If you are pro choice, doesn't that mean
you want women to have the right to choose
whether or not they will have an abortion.
If they have the right to choose,
shouldn't they be informed properly? If
they are informed properly, doesn't that
mean presenting both sides of the debate
in an unbiased way, and allowing the woman
to make up her own mind? When I hear
talk of this "breast cancer lie", I wonder
if this is being spoken in an unbiased
way? Have you all really studied the
research? Or, do you think all of the
research scientists are pro life? The
following is factual, and unbiased.
Just follow the research...Because of the
rapid growth of breast tissue in early
pregnancy, a premature cessation of
pregnancy, such as that caused by
abortion, creates an unnatural condition.
Consequently, women who have first
trimester abortions face twice the risk of
contraction breast cancer as those who
complete their pregnancies and give birth.
The leading authority on the connection
of abortion and breast cancer is Dr.
Joel brind, professor of endocrinology,
department of natural sciences, baruch
college of the city university of new
york. He is the author of comprehensive
review and meta-analysis of the
abortion/breast cancer link. Dr.
Brind says "the single most avoidable risk
factor for breast cancer is induced
abortion". In his testimony before the
reproductive health drugs advisory
committee of the food and drug
administration, Dr. Brind said,
"only induced abortion---not spontaneous
abortion---is consistently linked to the
incidence of breast cancer. The
biological basis of this difference is
also clear: most spontaneous abortions
are characterized by subnormal ovarian
estradiol secretion. It is the surge of
estradiol early in a normal pregnancy
which provides an estrogen overexposure by
which most known risk factors increase
breast cancer risk.
Induced abortion increases breast
cancer risk independently of its effect in
delaying first full-term pregnancy. An
early full-term pregnancy decreases breast
cancer risk. Since induced abortion
also abrogates this protective effect, it
raises breast cancer risk in two ways for
young nulliparous women."
a 1997 new england journal of medicine
article by mads melbye and others claimed
that the abortion breast cancer connection
wasn't valid. "there is no increased
risk of breast cancer for the average
woman who has had an abortion," the author
told the wall street journal.
The new york times echoed the
reassuring counsel that women "need not
worry about the risk of breast cancer"
when considering abortion. But why had
the same sources not reported the results
of 10 out of the 11 previous studies on
the subject, nearly all of them more
significant than Dr. Melbye's, which had
found a significant increase of breast
cancer among women who had had abortions?
According to Dr. Brind, the scientific
community has know for over twenty years
that early abortion is a risk factor for
breast cancer. Dozens of studies have
been published confirming this. Yet
this information has not even been
acknowledged in the literature of the
american cancer society. These studies
show that aborting a first pregnancy
during the first trimester can double a
woman's risk of breast cancer. Multiple
abortions can triple or quadruple the
risk. In a national review article, Dr.
Brind asks what seems to be a reasonable
question: "if there is a way to reduce
the incidence of breast cancer, shouldn't
american women be told about it?"
if you need more sources, I have plenty.
Looking through these forums, I notice
many women being encouraged to kill their
unborn child. The pro choice side
claims to want women to have a choice, yet
they so adamantly push abortion...Where is
the choice in that? Everyone has the
right to express their own opinions, but
shouldn't all of our ultimate goals be for
the mother not to kill her child. Isn't
that what "choice" is...Giving the mother
all of her available options...And all of
the possible (researched backed) outcomes
of abortion from both sides, or, are some
scared of the truth because it doesn't fit
their agenda. You may say that I push
my beliefs on people (even though I have
stuck to the legitimate research) but
shouldn't life be a natural thing to
advocate for? It takes a selfless
person to be a good mother, but much of
this generation only thinks of self.
I welcome your replies, but please
refrain from embarrassing yourself by
using explicative language. Thank you.
|
DdMd
New User, Becoming EHEALTHy
Joined: 03 Nov 2005 Posts: 6
Posted: 11-03-05 21:58pm
I don't want to force anyone to do
anything. I believe anyone who is
interested has the right to read the
research.
If the research points to an elevated risk
of cancer in women who have miscarriages,
show me. If it's valid, I will except
it, and inform others.
"only induced abortion---not spontaneous
abortion---is consistently linked to the
incidence of breast cancer."...
------dr. Joel
brind, text of oral testimony given before
the reproductive health drugs advisory
committee of the food and drug
administration at its public meeting of
july 19, 1996, www.Epm.Org/brindtest.Html
are you saying that if there is a greater
chance of cancer from an abortion that you
would not want to inform someone?
I think all women should know this.
