|
Dear Friends:
The National Breast Cancer Coalition has announced that the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer is the recipient of its "Golden Boob Award." We are shocked by the name of this award because it trivializes a devastating disease.
This publicity stunt distracts people from the truth about scientific evidence that emerged decades ago and linked breast cancer with abortion and the use of steroidal hormones (oral contraceptives and hormone replacement therapy). It also distracts people from the truth that the abortion and the cancer fundraising industries have interlocking directorates.
Please send us a generous, tax-deductible, end-of-year donation so that we might continue our research and educational efforts.
For credit card donations, visit:
<http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/support/index.htm>.
Mail checks to:
The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer,
P.O. Box 957133,
Hoffman Estates, IL 60195.
Read more below and spread the word to family and
friends.
Sincerely,
Karen Malec
Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer
ABORTION-BREAST CANCER NEWS HEADLINES
"National Breast Cancer Coalition's Golden Boob Award Trivializes Breast Cancer, Distracts Women from the Truth"
The National Breast Cancer Coalition (NBCC) has announced that the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer is the recipient of its "Golden Boob Award." We are shocked by the name of this award because it trivializes a devastating disease that has caused untold suffering among women and their families.
After the NBCC nominated us for its newly created "award" in May of 2006, we challenged its leaders to debate scientific evidence that supports an abortion-breast cancer (ABC) link. Thus far, its officials have avoided any debate. If as they claim, the truth is on their side, then why won't they jump at the chance to make us look foolish in public by proving us wrong, instead of relying on a cheap publicity stunt? We view their "award" as a measure of our effectiveness in educating the public about this risk.
Their publicity stunt distracts people from scientific evidence that emerged decades ago. Breast cancer was first linked with abortion in a 1957 study on Japanese women. [1] By the mid-1980s, there was sufficient biological, epidemiological and experimental evidence to show that abortion is a risk factor for the disease. [5] In 1986, government scientists wrote a letter to the British journal Lancet and acknowledged that abortion raises breast cancer risk. [4]
In 1987, Oxford scientists reported that the disease is associated with the use of steroidal hormones (oral contraceptives and hormone replacement therapy). [2,3] Why weren't women told about the existence of this research in a timely fashion?
In 1991, an authoritative medical text used by breast disease specialists - The Breast (edited by Bland and Copeland) fingered abortion and OCs as risk factors for the disease.
A Medline search [9] reveals that these risks have been known in the scientific community for a long time. (Do a search using the terms, "breast cancer AND HRT" or "breast cancer and oral contraceptives" or "breast cancer AND abortion".) Why do the NBCC's officials call published, peer-reviewed research "pseudo-science"?
Nevertheless, it was not until 2002 that women were informed about the risks of using combined HRT. [6] Combined HRT and combined OCs contain the same drugs - estrogen and progestin - (and OCs have a larger dose), but it was not until 2005 that the World Health Organization listed combined OCs and combined HRT as Group 1 carcinogens. [7,8] Few women are aware that "Most combined contraceptives are taken orally, but they can also be delivered by injection, transdermal patch, or vaginal ring." [7] Why aren't women being told about these facts on the NBCC's website?
The NBCC's publicity stunt also distracts people from the fact the abortion and the cancer fundraising industries have interlocking directorates. If executives from either the tobacco or asbestos industries sat on the board of directors for the American Lung Cancer Association, would it not compromise the professional judgment of the organization's leaders in determing the risks of smoking and asbestos exposure?
Similarly, the presence of abortion activists and former employees of Planned Parenthood and the National Abortion Rights Action League in the cancer fundraising industry compromises both the credibility and the professional judgment of cancer fundraising groups like the NBCC, the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation and Breast Cancer Action.
The NBCC has at least one person on its board of directors with a conflict of interest. Cynthia Pearson, the NBCC's treasurer, previously worked as a Colorado organizer for the National Abortion Rights Action League. She is executive director of the National Womens Health Network (NWHN), a group that advances what is euphemistically propagandized in U.S. society as "reproductive health."
Eve Sanchez Silver, formerly Komen's Latina adviser, resigned abruptly in 2004 after recognizing the cancer fundraising industry's dereliction of duty. She resigned in protest of:
1) Komen's monetary gifts to Planned Parenthood;
2) The cancer fundraising industry's failure to inform women about the existence of research dating from 1957 linking abortion with increased breast cancer risk; and
3) The fact that Komen's founder, Nancy G. Brinker, sat on an advisory board for Planned Parenthood of North Texas.
