Showing posts with label lie. Show all posts
Showing posts with label lie. Show all posts

Wednesday, December 26, 2012

Dec 12: Putin population policy


About 15 minutes of the 1.5-hour address was devoted to the demographic situation. We managed to transcribe the speech and translated it into English to share with you below.

Mr. Putin expressed his conviction that in the future having 3 children per family should become a norm. This should be achieved through a range of financial benefits for families with 2nd and 3rd children, helping women reconcile family and work and improving lodging conditions for lower middle class families. While the President underlined many times that his Government will do its best to ensure that women’s needs are met when deciding whether to have a child (state solutions should be based on combatting the reasons that population does not want to have children), last (2011) year had seen a number of restrictions imposed to women’s access to abortion.

Full speech (1,5 hours):

Part on demography (14 minutes) :  (some parts are missing here and are available in the full speech)


(script of the speech translated from Russian below)

  • By the beginning of the year 2000, the population of Russia was reducing by 1 million annually. It seemed impossible to stop this catastrophy.
  • After the launch of demographic programmes the population of the country stabilised, starting from the year 2010 is started to increase. This is our key achievement.
  • Stability is the main condition for developing and improving life conditions (and people believed the government!)
  • For Russia to be sovereign and powerful - we have to be "more" and we have to be "better" in our morals, competences, work, creativity
  • Today the rate of working population 20-40 years in Russia is the largest among the developed countries in the world. But in 20 years this number can decrease by 1,5 times. This tendency will continue if we do nothing. We have to open life opportunities for these generations: have interesting jobs, launch businesses, get housing, establish big and strong families, raise many children, be happy in their own country.
  • Otherwise just in few decades Russia will become a poor, hopelessly old by age country, unable to keep its independence and even its territory.
  • Demographic programmes adopted in last decade are working.
  • Population not only stabilised but started to grow. In January- September 2012 population grew by 200 000 persons. 5 months in a row (first time ever in the newest history of the country) - we are registering a natural increase of population. Birthrates became higher than death rates.
  • Life expectancy today has increased by 2,5 years (for the past 4 years) and is over 70 years now.
  • We have adopted a programme of providing "Family capital" for the birth of the second child - it is successful. It will be in force till the end of the year 2016.
  • But I do not want to push our women to the birth of the second child! Our women know themselves what and when  to do. But we need to inform our citizens. We also need to think what to do with this programme after year 2016.
  • As of year 2013 we will start providing additional benefits for third and following children - in those regions, where demographic situation is worse than the country average. These are 50 Federation subjects: central, north-west, trans-Volga and far-East federal districts.
  • Besides I remind all heads of Federation subjects the need to develop own programmes of demographic development.
  • Demographers stress that choice of the second child represent a potential choice for the third child. It is important that the family takes this step.
  • Although some experts that I respect are doubtful about it, I am convinced: the norm in Russia should be a family with 3 children.
  • But to ensure this a lot needs to be done. We need to create favorable conditions first and foremost for women. So that they should not fear that 2nd and following child would close their way to careers and good jobs. That it would make them limited to household work. What we started to do is: solving the long queues to the kindergartens; professional trainings for women with children; supporting flexible form of employment  - this will directly affect the choice of family for the second child.
  • High attention should be paid to under-school facilities including supporting private facilities. Many obstacles to that have already been removed. I (Putin) request to completely clear out obstacles in the first half of the next year. Regions need to work more: everywhere should be open small and 'home-based' kindergardens as well as after-school hours facilities. Parents should have choice for these facilities without queues and stress.
  • lodging problems should be solved and mortgage should be available to lower middle class families (teachers, doctors etc.)



Source: Marina Davidashvili, Senior Policy Officer, EPF

Sunday, November 27, 2011

Health Risks in 'Reproductive Health': New Studies on the Pill

Otto Dix (1927) Новорожденный на руках

More Research on What Women Are Not Being Told

By Arland K. Nichols
WASHINGTON, D.C., NOV. 23, 2011 (Zenit.org).-

Approximately 100 million women worldwide use some version of "the Pill," or combined oral contraceptives. In the developed world, the use of some form of contraceptive is nearly universal, with surgical sterilization and oral contraception the most popular methods. [1] As the United States and other Western powers continue to spend billions of dollars on the "reproductive health" of women in the developing world, the numbers of users continue to rise.