Cancer isn't all. Along with an abortion
comes many physical risks.
Ectopic pregnancies are twice as high.
Pelvic inflammatory disease (pid) reported
in 30% of all abortions.
Health of future children are at risk.
These and more are topics for another day.
This is not scare tactics, scare tactics
to me would be not informing women, yet it
is so common to hear what "mindkandy" said
of the abortion clinic.
Abortion is the only surgery for which the
surgeon is not obligated to inform the
patient of the possible risks of the
procedure, or even the exact nature of the
procedure. Abortion providers are the
only medical personnel who have a
"constitutional right" to withhold
information, even when directly questioned
by the patient.
----reardon,
aborted women, 234.
Feel free to check out all the research
for yourself.
|
DdMd
New User, Becoming EHEALTHy
Joined: 03 Nov 2005 Posts: 6
Posted: 11-03-05 22:08pm
I know, jlee77
|
jenn_smithson
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 15 Nov 2004 Posts: 808 Location: Texas
Posted: 11-03-05 22:28pm
"the largest, and probably the most
reliable, single study of this topic was
conducted during the 1990s in denmark, a
country with very detailed medical records
on all its citizens. In that study, all
danish women born between 1935 and 1978
(1.5 million women) were linked with the
national registry of induced abortions and
with the danish cancer registry. So all
information about their abortions and
their breast cancer came from registries,
was very complete, and was not influenced
by recall bias.
After adjusting for known breast cancer
risk factors, the researchers found that induced
abortion(s) had no overall effect on the
risk of breast cancer. the size of
this study and the manner in which it was
conducted provides substantial evidence
that induced abortion does not affect a
woman's risk of developing breast
cancer."
(http://www.Cancer.Org/docroot/cri/content
/cri_2_6x_can_having_an_abortion_cause_or_
contribute_to_breast_cancer.Asp)
"in february 2003, the us national cancer
institute (nci) convened a workshop of
over 100 of the world’s leading experts
who study pregnancy and breast cancer
risk. The experts reviewed existing human
and animal studies on the relationship
between pregnancy and breast cancer risk,
including studies of induced and
spontaneous abortions. Among their
conclusions were:
-breast cancer risk is transiently
(temporarily) increased after a term
pregnancy (resulting in the birth of a
living child).
-induced
abortion is not associated with an
increase in breast cancer risk.
-recognized spontaneous abortion is
not associated with an increase in breast
cancer risk.
the level of scientific evidence for these
conclusions was considered to be "well
established" (the highest level)."
(http://www.Cancer.Org/docroot/cri/content
/cri_2_6x_can_having_an_abortion_cause_or_
contribute_to_breast_cancer.Asp)
"the collaborative group on hormonal
factors in breast cancer, based out of
oxford university in england, recently put
together the results from 53 separate
studies conducted in 16 different
countries. These studies included about
83,000 women with breast cancer. After
combining and reviewing the results from
these studies, the researchers concluded
that "the
totality of worldwide epidemiological
evidence indicates that pregnancies ending
as either spontaneous or induced abortions
do not have adverse effects on women's
subsequent risk of developing breast
cancer."
(http://www.Cancer.Org/docroot/cri/content
/cri_2_6x_can_having_an_abortion_cause_or_
contribute_to_breast_cancer.Asp)
from the national cancer institute:"these
newer studies examined large numbers of
women, collected data before breast cancer
was found, and gathered medical history
information from medical records rather
than simply from self-reports, thereby
generating more reliable findings. The
newer studies consistently showed no association
between induced and spontaneous abortions
and breast cancer risk."
(http://www.Cancer.Gov/cancertopics/factsh
eet/risk/abortion-miscarriage)
regarding, Dr. Joel brind:
Quote:
in 1996-oct, Dr.
Brind and three other us scientists
announced the result of a statistical
analysis of previous studies. 15 they
selected 23 studies which involved over
60,000 women. They combined all of their
results using a process known as
"meta-analysis." they found "overwhelming"
evidence that women who terminate a
pregnancy by an abortion have a 1/3 higher
chance of contracting breast cancer later
in life. this particular statistical method
is fraught with hazard, because the
results can easily be influenced by the
method of selecting which specific studies
are included.
three of the four scientists in the
1996-oct study are known to be vocal
opponents of abortion. They might have
been biased, consciously or unconsciously,
in their selection processes. many of the
studies selected were case control
studies, and thus were
unreliable.
(http://www.Religioustolerance.Org/abo_can
c.Htm)
also, I cannot possibly understand the
leap that Dr. Brind takes in his
statement, "only induced abortion---not
spontaneous abortion---is consistently
linked to the incidence of breast cancer."
