Press Releases

2nd Breast Cancer Scandal: National Cancer Institute Researcher Louise Brinton Reverses Position, Finally Admits Abortion Raises Breast Cancer Risk in Study that Fingers Oral Contraceptives as a Probable Cause of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer 

Study is 9 months old, but still no warnings from cancer establishment

Less than two months since the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force issued new guidelines recommending against routine mammograms for women in their forties, a second breast cancer scandal involving a U.S. government panel of experts has come to light which has implications for healthcare reform.

Press Release
Contact: Karen Malec
For Immediate Release
Date: January 20, 2003 

Study Says Tell Women about Research Exploring Abortion-Breast Cancer Link; Study Offered as CME Course to Ob/Gyns 30 years after Roe v. Wade 

A recent study examining a variety of physical and psychological consequences associated with abortion calls for physicians to inform women about a breast cancer risk known to scientists for 33 years [1] (the delayed first term pregnancy effect) and about the existence of research examining abortion as an independent risk factor for breast cancer.  

Angela Lanfranchi, M.D., F.A.C.S.
515 Church St., Suite 1
Bound Brook, New Jersey 08805
732/356-0770
Diplomat of the American Board of Surgery
Fellow of American College of Surgeons

Statement to the Press
Population Research Institute Conference
Santa Clara, California
April 5, 2002

Although I observed in my own practice in the early 1990s an inordinate number of 30 year olds with breast cancer who had no family history, but had abortions as teenagers, it wasn’t until 1999 that I informed my patients of this risk. That was when a Harvard professor in charge of risk assessment at a well known Boston clinic told me she knew abortion was a risk factor for breast cancer and considered it in the evaluation of her patients. Although she chose not to publicly speak about this issue, she encouraged me to do so.

"[A]fter the Hiroshima atomic bomb exposed women to high doses of radiation, it was young, nulliparous (childless) women who later developed breast cancer while the older parous (with children) women did not." Angela Lanfranchi, MD, Clinical Assistant Professor of Surgery, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School; and President, Breast Cancer Prevention Institute.

Study: Pregnancy Outcomes Influence Breast Cancer Risk

A paper published this week in the journal, The Linacre Quarterly, by Angela Lanfranchi, MD shows how different pregnancy outcomes influence breast cancer risk. She explains, in simple terms, the biological reasons for each risk. [1] Citing 52 years of research, she said the evidence shows that:

Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer Applauds Susan G. Komen for the Cure for Halting Grants to Planned Parenthood, But Remains Its Critic for Cooperating in Abortion-Breast Cancer Cover-up and Downplaying the Risk of the Birth Control Pill

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer vigorously applauds the breast cancer organization, Susan G. Komen for the Cure, for discontinuing its grants to Planned Parenthood (PP).

"Komen's decision is a giant step in the right direction to protect women's lives," said Karen Malec, president of the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer. On the other hand, our group will remain as Komen's critic as long as it continues to work against its own mission to eradicate breast cancer. Personally, I will not donate to Komen while it is still cooperating in the cover-up of the abortion-breast cancer link and downplaying the risk of using oral contraceptives (OCs).

Indian Study: Abortion Increases Breast Cancer Risk Six-Fold

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer reports on a study published in the Indian Journal of Community Medicine (May, 2013) whose authors found a 6.38-fold greater risk of breast cancer among women with histories of induced abortion. [1] The study, led by Ramachandra Kamath, MD (Department of Public Health, Manipal University), found induced abortion was the most important risk factor.

“With only 94 cases and 94 controls, the study was way too small for a significant risk of the order of 1.5-fold to even show up,” explained Professor Joel Brind (Baruch College, City University of New York). “Yet induced abortion did show up as the strongest risk factor (and right on the border of statistical significance) because the risk increase was so high at 6.38-fold.”