In spite of the Church's consistent teaching through the centuries, Catholic women use contraception at the same rate as non-Catholics. The contraceptive mentality, as Blessed John Paul II described it, has a dramatic impact on the lives of Catholics everywhere and is a root cause of the culture of death. This mentality was described by him in "Evangelium Vitae" No. 13 as "a hedonistic mentality unwilling to accept responsibility in matters of sexuality … a self-centered concept of freedom, which regards procreation as an obstacle to personal fulfillment." It is characterized not only by widespread promiscuity and diminishing respect for women, but by a view that only life that is "wanted" or convenient is to be valued and protected. [head over heels -- new? balance]

Considering the growing body of evidence which calls into question the safety of the most popular forms of oral contraceptives, we can see that the negative social and moral effects so presciently identified by Pope Paul VI in "Humanae Vitae," are now correlated with increased and serious risks to women's health.

It is well established, if not well known [with reference to the year 2012 ;)], that combined oral contraceptives bring a heightened risk for a number of maladies -- breast, liver and cervical cancers, heart attack, stroke, and blood clots, to note a few. [2] [btw: The Linacre Quarterly is the official journal of the Catholic Medical Association.] To exacerbate the problem, two recent studies have shown that one of the newest and most popular types of oral contraceptives brings an even greater risk of what one study describes as "the most important safety issue for these products" -- venous thromboembolism, or VTE.

VTE refers to the formation of blood clots in large veins (deep vein thrombosis) that can break loose, travel through the blood stream, and eventually block an artery in the lungs (pulmonary embolism). VTE may be responsible for some 100,000 deaths each year in the United States alone. The surgeon general of the United States considers VTE "a major public health problem, exacting a significant human and economic toll." [3] Though the majority of VTE events occur in older populations, combined oral contraceptives increase the risk of
blood clots for women during their childbearing years.

Normally, after a given drug has been in circulation for some time, the medical community arrives at a consensus concerning the risks posed by the drug. Such a consensus has arisen with reference to the second and third generation of combined oral contraceptives and the incidence of blood clots. The Physicians Desk Reference states that "an increased risk … is well established" and the Federal Drug Administration confirms that "[a]n increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) (deep venous thrombosis [DVT] and pulmonary embolism [PE]) is well established and has been consistently reported."[4] [citation is over] Users of second and third generations of oral contraceptives have a two to seven times greater risk of VTE than non-users.

The newest (fourth) generation of combined oral contraception contain both synthetic estrogen and a progestin called "drospirenone." Marketed under the trade names of Yaz, Beyaz, Yasmin, and Safryal, these contraceptives have led to a financial windfall for Bayer Pharmaceuticals, earning over $780 million in the first nine months of 2011. [5] This financial success can be attributed in part to the marketing campaign which, until recently, was directed toward young women in their teens and early 20s. Television and online advertisements showed spry, independent, and carefree young women who had been set free from the "burden" of their fertility, monthly cycles, Premenstrual Syndrome, and acne. The Yaz Web site featured an interactive, colorful, and trendy city block in which young women could peruse the stores and learn all about the positive benefits of Yaz.

This light hearted sales approach has changed, however, as 10,400 lawsuits have been served upon Bayer in response to side-effects from Yaz as of Oct. 8, 2011. [6] Further, in early 2011 two studies were published by the British Medical Journal indicating that women who use Yaz had a two to three times greater risk of blood clots than women who use other combined oral contraceptives. In May, the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) responded by launching a safety investigation, and announced in September that "preliminary results of the FDA-funded study suggest an approximately 1.5 fold increase in the risk of blood clots for women who use drospirenone-containing birth control pills compared to users of other hormonal contraceptives." [7]

In late October, the FDA confirmed these findings. On the heels of this confirmation came another extensive study of 329,995 women in Israel, which was published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ) on Nov. 7. [8] This study corroborated the FDA's investigation, showing an increased risk of 1.5 times that of other forms (second and third generation) of oral contraceptives. The authors noted that "the risk of venous thrombotic events was significantly greater among drospirenone users than among users of third generation combined oral contraceptives." This study concluded that one out of every 1,000 women who use drospirenone containing contraceptives will experience a VTE during use.
This was followed four days later by yet another study conducted in Denmark and published in the British Medical Journal, which found that the risk for women who use Drospirenone OCPs have "a sixfold to sevenfold increased risk" of VTE compared to non-users. [9]

The authors of the CMAJ study noted that they do not know the reason why the risk is so much greater, but stressed that "it is important to raise awareness of the increased, albeit small, risk of venous thromboembolism relative to third-generation pills." It is laudable that the authors want to raise awareness of this risk to women's health, and it is surely also a moral obligation. Before addressing this moral obligation one rightly asks, is this risk really "small?" To consider this question it might be helpful to crunch some raw numbers from the two recent studies.

If the 100 million women who use oral contraception today did not do so, we could expect 30,000 women from this group to experience VTE. If we use the most conservative numbers from the studies cited here and assume that half of the women on oral contraceptives used second and third generation pills and half used drospirenone containing oral contraceptives, we can expect some 80,000 women to face life-threatening blood clots. This means that 50,000 more women would suffer from life-threatening blood clots in one year alone!

