Dr. Janet Dalingís Abortion/Breast Cancer Study - Page 2

Here is what Dr. Brind had to say about the abortifacient drugs:

"In the drug approval process to date for mifepristone/misoprostol, has breast cancer, even as a potential risk factor, ever come up?

"Indeed, the overall, highly significant positive association between induced abortion and breast cancer, which we have documented in the meta-analysis, demands that women be warned at the very least.

"Such warnings are already mandated to be given to any women considering induced abortion by law in Louisiana Montana and Mississippi, with more such laws in the pipeline.

"Finally, we are not speaking here about any concern for the life of any fetuses: only about the life and health of the women who may be able to take these abortifacient drugs.

"However safe this drug regimen may appear in short term testing, there is too much hard evidence that in the long term, many thousands of women will get breast cancer because they took these drugs. If this agency can simply approve, as the Population Council has requested, the legitimate use of such drugs by healthy women in order to achieve elective medical results, then we will have witnessed, in effect, the end of the Food and Drug Administration as we know it, for this agency will have abandoned its function to protect American women from purveyors of harmful medicine."

Continuing with the Daling study, Rosenberg goes on: "the overall results as well as the particulars are far from conclusive, and it is difficult to see how they will be informative to the public."

She has no evidence that itís inconclusive. We just have to take her word for it. It is NOT difficult to see how the results would be informative to the public. It could not be any clearer.

She goes on, "Whatever future results show, the decision to continue or terminate an unplanned pregnancy will still need to be based on a balanced consideration of the entire range of relevant issues: personal ethical considerations, the desire for a child, the ability to care for it, and the total health implications of continued pregnancy versus induced abortion."

The above is plain double speak -- it makes no sense at all. What she is saying is that if your child is inconvenient, then weigh that against getting breast cancer.

OK, so then why not warn women prior to an abortion and let THEM make the choice and not people like Dr. Rosenberg, the NCI and the ACS?

She gives no scientific reason why the Daling study, or any other study, which shows that abortions increase the risk of breast cancer, is not valid. 28 out of 37 studies done worldwide and 13 of 15 done in the United States show that abortions increase the risk of breast cancer. Yet, because they canít come up with anything better, the above excuses are supposed to be convincing.

Breast cancer cases have almost doubled since abortions were legalized in 1973, while all other cancers remain the same and some have gone down. How do the NCI and the ACS explain the skyrocketing rate of breast cancer since abortions were made legal in 1973? They can't and don't even attempt to do so.

The following is the mechanism behind the ABC link. It can be readily understood by a 10th grader, but apparently not by those, whose ideology and political views get in the way of good medicine. They mock the Hippocratic Oath and the principle, First do no harm.

It is never refuted by the NCI or the ACS. Why not? Because it is physiologically accurate.

When pregnancy occurs, there is a surge of estrogen. This hormone causes the breast cells to proliferate dramatically in the first trimester in order to lay the foundation for the production of milk. These young growing cells are more prone to develop cancer.

In the second half of pregnancy, the estrogen levels recede under the influence of such hormones as human placental lactogen. The immature cells then grow and differentiate rapidly into mature, specialized milk producing tissue. Once specialization has occurred, the cells are less likely to turn cancerous.

When the pregnancy is terminated by an induced abortion, these young growing cells (known as undifferentiated cells), having undergone drastic changes, are now in limbo. They are no longer normal breast cells, nor are they capable of producing milk.

In plain English, these insulted cells (traumatized) have been hung out to dry. They are between a rock and a hard place. Scientists have known for years that any cell in the human body that has been traumatized, whether by chemicals, radiation, micro-trauma, or any other reason, would be especially vulnerable to cancer. One must then surmise that what has been instilled in physicians' heads from time immemorial, regarding the vulnerability of abnormal cells, is no longer valid.

To suit their political agenda, the NCI, ACS and the abortion industry would have you believe that an abnormal cell is no more prone to becoming cancerous than a normal cell. This defies all scientific knowledge, as well as common sense.

It has also been long known that a pregnancy carried to term protects against breast cancer. Even the NCI and the ACS admit this. However, if a woman has an induced abortion, this protection is terminated.

The estrogen-breast cancer risk has been known by doctors for many years, thus their reluctance to prescribe estrogen for menopausal women, especially those with any family history of breast cancer.

Women, who start their periods early and go through menopause late, are exposed to more estrogen, because they have more periods. And women who have fewer or no children are exposed to more surges of estrogen that come with more menstrual cycles. Women who breast feed their babies also have fewer menstrual cycles, thereby lowering their risk.

Foods high in animal fat can increase the blood estrogen level and thus increase the breast cancer risk. Leafy vegetables tend to help a woman to rid her system of estrogen.

As you can see, the estrogen factor is not just in the area of reproduction.

We are warned of these risks by the top medical journals and the media. We are told what to eat and not to eat, but of the biggest risk of all and the most avoidable, the abortion-breast cancer risk, they tell us NOTHING.

Frank Joseph MD
Email: DFjosephMD