School Board's Decision in Willamina, Oregon Will Put Students at Risk for Three Cancers

In 2005, World Health Organization (WHO) scientists assigned estrogen plus progestin (combined) hormonal contraceptives (the pill) and combined hormone replacement therapy (HRT) the highest level of carcinogenicity - Group 1. [1] 

"But that's not stopping the Willamina High school board (Willamina, Oregon)," said Karen Malec, president of the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer.  "According to a news report last week, the school board authorized a nurse practitioner to prescribe the pill for teens during the most cancer-susceptible time of their lives (before first full term pregnancy)." [2] 

WHO scientists said combined hormonal contraceptives (HCs) increase women's risks for cancers of the breast, cervix and liver, and they decrease the risks of ovarian and endometrial cancers.

"More than twice as many American women die every year from the first three cancers than the last two, but some health officials foolishly tell women to take a carcinogen - the pill - to prevent cancer!" said Malec.

Women's Group Warns about Von Eschenbach's Appointment as Acting FDA Commissioner

"Ladies, take cover! Andrew Von Eschenbach was named acting commissioner of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on Friday," warned Karen Malec, president of the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer. "The FDA had a commissioner who could resist political pressure. His abrupt resignation after two months on the job creates the impression that the Bush Administration couldn't take the heat from the abortion and the pharmaceutical industries. The industries want Plan B (morning-after pill) made available for over-the-counter sales."

"Von Eschenbach is no friend of women," warned Malec, a cancer survivor.  "He's a friend of the anti-woman abortion and pharmaceutical industries."

Plan B is a high dose of oral contraceptives.  The World Health Organization recognizes combined oral contraceptives as carcinogenic. [1] Oral contraceptives contain steroidal estrogens, which the U.S. Department of Health and Services recognizes as a carcinogen. [2]

Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer Chastises the U.K.'s Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists for Deceiving Women About Abortion-Breast Cancer Link

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer chastised the U.K.'s abortionists at the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (RCOG) today for publishing a statement in its revised guidelines entitled, "The care of women seeking induced abortion," which falsely claims "induced abortion is not associated with an increase in breast cancer risk." [1]

"The RCOG's statement is shameful, unethical, and totally self-serving. It has more to do with protecting abortionists from massive medical malpractice lawsuits and absolutely nothing to do with scientific evidence," said Karen Malec, president of the Coalition. "The RCOG's abortionists are following the tobacco industry's playbook."

Planned Parenthood’s Cancer War on Women Continues 40 Years After U.S. Supreme Court Made Induced Abortion Legally Accessible Throughout Pregnancy

Planned Parenthood reported in its 2008 tax returns that its purpose is "[a]chieving, through informed individual choice, a U.S. population of stable size in an optimum environment; in stimulating and sponsoring relevant biomedical, socio-economic, and demographic research." [1]

In other words, its purpose is to assist the U.S. government in achieving its population control objectives. Its last two annual reports show it received over a billion dollars in taxpayer money between June 2010 and June 2012. [2]

Increased childbearing, starting before age 25, has long been known to provide significant protection against breast cancer. But, Planned Parenthood is waging a cancer war on women through its sales of induced abortions, contraceptives, abortifacients, injections, vaginal rings, skin patches, implants, IUDs and sterilizations.

Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer
Press Release
Contact: Karen Malec, 847-421-4000
Date: June 11, 2012

Study: Recent Depo Provera Use Increases Invasive Breast Cancer Risk 2.2-fold When Used 12 Months or More

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer notes a study of 1,028 women ages 20-44 in the April 15, 2012 issue of Cancer Research found that recent users of depo provera (DMPA) for 12 months or more had a statistically significant 2.2-fold increased risk of developing invasive breast cancer. [1] The authors, Christopher Li and his team (including Janet Daling) at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center called it the “first large scale U.S. study” examining the link between DMPA and breast cancer. They concluded it’s the fifth study “conducted over a diverse group of countries that have observed that recent DMPA use is associated with a 1.5- to 2.3-fold increased risk of breast cancer.” [2]

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer reported that British researcher Patrick Carroll presented his research on abortion as the "best predictor of British breast cancer trends" at a conference in Paris sponsored by the National Institute for Demographic Studies on September 7, 2005. Carroll is director of the London-based Pensions and Population Research Institute.  The conference was attended by statisticians and epidemiologists.