Silver, a post-abortive, two-time breast cancer survivor who had lost both breasts to the disease, expressed her outrage about the incestuous relationship between the abortion and the cancer fundraising industries. She said that they "may stand to gain financially by maintaining an information black-out on confirmed abortion-breast cancer link facts."
Women tell us that they want uncensored information about breast cancer and the risks of abortion, and they want to hear it without bias. Only then can women make their own personalized decisions and really take control of their own health.
What Are the Facts?
Eight medical groups recognize that an abortion increases a woman's risk for breast cancer by leaving her breasts with an increase in cancer-vulnerable breast lobules. This is only the first of two breast cancer risks associated with abortion. Known as the "independent link," it is the only risk that scientists continue to debate.
The second risk of abortion is a recognized risk. All experts agree that the best way to prevent breast cancer is by having more children, starting at a younger age, and breastfeeding them longer - a feat that is impossible to manage in a culture where abortion is prevalent.
Even an expert witness for the radical Center for Reproductive Rights, acknowledged the protective effect of an early first full term pregnancy when she testified under oath in a Florida lawsuit in 1999. Dr. Lynn Rosenberg of Boston University admitted that the young woman who has an abortion has a greater risk than the young woman who has a baby. [10]
The National Cancer Institute (NCI), a federal agency, also admits that having an early first full term pregnancy reduces risk and increased childbearing protect women from the disease, but its officials illogically refuse to admit that abortion causes women to lose the protective effect of childbearing. The NBCC says women should believe the government's position on the ABC link. Its officials have never expressed any objections to the political charade that the NCI's leaders carried out during the agency's 2003 workshop on the ABC link, "Early Reproductive Events and Breast Cancer."
The NCI provides a videotape of the workshop on its website. [11] Anyone who watches it can discover that the NCI's bureaucrats invited scientists to examine only one point of view during the workshop - that abortion does not raise breast cancer risk. At that time, 13 out of 15 American studies had reported risk increases for post-abortive women. The NCI provided at least partial funding for at least ten of those studies. [16]
The Biological Reasons for the ABC Link
The biological reason why childbearing protects women from breast cancer is simple. The breasts of the childless woman overwhelmingly consist of immature, cancer-vulnerable Type 1 and 2 breast lobules where up to 95% of all breast cancers arise. Type 1 lobules are also called "TDLUs" - terminal ductal lobular units. During every monthly menstrual cycle, estrogen (a hormone and an acknowledged carcinogen) stimulates her Type 1 and 2 breast lobules.
The breasts do not mature into cancer-resistant Type 3 lobules until the last eight weeks of a full term pregnancy. [12, 13, 14]
Starting early in a normal pregnancy (not most miscarriages), the ovaries begin producing extra estrogen, which stimulates the breasts to grow and the lobules to multiply. Therefore, she develops more cancer-vulnerable lobules.
Starting at 32 weeks of pregnancy, another process called "differentiation" protects the breasts from the effects of estrogen. It shuts off the ability of the cells to multiply and shapes the breast tissue into cancer-resistant Type 3 lobules. The lobules fill up with milk at the end of pregnancy and these are called "Type 4 lobules", which are also cancer-resistant.
For these reasons, the more children she has, the lower her lifetime risk is for the disease. The longer she delays a first full term pregnancy, the greater her breast cancer risk is. By contrast, childlessness and delaying a first full term pregnancy increase risk. Even cancer fundraising groups are good enough to tell us this much.
The evidence makes it clear that worst time in any woman's life to have an abortion or use hormonal contraceptives/abortifacients is before the birth of a first child.
Epidemiological and Experimental Research
During the last half-century, 70 epidemiological studies on the independent link between abortion and breast cancer have been conducted. About 80% of these studies show a correlation between abortion and increased risk for the disease. Experimental research in 1980 showed that more aborted rats (77.7%) develop breast cancer after being exposed to a carcinogen than do virgin rats (66.7%) and rats with pups (0%). [5, 15]
Conclusions
The NBCC's leaders have argued that we are motivated to educate women about these risks only because we are out to "make a buck." A little investigation would reveal that this is clearly a case of projection on their part. The tax returns for non-profits are public information. It would be easy to compare the NBCC's budget (as well as its address and the size of its staff) with ours. The situation might be likened to the difference between the sizes of an elephant and a mouse.
