Home | Site Map | Contact Us | About Us | Articles | Tips | Resources | Links
Newsletter - February 8, 2005
Dear Friends:
As you know, Dennis Byrne wrote an excellent commentary for the Chicago Tribune
last week discussing the nation's first judgment against an abortion provider
for neglecting to warn a 15-year-old girl about the increased risks of breast
cancer and psychological harm.
Scientists agree that childbearing is protective against breast cancer. That is
one of the reasons why the plaintiff won her judgment without having to go to
trial. The defendants made an offer to accept a judgment against themselves,
even though she hasn't developed breast cancer.
Predictably, the American Cancer Society and Planned Parenthood shot off letters
to the editor denying that abortion is related to increased breast cancer risk.
We agree with the Society's assertion that "The public is never well-served by
mis-statements of fact or misrepresentation of the evidence."
However, isn't it peculiar that the Society and the government never informed
women about the existence of this extensive research conducted over the last
five decades? During that period, abortion became the most commonly performed
elective surgical procedure in the country.
It's equally strange that government scientists in 1986 would have admitted to a
risk elevation for women who procure abortions before a first term pregnancy,
but that no one told women about it. [Stadel BV, Rubin GL, Wingo PA,
Schlesselman JJ. Letter. Oral contraceptives and breast cancer in young women.
Lancet 1986;ii:436]
No one told women about the rat study done by Russo and Russo in 1980 showing
that more aborted rats (77.7%) developed breast cancer after being exposed to a
carcinogen than did virgin rats (66.7%) and rats with full term pregnancies
(0%). [Russo J, Russo IH. Susceptibility of the mammary gland to carcinogenesis.
Am J Pathol 1980;100: 497-512]
No one told women about any of the subsequent American research that followed.
After 48 years of concealment, it's remarkable that anyone would believe the
government's and the cancer establishment's denials of a link today.
The Society's letter falsely claimed that Mr. Byrne "misrepresented the
scientific facts used in the debate about the possible link between abortion and
breast cancer." We challenge the Society to specify what exactly those
misrepresentations were. The protective effect of an early first full term
pregnancy?
Similarly, Planned Parenthood president Steve Trombley went on ad nauseum about
the organization's health services and the breast exams it supposedly offers to
its customers.
The Ryan Report has revealed that breast exams have declined in recent years at
Planned Parenthood, despite $1.3 million in donations from the Susan G. Komen
Breast Cancer Foundation for this specific purpose between 2000 and 2003.
Moreover, when Pamela Maraldo headed Planned Parenthood some years ago, she
tried to take the organization into the direction of legitimate health care, but
the organization's directors would have none of it. She left Planned Parenthood
shortly thereafter. This demonstrated Planned Parenthood's lack of interest in
health care.
If you have not signed up for our new list service, Brave Net, then please do so
soon. We are moving over to Brave Net in order to save on expenses, so you will
be required to sign up in order to continue your subscription. Please watch for
notices from the coalition in this regard.
Spread the word.
Sincerely,
Karen Malec
Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer
Source :
http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/start/