Carroll provided forecasts of the increased incidence of breast cancers to be expected in Great Britain in the next 25 years.   He reported three trends:

1. British upper class women are more likely to develop breast cancer and to die of the disease than are lower class women. Upper class women are more likely to delay the birth of a first child and to abort before the birth of a first child. These are highly carcinogenic abortions.

Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer Challenges LiveScience.com Columnist to Publicly Debate Abortion-Cancer Link

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer notes that Christopher Wanjek of LiveScience.com labeled the abortion-breast cancer link as a "persistent myth."

"We issue four challenges to Wanjek," declared Karen Malec, president of the Coalition. "First, act like a real scientific expert by participating in a public debate with our experts.

"Second, disprove the biological basis for the link. No scientist has ever refuted it.

"Third, write a letter to the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons explaining why Professor Joel Brind's conclusions in 2005 were erroneous.  [1]  No expert has ever done so.

"Brind demonstrated that the studies that abortion enthusiasts use to discredit the link are seriously flawed and cannot be used to discredit the larger body of research supporting the link.

"Fourth, write a second letter to that journal explaining why Patrick Carroll's new study published last week is erroneous.  Carroll showed that abortion is the 'best predictor' of breast cancer. [2]

WOMEN'S GROUP APPLAUDS BRITISH MP's ABORTION-CANCER PROBE / CRITICIZES DR. STUART DONNAN's HYPOCRISY

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer welcomes the efforts of British MP Claire Curtis-Thomas and her colleagues who asked doctors to examine women's reproductive histories and the abortion-breast cancer (ABC) link within their patient populations.  The coalition condemns the efforts of Manchester University Professor Stuart Donnan to disabuse women of the truth that abortion raises breast cancer risk.  Donnan misled the BBC by saying "some studies" reported risk elevations, but others show abortion reduces risk. [1]

"There is no biological evidence and no plausible biological explanation supporting a risk reduction," said Karen Malec, the coalition's president.  "Scientists don't rely solely on epidemiological research when determining a cause and effect relationship.  Such research merely establishes a statistical association. Donnan should bone up on the basics of science."

2nd Breast Cancer Scandal: National Cancer Institute Researcher Louise Brinton Reverses Position, Finally Admits Abortion Raises Breast Cancer Risk in Study that Fingers Oral Contraceptives as a Probable Cause of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer 

... still no warnings from cancer establishment

Less than two months since the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force issued new guidelines recommending against routine mammograms for women in their forties, a second breast cancer scandal involving a U.S. government panel of experts has come to light which has implications for healthcare reform.

An April 2009 study by Jessica Dolle et al. of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center examining the relationship between oral contraceptives (OCs) and triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) in women under age 45 contained an admission from U.S. National Cancer Institute (NCI) researcher Louise Brinton and her colleagues (including Janet Daling) that abortion raises breast cancer risk by 40%. [1]

Congressional Candidate Doug LaMalfa Was Right the First Time: Abortion Raises Breast Cancer Risk

Doug LaMalfa, a candidate for California’s first Congressional district, was right when he said on Monday, September 10, 2012 that women who have abortions are more likely to get cancer. [1] Unfortunately, LaMalfa retracted his statement on Tuesday, saying current research doesn’t support it. He cited the U.S. National Cancer Institute (NCI) and the American Cancer Society.

“LaMalfa should ask NCI branch chief Dr. Louise Brinton why her name is on a 2009 study that concluded induced abortion and oral contraceptives (the birth control pill) are risk factors for breast cancer,” suggested Karen Malec, president of the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer. [2]

Press Misses Huge Story about National Academies of Science Recognition of Abortion-Premature Birth Link, Says Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer

Last week, the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer published a press release noting that the Institute of Medicine (IOM), an organization of the National Academies of Science, has listed "prior first trimester abortion" as a risk factor for subsequent premature birth. [1,2]  Leading radio networks carried the story, but not the mainstream print press.

