So I was reading the article and I was delightfully surprised to see it was about abortion, contraception and the drugs associated with it. The topic of abortion always interested me and frustrated me at the same time. To keep from causing any political insults I will keep my opinion on the matter disclosed. However, what I thought was pretty crazy was that I was watching a tv show right before reading this article. In the show a teenage girl got pregnant and the topic of abortion came up. The girl opted to have an abortion but by the time she went to the clinic the baby was too far along to be legally allowed to abort. So back to the article. I was wondering if this new drug would be able to help in a scenario like this. Per say if a woman was too far along would this technique and drug be allowed to abort the baby or is it still considered illegal. The article didn’t address a scenario like that where a woman was pregnant for a while.

Also in class we spoke a lot about molecular structures and drawings. After reading this article, in my opinion, the molecular structure pictures provide in the article were unnecessary. They didn’t help me understand or visualize the article better. I felt as if they were just there. Like cool that’s what it looks like but it doesn’t help. I would have understood the article the same with or without the structures. Another thing is that the article didn’t really provide a conclusion. They kind of hopped around the idea of the potential of this drug but didn’t come to an exact and concrete conclusion.

But anyways I usually dislike science articles and the like as they confuse me. But this on the other hand was an interesting article on an interesting topic. The only thing is this article was written in 1971 so I don’t know about any of the updates they had in this study. If the article was written today there probably would have been different results and studies. I’m going to look into it a little further.