FDA Might Approve Over-the-Counter Sales of One Birth Control Pill. Now It's Time To Approve All the Rest.
Why won’t the FDA allow women to buy a safer product without requiring a doctor’s visit that medical experts think is unnecessary?

For decades, the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology, the American Academy of Family Physicians, the American Medical Association, and the vast majority of practicing reproductive physicians have called for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to make hormonal contraceptives (e.g., birth control pills) available over the counter (OTC) to women of all ages.
When experts in the field who get paid for prescribing hormonal contraceptives nonetheless keep telling patients, "You don't need to see me for this," government regulators should take notice. Women can get birth control pills OTC in over 100 countries, formally or informally, around the globe. It's time for them to be OTC in the "land of the free."
The FDA might soon give access to a type of birth control pill that has been available only by prescription since 1973; in fact, today, an FDA panel voted unanimously to make birth control pills available OTC. But here's a catch: women will only have access to one brand of one kind of birth control pill, a progestin-only pill sometimes called the "mini-pill."
Unlike regular birth control pills, which contain two female hormones, estrogen and progesterone, the mini-pill doesn't affect milk production in nursing mothers and is less likely to cause blood clots in women who smoke. To put this in perspective, pregnancy is more likely to cause clots than any pill to prevent it.
But, the mini-pill, while it may be slightly safer to use than other birth control pills, has drawbacks.
For example, the mini-pill only works if women take it at the same hour daily. If they take it more than three hours late, women must use another contraceptive for the rest of the month and start the cycle again. The same is true if they miss a day. With regular birth control pills, if women miss a day in the cycle, they can take two pills the following day.
While better than the status quo, the FDA shouldn't restrict women's OTC options to safer progestin-only pills, not to mention one progestin-only product. Unlike regulators in, say, Portugal, Brazil, or Mexico, the FDA doesn't think American women can weigh the risks and benefits of various birth control pills and decide which is best for them—even if reproductive specialists believe they can.
Further mitigating drug-related side effects is that women may be more cautious than doctors in choosing the best drug for themselves. A 2006 study asked women to self-assess birth control pills. Ninety percent of the time, doctors agreed with their assessment, and 10 percent of the time, women were more conservative than doctors.
In 2013, the FDA approved OTC access for women of all ages to emergency contraception—the so-called "morning-after pill." The most well-known emergency contraceptive is called "Plan B." The fact that it is available OTC while "Plan A" (birth control pills) is not, defies logic.
The reason? Dose. There is much more progestin in Plan B pills. This becomes obvious when considering that standard birth control pills can also be used for emergency contraception. When used as such, the required dose is 8-10 pills. It isn't easy to imagine a logical scenario where a pill containing a 10-fold dose of progestin (Plan B) should be readily available to women of all ages while a single, low-dose pill taken daily is not.
Furthermore, far more dangerous OTC drugs are available to women–and children–without any FDA restrictions whatsoever. Acetaminophen (Tylenol) accounts for 56,000 emergency room visits and 500 deaths annually. In 2018, 27,000 people overdosed on salicylates, primarily aspirin, with a mortality rate of 0.4 percent. Between 2011-16 Benadryl was involved in 3 percent of all drug overdose deaths. It defies logic that a 10-year-old can purchase any of these drugs in a pharmacy or supermarket while women are forced to see a physician for a script for a far safer drug.
Why won't the FDA allow women to buy a safer product without requiring a doctor's visit that medical experts think is unnecessary? The time has come for the FDA to make all birth control pills—not just one "mini-pill"—over the counter.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Well, OK...why do you think?
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I’m now creating over $35,000 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks online from $28,000 dollars, its simple online operating jobs.
.
.