It is understandable that journalists who originally covered the IOM's report on premature births on July 13 might have missed the inclusion of abortion as an "immutable medical risk factor" for premature birth.  The information was buried in a table on page 519 of the report and omitted in the IOM's press release. [2,3] 

Nevertheless, what will women think if the press never reports this risk of abortion?  The information impacts many women, children and doctors.  Approximately 1.29 million abortions were performed in the U.S. in 2002. [4]

Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer
Press Release
Date: December 2, 2008

MEDICAL MALPRACTICE EXPLAINS HIGH PREMATURE BIRTH RATE AMONG BLACK AMERICANS, REPORT RESEARCHERS: "ONLY FULL TERM PREGNANCIES REDUCE MOTHERS' BREAST CANCER RISK"

A new article in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons says African American women are being disproportionately exposed to an unsafe surgical procedure that is a "probable cause" of the high preterm birth rate among blacks. [1]

The authors, Brent Rooney and his colleagues, cited numerous studies, the Institute of Medicine, and other authorities acknowledging the abortion-preterm birth (APB) link.  

Black Americans are three times more likely to have an early preterm birth (EPB) before 32 weeks gestation and four times more likely to have an extremely preterm birth (XPB) before 28 weeks gestation in comparison with non-black Americans. The risk of cerebral palsy for XPB babies is 129 times greater than that of full-term infants.  Blacks represent 12.5% of American females; but 38.2% of all abortions are committed on blacks.

Renowned Surgeon Presents Evidence of Abortion/Breast Cancer Link

Hoffman Estates, Illinois - Angela Lanfranchi, MD, FACS, Clinical Assistant, and Professor of Surgery at the Robert Wood Johnson Medical Center in Piscataway, New Jersey, will present two public seminars on breast cancer entitled "The Impact of Reproductive Choices and the Risk of Breast Cancer" :

Thursday, November 2, 2006       11:30 a.m. until 1:30 p.m.
James R. Thompson Center, 100 W. Randolph St, Rm 503, 16th Fl, Chicago;

Friday, November 3, 2006         12:30 p.m. to 1:30 p.m.
University of Illinois Medical School, 1853 W. Polk St., Rm 221 CMW, Chicago

Childbearing Protects Women from Breast Cancer Only When Mothers Deliver at 32 Weeks Gestation or Later

Yesterday, journalists reported that scientists at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center speculated on the reasons why childbearing protects women from breast cancer. They discussed a paper published in the journal Cancer Research. [1] 

Researchers reportedly told journalists that the presence of fetal cells in the mother's blood "may also benefit mothers by putting the immune system on alert for malignant cells to destroy." [2]

Their speculation fails Occam's Razor, a fundamental scientific principle that says any hypothesis can be dismissed if it is unnecessary to explain the phenomenon.  Irma and Jose Russo of Fox Chase Cancer Center showed many years ago why a full term pregnancy is protective.  [3,4]

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer applauds the successful prosecution of a lawsuit against an abortion clinic and a physician for performing an abortion on a 15-year-old girl without informing her of the psychological risks and the increased risk of breast cancer.  It is the second abortion-cancer lawsuit to be successfully prosecuted in the U.S. and the first case to obtain a judgment.

All Women's Health Services, a clinic in Portland, Oregon, made an offer of judgment last year. This allows the plaintiff to win the lawsuit without a trial. The judge signed the agreement on January 24, 2005. The amount of the judgment is confidential.

The teenaged plaintiff has a family history of breast cancer and indicated a history of cancer on the clinic intake forms.  According to research in 1994 by Janet Daling and her colleagues at Seattle's Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, teenagers with a family history of the disease who procure abortions before age 18 have an incalculably high breast cancer risk.

