Abortion and Breast Cancer: Only fuzzy math can make the ABC link disappear

In testimony to the UK Parliament Select Committee on Science and Technology, which can be viewed here, Dr. Joel Brind, Professor of Human Biology and Endocrinology, Baruch College of the City University of New York, provided information on the following points:
 

  • Higher risk of future breast cancer in women with abortion versus pregnancy and delivery has been consistently reported in medical literature since 1970 multinational study (including the UK) by the World Health Organization (WHO).
     
  • Oxford University epidemiologists have led the effort to give public false assurance of safety since 1982, with 3 studies on UK women, and a recent (2004) “reanalysis” by Valerie Beral et al., of worldwide data, which reported the false conclusion of no risk increase with abortion.
     
  • The Oxford “reanalysis” was biased in selecting studies for review, including at least 4 large, scientifically invalid studies, and excluding or omitting 15 valid studies for non-scientific reasons.
     
  • The Oxford “reanalysis” used the clinically impossible standard “of never having had that pregnancy” to which women who chose abortion are compared .
     
  • The majority of world-wide published evidence shows abortion raises breast cancer risk beyond “never having had that pregnancy”, as we reported in our 1996 meta-analysis, published by the British Medical Association.
     
  • Established facts of breast physiology support independent effect of abortion in raising breast cancer risk.
     
  • The flawed methodology used for abortion, in Oxford “reanalysis” and in general, is compared with correct methodology used to identify HRT as a significant risk factor, even by the same Oxford researchers (Beral et al.) in their 2003 “Million Women Study”.
     
  • The same inappropriate standard of comparison used for abortion would also make HRT appear not to increase risk, as demonstrated by Million Women Study results.
     
  • Recent US experience with hormone replacement therapy (HRT) shows honest reportage of risks results in women avoiding risk, by stopping HRT use.
     
  • Recent US drop in breast cancer shows striking results of women stopping HRT use, thus avoiding risk.
     
  • RCOG Clinical Guideline No. 7 acknowledges lower breast cancer risk with pregnancy and delivery, yet it contradicts its own evidence with the claim of no risk increase, and violates its own Clinical Governance Advice No. 6 re: obtaining informed consent.
     
  • RCOG Clinical Guideline No. 7 misrepresents evidence against their recommendation as “Evidence supporting recommendation”.
     
  • Open disclosure of abortion’s effect in raising breast cancer risk will reduce future medical costs and demographic decline in the UK.

Donate

Help us build a pro-life

New York. Donate today!

Follow us on Facebook!

Urgent Alerts & News

Get Involved

Host a party for life!
Would you like to throw a house party or barbecue to help raise funds for the cause?  Call us at 518-434-1293.

 

See more ways you can get involved.

Subscribe to Updates to "Abortion and Breast Cancer: Only fuzzy math can make the ABC link disappear"
200 OK

OK

The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request.

Please contact the server administrator, [no address given] and inform them of the time the error occurred, and anything you might have done that may have caused the error.

More information about this error may be available in the server error log.