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.

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:

Women's Group Educates State Lawmakers about Abortion-Breast Cancer Link

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer notes that Georgia and other states are considering informed consent legislation that would require state health departments and/or doctors to tell women about the breast cancer risks of abortion.

Three years ago, a widely reported scientific review of 47 studies in 30 countries reported that breast cancer rates in developed nations could be cut by over 50% if women would have more children and breastfeed them longer. [1]

Experts agree that increased childbearing, starting before age 24, provides the best way to prevent breast cancer. Biological evidence shows that a third trimester process in pregnancy provides the only mechanism for a woman to mature her breast tissue into cancer-resistant tissue. [2]

Common sense says you can't have more children and breastfeed them if you also abort your pregnancies.

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.

Medical Journal Shows How to Reduce Rates of Breast Cancer, Premature Birth

Two letters published this month in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons show how the exceptionally high rates of breast cancer and premature birth can be reduced in the U.S. [1,2]

The first letter by Brent Rooney and William Johnston reports that Poland dramatically reduced its rates of premature birth, maternal mortality and infant mortality within a few years after its abortion rate declined by 98% between 1989 and 1993 (as a result of the passage of restrictive abortion laws).  The authors predict that U.S. rates of premature birth and breast cancer will decline if a similar decline in the abortion rate takes place.

The authors said no published animal studies exist that prove the safety of vacuum aspiration (VA) abortion.  Noting that that makes abortion on women medically unethical, the authors wrote, "Thus, as of 2007, VA is an unproven experimental procedure."

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]

Press Release
Contact: Karen Malec
For Immediate Release
Date: November 3, 2003

MEDICAL GROUP FAVORS DISCLOSURE OF ABORTION-BREAST CANCER LINK

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer cheered news that the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) favors disclosing to patients a "highly plausible" relationship between abortion and increased risk of breast cancer.  AAPS executive director Jane Orient, MD said:

"The AAPS believes that patients have the right to give or withhold fully informed consent before undergoing medical treatment. This includes notification of potential adverse effects. While there is a difference of medical opinion concerning the abortion-breast cancer link, there is a considerable volume of evidence supporting this link, which is, moreover, highly plausible. We believe that a reasonable person would want to be informed of the existence of this evidence before making her decision."

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.

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.

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:

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.

Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists' Drafted Guidelines on Abortion Cover Up Abortion-Breast Cancer Link, Say Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer, Researchers

Putting their wallets ahead of their patients' health much like tobacco executives, abortionists at the United Kingdom's Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) have prepared preliminary, new guidelines on The Care of Women Requesting Induced Abortion that say, "Women should be informed that induced abortion is not associated with an increase in breast cancer." [1]

"Do they read standard medical texts at the RCOG?" asked Karen Malec, president of the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer. "Increased childbearing, starting at a younger age, and increased duration of breastfeeding sharply reduce breast cancer risk. The woman choosing abortion has a greater risk than the one choosing to give birth.

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.

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.”

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.

Image

Scientists agree that the later a woman delays a first full term pregnancy, the greater her breast cancer risk is.

We Are Woman Rally, ObamaCare Mandate Represent War on Women’s Health

The group, Think Progress (funded by billionaire atheist George Soros) is organizing the We Are Woman Rally which is set to take place in Washington D.C. on August 18, 2012. Its leaders claim to work for women’s rights, but by promoting access to induced abortion and use of hormonal steroids (i.e. the birth control pill and Depo Provera birth control), they are sickening women.

They would have us believe the absurdity that those who dare to oppose Planned Parenthood’s greed and the population control agenda of the U.S. government and some billionaires are the ones waging a war on women.

Karen Malec, president of the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer said,

“It is ludicrous to suggest that women will have more freedom and will be ‘empowered’ by taking cancer-causing hormonal steroids, i.e. birth control pills, injections, vaginal rings, skin patches and some IUDs.