Abortions that occur before the birth of a first child are the most carcinogenic, a finding supported by biological and epidemiological evidence.

Bangladesh Study: Induced Abortion Raises Breast Cancer Risk By More Than 20-Fold!

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer reported today on a Bangladesh study published in the Journal of Dhaka Medical College on risk factors for breast cancer, led by Dr. Suraiya Jabeen. The authors found a statistically significant 20.62-fold increased risk among women with abortion histories - by far the highest risk elevation reported among 73 published abortion-breast cancer studies. [1,2]

Professor Joel Brind (Baruch College, City University of New York) said the reason why the risk elevation is so high is because it’s “a measure of RELATIVE risk.” Observing that women in Bangladesh have very traditional childbearing patterns that reduce breast cancer risk, he explained:

Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer Challenges CBS News, Health.com to Debate Abortion-Breast Cancer Link

CBS News and Health.com have damaged their credibility by publishing identical statements that falsely claim the abortion-breast cancer (ABC) link is a myth. Therefore, the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer challenges both organizations to debate the ABC link.

"We expect CBS News and Health.com to duck the challenge, just as other organizations have whose leaders would rather see women die of breast cancer than expose the truth that abortion is not safe," said Karen Malec, president of the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer. "After behaving like snipers, they cut and run. They should be ashamed of themselves.

"Think," demanded Malec of CBS News and Health.com. "If medical texts and medical authorities say childbearing reduces breast cancer risk, then who has the greater risk - the woman who aborts or the woman who has a baby?"

The websites for both CBS News and Health.com falsely asserted that:

Scientist: Abortion Caused Over 300,000 Additional Breast Cancer Deaths Since Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade Decision / Experts privately acknowledge abortion-breast cancer link, but say it's too political to discuss publicly

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer announced that three experts will be available for interviews to discuss the impact of the abortion-breast cancer (ABC) link on the Roe v. Wade generation during the month of January. Their contact information and their quotes are available below.

Karen Malec, the Coalition's president, said,

"During the last 21 months, four epidemiological studies and one review reported an ABC link. [1-5] One study included National Cancer Institute branch chief Louise Brinton as co-author. [3] We count nearly 50 published epidemiological studies since 1957 reporting a link. Biological and experimental studies also support it.

"Experts proved in medical journals that nearly all of the roughly 20 studies denying the link are seriously flawed (fraudulent). Like the tobacco-cancer cover-up, these are used to snow women into believing abortion is safe." [6-16]

Scientific Review of 72 Epidemiological Studies, Biological Evidence Supports Abortion-Breast Cancer Link

A scientific review conducted by Angela Lanfranchi, MD and Patrick Fagan, Ph.D. found that support for an abortion-breast cancer (ABC) link exists in current knowledge of breast physiology (as it is presented in standard medical texts), as well as epidemiological and experimental research. The review, published in Issues in Law and Medicine, is entitled, “Breast cancer and induced abortion: A comprehensive review of breast development and pathophysiology, the epidemiologic literature, and proposal for creation of databanks to elucidate all breast cancer risk factors.”[1] Lanfranchi is Clinical Assistant Professor of Surgery at the Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School. Fagan is the Director of the Marriage and Religion Research Institute.

Among 72 epidemiological studies they reviewed, the authors explained:

Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer
Press Release
Date: July 5, 2011

Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer Condemns Indiana University Simon Cancer Center (IUSCC), Indiana Legislators for Depriving Women of the Right to Know about the Abortion-Breast Cancer Link

The Indianapolis Star reported that Indiana state legislators were (falsely) persuaded by an oncologist from Indiana University Simon Cancer Center that abortion doesn't increase breast cancer risk. [1] Unfortunately, that testimony persuaded legislators to remove language from a bill, HB 1210, that would have required abortionists to inform women about the abortion-breast cancer link.

