Since the letter, with its references, is a bit long, I start with some excepts followed by the entire letter itself. I hope that you glean from this letter that those who have debunked Todd Akin for making a statement that "
So that this letter is intended to debunk those who say there is no connection between rape and inhibition of pregnancy.
The thing to keep in mind here is, as the author suggests, that the statements made in his letter are factual in terms of scientific observations made, but the issue of inhibition of pregnancy "remains controversial because the exact mechanism has not been elucidated".
Letter with Excerpts:
Dear Congressman Aiken, (sic)
It’s unfortunate that the fate of a nation my (sic) hang on the use of a single word. But that appears to be the case in your recent use of the word ‘legitimate’ rather than the eminently defensible word ‘forcible’. More unfortunate is that your apology was ill conceived by totally renouncing the concept rather than clarifying the categorization of rape.
You are correct in making the distinction between forcible and non-forced rape. Studies have shown that then is an approximate 1% pregnancy rate in cases of forcible rape, in contradistinction to close to a 5% pregnancy rate in cases where the rape was not associated with physical force.
When one examines the medical and veterinary literature, there is strong support for stress induced delay in pregnancy or suppression of conception. This remains controversial because the exact mechanism has not been elucidated.
More recently, studies have evaluated effects of cortisol and adrenaline by measuring salivary secretions in women. This study demonstrated a relationship between adrenaline (the ‘fight or flight’ hormone) but not cortisol. Again, suggesting that high levels of adrenaline – as would be expected in a forcible rape - might indeed decrease rates of conception.
A German veterinary paper, Pferdeheilkunde 24 (2008) 1 (Januar/Februar) 99-102 found that even transporting mares was sufficient stress to temporarily effect fertility. So, it is certainly plausible that the severe stress of forcible rape could reduce fertility.
While I wish that you had used the correct word – forcible, rather than legitimate – I wish even more that you had explained the medical basis for the statement, rather than abandoning your statement to appease those who desire nothing more than a political victory.
I wish you well in your future decisions but hope that you will not be so ready to abandon your beliefs, and medical facts, to attempt to please those who cannot be pleased.
Letter in Full:
Dear Congressman Aiken, (sic)
It’s unfortunate that the fate of a nation my hang on the use of a single word. But that appears to be the case in your recent use of the word ‘legitimate’ rather than the eminently defensible word ‘forcible’. More unfortunate is that your apology was ill conceived by totally renouncing the concept rather than clarifying the categorization of rape.
You are correct in making the distinction between forcible and non-forced rape. Studies have shown that then is an approximate 1% pregnancy rate in cases of forcible rape, in contradistinction to close to a 5% pregnancy rate in cases where the rape was not associated with physical force.
Both The NY Times
and BBC News
aspx ) reported, 2010:
“Researchers from the US National Institutes of Health, Ohio State University and the University of Oxford carried out this study. It was funded by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, the UK NHS Executive, the DLM Charitable Trust and the Unipath Corporation (a company that sells fertility monitors, pregnancy tests and technical assistance for medical devices).
The study was published as an uncorrected proof in the peer-reviewed medical journal, Fertility and Sterility.
BBC News and the Daily Express reported on this research. They both state that stress could lead to a 12% reduction in the chances of becoming pregnant,
When one examines the medical and veterinary literature, there is strong support for stress induced delay in pregnancy or suppression of conception. This remains controversial because the exact mechanism has not been elucidated. Hypotheses include the increased production of hormones such as cortisol, epinephrine and changes in the hypothalamic-pituitary axis with interference in leutenizing hormone (LH) pathway interactions. As reviewed in a May 2012 post
( http://biozhena.wordpress.com/tag/fertility/ ), which quoted an abstract from a 2004 paper (please see the review for scientific citations):
Stress activates the hypothalamo-pituitary-adrenal axis leading to enhanced glucocorticoid secretion and concurrently inhibits gonadotropin secretion and disrupts ovarian cyclicity. Here we tested the hypothesis that stress-like concentrations of cortisol interfere with follicular phase endocrine events of the ewe by suppressing pulsatile LH secretion, which is essential for subsequent steps in the preovulatory sequence.
More recently, studies have evaluated effects of cortisol and adrenaline by measuring salivary secretions in women. This study demonstrated a relationship between adrenaline (the ‘fight or flight’ hormone) but not cortisol. Again, suggesting that high levels of adrenaline – as would be expected in a forcible rape - might indeed decrease rates of conception.
A German veterinary paper, Pferdeheilkunde 24 (2008) 1 (Januar/Februar) 99-102 found that even transporting mares was sufficient stress to temporarily effect fertility. So, it is certainly plausible that the severe stress of forcible rape could reduce fertility.
One suggested mechanism is (from: http://www.conceiveonline.com/articles/howstress- affects-fertility):
Stress has other reproductive ramifications. It “can increase the frequency of uterine contractions, which may interfere with implantation, says Sherman Silber, M.D., director of The Infertility Center of St. Louis at St. Luke’s Hospital in Missouri and author of How to Get Pregnant (Little Brown & Co., 2005).
While I wish that you had used the correct word – forcible, rather than legitimate – I wish even more that you had explained the medical basis for the statement, rather than abandoning your statement to appease those who desire nothing more than a political victory.
I wish you well in your future decisions but hope that you will not be so ready to abandon your beliefs, and medical facts, to attempt to please those who cannot be pleased.
No comments:
Post a Comment