CIHI missing 18,278 Ontario abortions in 2019 statistics

CIHI has reported abortion numbers for 2019

Back in December I posted a comparison chart of CIHI's numbers compared to FOI's I did for each province.

CIHI reported 27,911 for Ontario for 2019. The Ontario Ministry of Health and Long Term Care (MOHLTC) reported 46,189. that means that CIHI is not reporting a whopping 18,278 Ontario abortions.

CIHI believes they are accounting for the difference. Unfortunately they are not. From CIHI's notes:

"The methodology to estimate induced abortion volumes for Ontario is consistent with the enhanced methodology that was introduced in the 2015 report (emphasis added). Total volumes were derived by using the total abortion volumes reported to the National Physician Database (NPDB) at CIHI and adding both hospital-based abortions for non-Ontario residents and hospital-based medical-method-only abortions for Ontario residents (as reported to the Discharge Abstract Database and the National Ambulatory Care Reporting System). For Ontario, volumes reported in the column Number of induced abortions reported by clinics include services from non-hospital settings. Volumes for non-hospital settings (clinics/surgical facilities/physician offices) were estimated using the total abortion volumes as described above and subtracting hospital-based abortions. This methodology results in induced abortions occurring in physician offices and in clinics being included in non-hospital settings volumes. This estimation approach for non-hospital volumes was required because information on the location where the service is rendered (e.g., clinic, hospital, physician’s office) may not be included in the NPDB data." 

CIHI does not report medical abortions. They only report these abortions: S752 - induced - by any surgical technique up to and including 14 weeks gestation, S785 - induced - by any surgical technique after 14 weeks of gestation. 

How many of these 18,278 missing abortions are medical abortions? We do not know.

MOHLTC does report medical abortions. As well as all these types:

A920A - MEDICAL MANAGEMENT OF EARLY PREGNANCY - INITIAL VISIT (medical abortions)
P001A MEDICAL MGMT FETAL DEMISE BETWEEN 14-20 WKS GESTATION
P054A FETAL MANAGEMENT-SGL/MULT-INTRACARDIAC KCL INJECTION
S752A FEM.GENITAL SYST.-INDUCED-CURRETINTRA-AMNIOTIC INJ.
S770A CORPUS UTERI - HYSTEROTOMY.
S783A CORPUS UTERI - HYSTEROTOMY WITH TUBAL INTERRUPTION.
S785A FEM.GENITAL SYST.-INDUCED-INTRA-AMNIOTIC INJ. (INCOMP.)

Stop telling us what we can believe

Dear Chris Selley,

I really must take issue with your recent column in the National Post on abortion. 

You say:

“It probably doesn’t need explaining how fantastically stupid abortion-to-Holocaust analogies are — the two things are overwhelmingly more dissimilar than they are similar — but I suppose it couldn’t hurt. The Canadian Institute for Health Information reports 83,576 women underwent an abortion procedure in 2019. They made that choice for a wide variety of reasons, some of which would attract more sympathy in the court of public opinion than others.”

To begin with CIHI grossly under reports the numbers of abortions done in Canada every year. If you had delved a bit deeper into the subject you would have learned this yourself. See here and here. (This is due to a complicated bunch of reasons but I would be happy to send you all of my research on abortion numbers in Canada if you care to learn the facts.)

This means that since 1988 there have been at least 100,000 abortions every year, which would mean at least 3,300,000 abortions since that year, never mind the ones done before that. Some find this comparison to a holocaust offensive. In fact you call it "fantastically stupid".

So what is the definition of holocaust? According to Merriam-Webster:

a: usually the Holocaust: the mass slaughter of European civilians and especially Jews by the Nazis during World War II
b: a mass slaughter of people, especially GENOCIDE (emphasis added)

So you see there are many Canadians (Group A) who believe that abortion is a morally horrific act. They believe that taking the lives of defenseless human beings on such a massive scale scale, each and every year, is in fact a holocaust. On the other hand, there are many Canadians (Group B) who believe that abortion is an acceptable solution to an unwanted pregnancy. You seem to belong to Group B. While I don't agree with you, I wouldn't call your viewpoint "fantastically stupid".

Next you say:

“The vast majority of people who might retweet or nod in agreement with that NCLN tweet clearly do not, in fact, believe it. If you actually think a Holocaust is ongoing in your country’s clinics and hospitals, you don’t cheerfully promote online events featuring “pro-life badasses.” You don’t say things like “there’s a lot of joy in the air,” as a spokesperson for the anti-abortion Campaign Life Coalition effused of 2018’s March for Life in Ottawa. You’re beside yourself. You’re pulling your hair out, chaining yourself to things, frantically trying to keep people out of abortion clinics. Maybe you’re even blowing stuff up.”

