ANOTHER Study Shows Induced Abortions/Increased Risk For Breast Cancer Link

Until quite recently  we were still more or less agnostic on the purported abortion/breast cancer link, but study after study, from all over the world, seem to indicate that there is indeed such a link. Today,  Steve Ertelt, writing at LifeNews brings news of ANOTHER study by reputable scientists asserting a link between breast cancer and induced abortions. 

"A new study published in the Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention in February reported a very statistically significant increased risk of breast cancer for women with previous abortions as opposed to women who have never had one.

The study, consisting of 1,351 women and led by researcher Ai-Ren Jiang, reported a statistically significant 1.52-fold elevation in risk for women with induced abortions and a “significant dose-response relationship between (the risk) for breast cancer and number of induced abortions,” meaning the risk climbed with a higher number of previous abortions."

In 2010, we reported on four recent independent studies in Turkey, China, Sri Lanka, and Seattle. All four concluded that there is indeed an increased risk for breast cancer in post-abortive women. All four studies were published in significant professional medical journals. We re-post the part of our article describing the four studies:

"The Chinese study “A case-control study of reproductive factors associated with subtypes of breast cancer in Northeast China,” was published in the Journal of Medical Oncology on September 23, 2009. The study’s abstract concluded: “Breastfeeding protected parous women from any subtype of breast cancer. Postmenopause and spontaneous abortion were inversely associated with the risk of luminal tumors. By contrast, multiparity, family history of breast cancer and induced abortion increased the risk of breast cancer.”

The Turkish study “Breast cancer risk factors in Turkish women – a University Hospital based nested case control study” was published on April 8, 2009 in the World Journal of Surgical Oncology. It concluded: “These findings suggest that age and induced abortion were found to be significantly associated with increased breast cancer risk whereas oral contraceptive use was observed to be associated with decreased breast cancer risk among Turkish women in Istanbul.”

The Sri Lankan study “Prolonged breastfeeding reduces risk of breast cancer in Sri Lankan women: a case-control study” was published in Cancer Epidemiology in June 2010. It concluded, in part: “The significant factors associated with increased risk of breast cancer were: post-menopausal women (OR=1.74; 95%CI=1.01, 3.01); having an abortion in the past (OR=3.42; 95%CI=1.75, 6.66) and exposure to passive smoking (OR=2.96, 95%CI=1.53, 5.75).”In other words, as the Daily Mail UK reported, although the study was focused on the association between the duration of breastfeeding and the risk of breast cancer, other risk factors were discovered, and “the highest of the reported risk factors was abortion.”

The Seattle study “Risk Factors for Triple-Negative Breast Cancer in Women Under Age 45” was published in April 2009 in Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and Prevention. The study concluded, in part: “In analyses of all 897 breast cancer cases (subtypes combined), the multivariate-adjusted odds ratios for examined risk factors were consistent with the effects observed in prior studies of younger women . Specifically, older age, family history of breast cancer, earlier menarche age, induced abortion, and OC (oral contraceptive) use were associated with an increased risk of breast cancer.”

The Seattle study was remarkable not just for its conclusion, but because of the identity of one of the authors, Dr. Louise A. Brinton, MPH, Ph. D. It so happens that Dr. Brinton works for the National Cancer Institute and was one of the organizers of the NCI’s 2003 workshop that produced the study that NARAL cites as the sole authority for their sweeping claim of no abortion/breast cancer link. Unfortunately for NARAL, while Dr. Brinton may have held that opinion in 2003, she no longer does. From the Daily Mail UK 'Earlier this year, Dr Louise Brinton, a senior researcher with the U.S. National Cancer Institute who did not accept the link, reversed her position to say she was now convinced abortion increased the risk of breast cancer by about 40 per cent.'”

"Outside of court, the boy's father broke down in tears and called doctors 'killers'."

A horrific story out of Canada.

