Abortion predicts 3 breast cancer trends

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 Says World Health Organization Classified Birth Control Pill as Cancer-Causing

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:

Mayo Clinic's Misinformation about Abortion-Cancer Link

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. 

Illinois bill risks Increased breast cancer

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


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.

Cover-up discussed at doctor's meeting

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.

Flawed Danish study

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.

Turkish study shows abortion - breast cancer link

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."

Analysis of Flawed Study

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;

ABC Link at National Lawyers Assn Conference


Attorneys attending a conference sponsored by the National Lawyers Association at Chicago's Kent College of Law on August 1 heard speakers discuss the abortion-breast cancer (ABC) link and the role of hormones in the development of breast cancer.

Mayer Eisenstein, MD, JD, MPH, said that estrogen is connected with the development of most breast cancers.  Eisenstein's speech is relevant to the ABC link because women are exposed to more estrogen during normal pregnancies (but not most miscarriages) than at any other time during their lives.  This effect is only corrected in the third trimester when breast cells are matured into cancer-resistant tissue.

The government's Report on Carcinogens included steroidal estrogens (used in oral contraceptives and estrogen replacement therapy) on its list of "known carcinogens" last year.

Eisenstein said, "Anyone who's on (them) unavoidably increases breast cancer risk."  Having more children, starting at an earlier age, reduces lifetime risk.

Minnesota Medical Association


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]

Scientific review recommends informing of abortion health risk

Scientific Review Recommends Informing Patients about Abortion-Breast Cancer Link, Risks of Birth Control Pills and Menopausal Therapy

The real war on women!

A second scientific review in 2014 has strongly urged physicians to warn patients about the abortion-breast cancer (ABC) link before an abortion and argued the evidence for a cause-effect relationship is substantial.[1,2] A. Patrick Schneider and his colleagues authored the latest review entitled, “The breast cancer epidemic: 10 facts,” for the journal, The Linacre Quarterly.[1] 

There are multiple, serious, health risks[3,4] associated with using the birth control pill and combined hormone replacement therapy (CHRT), both of which contain estrogen and progestin, although the former contains a larger dose. The authors of both reviews urged physicians to warn patients about the harms of taking either these drugs.

Schneider’s team said, “...having more than one risk factor compounds the risk of breast cancer via synergistic mechanisms,” meaning the risk increase the woman incurs is greater than the sum of the risks for each of her risk factors. They explained:

Medical Journals Censoring Scientific Debate

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.

Legislative Measures Will Worsen Epidemics


President Obama, U.S. Rep. Jerrold Nadler and legislators in Texas, Illinois and New York support legislation that will have the unintentional effect of deepening the breast cancer and premature birth epidemics. To educate policy makers, the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer is publishing the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute's document summarizing the state of the research on the abortion-breast cancer link and discussing the risk of premature birth.  It is available at:    

Bioethics Journal reports Lancet review is flawed

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]

Misleading report from Congress

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."

UK RCOG coverup

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.

Medical journal links breast cancer to abortion

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."

Women's Group Educates Lawmakers

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.