"Perhaps oncologists at the Cancer Center don't read standard medical texts," declared Karen Malec, president of the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer. "Medical texts have long recognized that increased childbearing, especially starting before age 24, dramatically reduces risk.

Coalition Berates American Cancer Society for Withholding Cancer Evidence

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer notes an American Cancer Society report showing that cancer deaths declined slightly in 2003 and 2004. [1] 

Karen Malec, president of the Coalition, commented, "There would be fewer cancer cases and deaths if women had been told the truth in the 1980s when conclusive evidence became available showing that breast cancer is associated with combined (estrogen plus progestin) hormone replacement therapy [2], combined oral contraceptives [3,4,5,6], and abortion." [7,8,9,10,11,12]

The Society expects 40,460 female deaths due to breast cancer and 240,510 total breast cancer cases for 2007.

The Society misleads women about abortion-breast cancer research.  Its website says, "Several studies have provided very strong data that induced abortions have no overall effect on the risk of breast cancer." [13] 

Oxford Scientists Reported Risk of Using Hormone Replacement Therapy in 1987 / "Why Weren't Women Told?", asks Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer

In 1987, Oxford University scientists authored a paper for the British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology demonstrating the risk of using hormone replacement therapy (HRT), said the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer. [1]  Their cohort study of 4,544 women reported a significant 59% increase in risk among those who used HRT (mean duration of use 67 months). Forty-three percent used combined HRT containing estrogen and progestin.

At the San Antonio Breast Cancer Conference, Peter Ravdin and his colleagues reported a 7% drop in breast cancer cases primarily among women over age 50 for the year 2003.  They attributed it to a decline in HRT use. [2]

"Why weren't women told in 1987 about the risk of using HRT?" asked Karen Malec, president of the Coalition.  "Breast cancer rates would have declined sooner." 

Cancer authorities didn't warn women about HRT risks until 2002 when the Women's Health Initiative study reported that its use increases the risks of breast cancer, heart attack and strokes. [3]

COALITION ON ABORTION/BREAST CANCER CHALLENGES SCIENCE BLOGS BLOGGERS TO ACT LIKE GENUINE EXPERTS

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer challenges Science Blog bloggers Mark C. Chu-Carr and "Orac" (a pseudonym) to behave like the real experts they claim to be.

"Write to the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons using your real names," said Karen Malec, president of the Coalition. "Explain your objections to the paper by Patrick Carroll which shows that abortion is the "best predictor of breast cancer." [1]

"If you have a better model with better predictors than abortion, then please tell us what it is.  While you're at it, perhaps you can do what no other expert has ever attempted to do - explain why the abortion-breast cancer (ABC) link is not biologically plausible."

Displeased with Dennis Byrne's article in the Chicago Tribune that reported Carroll's findings on Monday, Chu-Carr and "Orac" labeled the ABC link a "myth," Mr. Byrne's article "idiotic," and the medical journal "terrible."  [2,3,4]

Women's Group Disgusted by Mayo Clinic's Misinformation about Abortion-Cancer Link

"Shame on Mayo Clinic for misinforming women about the abortion-breast cancer (ABC) link!" declared Karen Malec, president of the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer.  "Women's lives are more important than Mayo's federal funding!"

Mayo's website says, "There's no credible evidence of a link between induced abortion and breast cancer, according to the National Cancer Institute." [1]  Mayo's staff gave this response to a Wisconsin woman who asked if there was a relationship between abortion and the disease.

Mayo Clinic's cancer research program receives federal funding and must, therefore, toe Big Brother's party line by denying an ABC link.  Malec explained:

"The federal government funds most of the cancer research in the U.S. through its agency, the U.S. National Cancer Institute (NCI).  The NCI concealed the existence of extensive research dating from 1957 and now expects women to believe there is no link. 

Women's Group Condemns Removal of Abortion-Cancer Warning by Louisiana Health Officials

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer condemns a decision by Louisiana health officials last week to remove a warning from the department's website informing women about the relationship between abortion and breast cancer.

