How Abortion Misinformation and Disinformation Spread Online

  • 📰 sciam
  • ⏱ Reading Time:
  • 97 sec. here
  • 3 min. at publisher
  • 📊 Quality Score:
  • News: 42%
  • Publisher: 63%

Law Law Headlines News

Law Law Latest News,Law Law Headlines

With reproductive rights being dismantled, social media companies need to stop propagating lies

The Supreme Court’s decision to curtail abortion rights has come to fruition. One of the outcomes that will be less discussed is how more people in states with heavy restrictions will turn to search engines and social media to figure out how now to manage their reproductive decisions, and will find themselves reading questionable information.

I am very familiar with disinformation and political agendas. Growing up in Texas suburbs and rural Alabama, I regularly heard the message in school, from doctors, and from community members that abortion was harmful and shameful. Now that I study health misinformation, focusing on online information about reproductive health, it’s clear to me that these admonishments were rife with disinformation and pushed by a religious and political agenda—not a public health one.

This is the bleak future for science-based reproductive health decisions; the highest volume of online searches about abortion are in the states with the most restricted access. Even a change in local policies on abortion in the U.S. is associated with more attempts to find abortion information online.

The Center for Countering Digital Hate reports that from January 2020 to September 2021, Facebook alone accepted between $115,400 and $140,667 for 92 ads promoting “abortion pill reversal”—the use of progesterone to reverse a medication abortion in its early stages. This procedure is unproven and unethical, and was stopped in clinical trials because it caused dangerous hemorrhaging.

As of this writing, a simple Google search of “abortion pill reversal” surfaced a Website endorsing the safety and efficacy of abortion pill reversal as the first result, listed above a webpage from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists stating that this reversal process is not supported by science.

This also applies to the Dobbs opinion. In the opinion, the justices cite the 2007 case Gonzales v. Carhart, which upheld the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act and signaled a shift in the court toward restricting abortion. They say that most abortions after 15 weeks “for non therapeutic or elective reasons [are] a barbaric practice, dangerous for the maternal patient, and demeaning to the medical profession.

 

Thank you for your comment. Your comment will be published after being reviewed.
Please try again later.

Additional mis-info or outright misandry, XY's do not support the US Constitution and BoRs foundation of a Privacy Doctrine. Right to be free of government interference in private lives. That is what Burke Conservativism is truly founded on. White independent guys, never trumper

Is it okay for a scientific journal to comment on killing unborn babies? Isn't it a part of philosophical discourse in a democracy, which the supreme court suggested? Propagating pride propaganda & being a philosophical robot is easy, creating new ideas is hard. philosophy

'Sister killed her baby 'cause she could afford to feed it And were sending people to the moon' - Sign O' The Times by Prince. How many people getting abortions were willing participants during sex, then chose to not want to deal with the responsibility?

To be completely honest, in 99% of cases, the issue of abortion is a matter of money. A family often cannot afford a child due to low incomes. Medical companies receive income from abortions. Ethical issues are secondary. First is the question of money.

Exactly. I mean How Can people think that abortion is not homicide of the unborn

So now the Scientific American is for censorship. Funny, the Catholic Church said Galileo was disseminating mis and disinformation too. You guys have become a self parody. Once, you were the gold standard. Now you are a lead weight.

It is a baby! ItsOurUterusNow

Such as me having one, for example. completetly false they use el colegio 1973 and humacao 1972 💯

Love these science ideas. No one really knows 100 percent. I believe when a sperm and egg, any species meet that's when the soul is given. Call it energy, conscious...

This is a very polite way of saying “C’mon, censor that shit we don’t agree with! Neither the government or Big Media are the arbiters of truth. Quite the opposite.

KerryDonovanCO Time for massive public education on everything pregnancy… such profound ignorance. Scientific innovation could leave many medical procedures in the past if we were a more enlightened group. We don’t even have a grasp on basic biology.

Aborted fetus is used in making of vaccines, beauty rejuvenating creams & even food. Abortion is business. Organ procurement. Criminal organizations today continue kidnapping & killing children for the purpose of harvesting their organs for illegal organ trade.

An abortion IS killing a baby,FACT!

So another 'scientific' article? When are you going to drop the moniker of 'Scientific' from your title? The air of legitimacy you think it's giving you is starting to stink.

Free speech is free speech clowns. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out the truth.

How is abortion disinformation spread online? Look no further than this very post - 'With reproductive rights being dismantled...'. Yeah, that's not what happened, Sparky.

sonofbrank Are people really arguing for the right to be misinformed?

The physical harm in the least was the 62,000,000 Americans slaughtered since 1973. People of the states need to step up and stop the killings.

Who sent you

again, this is neither scientific nor American. you’re literally calling for censorship.

Science, guys.. Please concentrate. You guys do science. There's plenty of other people to do propaganda. You can do it, I've got faith in you: you did it before, you can do it again.. We're pullin' for ya, guys.

No, I don't think diminishing free speech with more censorship is the answer at all.

We have summarized this news so that you can read it quickly. If you are interested in the news, you can read the full text here. Read more:

 /  🏆 300. in LAW

Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines

Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.

Supreme Court abortion ruling live updates: Roe v. Wade struck down by courtBREAKING: Former first lady Michelle Obama: “I am heartbroken for people around this country who just lost the fundamental right to make informed decisions about their own bodies.” This is part of the GOP plan to replace the kids killed in mass shootings at schools. Because it's ok if kids die after birth. All people were once a fetus. It cannot be ignored or waved away with religion or atheism.
Source: ABC - 🏆 471. / 51 Read more »

Legal battles likely as divided states grapple with abortionThe Supreme Court's decision to end the constitutional right to abortion likely will lead to legal battles as already divided states grapple with the new landscape of abortion access
Source: WOKVNews - 🏆 247. / 63 Read more »