Silence slowing lifting on connection between abortion, breast cancer
Slowly it seems, word of the connection between induced abortion and an increased risk of breast cancer is percolating to the general consciousness. Thanks to the effort6s of cancer researcher Dr. Joel Brind and others like him, the scientific-medical community and the mainstream media have little choice but to sit up and take notice.
It hasn’t, been an easy struggle. Studies as far back as1957 found evidence of a possible connection. Subsequent studies yielded similar results over the years, yet as Dr. Brind pointed out, it wasn’t until as late as 1994 that the media and the scientific medical community took much notice.
These were among the major raised by Dr. Brind in late June during visits to Ottawa, Toronto and Edmonton. Typically, the media paid little attention to his visit. Despite mounting evidence, news of the abortion-breast cancer link has been dismissed an “extremist, pro-life scare tactic.”
Indeed at Dr. Brind’s Toronto media conference, members of the of the Canadian Abortion Rights Action League (CARAL) distributed material suggesting that at best, the abortion-breast cancer link is inconclusive. Their material, lifted from the (U.S.) National Breast Cancer Institute, said women should not be subject to the pressure of “misleading propaganda” designed to influence their decisions about abortion.
Without going into details, evidence reveals that choosing abortion significantly raises a woman’s breast cancer risk. The risk is present for all women regardless of age or number of pregnancies. More sadly, women who choose to abort their first pregnancy double breast cancer risk.
Dr. Brind is undeterred by suggestions his life work is nothing more than pro-life propaganda. In his understated but persuasive way, Dr. Brind continues an ongoing effort to disentangle his research findings from the morass of denial and obfuscation thrown up by abortion advocates.
His cause should be aided in October when the prestigious Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health publishes a “meta” analysis of previous studies of the abortion – breast cancer connection. The analysis will back Dr. Brind’s message states that 18 of 23 research/scientific studies have shown an undeniable link between induced abortion and an increased risk of breast cancer.
Despite such overwhelming evidence, abortion providers do not warn women of the risks they face when undergoing induced abortion.
Their motivation in failing to warn women and in discrediting or suppressing the research findings is a chilling reminder that pro-choice advocates regard access to abortion as a higher priority than the safety and health of women.
This issue came to a head in Philadelphia recently when city officials ripped down a number of posters warning pregnant women of the abortion-breast cancer risk. To the pro-abortion advocates who pressured civic authorities to remove the posters, access to abortion overrides women’s health concerns. The action is being challenged in court as a freedom of speech issue and it will be interesting to see which way it goes. As Dr. Brind reminded readers of the National Review in December….’’One needn’t look very far to find the motivation behind the increasingly desperate attempts to prevent public access to the considerable body of evidence of a connection between induced abortion and breast cancer: the reputation of abortion as safe for women is crucial to the ‘pro-choice’ movement.’’
And as Brind said during his visit to Toronto, “if it were anything other than abortion, the brakes would have been put on this situation long ago.”
If there is any light at the end of the tunnel, one can look to the state of Louisiana which now informs abortion –breast cancer connection. At least two other U.S. states, Montana and Mississippi, have similar legislation and the number could swell in the coming years.
Brind has been at the forefront in pressing for informed consent legislation in the U.S. He has joined forces with Americans United for Life in preparing a legislator’s Guide on the abortion breast cancer connection. The guide admits to the daunting task of persuading legislators of a medical risk that even some leading medical authorities are unwilling to recognize. Yet the guide should become an effective weapon in pressing for more widespread informed consent laws.
Like Brind, Campaign Life Coalition has been lobbying MPs through its Women need to Know booklet. Let’s hope that continuing research and effort will overcome the misguided political motives working to discredit evidence of the abortion breast link.
Too many women have suffered already. It’s time the whole story is put on the public agenda.