the starting point for a wide-ranging and multi-disciplinary set of panels, including discussions about health policy decisionmaking, informed consent, litigation over hormone use, and gendered medicine. Panel titles are as follows:

Morning Panels

Panel 1 – Introduction and Background

Hormone Therapy: What We Know (and Don’t Know) after the Women’s Health Initiative Trials

Panel 2 – Translational Research and the “Timing Hypothesis”

Panel 3 – Government Agency and Health Policy Decision Making and Recommendations in an Environment of Empirical Uncertainty

Afternoon Panels

Panel 4 – Public Support/Public Advocacy: Public vs. Private Research Funding, Grassroots Advocacy, Effects on Underserved Populations, Media’s Role

Panel 5 – Informed Consent/Litigation Related to Hormone Therapy

Panel 6 – Legal Relevance of “Real” Differences: Constitutional Issues, Work and Family, Healthcare and Aging.
Women’s Health Experts Gather

The lunchtime keynote speaker is women’s health pioneer Marianne J. Legato, MD, an internationally recognized specialist in women’s health and the founder and director of the Partnership for Gender-Specific Medicine at Columbia University. She is the founder and editor of The Journal of Gender-Specific Medicine and a leading advocate for the inclusion of women in clinical trials.

Legato has devoted much of her research to the subject of women and heart disease. She is the author of several books, including Principles of Gender-Specific Medicine (for medical practitioners) and the general-trade books Eve’s Rib: The New Science of Gender-Specific Medicine and How It Can Save Your Life, The Female Heart: The Truth About Women and Heart Disease, and Why Men Never Remember and Women Never Forget (with Laura Tucker). Read more about Legato on the National Library of Medicine website.

Other panelists, in alphabetical order, include:

Roberta Diaz Brinton, PhD, R. Pete Vanderveen Chair in Therapeutic Discovery and Development, professor of Pharmacology and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Biomedical Engineering and Neurology, University of Southern California; director, Los Angeles Basic Clinical Translational Science Institute.

Marcelle I. Cedars, MD, professor, Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, director, Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility at UCSF; principal investigator, UCSF Women’s Health Clinical Research Center.

Marsha Cohen, JD, professor of Law, UC Hastings College of the Law; past president, California State Board of Pharmacy. Cohen has served on four National Research Council and Institute of Medicine committees, including the recent “Committee on Strategies to Reduce Sodium Intake,” and has also served on the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare Review Panel on New Drug Regulation.

David L. Faigman, JD, John F. Digardi Distinguished Professor of Law, Director, UCSF/UC Hastings Consortium on Law, Science & Health Policy, UC Hastings College of the Law; Author of numerous books and articles concerning the use, or failure to use, scientific research in legal decision making.

Baruch Fischhoff, PhD, Howard Heinz University Professor, Depts. of Social and Decision Sciences and of Engineering and Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon University; member, Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences; chair of the Food and Drug Administration Risk Communication Advisory Committee.

Cynthia Gorney, professor, UC Berkeley, Graduate School of Journalism; Contributing writer for the New York Times Magazine and National Geographic; former national features writer, South American bureau chief and founding Style section writer for the Washington Post.

Cantor’s policy on women’s health shows his speech as empty rhetoric

In his Charter Day address to the student body, House Majority Whip Eric Cantor J.D. ’88 declared, “Our commonwealth, this region, is a place where our founding principles of liberty, democracy and limited government were cultivated.” Apparently, these founding principles do not extend to America’s women.
Under Cantor’s leadership, the House of Representatives has introduced a number of bills to severely limit women’s liberty, expand governmental power over women’s bodies and harm our democracy.

In 1970, Richard Nixon signed Title X, legislation to provide family planning services for Americans. Title X was passed three years before Roe v. Wade legalized abortion, a clear and obvious testament to the fact that Title X never intended to provide federally funded abortions. Under current U.S. law, no abortion is provided at federal expense.

This blatant fact, however, does not appease those in control of Congress’ 112th session. Rep. Mike Pense (R-Ind.) introduced H.R. 217, or the Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act, to Congress on Jan. 7. The controversial bill has 164 co-sponsors, including three democrats, Michele Bachmann ’89 and our Congressman Rob Wittman. The bill would prohibit providers who perform abortions from receiving family planning grants.

If passed, H.R. 217 will have disastrous effects on the health of American women. The bill will cut $327 million in funding to Planned Parenthood. In 2008, Planned Parenthood provided healthcare to 3 million patients. According to its annual report for that year, 36 percent of Planned Parenthood’s total services went to providing contraception, 31 percent involved testing and treatment for STIs, 17 percent provided cancer screening and prevention and only 3 percent of Planned Parenthood’s services were used for abortions. H.R. 217 will disconnect 3 million women from preventative treatment and vital healthcare annually.
On January 20, Rep. Joseph Pitts (R-Pa.), along with 121 cosponsors including 10 democrats, introduced H.R. 358, the Protect Life Act. As the law stands today, federal funds cannot be used for abortion services.

Plans that receive federal funds are required to keep those funds separate from funds used for abortion. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, the Protect Life Act prohibits “federal funds from being used to cover any part of the costs of any health plan that includes coverage of abortion services.” Even though federal assistance is not used to fund abortions, if H.R. 358 is passed, providers will be bribed into discontinuing abortion services.

Rep. Christopher Smith (R-N.J.) introduced H.R. 3, the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act. H.R. 3 similarly “prohibits federal funds from being used for any health benefits coverage that includes coverage of abortion.” Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio) has called H.R. 3 “one of our highest legislative priorities.” Abortion has been legal in the United States for 38 years, but Congress seems determined to revoke healthcare providers’ right to cover it at their own expense. Congress’ chief priority seems politicized and pointless in a time when Americans are faced with mounting debt, high unemployment and homelessness.

Rep. Cantor told us last Friday that America is “the world’s free-est [sic] and most prosperous nation.” Yet in terms of women’s health, our country is by no means the world’s leader. Amnesty International’s 2010 report, “Deadly Delivery; The Maternal Health Care Crisis in the USA,” outlines the danger of further sanctioning women’s health. The report declares the U.S. 41st in maternal health. Further limiting women’s access to vital health services such as family planning and cancer screening will improve neither women’s freedom nor American prosperity.

The sponsors of these bills claim to be both anti-deficit and pro-life, yet they have introduced no such measures regarding the defense budget. Of the world’s military expenditures in 2006, the United States accounted for 46 percent. According to the Center for Defense Information, defense related budget requests for 2011 total at around $1,048.9 billion dollars. An obvious way both to reduce spending and save lives would be to examine the defense budget; yet our leaders are focusing on limiting women’s access to pap smears. At our Charter Day assembly, Rep. Cantor proclaimed that “America is built on a culture of opportunity, responsibility and earned success.” American liberty and democracy are too important to be used merely as politicized talking points: We must extend these freedoms to our citizens before we can boast about them to the world.