Pro-Abortion propagandist Jessica Valenti published an attempted takedown of Students for Life of America’s (SFLA) recently published peer-reviewed study showing that the Chemical Abortion Pill mifepristone is present in our waterways. 

Sadly for Valenti, though not surprising perhaps to her regular readers, she failed. 

Let’s address her argument against our study point-by-point. 

Claim #1: SFLA “didn’t even test for” mifepristone in this study. FALSE 

It is easily discernable that SFLA did test specifically for the presence of mifepristone in the water. The article says that – repeatedly.  

While Valenti tries to claim that this test could pick up anything that even remotely blocks progesterone (her examples for some reason being “insecticide, flame retardant, or even sunscreen” rather than well-known pharmaceutical progesterone blockers), her lack of understanding of the highly specific kind of testing employed was on display.  

The water samples were analyzed using PR CALUX® bioassays (Progesterone Receptor Chemical Activated LUciferase gene eXpression).  

In this test, cells from fireflies “have been tailored so that they produce light in a dose-responsive way when exposed to chemicals,” notes the manufacturer. The cells are altered to light up specifically and only in the presence of what they are altered to detect. In our study, it was altered to detect mifepristone specifically 

Mifepristone is a complex manmade chemical. Dr. Étienne-Émile Baulieu designed mifepristone for the sole purpose of disrupting a pregnancy by manipulating hormones, as well documented by the New York Times. He intended RU-486 to be an “an antiprogesterone” and called the concept ‘contragestion’ because it counteracted the gestation process.  

“More simply, he wrote, ‘RU-486’s action is like jamming a radio signal,’” reports the New York Times. 

As the study itself clearly states, the researchers went looking for mifepristone with a specialized tool for its detection alone.  

Let’s start with the Abstract:  

Past research has shown that steroid hormones and other endocrine-disrupting compounds (EDCs) are present in environmental water, with implications for human and wildlife health. Abortion providers have shifted a large part of their practice to medication-induced abortion, using the anti-progesterone synthetic steroid hormone mifepristone. We wanted to see if mifepristone, an EDC, could be detected in water sources. Water samples were collected from sites upstream and downstream of water treatment facilities, and from municipal tap water, from each of 3 American cities. The water samples were tested for mifepristone using PR CALUX®. There were significant levels of mifepristone (up to 0.041 μgram/l) in the water of all but one of the nine sampling classes. Because of the plethora of effects of progesterone, this contaminant could affect the physiology of aquatic animals; and human health, including fertility, pregnancy, and fetal development. The findings indicate the necessity for significant additional investigation. 

Later we read (if you actually READ the study):  

Sample bottles [of water] were prepared by ALS Environmental in Cincinnati, Ohio, for analysis of anti-progesterone CALUX®. . . . Each city also contained a “field blank” sample filled with laboratory-supplied distilled water. . . . The water samples were sent blind (without source identification) to BioDetection Systems laboratory in the Netherlands which dissolved the samples in DMSO and used PR CALUX® bioassays to test for mifepristone. The PR CALUX® activity was determined after 24h exposure and benchmarked against mifepristone (Ru486). . . . The presence of an appropriate substrate, in this case mifepristone, triggers the activation of such REs [responsive elements], thus initiating the creation of luciferase, which then emits light. The amount of light produced is measured by luminometer and is proportional to the amount of ligand-specific receptor binding, which is benchmarked against a reference level of mifepristone. 

As was stated in the POLITICO article Valenti herself linked to: 

The lab they contracted with in the Netherlands tested specifically for mifepristone, she said, and any other chemical detected would have to be genetically “identical or nearly identical” to the abortion medication, and “the odds against that would be very great.” 

“This is a bio assay that’s based on enzymes and antibodies are like a lock and key,” said Rose, who holds a doctorate in agronomy and environmental plant physiology from Kansas State University. “In order for something else to fit in there, it has to be very similar. And mifepristone is not a simple molecule.” 

Scientific inquiry is exactly what this study did: propose a question, seek an answer, open its findings to public and professional scrutiny, and ask others to participate in further research and discussion. 

For another contaminant to contribute to the reaction, it would have to have the same structure as mifepristone, and therefore the same risks. The chances of this are very low. Even if another contaminant contributed to the light reaction, it wouldn’t change that mifepristone was specifically detected. 

50+ tons of Chemical Abortion Pill pollution are flushed into our waterways every year (if you believe the math from Valenti’s beloved Guttmacher Institute). It is obvious what the main contributor to anti-progesterone in our water is. 

The presence of mifepristone is undeniable, and we encourage more studies to prove our findings correct. 

Claim #2: SFLA doesn’t “actually believe any of it.” FALSE — and we have the receipts

This is just a ridiculous claim. 

Valenti’s entire justification for this assertion is that SFLA’s Vice President of Media & Policy once said that using environmental law was not SFLA’s “first weapon of choice” in tackling how abortion hurts preborn children and society as a whole. The Pro-Life movement has engaged in many strategies over the years, protecting LIFE in law and in service. And now, as the disastrous effects of reckless abortion policies come to light, we also need to protect the environment and endangered species from deadly abortions.  

At this point, in numerous citizen petitions to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and in a campaign to add mifepristone to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) tracking through the “Safe Drinking Water Act,” and in legal briefs detailing risks to endangered species because of abortion water pollution, SFLA has illustrated that our concerns about Chemical Abortion Pills begin with the babies whose lives are ended. From there, our worries extend to their mothers, too often poisoned with abortion pills by abusers, and continue to the environment. Our advocacy on this issue represents a real investment in protecting all Life from deadly and dangerous Chemical Abortion Pills.  