I cannot see how the same
biological and chemical processes involved
in one scenario won't be the same for the
second scenario. A .Woman obtains an
abortion is going through the same
hormonal and biological fluctuations as a
.Woman who spontaneously aborts.
Finally, even though the link, according
to more recent and valid
reserach, does not exist, .Women in
several (if not all) states are
given this misinformation in the form of
"informed consent" laws.
And, i'd like the proof given for this
statement please, "abortion providers are
the only medical personnel who have a
"constitutional right" to withhold
information, even when directly questioned
by the patient" as it directly contradicts
the current applicable laws for my state.
I have seen comments in posts, quotes from
sites I believe, saying there is a
possible link between giving birth and a
reduction in the chances of breast cancer
and a subsequent corrolation between not
giving birth (through miscarriage or
abortion) and an increased chance for
breast cancer. I personally believe
that's bunk, since there's no proof. But
I can verify that i've seen the "info" on
this forum.
|
jenn_smithson
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 15 Nov 2004 Posts: 808 Location: Texas
Posted: 11-04-05 19:44pm
ddmd
wrote:
http://www.Abortionbreastcan
cer.Com/
do you have any valid,
unbiased sites? Perhaps sites from
medical journals, medical schools, or
medical societies?
The .American .Cancer .Society can be
found at www.Cancer.Org.
Their site is very user friendly.
The .National .Cancer. Institute, funded
and controlled by the government, can be
found at www.Cancer.Gov.
The .Centers for .Disease .Control, also
funded and controlled by the government,
can be found at www.Cdc.Gov. They
have great links to other cancer sites on
their page.
The .American .College of .Obstetricians
and .Gynecologists can be found at www.Acog.Org. Their
site is less user friendly but full of
good, valid, scientifically accurate
research.
As posted in the quotes above, many of the
studies used in the past which pointed to
a link between breast cancer and abortion,
were invalid or less valid than more
recent studies for a variety of
methodological flaws. Recent, accepted
research continues to find no causal link
between abortion and breast cancer.
|
jenn_smithson
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 15 Nov 2004 Posts: 808 Location: Texas
Posted: 11-04-05 19:48pm
jlee77
wrote:
as I have said, this is why
the link between abortion and breast
cancer is questionable. You have sources
they say abortion increases the risk and
some say it doesn't. The sources posted
here from what I see are
valid.
if you will notice from
the quotes that I posted, the .American
.Cancer .Society, the .National .Cancer
.Institute, and the .American .College of
.Obstetricians and .Gynecologists,
thoroughly explained the methodological
flaws in the past research that pointed to
a link. The recent research has found no
causal link between abortion and breast
cancer.
jlee
wrote:
so who knows the
answer?
you are, of course,
capable of believing whatever you wish.
However, the qualified medical communities
accepted response is stated in the quotes
above.
jlee
wrote:
nonetheless, it's yet
another reason to not get an
abortion.
whatever reason you
need. I can say with some certainty that
even though .Women are given this
misinformation in the guise of "informed
consent", it does not stop them from
obtaining an abortion.
|
Tazzy D
Advanced Support Team
Joined: 30 Oct 2004 Posts: 3718 Location: , va
Posted: 11-04-05 19:50pm
Honestly no one will ever know what causes
what or what can actually cure something
forever...
|
DdMd
New User, Becoming EHEALTHy
Joined: 03 Nov 2005 Posts: 6
Posted: 11-04-05 22:42pm
Studies which reported more than a twofold
elevation in risk
* m. Segi, et al "an epidemiological
study on cancer in japan," gann, vol. 48,
supplement: april, 1957.
* pike et al (1981) br journal of
cancer 43 oral contraceptive use and early
abortion as risk factors for breast cancer
in young women
* nishiyama (1982) shikoku ichi 38:
333-43 (in japanese)
* laing et al (1993) j national med
assoc. 85:931-9 breast cancer risk
factors in african - american women: the
howard university tumor resistry
experience.
* laing et al (1994) genetic
epidemiology 11:a300
* rohan et al. Am j epidemiol 1988
sep;128(3):478-89
a population-based case-control
study of diet and breast cancer in
australia.
* bu et al. (1995) am j epidemiol
141:s85
other studies which show increased risk
* ye et al. (2002) br j cancer
87:977-981
* brinton et al. (1983) br. Journal
of cancer 47:757-62
reproductive factors in the etiology
of breast cancer.
