A study indicates there is a link between abortion and breast cancer, and the Pill and breast cancer:
…Dr. Brinton’s participation in the study was significant because the NCI has “firmly maintained” a position denying an abortion-breast cancer link since 2003.
The study, titled “Risk factors for triple-negative breast cancer in women under the age of 45 years,” was published in the American Association for Cancer Research’s (AACR) medical journal “Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention.”
If you could stop just one person from getting cancer, wouldn’t you get the word out on these links?
____________________
Brigitte disagrees: Oh dear me, no. You don’t mention it AT ALL. Instead, what you do is share intimate but meaningless information with strangers in the hopes of “raising awareness” about breast cancer, even though it’s getting hard nowadays to find someone somewhere who isn’t aware of it.
by 
I’ve already decided to not donate to breast cancer research. The ABC link is constantly hidden as it would damage the abortion cause way too much.
I find it interesting that the title of the paper is “Risk Factors for Triple-Negative Breast Cancer in Women Under the Age of 45 Years”, even thought the majority of the abstract is focused on the pill. Why not mention the pill in the title? Was it because the journal/peer reviewers wanted the paper to fly under the radar, or because the authors didn’t want to prejudice potential readers from even reading the abstract?
Here’s the citation:
CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY BIOMARKERS & PREVENTION Volume: 18 Issue: 4 Pages: 1157-1166 Published: APR 2009
And the money quote from the abstract, if anyone’s interested:
“Oral contraceptive
use ≥1 year was associated with a 2.5-fold increased
risk for triple-negative breast cancer (95% confidence
interval, 1.4-4.3) and no significantly increased risk for
non-triple-negative breast cancer (P heterogeneity = 0.008).
Furthermore, the risk among oral contraceptive users
conferred by longer oral contraceptive duration and
by more recent use was significantly greater for triple-negative
breast cancer than non-triple-negative breast
cancer (P heterogeneity = 0.02 and 0.01, respectively).
Among women ≤40 years, the relative risk for
triple-negative breast cancer associated with oral contraceptive
use ≥1 year was 4.2 (95% confidence interval,
1.9-9.3), whereas there was no significantly increased
risk with oral contraceptive use for non-triple-negative
breast cancer among women ≤40 years, nor for triple-negative
breast cancer or non-triple-negative breast
cancer among women 41 to 45 years of age. In
conclusion, significant heterogeneity exists for the
association of oral contraceptive use and breast
cancer risk between triple-negative breast cancer and
non-triple-negative breast cancer among young women,
lending support to a distinct etiology.”
Pro-choicers arn’t going to take seriously anything the Catholic News Agency says. We don’t trust it at all. Don’t even bother trying to spread that link around, it’ll just be ignored. If you can find the same story being reported by a less biased organisation, then that will work. You need credibility.
I did a quick search for you, but couldn’t find anything – give it a couple of days, and try google news.
Suricou: That’s why I posted the article citation here, since CNA didn’t link to it.
Again, the citation:
AUTHORS: Jessica M. Dolle, Janet R. Daling, Emily White, Louise A. Brinton, David R. Doody, Peggy L. Porter and Kathleen E. Malone
CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY BIOMARKERS & PREVENTION
Volume: 18 Issue: 4 Pages: 1157-1166 Published: APR 2009
Here’s the article itself, but you need a subscription:
http://cebp.aacrjournals.org/content/18/4/1157.long
If you’d like the full text, I’ll happily provide it to you.
From what I have read about the breast cancer link and abortion, when you have an abortion the milk that is produced has nowhere to go and turns into masses inside the breast. When I had the abortion procedure done, shortly thereafter I experienced major pain and swelling, and was given drugs to eliminate the problem. Now it’s starting to make sense, reading the newest findings on the correlation between breast cancer and abortion..
OH MY GOODNESS! I didn’t know what that colour thing was about, and it was driving me crazy. But I didn’t want to ask anyone because I thought I’d get laughed at for being out of the loop.
I thought people might have been posting their favourite colour, and almost did so myself. It would have been very embarrassing for me to have posted “green” on that day, then. 😛
As for the actual point of the post, it is interesting to see this evidence surface. It will definitely help pro-choice moderates or the undecided, but most pro-choicers will sweep it under the rug, like they seem to do with most evidence.
Georgia: I’ve never heard the milk mass theory. Whether or not that’s true, excess milk is not composed of living cells and therefore is not cancer. With respect to the abortion/cancer link, what’s most likely going on is that the stem cells in your breasts start differentiating when you become pregnant, starting down the pathway to forming the mature glands. If their differentiation is disrupted by an early end to the pregnancy, then your body is no longer producing the correct hormonal signals to guide them to complete the differentiation process. You then end up with a bunch of immature, incompletely differentiated cells that don’t know what to do. These cells have not yet left the cell cycle (meaning they still are capable of dividing). Therefore, without any direction to their division, they are more likely to produce cancer (which is, by definition, cells that are dividing out of control).
I don’t think it’s that the milk has “nowhere to go” (people with babies dry up their milk and there’s nothing to suggest that’s unhealthy). People also have miscarriages and I’m not sure if that has the effect of raising breast cancer risk or not. Nevertheless, if the link is indeed true, then there’s probably some other reason, maybe to do with quickly fluctuating hormones in such a short span of time, but who knows (certainly not me).
Oh, and what Darlene said. 😛
Tempting as the paper is, I am well aware that I am in no way qualified to make any medical judgement. I shall leave the analysis to the experts – and that means I wait, give it time, and then see if any of the major trustworthy cancer-expert organisations have seen fit to change their stance on the issue.
Thank you Darlene for the clarification. I think doctors should be informing women of these risks, before they undergo the procedure, so they can make an informed decision. I know for me I was coerced into having my pregnancy terminated and I’m quite certain the “father” was not too concerned about any health risks to me. (emotional or physical)
Georgia: I’m so sorry to hear that. I hope you’re finding the support and healing you need.
Thank you Darlene. One month after the abortion, I ingested a full bottle of sleeping pills, but I still woke up the next day. I guess I wasn’t meant to go like that. I am hoping that if nothing else, if I can make a difference in even one girl’s circumstances, to give them courage not to let anyone make them do anything they don’t want to do. Because ultimately, as women, we are the ones who have to live with the choice.
Ladies, do a google search for this medical journal article, “Normal Breast Physiology,” in order to learn what the biological reasons are for the abortion-breast cancer link. It explains why different pregnancy outcomes either increase risk, decrease risk or make no changes whatsoever to breast cancer risk.
If you are like Suricou Raven, who has said in so many words that Catholics can’t do science, then you might take a look at the citations in the paper and pay special attention to the research team that did the groundbreaking work that explains how the maturity of the breast lobules influence breast cancer risk. That team includes Irma and Jose Russo of Fox Chase Cancer Center in Pennsylvania. Try reading their papers. The citations in the paper, “Normal Breast Physiology,” include big name medical journals.
Georgia: I admire your courage in telling your story to help others!
Karen: That article does look very informative. I look forward to reading it. Thanks.
I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don’t know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.
Alena
http://ovarianpain.net
Great post! Interesting! But are you saying that there is really no chance that breast cancer will be link to morning after pill?