Cart Search
lulapilgrim lulapilgrim

The culture of the pill & breast cancer

The culture of the pill & breast cancer

Spotlight: Jenn Giroux - Fighting the Culture of the Pill

 

For Jenn Giroux, celebrating large families is part of an effort to save parents from the regret they might experience later in life in the absence of children that might have been - had it not been for the pill.

By Kathleen Gilbert

CINCINNATI, Ohio, October 1, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Most people who run into Jenn Giroux probably wouldn't guess that she is mother to nine children.

 A warm, youthful registered nurse with an energetic smile, Giroux, 48, is a remarkable intersection of proud mother and dynamic pro-life leader. As executive director of HLI America, she counters the agenda of the likes of abortion giant Planned Parenthood; however, abortion is not the end of the story for Giroux. As founder of the Association of Large Families (AFLA), she's also dedicated to reaching out to "planned parents," a much larger group of people who are heir to the idea that having more than a few children is not only burdensome, but even dangerous and unnatural.

This mentality, she said in a telephone interview with LifeSiteNews.com, is more at the root of our culture's problem than even the abortion industry – and it is a root cause that conservatives need to come to terms with.

 "We're really taking on the 'planned parenthood' mentality ... that less children is better," said Giroux.

 A nurse with 24 years' experience, she said that she was often struck during her time in the health care industry by women's negative attitude when asked whether they were pregnant. "It reflected how America has really lost sight of our greatest resource, which is our children," she said. Giroux blames the mentality that blossomed in the 1960s and 70s that says that families should be limited to allow women to pursue careers.

The idea has penetrated so deeply that doctors now even suggest that having a large family, far from the natural course of married life, is a risk to a woman's health. "Your doctors nowadays are going to tell you, 'Don't have any more than two, your body can't take it. You don't want to do that, take the Pill,'" she said. "I hear this consistently."

 The Silent Mourning

 However, said the nurse, she has also seen the other end of the journey - the one no one talks about.

 "I discovered in my experience that ... women over fifty expressed time and time again to me their post-contraceptive regret," said Giroux. "And what they're realizing now is that they had their two children, they put them in daycare, and their children are now grown and moved away, and they wish they had more children - or they sincerely mourn and regret the children they willingly prevented."

Parents later in life not only suffer remorse, she said, but they and their families often end up experiencing the loss quite tangibly. "I witnessed only children at the bedside of their dying parents with no support around them from siblings, because they don't exist," she said. She noted also the "terrible, burning regret" and "mourning" she's seen from sterilized individuals, who can be left barren even after reversing the procedure.

While she is dedicated to exposing the tragic effects of smothering natural fertility, Giroux said she and former Human Life International President, Rev. Tom Euteneuer, came up with AFLA to show the positive "flip side" of that concern. "It is an effort to show people the beauty of having large families," she said.

Modern society, she said, has been left in the dark about what large families are really like. When large families are mentioned in the national media, "it is usually to mock them" - but in truth, she notes, large families are the "physical and spiritual backbone of America."

 ALFA exists "not to judge people at all," she said, "but more to make sure that our daughters and granddaughters do not buy into the same lies that were fed to women our age."

 "What we really basically are asking is that families that are open to God's plan for marriage, love and children and accepting the gifts he sends their family instead of limiting their families through artificial means."

"The Catholic Issue"

According to Giroux, the fight to get their message out has not exactly been easy.

 "I have been called a lunatic more times than I care to remember," she said, relating struggles she has had to find a foothold even among top conservative and pro-life circles.

 Despite some discouraging results, Giroux said she feels the movement is making progress against one of the biggest impediments: the idea that opposing contraceptives is just a "Catholic issue." More and more research, she says, is pointing to the devastating repercussions of the contraceptive culture on women's health.

Giroux has teamed up with Angela Lanfranchi, M.D. of the Breast Cancer Institute to expose the link between contraceptive use and breast cancer. For example, she says research has suggested women on the Pill within five years of having their first baby are at 50% increased risk for breast cancer.