"Joy" and "cheerfully"? Since you are not pro-life and have no idea what it is like to be pro-life and be discriminated against and marginalized by every Tom, Dick and Chris, we must try to, you know, keep each other's spirits up in such a difficult and thankless task it is, to advocate against abortion. As for "chaining ourselves to things trying to keep people out of abortion clinics"-- have you heard of abortion bubble zone laws where pro-life people have no freedom of expression rights, and at the March's for Life where handfuls of screaming antifa people are allowed to block thousands of us on our approved routes, and the police do nothing to stop them? See:

https://run-with-life.blogspot.com/2020/01/pro-life-right-wing-extremists.html

https://run-with-life.blogspot.com/2017/05/how-peaceful-prolife-people-are-dealt.html

https://run-with-life.blogspot.com/2017/05/march-for-life-2017-we-will-never-give.html

https://run-with-life.blogspot.com/2018/05/march-for-life-2018.html

And as for "blowing stuff up"? Did you really haul out that tired old mantra?

Finally, and most importantly, why is it that people from (Group B) always want to dictate what people from (Group A), are allowed to believe, allowed to say, and how they are allowed to act?

My views are not pathetic, outdated, or offensive

TO: Lucille Collard, MPP in Ottawa—Vanier

Dear Ms. Collard,

I am your constituent. I am a woman. I am against abortion. I support that Sam Oosterhoff is also against abortion. I see that you don't support him, when you re-tweeted this statement from Emilie Leneveu:

Emilie Leneveu, Ontario Liberal Party candidate for Bay of Quinte, issued the following statement:

 

“Last week, on International Women’s Day, Doug Ford spoke about his ‘commitment’ to gender equality. One week later, when one of his MPP’s is proudly leading an attack on women’s reproductive rights, he is silent. In a time and age like this – the Premier of Ontario is legitimizing attacks on the reproductive rights of women by allowing one of his own male-caucus members to continue these anti-women attacks.

 

Equality requires more than words it requires action. It needs leaders to take action and speak up. Instead, Ford’s silence just empowers and enables this outdated and offensive behaviour. 

 

I hope that young women in this province use this as motivation to get involved and speak up – whether that’s through joining a political party, an advocacy group, or talking to your own social groups, it’s critical that we use our voice and tell Doug Ford and Sam Oosterhoff that their pathetic views are unacceptable for Ontario in 2021.”

Mr. Oosterhoff's comments are not "anti-woman attacks". They are not "pathetic". His behaviour is not "outdated and offensive". They are brave comments/behaviours. More men should have the courage to speak out like he does in support of pre-born Canadians. Not only does Mr. Oosterhoff stand up for the rights of these children, he also won't let the feminist bullies tell him what comments/beliefs he is allowed to have. And even though he is not "dictating any of your choices", I thank God he is against choices that are grossly immoral and intentionally kill a child in the womb.

And please let's dispense with the "reproductive rights" nonsense. There is no such thing. What we do have is the "wholesale slaughter of children" masquerading as "reproductive rights".

I wish we had a whole lot more people like Mr. Oosterhoff at Queen's Park. How wonderful that would be.

Sincerely,

Patricia Maloney

4 reasons Ontario does not need an abortion bubble zone

I have repeatedly said that there is no need for an abortion bubble zone in Ontario. This is based on the following facts. (Emphasis added in all quotes.)

First, from abortion doctor Wendy Norman from her 2012 study of Canadian abortion clinics. These are the different texts she wrote in this study pertaining to harassment at abortion places, where she explicitly says that there is little to no pro-life harassment at abortion facilities.

Page e209

"We identified 94 Canadian facilities providing abortion in 2012, with 48.9% in Quebec. The response rate was 83.0% (78 of 94). Facilities in every jurisdiction with services responded. In Quebec and British Columbia abortion services are nearly equally present in large urban centres and rural locations throughout the provinces; in other Canadian provinces services are chiefly located in large urban areas. No abortion services were identified in Prince Edward Island. Respondents reported provision of 75 650 abortions in 2012 (including 4.0% by medical abortion). Canadian facilities reported minimal or no harassment, in stark contrast to American facilities that responded to the same survey."

Page e209

"More than half of all abortion providers in Canada are family physicians or general practitioners. Medical abortion is rare, as is harassment of facilities."

Page e212

"Facilities reported very little harassment (Table 4). No Canadian facility reported a resignation of an abortion provider–physician or any staff member owing to harassment. Only a single facility reported any resignation of an allied health professional staff member, and in this case the facility specified that the one resignation was not owing to violence, fear, or threats. Similarly, two-thirds of reporting facilities (49 of 74, 66.2%) indicated no episodes of harassment or violence in 2012, with a further 28.4% (21 of 74) reporting solely picketing without interference. Among 7 facilities reporting “other” episodes of harassment, half specified only receipt of harassing e-mail."

Page e215

"Canadian abortion facilities reported rare harassment. In contrast, among American abortion facilities sampled concurrently 83% reported substantial episodes of harassment, and 10% reported staff resignations owing to harassment."

Page e216

"Conclusion. Equitable access to abortion service varies by region across Canada. Medical abortion is rare, as is harassment of facilities. Provincial government leadership in BC and Quebec has demonstrated effective strategies to address inequity. Regulatory advances that could improve abortion service access include improved access to mifepristone for medical abortion; provincial leadership supporting abortion services through policy and legislation; implementation of routine training in surgical and especially medical abortion within family medicine residency programs; and regulations to broaden the scope of practice for nurses, midwives, and other allied health professionals to include abortion provision. Health policy and service improvements have the potential to address current abortion access inequity in Canada."