Health department officials were intimidated by inquiries from an Associated Press (AP) reporter into the state's "Woman's Right to Know" booklet.  A report from the AP inaccurately claimed women were being "wrongly warned" about an abortion-breast cancer link. [1]

The AP story said the National Cancer Institute and a Lancet review found no link. [2] However, the AP omitted important facts. Five medical groups recognized abortion as a cause of breast cancer at the time of the AP report. [3] A sixth group, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, issued a statement in 2003 calling on doctors to warn women of a "highly plausible" link.

British Researcher to Report Abortion-Cancer Findings at American Statistical Association Meeting on Wednesday

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer calls attention to research on the abortion-breast cancer link that will be presented on Wednesday, August 10 by British researcher Patrick Carroll at the Joint Statistical Meetings at the Minneapolis Convention Center - the largest gathering of statisticians in North America.

Carroll directs the Pensions and Population Research Institute in London. His research showed that abortion is the best predictor of three British breast cancer trends:

Trend #1: Upper class women are the most likely to develop breast cancer and die of the disease. For other cancers, lower social classes experience higher incidence and mortality rates. Abortion before a first birth (the most carcinogenic abortion) and delayed first birth among upper class women provide the best explanations for this trend.

Federal Appeals Court Slaps Down ObamaCare Mandate, Says World Health Organization Classified the Birth Control Pill as Cancer-Causing

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer vigorously applauds a decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in a lawsuit filed by two business owners who have religious objections to being forced by ObamaCare to provide employees with insurance coverage for abortion-inducing drugs, contraceptive steroids and sterilizations. In the case, Francis Gilardi, et al. vs. U.S. Health and Human Services, et al., the court agreed to enjoin (stop) the government’s mandate as to the Gilardi’s. [1]

Karen Malec, president of the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer, said, “We’re encouraged the court cited the amicus brief [2] filed by Bioethics Defense Fund on behalf of our organization, the Polycarp Research Institute and the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute. As stated in the decision:

Latest Danish Study’s Reported Findings on Abortion-Breast Cancer Link Are Hyperinflated

Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer Challenges Danish Researchers to Study the Whole Group, Use Record-Linkage Database

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer commented on a Danish study led by Christina  Braüner entitled, “Induced abortion and breast cancer among parous women: A Danish cohort study.”  [1]

Braüner’s team studied a very limited segment of the population and misrepresented their findings. They stated they “did not find evidence of an adverse effect of induced abortion on breast cancer risk in parous (childbearing) older women overall....” But they didn’t look at parous women overall. They underestimated the risk of abortion by recruiting only women ages 50-65 and excluding all women already diagnosed with cancer. Pre-menopausal women were excluded, as were childless women, although there was no legitimate justification for it.

Illinois Bill, "Reproductive and Health Access Act," Would Increase Breast Cancer, Premature Birth Rates, Reports Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer announced today its opposition to the euphemistically-named Illinois bill, "Reproductive and Health Access Act," HB 6205. The women's group has published a position paper for legislators and interested citizens.

"Contrary to what the bill's title says, it will significantly damage the health of women and their children in subsequent pregnancies," declared Karen Malec, president of the Coalition. "It is indisputable that an expansion of abortion in Illinois will lead to increased rates of breast cancer and premature births. 

"Medical texts report that increased childbearing, starting at a younger age, and increased breastfeeding sharply reduce breast cancer risk. Childbearing helps protect women from breast cancer. Abortion results in the loss of that protective effect. Doctors are ethically obligated to inform pregnant women that abortion will leave them with a higher breast cancer risk than would childbearing.

IDEOLOGY TRUMPS SCIENCE AGAIN, SAYS COALITION ON ABORTION/BREAST CANCER

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer denounces two flawed studies on the risks of oral contraceptives (OC's) and cites it as one more example of ideology trumping science. The authors, whose research is a part of the Women's Health Initiative, erroneously claimed their findings showed that OC's reduce the risk of heart disease and do not raise breast cancer risk.  Federal officials announced this week that a statistical reanalysis shows the heart findings to be flawed and the breast cancer findings suspect.