"You don't always get people who want to hear the spiritual side," said Giroux. She pointed out that women in their 30s have begun succumbing to breast cancer even though it used to be "a post-menopausal woman's disease" - a change that she said is "directly tied to hormonal contraception and abortion." "The pathophysiological development of the breast cancer tissue ... has nothing to do with anybody's beliefs."

"It is time for the pro-life movement to wake up and be bold enough to say, you know what, you're damaging our children, you're damaging women, and we're not going to stand for it anymore," she said. "It's not a Catholic issue anymore, it's a women's health issue now."

In addition to the emergency contraceptive known as Plan B, which pro-lifers have constantly warned can kill a newly-conceived embryo, Giroux said that even the hormonal birth control pill may inadvertently be causing the death of countless tiny lives. She notes that scientists have found that during in-vitro fertilization, embryos often died after they could not receive nutrients from a uterine lining thinned by regular hormonal contraceptive use.

One day, she said, public opinion will recognize what damage the pill has done to women both physically and spiritually - a day she thinks is close at hand. She compared the contraceptive industry to the cigarette industry, which was also once virtually free of regulation.

"It took six decades to finally have the lawsuits and the legal liabilities catch up to the sales of cigarettes," she said. "This is now the sixth decade of pill use. I believe this is the decade the pill and hormonal contraceptives, and the physical damage it has done to women's health, is going to catch up also with the billions of dollars that are made in profit."

 Click here to visit AFLA's Web site, FourorMore.org. URL: http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/oct/10100109.htm

 

73,405 views 49 replies
Reply #27 Top

 Finally, some exposure to the truth of the pill's devastating social and medical reupercussions. I've highlighted what I what I found most interesting.

Experts to expose true legacy of 50 years of the pill

 

By Kathleen Gilbert

WASHINGTON, D.C., November 12, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - As the hormonal birth control pill celebrates its 50th anniversary this year, experts in the medical, ethical, and legal fields are coming together to challenge Congress and the country to face mounting evidence of the drug's devastating social and medical repercussions.

A conference hosted by Human Life International (HLI) America entitled 50 Years of 'The Pill' in America: A Comprehensive Analysis,” to be held in the Hyatt Regency Washington in the nation's capital on December 3, will host speakers talking about various aspects of contraceptive use. 

The conference is advertised as a series of "analyses of how America has changed demographically, legally, socially, politically, culturally and ethically because of 'The Pill.'"

Jenn Giroux, executive director of HLI America, told LifeSiteNews.com that the conference was a timely response to the mainstream media's one-sided representation of a drug that has deeply altered the face of American society.

At the event bioethics expert Dr. Theresa Deisher will speak on the ethical slippery slope created by the pill, while breast cancer surgeon Dr. Angela Lanfranchi will outline the alarming correspondence of pill use and the increasing prevalence of breast cancer in younger women. Former Kansas attorney general Phill Kline, known for his work investigating the practice of late-term abortionist George Tiller, will discuss the possible legal ramifications of administering the birth control pill to minors, a large percentage of whom statistics have shown to be victims of sexual abuse by older men.

Other speakers include Prof. Janet Smith, Chair of Life Ethics at Sacred Heart Major Seminary; Dr. John Bruchalski, founder of the Tepeyac Family Center; Jennifer Lahl, founder and president of the Center for Bioethics and Culture Network, and Patricia Bainbridge, author and Chairman of the Board of Human Life International.

Now that so much information on the drug has become available, said Giroux, she expressed a conviction that "the next 50 years of the birth control is a whole different story than the first 50 years."

"The World Health Organization classified the pill as a class a-1 carcinogen in the same category as asbestos and cigarettes," she said. "If that's true, why are we allowing these young 12 year olds to be put on this in the name of cramps and in the name of acne [treatment]?"

Leaders will also host a press conference calling for congressional hearings into the drug's detrimental effects. "It's time to drive hormonal birth control ads off of TV in the name of women's health," said Giroux.

Giroux also called upon other pro-life and conservative leaders to step up to the fight against the birth control pill. "It's no longer a Catholic issue. It's a women's health issue. These health issues visit women of all faiths," she said. "We have got to be strong in the defense of w omen's health and not be afraid to take this on."

To register for the conference click here.

 URL: http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/nov/10111910.html

Reply #28 Top

thanks for the update Lula. 