* rosenburg et al. (1988) am j
epidemiology 127:981-9
breast cancer in relation to the
occurrence and time of induced and
spontaneous abortion.
* marcus et al. Am j public health
1999 aug; 89(8):1244-7
adolescent reproductive events and
subsequent breast cancer risk.
* palmer et al. (1997) cancer causes
control 8:841-9
induced and spontaneous abortion in
relation to risk of breast cancer.
* lazovich et al. Epidemiology 2000
jan;11(1):76-80
induced abortion and breast cancer
risk.
* daling et al. Am j epidemiol 1996
aug 15;144(4):373-80
risk of breast cancer among white
women following induced abortion.
* daling et al. J natl cancer inst
1994 nov 2;86(21):1584-92
risk of breast cancer among young
women: relationship to induced abortion.
* laing et al. J natl med assoc 1993
dec;85(12):931-9
breast cancer risk factors in
african-american women: the howard
university tumor registry experience.
* white et al. (1994) j natl cancer
inst 86:505-14
breast cancer among young u.S.
Women in relation to oral contraceptive
use.
* newcomb et al. (1996) jama
275:283-7
pregnancy termination in relation to
risk of breast cancer.
* howe et al. Int j epidemiol 1989
jun;18(2):300-4
early abortion and breast cancer
risk among women under age 40.
* andrieu et al. Br j cancer 1995
sep;72(3):744-51
familial risk, abortion and their
interactive effect on the risk of breast
cancer--a combined analysis of six
case-control studies.
* hirohata et al. (1985) natl cancer
inst monogr 69:187-90
occurrence of breast cancer in
relation to diet and reproductive history:
a case-control study in medical answer,
japan.
* ewertz & duffy (1988) br j
cancer 68:99-104
risk of breast cancer in relation to
reproductive factors in denmark.
* lipworth et al. (1995) int j cancer
61:181-4
abortion and the risk of breast
cancer: a case-control study in greece
* rookus & van leeuwan j natl
cancer inst 88:1759-64
induced abortion and risk for breast
cancer: reporting (recall) bias in a dutch
case-control study
* talamini et al. (1996) eur j cancer
32a:303-10
the role of reproductive and
menstrual factors in cancer of the breast
before and after menopause
* watanabe & hirayama (1968)
nippon rinsho 26:1853-9
* dvoirin & medvedev (1978) meth
prog breast cancer epidemiol res, tallin
1978. Ussr acad sci pp 53-63 (in
russian)
* le et al., (1984) british j cancer
72:744-51
* luporsi (1988) british j cancer
72:744-51
* wu et al. (1996) br j cancer
73:680-6
* robertson c, van den donk m,
primic-zakelj, macfarlanet, boyle p. The
association between induced and
spontaneous abortion and risk of breast
cancer in slovenian women aged 25-54.
Breast 2001; 10:291-8.
Studies showing link between delayed first
full term pregnancy and breast cancer
* russo et al. Breast cancer res treat
1992;23(3):211-8
influence of age and parity on the
development of the human breast.
* macmahon, b. Et al "age at first
birth and breast cancer risk,"
bull. Wld health org., 1970;
(43-209-21) study reported "it is
estimated that women having their first
child when aged under 18 years have only
about one-third the breast cancer risk of
those whose first birth is delayed until
the age of 35 or more." its data also
revealed a "suggested increased risk
associated with abortion -- contrary to
the reduction in risk associated with
full-term births."
* macmahon, b. Et al "age at first
birth and breast cancer risk," (same as
above) bull. Wld health org., 1970;
(43-209-21) study reported "it is
estimated that women having their first
child when aged under 18 years have only
about one-third the breast cancer risk of
those whose first birth is delayed until
the age of 35 or more." its data also
revealed a "suggested increased risk
associated with abortion -- contrary to
the reduction in risk associated with
full-term births."
* segi m., et al "an epidemiological
study on cancer in japan," gann, vol. 48,
supplement: april, 1957segi et al (1957)
gann 48 (suppl) : 1-63
studies which did not show an increased
risk:
* sanderson m, shu x-o, jin f, dai q,
wen w, hua y, gao y-t, zheng w. Abortion
history and breast cancer risk: results
from the shanghai breast cancer study.
Int j cancer 2001;92:899-905
* moseson et al. (1993) int j
epidemiology 22:1000-9
the influence of medical conditions
associated with hormones
on the risk of breast cancer.
