Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer
P.O. Box 957133, Hoffman Estates, IL 60195
response@abortionbreastcancer.com
www.AbortionBreastCancer.com
1-877-803-0102

Press Release
Contact: Karen Malec
For Immediate Release
Date: October 5, 2004

Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer: Like Big Tobacco, Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Covers Up Abortion-Cancer Link

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer condemns a statement from the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (RCOG) saying, "Induced abortion is not associated with an increased breast cancer risk."  This represents a reversal from its position in 2000 when the RCOG's guidelines said the research was methodologically sound and "could not be disregarded." [1]

"Five months after the 2000 guidelines were published," said Karen Malec, president of the coalition, "some left-leaning journalists, unconcerned about escalating breast cancer rates, turned up the political heat. The RCOG quietly removed the offending guideline.  That shows what the RCOG was willing to reveal when its leaders believed it was politically safe to do so."

There are recognized and contested breast cancer risks of abortion.  Recognized reproductive risk factors include: childlessness, small family size, delayed first full term pregnancy (FFTP) and little or no breastfeeding.  Such childbearing patterns account for at least 50% of all breast cancer cases in developed nations. [2,3]  Nevertheless, the RCOG declined to finger abortion as a cause of breast cancer.

"Any doctor or medical group that denies a cause-effect relationship is either lying or is uninformed," said Mrs. Malec.  "The words, 'Abortion raises breast cancer risk,' stick in the throats of abortion enthusiasts. Like the tobacco industry whose executives put financial interests above human lives, abortion zealots would rather see thousands die than harm their industry."

Abortion enthusiasts celebrate abortion and abortionists on the RCOG's website. [4]

The RCOG relied on research criticized for misclassifying tens of thousands of women who'd had abortions as not having had abortions. [5,6]  It included Chinese studies, although China is an improper venue for conducting this research. [7,8] Chinese women are forced to have abortions after having one child.  They have early FFTP's before their abortions are performed.  An early FFTP is the best way to prevent breast cancer. [9,10]  By contrast, British women generally abort during the most carcinogenic period in their lives - before FFTP.

The RCOG relied entirely on statistical (epidemiological) evidence.  Its leaders ignored 31 epidemiological studies and biological and experimental evidence supporting a causal relationship. [11,12,13,14,15]  They ignored Patrick Carroll's British research showing that abortion, especially before FFTP, is the "best predictor of English breast cancer trends." [16]  Unlike the sample-based research cited by the RCOG, Carroll used national historic data from England and Wales that recorded nearly every abortion and breast cancer.

"It's easy for scientists to manipulate statistical evidence," declared Mrs. Malec.  "However, they can't manipulate biological and experimental evidence."

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.

References:
1. Evidence-based Guideline #7 (2000) RCOG Press, pp. 29-30.
2. Colditz G. Relationship Between Estrogen Levels, Use of Hormone Replacement Therapy and Breast Cancer. J Natl Cancer lnst (1998) 90:814-823.
3. Beral V. Breast cancer and breastfeeding: collaborative re-analysis of individual data from 47 epidemiological studies in 30 countries, including 50,302 women with breast cancer and 96,973 women without the disease. Lancet 2002;360:187-195.
4. "Women's choice advocate immortalised in new book," RCOG press release,  June 9, 2004.
5. Goldacre MJ, Kurina LM, Seagroatt V, Yeaates. Abortion and breast cancer: a case-control record linkage study. J Epidemiol Community Health 2001;55:336-337.
6. Erlandsson G, Montgomery S, Cnattingius S, et al. Abortions and breast cancer: Record-based case-control study. Int J Cancer 2002;103:676-679.
7. 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.
8. Ye Z, Gao DL, Qin Q, Ray RM, Thomas DB. Breast cancer in relation to induced abortions in a cohort of Chinese women. Br J Cancer 2002;87:977-981.
9. MacMahon, B, Cole P, Lin TM, Lowe CR, Mirra AP, Ravnihar B, Salber EJ, Valaoras VG, Yuasa S. Age at First Birth and Breast Cancer Risk. Bull WHO 1970;43:209-221.
10. Trichopoulos D, Hsieh C, MacMahon B, et al. Age at any birth and breast cancer risk. Int J Cancer 1983;31:701-704.
11. 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.
12. Russo J, Rivera R, Russo IH. Influence of Age and Parity on the Development of the Human Breast. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 1992;23:211-218.
13. Russo J, Russo IH. Susceptibility of the mammary gland to carcinogenesis. Am J Pathol 1980;100: 497-512.
14. Russo J, Yun-Fu Hu Xiaoqi Yang, Russo I. Chapter 1.  Developmental Cellular and Molecular Basis of Human Breast Cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 2000; 27:17-37.
15. Epidemiological research reporting risk elevations for women who choose abortion can be found on the "Research" page at <www.AbortionBreastCancer.com>.
16. Carroll P. Trends and Risk Factors in English Breast Cancer. British Journal of Cancer 2004;91 (Suppl. 1):S24.