Second, an FOI I did to the Ottawa Police, identified no arrests and no charges in a period from 2010 to June 1, 2017. Then with a subsequent conversation with the Ottawa Police, this was confirmed for me.

"Yesterday I spoke with constable Chuck Benoit at the Ottawa Police Service. There were two "level 1" assaults at the facility in three and a half years. One on October 25, 2016 and one on May 28, 2017. All the other incidents were run of the mill police work.

I was told that neither of these assaults resulted in injuries, and no one was charged with anything."

Third, besides Ottawa's lack of any problematic police reports, the fact that there were no other police reports in the entire province of Ontario, to support a bubble zone law. The Attorney general of Ontario quite unbelievably has no police reports from anywhere in Ontario to support this unconstitutional law against our freedom of expression rights.

"One of my other complaints was the glaring omission of any police reports to support the need for a bubble zone in the first place. You know, like actual evidence for the need for a bubble zone? When I asked the information commissioner about this, I was told:

"with respect to the police reports, I had followed up earlier with the ministry [attorney general] and they advised there were no police reports."

Finally, the Ontario government has never provided an actual reason for the need of a bubble zone.

Conclusion, there is no need for an abortion bubble zone in Ontario. Not now. Not ever. This legislation is purely about pro-abortion ideology that permeates the powers that be.

The abortion bill: what a horrible way to die

The abortion pill is not a safe drug. Health Canada issued 40 adverse reaction reports on this drug. Of these, there were 26 individual women.

One woman died.

Two more experienced "life threatening" side effects.

23 women experienced "serious" side effects.

In 2017 there was one woman affected; in 2018 two women were affected; in 2019, it was six women. And in 2020 there were 16 women with serious side effects (Note that the report is only until July 31, 2020, so 2020 will undoubtedly have more serious problems reported).

Notice the trend here? As the abortion pill becomes more popular, even more women will suffer from its life threatening and possibly fatal side effects.

Not a safe drug at all.

Mifepristone (Search the database by active ingredient)

The woman who died was 27 years old. From the documented adverse reactions she experienced, it appears that her whole body, and all of her organs, went into extreme failure. Here were her symptoms:

Abdominal pain, Acidosis (a process causing increased acidity in the blood and other body tissues), Ascites (the abnormal buildup of fluid in the abdomen. Technically, it is more than 25 ml of fluid in the peritoneal cavity, although volumes greater than 1 liter may occur) Bacterial infection, Blood pressure decreased, Blood urea increased, Body temperature decreased, Cardiac arrest, Cardiovascular disorder, Chills, Dehydration, Dizziness, Endometritis, Gastritis haemorrhagic, Hyponatraemia (is a low sodium concentration in the blood), Hypoxia (is a condition in which the body or a region of the body is deprived of adequate oxygen supply at the tissue level), Leukocytosis (a condition in which the white cell is above the normal range in the blood. It is frequently a sign of an inflammatory response, most commonly the result of infection), Multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, Nausea, Oliguria (or hypouresis is the low output of urine specifically more than 80 ml/day but less than 400ml/day. The decreased output of urine may be a sign of dehydration, kidney failure, hypovolemic shock, hyperosmolar hyperglycemic nonketotic syndrome, multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, urinary obstruction/urinary retention, diabetic ketoacidosis, pre-eclampsia, and urinary tract infections, among other conditions), Palpitations, Pelvic pain, Pleural effusion (is excess fluid that accumulates in the pleural cavity, the fluid-filled space that surrounds the lungs), Pyrexia (Fever, is defined as having a temperature above the normal range due to an increase in the body's temperature set point), Sepsis, Septic shock, Uterine spasm, Vaginal discharge, Vaginal haemorrhage, Vomiting

From the data file produced: 

CAVEAT: This summary is based on information from adverse reaction reports submitted by health professionals and laypersons either directly to Health Canada or via market authorization holders. Each report represents the suspicion, opinion or observation of the individual reporter. The Canada Vigilance Program is a spontaneous reporting system that is suitable to detect signals of potential health product safety issues during the post-market period. The data has been collected primarily by a spontaneous surveillance system in which adverse reactions to health products are reported on a voluntary basis. Under reporting of adverse reactions is seen with both voluntary and mandatory spontaneous surveillance systems. Accumulated case reports should not be used as a basis for determining the incidence of a reaction or estimating risk for a particular product as neither the total number of reactions occurring, nor the number of patients exposed to the health product is known. Because of the multiple factors that influence reporting, quantitative comparisons of health product safety cannot be made from the data. Some of these factors include the length of time a drug is marketed, the market share, size and sophistication of the sales force, publicity about an adverse reaction and regulatory actions. In some cases, the reported clinical data is incomplete and there is not certainty that these health products caused the reported reactions. A given reaction may be due to an underlying disease process or to another coincidental factor. This information is provided with the understanding that the data will be appropriately referenced and used in conjunction with this caveat statement.

More information here on the abortion pill and its side effects.