In fact, a recent Kaiser poll shows that people are paying attention. Almost half of those polled (49%) felt Chemical Abortion Pills were unsafe, or they were not convinced of their safety. The dangers of the pills give reason for that concern.  

Claim #3: The publisher and researchers of the study are biased. FALSE 

If Jessica Valenti wants this argument to be taken seriously, she shouldn’t suggest an article from the Guttmacher Institute, a radical pro-abortion research group that was literally founded by Planned Parenthood, to support her pro-abortion argument almost immediately after accusing us of using biased sources. And she shouldn’t cite like a Bible verse data from places like “We Count,” made up of abortion activists, such as Ushma Upadhyay of UC Berkeley’s Bixby Center, applauded and supported by abortion pill manufacturer GenBioPro.  

Of course, we don’t expect Jessica to read the kind of data produced by the abortion lobby with a skeptical eye, but we also need science from people of all persuasions, not just her fan favorites.  

Issues in Law & Medicine: A Journal of the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine is a journal founded by the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, an organization that is very transparent about its values and advocacy for Life.  

But determining the presence of mifepristone in the water has nothing do with who the source is and everything to do with the methods and quality of the test conducted. As was already addressed, the study was specifically tuned to show the presence of mifepristone. The study found it, and multiple rounds of peer reviews agreed. 

About Dr. Elise Rose, PhD — Jessica is dismissive because you can find her bio on a website with other scientists who think preborn babies in the womb have value. But let’s look at what is in that bio: 

Elise Rose earned her doctorate in agronomy at Kansas State University, her Master of Arts in Teaching from Howard University, and her Bachelor of Science from Georgetown University. She is a former Adjunct Professor of Biology, as well as Director of Tutoring, at Ave Maria University. Dr. Rose has taught classes on microbiology, introductory biology laboratory and lectures, and animal biology at the college level. She has done research for the U.S. EPA, the Department of Energy, the Wisconsin State Department of Agriculture, the White House Committee on Science and Technology Policy, and NASA. 

Dr. Rose’s environmental studies have included investigating the presence of nitrate in applied liquid manure and in soil groundwater; the effects of high carbon dioxide and high temperature (the “greenhouse effect”) on agricultural species; and the effects of low-light, low temperature (“nuclear winter”) on agricultural species. Her botanical research has included the effects of drought on root and shoot growth and ethylene production in winter wheat; stomatal effects of exogenous ethylene; and the mechanism of uptake of potassium into oat roots and tobacco pith tissue culture. 

She is well qualified to look at whether a substance has infiltrated the environment.  

Just because Jessica Valenti disagrees with the personal opinions of an organization or its members has nothing to do with the validity of their argument or research. But given Valenti has no valid arguments against the study, her reliance on genetic and ad hominem fallacies is an expected next step. 

Claim #4: The amount of mifepristone the study claims it found is so small, it doesn’t matter. FALSE 

Valenti claims that “the amount [of mifepristone found in the water study] was so tiny that you’d have to drink nearly 5 million liters of water to consume the equivalent of a single clinical dose.” 

For water contamination to hurt our health, it doesn’t have to be equivalent to a clinical dose. 

Under the Biden Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) set the “enforceable Maximum Contaminant Levels at 4.0 parts per trillion” for forever chemicals in our drinking water. 

Our study detected mifepristone at concentrations as high as 41 parts per trillion. This far exceeds the EPA’s standard for tracking as a harmful water contaminant.  

You don’t have to be pro-life to want clean drinking water. You don’t have to be pro-life to NOT want to be microdosed with a progesterone blocker without your consent.  

In fact, it’s not just preborn babies that need it, and you can learn more here: Why It Matters to Babies, Women & Men if Chemical Abortion Pills in our Water Block Progesterone 

The World Health Organization notes that 1 in 6 people worldwide is impacted by infertility, and many people are taking progesterone to get and stay pregnant. Is it possible that mifepristone in our water is hurting the chances of some people who want a baby? We need more testing to find out.  

And that’s exactly what we are asking the EPA to do – track mifepristone as part of the “Safe Drinking Water Act” so that we can get more information.  

Unlike Valenti, the EPA will hopefully be more curious about whether federal abortion policy has caused abortion water pollution, which may be hurting us. And unlike Valenti, they will probably read the fine print.  

Abortion advocates like Valenti and the deadly industry that supports them do not care about anyone’s health, only continuing to end innocent preborn children’s lives at the expense of the health of mothers and the rest of society. 

Conclusion 

Our study is just the beginning of an inquiry that the abortion industry and its supporters have worked hard to avoid. SFLA calls on the EPA and FDA to conduct testing on the environmental and public health risks of mifepristone — tests that were not conducted when the deadly drug was approved decades ago. 

But the truth about our study is not the real concern of abortion advocates like Valenti.  

This is just another attempt to distract the public from the underlying moral truth she wants to avoid: abortion is the senseless killing of a preborn child. 

We all deserve to know the truth about how Chemical Abortion Pills in our water is affecting our health, and our study is a great first step.  

Jessica Valenti has a long history of lying about SFLA and abortion. 

READ About SFLA’s CEASE AND DESIST to Valenti’s LIES about SFLA HERE. 

READ Kristan Hawkins’ Op-Ed at The Federalist About Jessica’s Lies HERE: In Her New Book, Abortion Activist Jessica Valenti Lies About Me And Rape Statistics