Karen Malec, president of the coalition, said "This sorry incident is just another example of government-funded junk science that serves a pro-birth control and pro-abortion agenda. The credibility of federally funded research is already at an all-time low for several reasons.  Government scientists are creating conflicts of interests by moonlighting as pharmaceutical industry scientists.  Other experts have accused the U.S. National Cancer Institute of covering up an abortion-breast cancer link for a half-century.

Abortion-Breast Cancer Cover-up to be Discussed at Association of American Physicians and Surgeons 60th Meeting

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer announced today that its president, Karen Malec, will speak about the government's cover-up of the abortion-breast cancer (ABC) link at the 60th Meeting of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) on September 19, 2003. Her speech, "Perversion of Science by Politics: Case Study-Informed Consent," will take place at 11:00 a.m. at Marriott's Grand Resort in Point Clear, Alabama.

Mrs. Malec's article for the AAPS was published in the summer issue of the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons and entitled, "The Abortion-Breast Cancer Link: How Politics Trumped Science and Informed Consent." [1]

The AAPS' motto, "omnia pro aegroto," means "all for the patient." The group advocates for patients' rights.

WOMEN'S GROUP DENOUNCES MINNESOTA GOVERNOR'S DECISION TO MINIMIZE ABORTION-BREAST CANCER FINDINGS

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer condemns Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty's decision to revise wording about the abortion-breast cancer (ABC) link in a handbook provided by the state's Health Department.  The coalition deplores efforts by Planned Parenthood and the Minnesota Medical Association (MMA) to pressure Pawlenty to conceal the overwhelming evidence supporting abortion as a risk factor for breast cancer.

"These groups are following the tobacco industry's playbook," said Karen Malec, president of the coalition.  "Human life is of no importance to them.   They care only for one thing - abortion industry profits.  They're petrified because the nation's first ABC malpractice lawsuit was settled late last year."

The MMA falsely told Pawlenty that agreement exists in the medical community that abortion doesn't increase risk.  In fact, six medical groups recognize the significance of the research. [1]

Study: Turkish Women with Abortions Have Statistically Significant 66% Increase in Breast Cancer Risk / Researchers Likely Underestimated the Risk, Reports Scientist

"I guess they didn't get the 'memo' from the U.S. National Cancer Institute (NCI), which declared back in 2003 that the non-existence of the ABC (abortion-breast cancer) link had been 'established'"! - Professor Joel Brind, Breast Cancer Prevention Institute

A retrospective study conducted by Dr. Vahit Ozmen and his colleagues at the Istanbul Medical Faculty and Magee-Women's hospital reported a statistically significant 66% increase in breast cancer risk among women who'd had any abortions.

According to Joel Brind, professor of endocrinology at Baruch College, City University of New York and a director at the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute, Ozmen's team most likely underestimated the breast cancer risk associated with abortion because of a flaw known as "selection bias."

Medical Journal: Flawed Study Underestimated Breast Cancer Risk of Abortion

Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer Urges Journalists to Hold Researchers' Feet to the Fire

An article published on Friday in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons [1] identifies serious flaws in a recent study on the abortion-breast cancer link by Karin Michels and her colleagues at Harvard.  [http://www.jpands.org/vol12no2/brind.pdf]

Michels et al. reported a 1.01 hazard ratio for women who had one or more abortions; and they focused exclusively on only one of two breast cancer risks of abortion - the debated risk (the independent link), not the recognized risk (loss of the protective effect of childbearing). [2] 

The article by Professor Joel Brind of the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute said that the Michels team included flaws in their study, which caused an underestimation of the risk of abortion, such as:

1) Insufficient follow-up time between exposure to abortion and the development of breast cancer;