Birth control, abortion and unwanted pregnancies.

[*PhilHos*]

(08-16-2016, 12:53 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: That is one of the fair criticism of the paper. But, when Callie Gable analyzed the data she was guilty of blatant conformational bias by accepting data which supported her opinion while rejected data which didn't.

She may be analyzing the data through a filter of bias, but I didn't see her reject data that didn't support her opinion. I saw her question data and gave reasons for why it should be called into question and acknolwedged the data that supported the claims that she was critiquing, but I don't recall reading her rejecting any data because of her biases.

oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote:Seems the researchers, Callie Gable, and you agree they are effective at reducing unwanted pregnancies.

So do condoms. So does abstinence. The question is if making the more expensive LARCs available to more people will it have the effect on a societal problem to the point that it justifies its cost.  If the problem is already declining at the same rate without this program, then I would say the cost is NOT justified. 

That's why I'd like to see a more comprehensive study done.

oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote:How many abortions need to be prevented for a program like this to be deserving of tax payers dollars?

That's a good question. Off the top of my head, I'd say that if it lowers the abortion rate by, at least, 10-15% I'd probably be okay with some tax payer dollars going towards this.