Just open the link—————————————>>> http://Www.JobsRevenue.Com
I am making a good salary from home $6580-$7065/week , which is amazing under a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone,
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
Here is I started.……......>> http://WWW.RICHEPAY.COM
Consistently begin winning more than $13,000 by doing exceptionallystraightforward Online occupation from home.i m carrying out thisresponsibility in my low maintenance I have earned and gotten $13485 a monthago. I am presently a decent Online worker and gains enough money for myrequirements. Each individual can land this Online position by followsubtleties on this site.......... https://Www.Coins71.Com
I've always assumed the real boundary is between stuff that really works, which they can make you jump through some hoops for, and stuff that has only a marginal effect, which they'll let you have with no special permission since you'd go without sooner than pay a doctor to get access to it.
There are probably studies out there estimating how many people are prevented from hurting themselves by the prescription system and comparing it to people who let serious illnesses go totally unmedicated because seeing a doctor is too troublesome, expensive, and slow or will get them dragged into a series of just-in-case-cover-our-ass tests that are even more troublesome, expensive, and slow.
It'd be shocking if that's how they drew the line when it came to contraceptives. Like if the morning-after pill is OTC because it's only marginally effective, and like they're allowing this low-dose progestin likewise.
Where the line is said to be drawn is between things for serious illness and those for non-so-important conditions. The idea is to make you go to the doctor for anything serious, whether you want to or not. Not clear whether they consider pregnancy serious
"Studies estimating" is at best an oxymoron. More likely scientism pretending to speak truth.
Lucy . you think George `s storry is impossible, on sunday I got a brand new Saab 99 Turbo after having made $8551 this past four weeks and just over ten-k last month . it's by-far the most comfortable job I have ever had . I started this five months/ago and almost straight away began to bring home over $95... per-hour..
🙂
AND GOOD LUCK.:)
HERE====)> https://www.apprichs.com
Womb-slaves don’t NEED no stinkin’ PILLS, dammit!!! Each of their unfartilized Sacred Egg Smells have 1/2 of a soul or 1/2 of a set of “human rights”, and they NEEEED to be fartilized and brought to term! It is their Sacred right-wing RIGHT to be fartilized and brought to term!
(Ideally, of course, fartilized by MEEEEE, since I am a PERFECT adherent to ALL of the Sacred Dogma of “Team R”, dammit! And speaking and spanking of all that, I call rights on Womb-Slave-Prime Stormy Daniels next, right after Dear Leader, Der TrumpfenFuhrer, is done with Queen Stormy! A spanking, a spanking!)
So is this, then, finally, the eagerly awaited “Drag Queen Stormy Daniels Hour” that I’ve heard SOOO much about?
I do have to hang my head in shame these days, and ‘fess up to being old, over the hill, and out of touch!
Butt… Now what IS this deal about “Drag Queen Stormy Daniels Hour” who-haaa thingee anyway?!?!? Is or was she the Queen of Dragging men (against their will and utmost efforts at self-control) into her lady-parts bear-trap “Snatch, I gotcha” device? What can one DO to resist her contriving and cuntriving mind control?
Does GREAT world-ass-class POETRY fend off her mind cuntrol? Doesn’t hurt to try, right?
All Hail Der TrumpfenFuhrer, Full of Grace
Savior of the human race!
Never mind, us all, He’ll disgrace!
Conservatards, above all, MUST save face!
In glory, a glaze of Vaseline,
Behold Stormy Daniels, our Queen!
What a scene, what a scene!
The Donald? NEVER so obscene!
Now don’t you DARE throw a fit,
It won’t matter, not even a bit,
We mustn’t ever, EVER quit,
We be saved, by The Trumptatorshit!
Q: What’s the difference between a rooster and a Stormy Daniels?
A: The rooster says “Cock-a-doodle-doooo”!, while the Stormy Daniels says “Any cock’ll do!”
The Republicans pushed many times to make the pill available over the counter, and every time the Democrats furiously opposed it because their Planned Parenthood racket would fall apart.
But look at Shillsy lie about it anyway.
"You don't need 23 choices of over-the-counter birth control pills."