Now consider the Guttmacher Institute's suggestion that women should be on contraceptives for 30 years if they are to have the typically desired number of children -- two. [10] To continue our projection, if 100 million women used the pill every year over 30 years, some 2.4 million women will experience deep vein thrombosis, 1.5 million of whom would face this life threatening event because they used oral contraception.

Perhaps we should not be surprised that such significant health risks would follow the embrace of ideals that are also morally problematic. The Catholic Church has consistently taught that married couples may not deliberately make the marital act infertile. [do they understand the consequences?] Regrettably, most couples ignore or are ignorant of this teaching. Also, many women are prescribed oral contraceptives who are not married, often to alleviate painful periods, irregular cycles, and other reproductive health difficulties. Such use is not intrinsically immoral, though it may be imprudent.

Regardless, people of good will should agree that physicians have a moral obligation to inform women of the potential negative side effects of any drug they prescribe, including oral contraception. Yet, women regularly report that they are not informed of the well-established risks. A nationwide survey conducted by HLI America in November of 2010 found that only 40% of those who use oral contraception report being warned by their physician that using the drug increases the risk of blood clots. This is unsettling: Women have a right to such information and physicians have a responsibility to provide it.
The use of oral contraception today has become so routine and the contraceptive mentality has become so pervasive that women do not know about the well-established risks they face when they use combined oral contraceptives. Women, not to mention marriage and society, would be better served if greater knowledge of the well-established health risks encouraged a cultural shift away from the de facto use of contraceptives and encouraged greater openness to the gift of life.

Blessed Pope John Paul II emphasized that the contraceptive mentality is at the root of the culture of death. Scientific studies like those cited here only strengthen the case that health and life are better served when we refuse to rely on contraception and are open to new life.

[1] www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_contr_use.html
[2] Arland K. Nichols, Misleading Leadership: The Deliberate Deception of Recommendation 5.5, The Linacre Quarterly, February 2012 V. 79 N1)
[3] www.surgeongeneral.gov/topics/deepvein/calltoaction/call-to-action-on-dvt-2008.pdf
[4] www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/DrugSafety/UCM277384.pdf
[5] www.stockholders-newsletter-q3-2011.bayer.com/en/bayer-stockholders-newsletter-3q-2011.pdfx
[6] www.stockholders-newsletter-q3-2011.bayer.com/en/bayer-stockholders-newsletter-3q-2011.pdfx
[7] www.fda.gov/Safety/MedWatch/SafetyInformation/SafetyAlertsforHumanMedicalProducts/ucm257337.htm?source=govdelivery
[8] www.cmaj.ca/content/early/2011/11/07/cmaj.110463.full.pdf
[9] www.bmj.com/highwire/filestream/448051/field_highwire_article_pdf/0.pdf
[10] www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_contr_use.html#3a
* * *
Arland K. Nichols is the national director of HLI America, an educational initiative of Human Life International. His writing can be found on HLI America's Truth and Charity Forum.

Russian antichoice is not the only liar on the globe

Saturday, August 27, 2011

LifeSiteNews Lies

A dying nation: Russia’s abortion crisis

I can not comment on emotional stuff, but a few figures about this message:

In the last 20 years, an estimated 80 million unborn Russian children are believed to have been aborted.

“Russia is facing a very serious demographic problem. We’re losing almost three quarters of a million people every year,” said Alexey Komov, chairman of the Moscow Demographic Summit.

Currently, Russia has a birth rate per woman of 1.2, according to Komov, whereas the replacement rate for any population is at least 2.1. Similar numbers are found in China, Japan, and Eastern European countries. According to 2010 data by the CIA World Factbook, the United States has just slipped below replacement rate at 2.06 children born per woman.
  • Total number of abortions in 1991-2010 is about 44 mln, that's a lot. Why multiply? (warning >> important update: not all reported abortions are induced, a number of miscarriages is about 1/10th of total)
  • 3/4 mln a year -- average decline for the period 1990-2009 is 287,529, with range from +608,665 (1990) to -720,668 (2005), i.e., about 3/4 mln drop occured in the only single year.
  • Average total fertility rate 1990-2009 was about 1.4, ranging from 1.9 (1990) to 1.2 (1999) and about (rounding to the first digit) 1.2 in a period 1997-2001
Btw, the US do not have any pronatalist policy having the highest fertility

Data are somewhat filtered to generate bias.

Most important is the simple fact: the situation is really unpleasant, fertility is low, and mortality (not shown) is high, but antichoice measures will definitely lead to its worsening. E.g., when imposing abortion ban Poland had the same fertility as Russia, now Russian fertility is higher.