Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Posting a bunch of very old data doesn't help your position. The oldest if these studies is 1957, almost 60 years old. The newest is 1997, almost 20 years old. Further many of these don't appear to be linked to abortion--diet, oral contraceptive use, menstrual factors? Try again.
As was pointed out earlier the US National Cancer Institute, the American Cancer Society, the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the Royal Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the Canaduan Cancer Research Conference, the Getman Cancer Society all say that there is no link. You were asked to name any major organizations that say otherwise. You named none.Because every major organization doesn't in fact do that.
As was pointed out earlier the US National Cancer Institute, the American Cancer Society, the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the Royal Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the Canaduan Cancer Research Conference, the Getman Cancer Society all say that there is no link. You were asked to name any major organizations that say otherwise. You named none.
Our overview of the research and of advances in the biology of breast develop‑ ment show different magnitudes of breast cancer risk following a procured abortion. The independent effect of induced abortion on breast cancer risk as demonstrated in epidemiological studies varies from small to large and from nonsignificant to marginally or highly significant, depending on myriad factors now known to affect these rates. Though the independent effect of induced abortion is not always statistically large, it is important to consider the overall influence that abortion has in shaping one’s repro‑ 196 Janet R. Daling, Kathleen E. Malone, Lynda F. Voigt, Emily White, and Noel S. Weiss, “Risk of Breast Cancer among Young Women: Relationship to Induced Abortions,” Journal of the National Cancer Institute 86 (1994): 1584-1592. 197 Because induced abortion will leave a childless woman with more undifferentiated breast tissue than a woman who has never been pregnant, one might expect those women taking oral contraceptives after an induced abortion to be at higher risk for breast cancer than a woman who does not take them after an abortion. 112 Issues in Law & Medicine, Volume 29, Number 1, 2014 ductive history. The single effect of induced abortion on breast cancer risk is trumped by the overall effect of a long-term avoidance of pregnancy. In this lifestyle pattern, the effects of late age at first full-term pregnancy or nulliparity, oral contraceptive use, and induced abortion (possibly while nulliparous or long before first birth, if any) could all be evident and working in concert to increase a woman’s breast cancer risk. Additionally, whereas a woman cannot control some aspects of her risk of breast cancer—for exam‑ ple, genetic mutations—induced abortion is a modifiable risk. For instance, adoption alternatives would permit the mother to experience full-term pregnancy’s risk reduction, which may be important to women who have a high risk of breast cancer for other reasons, while shortening the waiting times of adoptive parents. As stated in a major text, “Nevertheless, a social norm that encouraged carefully planned first pregnancies at the beginning of advanced education and career development would reduce breast cancer rates.”198
Epidemiological Research
Two reviews support an independent link between abortion and increased breast cancer risk. [12][13] A review of 10 studies that are being widely used to deny a link between abortion and increased breast cancer risk was published in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons in 2005. It demonstrated that the ten studies "embody many serious weaknesses and flaws..." and they "do not invalidate the large body of previously published studies that establish induced abortion as a risk factor for breast cancer."[14]
Other investigators - Edward Furton, Ph.D., editor of the journal Ethics and Medics, and R. L. Walley, Executive Director and Honourary Research Professor of Obstetrics and Gynaecology at MaterCare International - argue that "shoddy research" is being conducted by scientists who strongly favor abortion. [Furton E. Editorial. The corruption of science by ideology. Ethics and Medics (Dec. 2004) Vol. 29, No. 11, p. 1-2. Available at:http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/E+MDec2004-EFurtonarticle.PDF] [Personal e-mail message from R. L. Walley. FRCSC., FRCOG., MPH sent to Karen Malec, president of the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer. Available at: http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/press_releases/051205quote/index.htm]
Medical Elite Privately Say Abortion Causes Breast Cancer, but It's 'Too Political' to Discuss Publicly
In a lawsuit filed against Planned Parenthood Federation of American in California Superior Court for falsely advertising the alleged safety of abortion, Angela Lanfranchi, M.D., a New Jersey breast surgeon, declared under oath that members of the nation's medical elite are aware that abortion causes breast cancer. However, they refuse to say so publicly because it is ‘too political.' She said to the court:
"In September 1999 I wrote a letter to the president and each of the board members of my medical society, the American Society of Breast Surgeons. My letter … said that doctors… need to get this information (about abortion and breast cancer) to the public, and asked that an expert be invited to address the Society on this issue. Some time later I called the president, Dr. Rachel Simmons, and she told me, apologetically, that she presented it to the board but they felt it was 'too political.'
