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.

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.

Komen, Planned Parenthood and US senators

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."

N Dakota court decision


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.

Healthcare bill risks increase of breast cancer

President Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid Show Anti-Woman Bias with Abortion Mandate / Ignore National Cancer Institute Branch Chief's Admission of Abortion-Breast Cancer Link

A spokesperson for the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer said today that President Obama, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senator Harry Reid are damaging the health of women and their future children with a healthcare bill that promises to increase the rates of abortion, breast cancer and premature birth. The Coalition's president, Karen Malec, said: 

"The Triumvirate - Obama, Reid and Pelosi - and all members of Congress were put on notice of an explicit admission from National Cancer Institute branch chief Louise Brinton that 'induced abortion and oral contraceptive use were associated with increased breast cancer risk' in a study led by Jessica Dolle last year.' [1]  Despite more than a half-century of research supporting an abortion-breast cancer link and statements in medical texts that childbearing sharply reduces breast cancer risk, the Triumvirate rammed a healthcare bill through Congress that requires federal funding of abortions. 

We Are Woman Rally, ObamaCare Mandate

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.

Cancer-Causing Birth Control Pills

Johnson & Johnson's Sales of Cancer-Causing Birth Control Pills Comparable to Tobacco Industry's Corporate Greed, Says Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer

"Real hatred of women involves their exploitation through sales of cancer-causing hormonal contraceptive steroids," Karen Malec, president of the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer.

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer condemns Johnson & Johnson's and its shareholders' decision to continue selling cancer-causing birth control pills to young women instead of protecting their lives and striving to reduce breast cancer rates.

On April 28, 2011, Dr. Chris Kahlenborn, a medical adviser for the Coalition, presented a resolution at a shareholder's meeting on behalf of a shareholder, Human Life International. The resolution proposed a change in J&J's policy - that it would not discriminate in employment against breast cancer survivors, including those voicing opposition to the sale of the pill. Shareholders rejected the proposal after J&J's board sent a message saying they "did not believe the resolution is necessary."

ABC link disclosure recommended by medical group

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


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."



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