Abstract
As part of the substantial public discourse surrounding the distribution and use of mifepristone, which is used with misoprostol to facilitate drug-induced abortions, claims comparing the safety of this regimen to that of common pharmaceuticals have emerged and proliferated. Offered in forums ranging from social media to the Supreme Court, these claims have so gained public acceptance that they are now echoed without scrutiny and, at times, reference. Yet the simplistic slogan that "mifepristone is safer than Tylenol", though easily disseminated, defies both an intuitive understanding of how we evaluate drug safety and our norms and regulations for doing so. Indeed, if such an assertion was attributable to the manufacturer, it would precipitate a reprimand by the FDA given the lack of specific, controlled, and head-to-head evidence rightly required for its support. To the extent that these claims persist, however, including among the outputs of medical societies, abortion centers, clinical researchers, and government officials, and to the extent that they aim to inform both individual and public decision-making, it is critical that the evidence offered for their support be thoroughly explored. Such examination reveals these claims to be wholly unfounded, offering deficient and disingenuous representations of safety for any of the drugs compared.