-Bernie Sanders
Now it's time to get rid of the FDA entirely
Problem is, even if you just rolled the FDA back to a strict “Does this pill contain the substances advertised and nothing else?” role, the answer to the question of “Great, now why should I be taking or do I need to take this pill?” then, likely, falls to the AMA. The same AMA that says we need to lower the barriers to access to genital mutilation surgery but that non-surgical orientation conversion therapy should be banned because of the risk of patient self-harm. To say nothing about still parroting "safe and effective".
AMA should have no power either of course.
Yeah, but then you get into the difficulty of Union or certified trade association or "private, self-regulating individuals" busting. Agreed, still a step forward from ex cathedra 'that which is allowed/that which is not allowed', but still not mostly/entirely free of socialist/fascist/nutjob capture.
The progressives used to be all for OTC birth control until the ACA passed making insurance pay for birth control. The Republicans tried to get Birth Control approved OTC and suddenly the left was opposed to it. They began saying that making it OTC will be to costly for women (don't mind the fact that it's cheaper than condoms, abortions or having a kid and averages about $9 per month and OTC approval almost always makes drugs cheaper than as prescription).
Bingo!
I had this discussion years ago with a prog. His position was: "it's free when a prescription is required. Why would anybody want to pay $5/month OTC?"
He didn't care that getting the government in the middle made the cost about ten times higher, and inconvenient to boot. This is the progressive version of logic.
Yeah it's like they did no research here.
"Why won't the FDA allow women to buy a safer product without requiring a doctor's visit that medical experts think is unnecessary?"
Because Democrats didn't want it.
Why can’t someone buy something as non-invasive as a CPAP machine without a prescription? Because you’d be able to buy one for $40 at Walmart instead of $1000 from a licensed therapist.
Yep.
Think they'd consider an instruction book on how to make one yourself a medical device? A spa blower and hose, scuba or skin diving mask, and then the hard part: the works to make it sense pressure and adjust to the breathing cycle.
Maybe that’s why they are expensive.
I don't object to them being expensive (I'm guessing we're talking CPAPs from Roberta's description), I object to needing a fucking prescription just to *buy* one, or worse, the supplies for one.
That's the beauty of homemade: Except for controlled substances and human growth hormone, no permission needed.
I could probably build the device, given plans and an arduino an parts. I'm probably not going to be able to mold the hoses or facemask or filters myself.
Equivalent hoses for air at low pressure can be obtained as stock items for such things as spa blowers, which would also provide the air pump. Face mask, similarly as scuba or skin diving equipment. If they were able to make an expedient connection on Apollo 13 with materials on hand, I'm sure you could do even better. Air filters and bubblers, again stock. If people can make bongs and hookahs, they can make CPAP. The hard part is a pressure transducer sensitive enough to use as a controller.
Liability insurance would still make them expensive even sans prescription.
Much like new civilian aircraft.
For the same reason we can't we buy a continuous glucose monitor without a prescription. The medical mafia wants revenue.
First of all, because no one would ever think of using such a thing without having it prescribed by a doctor.
Second, how are you supposed to know what pressure the thing is supposed to be set at to prevent you from, possibly fatally, stopping breathing in you sleep. or lack of it, tonight?
That said, I use CPAP, so I know something about it. The first CPAP tech who tested me told me that he was a sleep apnea sufferer. He was also a smoker (and since as he told me he grew up in his mother's bar is also likely a heavy drinker). But be that as it may, he told me that he pretty much treated his own apnea himself thru salvaging old machines bought at flea markets and garage sales. But, also, he is a technically trained person and for the most part, so, pretty much, are doctors.
So, without a doctor, I would never have known if the dark patches on my skin were just "signs of aging" or melanomas which could metastasize and attack my internal organs or my bones. I would never have even found out about the mass on my kidney.
But just because there are things we absolutely need a doctor (or other trained professional) to handle it occurs to me that women choosing an oral contraceptive that has proven effectiveness and safety is one of them.