From the Toronto Sun:

"A court appeal to stop doctors from removing a 13-month-old baby boy's breathing tube was denied Thursday, ending a Windsor couple's tragic fight to take their son home to die.

The parents accept that, barring a miracle, it as almost certain the little boy will die.

Joseph Maraachli, who's been in the London Health Science Centre's pediatric critical care unit since last fall, suffers from a terminal respiratory and neurological disorder.

Ontario's consent and capacity board recently agreed with doctors last month the boy's breathing tube be removed.

His parents, who lost a daughter to the same disorder eight years ago, had hoped to have a tracheotomy inserted and be allowed to take the child home to die peacefully.

Again, the parents accept that, barring a miracle, it as almost certain the little boy will die. They simply want to bring their own son to their own home, so he can die surrounded by those who love him. A government is denying them this right.

In her decision, an emotional Superior Court Justice Helen Rady said it was "a sad and difficult case" and praised the child's parents, Moe Maraachli and Sana Nader, for their dedication.

That "praise" is simply adding insult to injury.

But she said the baby has no brain stem reflex and is in a permanent vegetative state.

A deadline to take the baby off life support had been set for Friday, but Rady ordered the family to comply by Monday at 10 a.m., "to afford the family adequate time to say their goodbyes."

That's sounds just like a movie villain telling his victim "say your prayers" before shooting him.

Out side of court, the boy's father broke down in tears and called doctors "killers."

Which certainly makes sense.

Patrick Craine at LifeSiteNews has more, including contact emails.

NJ's Christie Vetoes Planned Parenthood Funding; NJ Senate Fails to Override

Good news from the Garden State, and their Pro-Life Governor Chris Christie.

From Life News:

Following the release of a video that has received nationwide attention showing Planned Parenthood staff at a New Jersey abortion center helping alleged sexual traffickers cover up their crimes with abortions and STD testing, Governor Chris Christie has vetoed a bill funding Planned Parenthood. ....

Christie has already yanked state taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood but the state legislature sent him a bill to restore the taxpayer funds.

Marie Tasy, Executive Director for New Jersey Right to Life, applauded the veto in an email to LifeNews.com.

“We thank Governor Christie for vetoing this bill. A3273/S2393 would have forced taxpayers to support the activities and expansion of an organization that was caught on tape aiding and abetting in the sex trafficking and abortions of minors as young as 14. In vetoing this bill, Governor Christie has ensured that NJ taxpayers will not be complicit in the sexual abuse and exploitation of poor women and minors under the pretense of ‘women’s health,” she said.

NJ.com reports that the New Jersey Senate failed to override the veto:

"An attempt to override Gov. Chris Christie’s veto of $7.5 million in family planning funds was defeated in the state Senate today, but the Democrats behind the effort vowed to fight on for pared down funding for the program.

"If God has to shame them into it, so be it."

That's Monsignor Charles Pope of the Archdiocese of Washington. The Cardinal Newman society gives the background:

"If you haven't heard yet, a federal agency decided that (Catholic) Manhattan College could not prevent faculty from unionizing on the basis that it is a religious institution. Despite acknowledging that the College is recognized as Catholic by the New York Archdiocese, the National Labor Relations Board reviewed College statements and course content, finding 'that the purpose of the College is secular and not the 'propagation of a religious faith'."

The Monsignor writes:

"The fact is that the Church is to be a light to the world, but it sometimes happens that we fall short and God must allow the world itself to rebuke us. The Christian community is supposed to be self-correcting. It is an embarrassing truth that it sometimes takes Caesar to tell us to give to God what is God's, to be more serious about our Christian walk, and to be true in our claims to be Catholic."

"But the moral lesson in these cases seems to be that we had better get our own house in order. Certain 'Catholic' Colleges may go on for a while gleefully dissenting and ignoring Church mandates, but in the end they are going to be called to account by Caesar who will say, 'Either give God what God is due, or stop pretending and pay the taxes that every other secular organization pays and observe the requirements every other secular entity does.' In other words, decide what you really are and do so quickly."

