fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3340 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3340 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

[Xena: Warrior Princess]

__________________________________________________

02.

[MLP:FIM]

__________________________________________________

03.

[What's My Line?]

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 013 secrets from Secret Submission Post #477.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

BLM vs Hillary Clinton, yesterday.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqLfvQfuvsA

I desperately want to like you, Hillary. Stop making it so hard to like you.

Anyone got an evaluation of the study from someone who doesn't have a giant, obvious axe to grind? I just want to know if it's a good study or a bad study. Reading it myself doesn't bring up any obvious issues with the data, although it's definitely limited in scope, but interpretations and evaluations of it are all over the place (and generally in line with people's existing political biases.)

For reference, the study in question: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsa1511902#t=abstract

And an article about the controversy: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/texas-health-official-steps-down-after-planned-parenthood-study/

It's not a secret that Planned Parenthood is a major provider of reproductive health care to the less well-off, where it exists. Why would this result be surprising?

Caveat: I only skimmed it.

That said: my sense was that it was a reasonably good study but with a fairly limited scope - all that it was really looking at was use of contraception. And it wasn't an exact study of that but it seemed like a reasonable attempt to capture peoples' ability to continue on planned contraception and to estimate unplanned pregnancies resulting from that.

It's not anything beyond that - it's certainly not a wide spectrum look at women's health, and I think some places are treating it as such. But I would feel reasonably confident in concluding that women's access to contraception has been harmed by restrictions on Planned Parenthood on the basis of the study.

[ SECRET POST #3340 ]

Politics thread

Re: Politics thread

That study on Planned Parenthood in Texas

Re: That study on Planned Parenthood in Texas

Re: That study on Planned Parenthood in Texas