* melbye et al. N engl j med 1997 jan
9; 336(2):81-5
induced abortion and the risk of
breast cancer
* burany (1979) jugosl genekol opstet
19:237-47 (serbo-craot)
* la vecchia et al. (1993) int j
cancer 53:215-9
* zaridze et al (1988) "unpublished"
and referenced in br j cancer 72:744-51
* sanderson et al. Amer j
epidemiology, june 1, 2000;151 (11)
abortion history and breast cancer
risk: results from the shanghai breast
cancer study.
* adami et al. (1990) br j cancer
62:122-6
absence of association between
reproductive variables and the risk of
breast cancer in young women in sweden and
norway.
* newcomb pa, mandelson mt. A
record-based evaluation of induced
abortion and breast cancer risk (united
states). Cancer causes control 2000;
11:777-81.1
* goldacre mj, kurina lm, seagroatt v,
yeaates. Abortion and breast cancer: a
case-control record linkage study. J
epidem community health 2001;55:336-7.
* mahue-giangreco m. Ursin g.
Sullivan-halley j. Bernstein l. "induced
abortion, miscarriage, and breast cancer
risk of young women." cancer epidemiology
biomarkers & prevention vol. 12,
209-214, march 2003.
* erlandsson g. Montgomery s.
Cnattingius s. Ekbom a. Abortions and
breast cancer: record-based case-control
study. Int j cancer (2003) 103:676-679.
|
Tazzy D
Advanced Support Team
Joined: 30 Oct 2004 Posts: 3718 Location: , va
Posted: 11-04-05 22:55pm
Wow... Well I have just been studying
breast cancer but I still dont know
everything or enough
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12984
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
Posted: 11-05-05 00:39am
tazzy d
wrote:
honestly no one will ever
know what causes what or what can actually
cure something
forever...
uh... Hello, polio anyone? We found a
cure for that, duh.
|
Meandering Away
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 06 Jul 2005 Posts: 535
Posted: 11-05-05 03:37am
Sorry eiri I have to disagree,we found a
vaccine for polio not a cure.A preventive
rather than cure.There are some things we
will never cure I don't think anyway and
there is not enough money put into
researching cancer and the causes,we all
have the cancer gene in us why not figure
a way to sort that gene from ever becoming
active and that should sort it.
|
Tazzy D
Advanced Support Team
Joined: 30 Oct 2004 Posts: 3718 Location: , va
Posted: 11-05-05 18:52pm
eiri
wrote:
tazzy d
wrote:
honestly no one will ever
know what causes what or what can actually
cure something
forever...
uh... Hello, polio anyone? We found a
cure for that,
duh.
there may be cures but not a cure for life
|
christy_babe
New User, Becoming EHEALTHy
Joined: 28 Jul 2005 Posts: 26 Location: US
Posted: 11-05-05 21:24pm
tazzy d
wrote:
eiri
wrote:
tazzy d
wrote:
honestly no one will ever
know what causes what or what can actually
cure something
forever...
uh... Hello, polio anyone? We found
a cure for that,
duh.
there may be cures but not a cure for
life
wouldn't death be a
sufficient cure for life?
|
sandyallen
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 02 Feb 2004 Posts: 4580
Ddmd Posted: 11-05-05 23:03pm
1st place, welcome!
2nd place, I would like you to understand
that pro-choice is not about hating, it is
about understanding, caring that a
pregnant female has a choice to continue
on with th pregnancy or to terminate the
pregnancy, she also has the right to get
herself educated on her choices.
Anyone can get breast cancer, including
males, their is always a 50% chance, so
how can you say that their is a higher%
chance in females who had an abortion do
get breast cancer. I do agree, that is a
lie!
|
Tazzy D
Advanced Support Team
Joined: 30 Oct 2004 Posts: 3718 Location: , va
Posted: 11-06-05 12:17pm
christy_babe
wrote:
tazzy d
wrote:
eiri
wrote:
tazzy d
wrote:
honestly no one will ever
know what causes what or what can actually
cure something
forever...
uh... Hello, polio anyone? We
found a cure for that,
duh.
there may be cures but not a cure for
life
wouldn't death be a
sufficient cure for
life?
im not talking about life itself.. Im
talking about cures for like aids, cancer
and etc. There may be an antidote or an
antibotic, but nothing has been intorduced
to really cure these type of issues for
the remainder of a persons life
|
msrosie
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 02 Jan 2005 Posts: 369 Location: Ontario, Canada
Thanks: 12
Thanked:2
Posted: 11-06-05 18:47pm
stillmehere
wrote:
jlee77
wrote:
my .Grandma died of it and
it runs in my
family.
well she deserved it. All those
abortions she
had.
i think this is uncalled for and you owe
jlee an apology.