Correction to my post!
But just because there are things we absolutely need a doctor (or other trained professional) to handle it occurs to me that women choosing an oral contraceptive that has proven effectiveness and safety is not one of them.
Why can’t someone buy something as non-invasive as a CPAP machine without a prescription? Because you’d be able to buy one for $40 at Walmart instead of $1000 from a licensed therapist.
You voted for this.
Not for any implication regarding the legality of the pill but, LOL at the accidental social experiment:
Women were more likely to report severe headaches (12.4% vs. 3.3%), possible pregnancy (7.3% vs. 3.5%) and smoking (6.2% vs. 2.1%) than providers, but less likely to report smoking more than 15 cigarettes per day (2.6% vs. 9.2%) and irregular menses (6.5% vs. 9.9%).
So when they’re talking to men and/or doctors, they exaggerate headaches, pregnancies, and may’ve smoked a cigarette or two but when talking to themselves or their peers they under report smoking 3/4 of a pack of cigarettes a day or missing a period.
"I see your culture war and raise 556."
https://hwfo.substack.com/p/in-defense-of-ar-15-story-hour
Not to argue against AR15 Story Hour, but "Prejudices are almost entirely learned behaviors," is drinking the woke kool-aid and propagating their bullshit. The freaking word is pre-, as in before, and -judice, as in to judge, you literally judge before knowing anything. Because cognition isn't the internet we, cognizant animals, can't just throw up '404 Not Found' errors every time our brain comes across something it can't find any data on. So it cobbles together *any* data and issues judgement without regard to the specific situation's data. It's not necessarily genetically pre-programmed (although plenty of a will adamantly murder the fuck out of same-genus-separate-race/tribe/colony as the result of pretty low-level biochemical signalling pathways), but there's lots and lots of ground between genes and confabulatory ideation.
Also, it should probably be clear about AR15SH fighting fire with fire and trolling the specific trolling behavior. Between Nerf guns and COD it's pretty clear that many young kids don't need the smallest iota of outside assistance in exposing themselves to firearms/weapons.
I think the point is less about actually reaching children (who, as young humans, need very little incitement to violence) as causing lefty parents to shit the bed and overreact.
Or propaganda via ridicule, as in the libertarian-led Guns for Tots event that led to New York City's quickly rescinding a toy gun ban in the 1990s.
Fair enough, my concern is a little bit of lecturing people who handle firearms for fun about social trigger discipline and knowing/deciding up front which hills to die on.
And yes, I think HWFO suffers from my same "hoping too much from the species", regarding the "prejudices" line. I'd like to think that. It's probably wrong. But despite all, I hope for the best anyway.
That's an interesting site. Thanks for linking it.
I liked the link that defines racism:
https://hwfo.substack.com/p/the-five-confusing-definitions-of
From now on I shall call racists by sub type: racist(1), racist(2), etc.
In modern culture only white people can be racist, which is a very handy club with which to beat your opponent and steal his property. That is the point of it. We are screwed.
Still looking for the Constitutional Authority for federal food and drug regulation...
F'En [Na]tional So[zi]alist[s].
Doesn't matter. The way state pharmacy laws are written, "new" drugs can't be marketed without permission, and they'll accept permission from either the state pharmacy board or fedgov. So, as it regards drugs, abolishing FDA would just mean someone marketing them would need permission from a regulatory board in each state they do so in.
The commerce clause, which SCOTUS has determined to be nearly infinite in scope.
The problem with the FDA is it has a monopoly on drug approval in America. Eliminate the monopoly power of the FDA and you will eliminate a lot of drug related problems we have in America.
Spoken like a "True" Libertarian.
Good thing medicine has not been politicized by the fascists.
Abolish the FDA. Abolish the prescription power. Abolish medical licensing.
Yes, I mean it. It's good for your health. And wealth.
Love libertarians. Clemency for mass murderers. Death to babies.