"In March 2000 I attended the Miami Breast Cancer Conference…. I asked the conference director, Dan Osman, M.D. if he knew there was a link between abortion and breast cancer. I was stunned when he said that he did. I asked him why there couldn't be a presentation about it at the meeting. He said it was 'too political.'
"Over the past three or four years, I have spoken with many authorities and people in a position to be well informed. Some have been straightforward and said they know it is a risk factor but felt it was 'too political' to speak about. Others have been evasive…. Some have been openly hostile…. Some initially hostile doctors … debated it with me and have changed their minds. Some pro-choice doctors have come to agree it is true and do tell their patients about the risk. Some doctors who were initially skeptical have started obtaining a complete reproductive history on their patients and found as I did that … cases of breast cancer in young women are associated with an abortion history…." [15]
Lifenews.com is not an unbiased source.73 Studies Have Examined Abortion and Breast Cancer, 53 Show Higher Risk
DR. PETER SAUNDERS AUG 19, 2013 | 12:57PM WASHINGTON, D
http://www.lifenews.com/2013/08/19/...ortion-and-breast-cancer-53-show-higher-risk/
Interesting that the ConservapediaJust give women that actual facts and not the spin and then let them decide. The left wants to paint a different picture of abortion that is the actual case. Women have the right to know these things. The left hides the truth.
No, they cite research that is favorable to their political views. Instead why not look at reports from organizations that are dedicated to fighting cancer. They are not trying to push any political views on the subject of abortion.They cite research that is reliable. You commit the genetic fallacy anyway.
OR - they do NOT want to cite them for fear of being seen as opposing abortions - which is a major 3rd rail in US politics.If they were valid major cancer organizations such as the American Cancer Society would be citing them.
OR - they do NOT want to cite them for fear of being seen as opposing abortions - which is a major 3rd rail in US politics. Funding goes away. Stricter political oversight. Harassment from various groups.
Hard science often gets swept away under such considerations. If you were a geologist or oceanographer in the 1940s and 50s and believed in tectonic plate movement, you were unemployed and unemployable. The woman who worked in this very office and mapped and made a model of the mid-Atlantic ridge in the 1950s almost got fired just for making it; because it appeared to be evidence for tectonic movement. Her boss refused, but almost got fired himself for not firing her.
Exactly right! There are support groups all over the world for women who suffer from abortion regret. PP never tells them about this sad reality. http://hopeafterabortion.com/?page_id=18Since we are talking about women's health issues regarding abortions, what about their mental health? Women who have abortions have a high rate of mental health issues. More than if they had the baby.
http://healthresearchfunding.org/19-shocking-post-abortion-depression-statistics/
But my biggest concern is for the baby not the mom. The baby is an innocent life and by all accounts of morality it's wrong to take an innocent life. The ONLY exception would be in the case of taking an innocent life to save an innocent life. That's a call I would not want to make. But bottom line is a baby is a human being and is innocent. Killing it for convience sake is murder.
Psalm 139:13–16.
For You formed my inward parts:
You covered me in my mother’s womb.
I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made;
Marvelous are Your works,
And that my soul knows very well.
My frame was not hidden from You,
When I was made in secret,
And skillfully wrought in the lowest parts of the earth.
Your eyes saw my substance, being yet unformed.
And in Your book they all were written,
The days fashioned for me,
When as yet there were none of them.
I was ME while yet in the womb and God knew ME then!
I believe that was in response to the pain issue. At any rate I take that position because of the development of the fetus and the potential of causing pain. Do spontaneous abortions cause pain?
Many people when they have to have a pet put down they ask if it will cause the pet to experience pain. I wish more people do take this into consideration when thinking about abortion.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?