"For the state to respect the rights of Catholics, Catholicism has to be intelligible. Hence these dissenters also endanger the religious freedoms of those who are faithful. Yes, we need to get our house in order."

h/t Cardinal Newman Society.

God Bless Bishop Olmsted!

His Excellency Thomas Olmsted has exercised his duty as Bishop of Phoenix, and stripped St. Joseph's Hospital of it's Catholic designation. We heartily support His Excellency. From Catholic World News:

"When I met with officials of the hospital to learn more of the details of what had occurred, it became clear that, in the decision to abort, the equal dignity of mother and her baby were not both upheld; but that the baby was directly killed…In this case, the baby was healthy and there were no problems with the pregnancy; rather, the mother had a disease that needed to be treated. But instead of treating the disease, St. Joseph’s medical staff and ethics committee decided that the healthy, 11-week-old baby should be directly killed.'

In accordance with canon law, Bishop Olmsted said, he told Sister Margaret McBride, the administrator responsible for the decision to peform the abortion, that she had incurred the penalty of excommunication. 'I did this in a confidential manner, hoping to spare her public embarrassment,' he added. Knowledge of the excommunication became public as the hospital defended its decision to perform the abortion.

Since that time, Bishop Olmsted reports, 'subsequent communications with leadership at St. Joseph’s Hospital and CHW have only eroded my confidence about their commitment to the Church’s Ethical and Religious Directives for Healthcare.' Thus he felt compelled to take action.

Bishop Olmsted makes the point that the medical institutions performed many services that the Church condemns under the terms of government contracts. 'CHW and St. Joseph’s Hospital have made more than a hundred million dollars every year from this partnership with the government,' he reports."

This is very important and welcome. In related news, California Catholic Daily reports on a recent investigation by the American Life League which shows that problems similar to that which provoked Bishop Olmsted's action permeate Catholic Heathcare West, of which St. Joseph's Hospital is a member.

In more related news, we note that Lloyd Dean, president of Catholic Healthcare West, was honored this year at the (Jesuit) University of San Francisco. Dean was the Commencement speaker at the exercises for USF's School of Nursing.

Iranian Study Indicates (again) Abortion/Breast Cancer Link

Today's LifeNews reports "Abortion Boosts Breast Cancer Risk 193% Study Finds, Giving Birth Lowers It."

We have posted about the increasing number of reputable national and international studies indicating an abortion/breast cancer link here and here.

The study the LifeNews article references is "Reproductive factors associated with breast cancer risk in northern Iran" by K. O. Hajian-Tilaki and T. Kaveh-Ahangar. The study was accepted in March 2010, and published in April 2010, by Medical Oncology, an international, peer-reviewed journal. From the abstract:

“Nulliparity, (never giving birth) late age at first birth and abortion were the most important reproductive factors associated with breast cancer risk; therefore, it is recommended to women with these risk factors to perform breast cancer screening tests earlier.”

The full abstract can be read here:

http://www.springerlink.com/content/6271770515q8451w/

The full study can be purchased there, too, but like most academic research it is expensive--$34. ________________________________________________

The Iranian study is one of a number by the authors which seek to identify environmental factors that may increase the risk of breast cancer among women. Their most recent study is “Body mass index and waist circumference are predictor biomarkers of breast cancer risk in Iranian women” accepted in July, 2010 by Medical Oncology. That study concluded:

“...our study found that BMI (body mass index) has a predictive ability to distinguish pre- and postmenopausal breast cancer, indicating that weight control programs may have an effective role in prevention of female breast cancer. While WC (waist circumference) has a predictive ability for premenopausal breast cancer but after adjusting for BMI, no longer an association between WC and breast cancer was found. The findings imply to perform breast cancer screening programs in Iranian women with high BMI and WC.”

The abstract of the Body mass index study can be read here:

http://www.springerlink.com/content/yl04620370547n49/