News Items

British Physician, Thomas Stuttaford, Does About-Face on Abortion-Breast Cancer Link

June 19, 2001

It was only last year in an August 14, 2000 issue of The Times that Thomas Stuttaford, M.D. authored an article entitled, “Can Abortions Be Linked to Breast Cancer?” In this article, Dr. Stuttaford reassured British women that abortion is a safe procedure. He declared that, “As yet there is no evidence of a causative link between abortion and breast cancer,” and he incorrectly added that “none has been claimed by Professor (Joel) Brind.”

Less than a year later, on May 17, 2001 Stuttaford authored another article for The Times in which he revealed that he had reversed his position on the abortion-breast cancer research. In an article entitled “Fresh Line of Attack,” he wrote that:

“Breast cancer is diagnosed in 33,000 women in the U.K. each year; of these, an unusually high proportion had an abortion before eventually starting a family. Such women are up to four times more likely to develop breast cancer.

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer is pleased to announce that on December 10, 1999 it joined hands with Endeavour Forum, located in Toorak, Victoria, Australia. Babette Francis, National and Overseas Coordinator for Endeavour Forum, met with the coalition’s leaders at a hotel near O’Hare International Airport. Babette and her husband, Charles, have been spreading the word about the abortion-breast cancer link for a number of years. Charles Francis, a personal injury attorney, won a lawsuit in 1999 against a general practitioner who referred his client for an abortion, as well as the abortion clinic, the physician who performed the abortion and the clinic counselor. His client claimed that she suffered Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder as a result of the abortion and that she had not been counseled properly before the abortion.

British Study: Half of Expected Breast Cancer Cases "Attributable to Abortion"

London, England: British researchers from the Populations and Pensions Research Institution, an independent group of statisticians, reported that women who procure abortions double their risks of breast cancer, said The Age (England) on December 4, 2001. 

The incidences of breast cancer and abortion in Finland, Sweden and Great Britain were examined by the statisticians who concluded that the increasing frequency of the disease was directly related to a climb in the abortion rates. 

The statisticians determined that as many as one half of the cases of breast cancer in England and Wales between 1997 and 2023 “will be attributable to abortion.” Patrick Carroll, a statistician and author, revealed that breast cancer rates in England will surge from 35,110 in 1997 to 77,000 in 2023. This dramatic increase will occur because of the large number of abortions performed before first full term pregnancy. 

Dear Friends:

Researcher Brent Rooney recently brought to our attention a letter he sent to the Israeli Medical Association Journal. His letter, "Pregnancy-associated breast cancer and the Nuremberg Code," was published in January 2009. We are sharing that letter with you (below). 

First, an explanation is in order. Our readers may find the term, "pregnancy-associated breast cancer," confusing because childbearing is known to have a protective effect against breast cancer. Medical texts have long acknowledged that a first full term pregnancy (FFTP), especially an early FFTP before age 24, substantially decreases the long-term risk of breast cancer. The younger the woman is when she has her FFTP, the lower her breast cancer risk is. Having an early FFTP before age 24 is the single most important thing a woman can do to reduce her breast cancer risk.

July 2, 2013

Association of American Physicians and Surgeons

Coalition Letter Against U.S. Senate Bill 959

THOSE WISHING TO SIGN THE LETTER SHOULD CONTACT ANDY SCHLAFLY, Esq., General Counsel for the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, by JULY 7, 2013 at aschlafly [at] aol.com (subject: Sign%20letter%20against%20S.%20959) ( ).

As advocates for patients, including the unborn, we oppose U.S. Senate Bill S.959 due to its very harmful impact on the ability of pregnant women to obtain affordable medication that protects against premature birth.  We also oppose S.959 for how it would vastly expand the power of the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) to write new regulations, which would likely include new interference by the FDA with adult stem cell treatments.