Two Australian women complained to a member of the Victorian Parliament
that one of them had written to Australian cancer groups about new
evidence in 2009 that supported the abortion-breast cancer link, but
she did not receive the courtesy of a reply. That is, not until after
Member of Parliament Peter Kavanaugh called for a government study of
the link.
Sincerely,
Karen Malec
Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer
ABORTION-BREAST CANCER NEWS HEADLINES
Member of Victorian Parliament, Peter Kavanaugh, Calls for
Government Study of Abortion-Breast Cancer Link
Babette Francis of Endeavour Forum, an Australian organization
affiliated with the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer, and her
associate, Gabrielle Whiting, complained to a member of the Upper House
in the Victorian Parliament, Peter Kavanaugh, that the Australian
Cancer Council and the Victorian Cancer Council had ignored Whiting's
letters (See letters addressed to: Ian Olver & Chief
Executive
Officer and David
Hill) alerting them to the publication of three epidemiological
studies in 2009 from the Turkey, China and the U.S. that reported a
link between abortion and increased breast cancer risk. [1,2,3]
After learning of the failure of Australian cancer groups to respond to
Whiting's letters and protect women's health, Mr. Kavanaugh raised an
adjournment motion on Wednesday, June 9, 2010 in the Legislative
Council. Kavanaugh, a member of the Democratic Labor Party representing
Western Victoria, informed the Legislative Council about the findings
from the three epidemiological studies. He called on the government to
study the matter and to issue warnings about the risk, even if it
results in a reduction in the abortion rate.
Pro-abortion ideological concerns, Kavanaugh argued, apparently have
priority over whatever concerns the leaders of Australian cancer groups
may have for women's health. Australians, however, are not alone in
this. American cancer groups put an abortion agenda ahead of women's
lives too. Susan G. Komen for the Cure, the National Breast Cancer
Coalition, the American Cancer Society, Breast Cancer Network of
Strength and others are champions of indifference to the prevention of
suffering caused by abortion-induced breast cancer.
Kavanaugh had previously
reported to his colleagues in 2008 on the risks of abortion,
including the abortion-breast cancer link.
On June 15, 2010, Gabrielle Whiting received a delayed
reply from the Cancer Council of Australia dated June 9, perhaps as
a result of Kavanaugh's adjournment motion, also on June 9; but the
reply includes the customary red herrings that are used to falsely
restore confidence in women that abortion is indeed safe. For instance,
the author of the Council's letter, Paul Grogan, cites the discredited
2004 Lancet study, Beral et al., which received heavy criticism for its
flaws from four experts independently of one another. [5-11]
Edward Furton, Ph.D., editor of the journal Ethics
and Medics, blasted the study and labeled it "shoddy research." He
accused the editors of the Lancet of "allowing its pages to be used as
a political platform" and setting aside "objective standards of
scientific research."
Grogan also falsely maintained that a phenomenon called "reporting
bias" explained why so many scientists have found that abortion
raises breast cancer risk. What he is saying is that these scientists'
results cannot be trusted because more breast cancer patients tell the
truth about their abortion histories than do healthy women.
Yet, the fact is that while some women may choose to conceal their
abortion histories, there is no evidence that healthy women do so at a
greater rate than do breast cancer patients. Therefore, scientists can
compare breast cancer rates between these two groups. Many researchers
have tested for evidence of reporting bias and none today claim they
have found credible evidence that it exists.
Grogan either needs to educate himself properly on this subject or else
get a conscience and tell the truth.
There is a fourth study published in The
Linacre Quarterly in 2009, which Kavanaugh should share with the
Legislative Council. [4] It explained in very simple language the
biological reasons why abortion and use of hormonal contraceptives
raise breast cancer risk. The author, Angela Lanfranchi, MD, related
that environmental factors have the greatest influence on breast cancer
risk during the "susceptibility window" - the period between the onset
of puberty and first full term pregnancy - when nearly all of the
breast lobules are made up of cancer susceptible Type 1 and 2 lobules.
For instance, after the atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and
Nagasaki only women who were nulliparous (childless) at the time of
radiation exposure developed breast cancer later in life.
Kavanaugh's American counterpart, Representative
Chris Smith, reported to his colleagues in the U.S. House on the
abortion-breast cancer link and other risks associated with induced
abortion on January 21, 2010. Like Kavanaugh, Smith cited a large body
of scientific evidence showing that abortion seriously harms women in
multiple ways. Smith asked, “Why then is the Obama Administration
expanding this vicious assault on women and children — often by
massively subsidizing pro-abortion non-governmental organizations
(NGOs) to do the dirty work — in the United States, Africa, Latin
America, everywhere? Maybe some politicians aren’t so smart, sane, or
compassionate after all.”
Smith's question is an easy one to answer. Why would politicians, who
feel no qualms about taking the lives of unborn children, care about
the lives of their mothers? Causing thousands of women to lose their
breasts, suffer the humiliation and indignities of cancer, and cut
their lives short is, for these politicians, a small price to pay when
there is an abortion agenda at stake.
Kavanaugh's full
statement is available on the Victorian Parliament's website.
References:
1. Ozmen V, Ozcinar B, Karanlik H, Cabioglu N, Tukenmez M, et al.
Breast cancer risk factors in Turkish women – a University Hospital
based nested case control study. World J of Surg Oncol 2009;7:37.
2. Xing P, Li J, Jin F. A case-control study of reproductive factors
associated with subtypes of breast cancer in Northeast China. Humana
Press, e-publication online September 2009.
5. Beral V, Bull D, Doll R, Peto R, Reeves G. Collaborative Group of
Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer. Breast cancer and abortion:
collaborative reanalysis of data from 53 epidemiological studies,
including 83,000 women with breast cancer from 16 countries. Lancet
2004;363:1007-16.
10. Brind J. Induced Abortion and Breast Cancer Risk: A Critical
Analysis of the Report of the Harvard Nurses Study II. Journal of
American Physicians and Surgeons (Summer 2007) Vol. 12, No. 2, p.
38-39. Available at: <http://www.jpands.org/vol12no2/brind.pdf>.
11. Brind J. The abortion-breast cancer connection. National Catholic
Bioethics Quarterly Summer 2005; p. 303-329.
<http://www.AbortionBreastCancer.com/Brind_NCBQ.PDF>.
#####
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.
Support the Coalition on Abortion/Breast
Cancer. We are volunteers whose work depends entirely on the
generosity of good people like you.
To help us continue our work, please make a tax-deductible, credit card
donation by Clicking Hereor
donations
can
be mailed to:
Coalition on
Abortion/Breast Cancer P.O. Box
957133 Hoffman
Estates, IL 60195