Bioethics Journal Charges Lancet, Scientific Community with Cancer Cover Up / CBS and Associated Press, Nevertheless, Represent Lancet Article as Authoritative

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer notes an editorial by Editor Ed Furton, MA, Ph.D. in the December issue of a bioethics journal, Ethics and Medics. [1]  Furton charged that a widely reported "review" of the abortion-breast cancer (ABC) studies published in the Lancet was seriously flawed for having omitted 15 studies reporting risk elevations "for no good reasons" and using an "inappropriate control group."

The Lancet reported a statistically significant 11% risk elevation among retrospective studies and a significant 7% risk decrease among prospective studies. [2]

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.

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
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 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).

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] 

Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer Chastises Uninformed Democratic Senators: Planned Parenthood Doesn't Do Mammograms and Damages Women's Health / Susan G. Komen for the Cure Was Right to Halt Planned Parenthood Funding

Today, the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer responded to a letter from 26 U.S. senators that called on Susan G. Komen for the Cure to resume its funding of Planned Parenthood.

"Contrary to what 26 overwrought Democratic senators and Big Media would have us believe," said Karen Malec, president of the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer, "Planned Parenthood does not do mammograms and doesn't offer breast cancer treatment. Planned Parenthood is fundamentally an abortion business that provides manual breast exams and refers women elsewhere for mammograms, thereby delaying breast cancer diagnosis and treatment."

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 NORTH DAKOTA SUPREME COURT DECISION, URGES MEDIA NOT TO ABANDON ITS ROLE AS WATCHDOG OF GOVERNMENT

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer condemns the decision of the North Dakota Supreme Court to dismiss the false advertising case of Amy Jo Kjolsrud against the Fargo based Red River Women's Clinic.  The clinic distributed a pamphlet claiming that medical research does not support a link between abortion and breast cancer.

The clinic circulated a revised pamphlet after the 1999 case was filed.  The pamphlet used an outdated 1996 National Cancer Institute (NCI) fact sheet.  The NCI asserted in 1999 that the evidence of a relationship was "inconsistent."  Yet, the pamphlet said, "The National Cancer Institute has stated, 'there is no evidence of a direct relation between breast cancer and either induced or spontaneous abortion.'"

The state's highest court alleged that the plaintiff did not have standing to sue.  However, state law says, "any person acting for the interests of itself, its members or the general public" may pursue an injunction to stop false advertising.

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;

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]

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]

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:

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."

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]

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]

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]

Medical Journals Censoring Scientific Debate on Abortion-Breast Cancer Link, Says Women's Group

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer deplores the fact that two medical journals have resorted to censorship for the purpose of suppressing scientific debate and academic criticism of flawed research on the abortion-breast cancer (ABC) link. [1,2]  The journals, Lancet and Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and Prevention, refused to publish letters critical of research showing little or no relationship between abortion and increased breast cancer risk.

"The editors of these journals are silencing experts who dissent from the view that abortion is unrelated to increased risk of breast cancer," argued Karen Malec, president of the coalition. "The editors don't want a full scale scientific examination of the ABC link because they know abortion causes breast cancer.  If science were on their side, then they wouldn't have to resort to petty censorship.  They could dispose of the link handily through the use of a full scale scientific investigation and debate.

Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer Condemns Congressman Henry Waxman, Minority Staff of Committee on Government Reform

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer condemns Congressman Henry Waxman and Congressmen on the Minority Staff of the Committee on Government Reform for publishing their misleading report, "Politics and Science in the Bush Administration." [1] The report falsely accuses the administration of perverting science for political ends, but Waxman's purpose is to continue the government's 46-year cover-up of the abortion-breast cancer (ABC) research.

Karen Malec, president of the women's organization, said  "Henry Waxman and his (overwhelmingly) male colleagues undoubtedly have their hands in the pockets of the abortion industry.  They're running scared because science isn't on their side.  Scientists can't disprove the biological explanation for an ABC link, and five medical organizations recognize a causal relationship. [2] That's why they collaborated behind the scenes to ensure that no comprehensive review and debate on the research would take place at the National Cancer Institute's (NCI) workshop in February."

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]

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