The NBCC receives funding from wealthy foundations, like the Barbara Streisand Foundation. By contrast, we depend on the widow's mite just to meet our expenses. Streisand's foundation is an organization that advances the abortion industry's interests. Is it
reasonable to expect that "Babs" and her directors would look kindly on any admissions from the NBCC that abortion raises breast cancer risk?
Apparently, our information has needled the NBCC's leaders. Despite their protests, we fully intend to continue our efforts to educate the public about these very real cancer risks and the cancer-fundraising industry's dereliction of duty.
References:
1. Segi M, Fukushima I, Fujisaku S, Kurihara M, Saito S, Asano K, Kamoi M. An epidemiological study on cancer in Japan. GANN 1957;48(Suppl):1-63.
2. McPherson K, et al. Early oral contraceptive use and breast cancer: Results of another case control study. Br J Cancer 1987;56:653-660. Available at:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=3426932&query_hl=12&itool=pubmed_DocSum
3. Hunt K, Vessey M, McPherson K, Coleman M. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1987;94(7):620-635. Available at:
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=3620411&query_hl=1&itool=pubmed_docsum>.
4. Stadel B, et al. Oral contraceptives and breast cancer in young women. Lancet. 1986 Feb 22;1(8478):436. Available at:
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=2868351&query_hl=14&itool=pubmed_docsum>.
5. Brind J. The abortion-breast cancer connection. National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly Summer 2005; p. 303-329.
<http://www.AbortionBreastCancer.com/Brind_NCBQ.PDF>.
6. Writing group for the Women's Health Initiative Investigators. Risks and benefits of estrogen plus progestin in healthy postmenopausal women. JAMA 2002;288:321-33. Available at:
<http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/288/3/321>.
7. Cogliano V, Grosse Y, Baan R, Secretan B, El Ghissassi F. Carcinogenicity of combined oestrogen-progestagen contraceptives and menopausal treatment. Lancet Oncology 2005;6:552-553.
8. Press Release No. 167, "IARC Monographs Programme Finds Combined Estrogen-Progestogen Contraceptives (the "pill") and Menopausal Therapy Are Carcinogenic to Humans," World Health Organization International Agency for Research on Cancer, July 29, 2005. See
<http://www.iarc.fr/ENG/Press_Releases/pr167a.html>.
9. Medline. Available at:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PubMed/.
10. Rosenberg (1999) NW FL Women's Health vs. State of FL, FL Circuit Ct., 2nd circ., videotape deposition of 11/18/99, pp. 77-78.
11. The 3-day videocast can be found by searching the National Cancer Institute's website for its workshop, "Early Reproductive Events and Breast Cancer." Available at: <http://videocast.nih.gov.>.
12. Neville & Daniel (ed) The Mammary Gland, Plenum, NY 1987:67-93.
13. Russo J, Reina D, Frederick J, et al. Expression of phenotypical changes by human breast epithelial cells treated with carcinogens in vitro. Cancer Res 1988;48:2837-2857.
14. Vorherr H. The Breast, Academic, New York 1974:1-18.
15. Russo J, Russo IH. Susceptibility of the mammary gland to carcinogenesis. Am J Pathol 1980;100: 497-512.
16. Breast Cancer Prevention Institute Fact Sheet. Review of Abortion-Breast Cancer link (ABC link) at National Cancer Institute (NCI) workshop on "Early Reproductive Events and Breast Cancer Risk", held Feb 24-26, 2003. May, 2003 Available at:
<http://www.bcpinstitute.org/abc_nci.htm>.
#####
The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer is an international women's organization founded to protect the health and save the lives of women by educating and providing information on abortion as a risk factor for breast cancer.
Tax-deductible, credit card donations can be made at http://www.AbortionBreastCancer.com. Donations can be mailed to: the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer, P.O. Box 957133, Hoffman Estates, IL 60195. The IRS recognizes the coalition as a 501(c)3 organization.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:
Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer
http://www.AbortionBreastCancer.com
Breast Cancer Prevention Institute
http://www.BCPInstitute.org
Polycarp Research Institute
http://www.polycarp.org
|
|