Reply #29 Top

I was doing some more research and came across two more articles from 2006. Very Interesting indeed. 

 

 

The Pill: “the largest unregulated human trial that’s ever been conducted”
Birth Control Pill Link to Breast Cancer

 

By Terry Vanderheyden

CHICAGO, March 7, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A world leader in cancer causes and prevention has warned that the so-called birth control pill is “the largest unregulated human trial that’s ever been conducted.”

Dr. Sam Epstein, author of Cancer-Gate: How to Win the Losing Cancer War and Professor of Environmental and Occupational Medicine at the School of Public Health, University of Illinois at Chicago, told the CBC’s Marketplace that exposure to the hormones estrogen and progestin, as found in the pill, increase breast cancer risk.

Marketplace author Wendy Mesley, herself a breast cancer survivor, explained that the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer last year re-classified hormonal contraceptives as carcinogenic to humans.

Dr. Chris Kahlenborn, M.D. demonstrated that a woman who takes birth control pills before her first child is born has at least a 40 percent increased risk of developing breast cancer and a woman who has taken the pill for four or more years prior to the birth of her first child has a 72 percent risk factor in developing breast cancer. Dr. Kahlenborn’s book, “Breast cancer: Its link to abortion and the birth control pill,” published by One More Soul, is based on six years of study and a meticulous analysis of hundreds of scientific papers and other sources.

A European study, which looked at 103,000 women aged between 30 and 49 in Norway and Sweden found the risk of developing breast cancer rose by 26% for women who had taken the pill over those who had never used it. Moreover, women who had used the pill for long periods of time increased their risk of breast cancer by 58%. The study also found that women over 45 still using the pill had an increased risk of 144%.

The British Medical Journal revealed that the pill increases a woman’s risk of developing cerebrovascular disease by 1.9 times while increasing the tendency to cervical cancer by 2.5 times. The 25 year follow-up study with 46,000 British women also noted that the enhanced risk of death lasts for 10 years after women have stopped taking the pill.




Reply #30 Top
     


Use with CAUTION
   ANDREA MROZEK


Pink ribbons are well and good. But why aren't people talking about the link between the pill and breast cancer?

It’s hard not to notice that it’s Breast Cancer Awareness Month. From pink ribbons to pink running shorts to pink hockey sticks, the campaign is on.

“This October,” reads one pink Web ad, “be a friend.” Vague advice to be sure, and women are right to wonder what precisely is the nature of the awareness being raised. For instance: Is it wrong to leave the light on at night? Are there risks to living on a farm? Both are questions posed by recent cancer research, which has examined possible links between breast cancer and myriad risk factors. Through it all, however, there’s one comparatively solid link to breast cancer that goes unmentioned. It’s the link between breast cancer and the birth control pill.

Eighty-four per cent of Canadian women have taken the Pill at some point, but few of those are aware that the Pill was classified as a “group-one carcinogen” by the International Agency for Research on Cancer in 2005. Far fewer still are likely aware of a new meta-analysis on the link between breast cancer and the Pill, published this month by the Mayo Clinic, a U.S.-based medical practice operated by the Mayo Foundation, a non-profit organization.

The lead author, Dr. Chris Kahlenborn, focused on younger, premenopausal women who had been on the Pill prior to having their first baby. The results: Twenty-one of 23 studies indicate a link between the Pill and breast cancer. Overall, they point to an astounding 44% increased risk of developing breast cancer for young women on the Pill before having their first child.

For 20 years, a study here, or a study there, has shown there could be a link between the Pill and breast cancer. The gold standard of Pill research, however, remains a 1996 Oxford study, which said the Pill causes a small increased risk of breast cancer, but after 10 years that risk vanishes. Dr. Kahlenborn’s goal was to improve on the Oxford study.


Why are his conclusions being reported on the back pages — even as breast cancer “awareness” has otherwise become an activist and media obsession? Perhaps it is because the Pill has long been the darling of feminists — a vertiable icon of female empowerment. In some circles, suggesting the Pill might kill you is seen as tantamount to issuing a press release that women belong in the kitchen. Pharmaceutical companies, too, have a vested interest in maintaining the Pill’s clean bill of health: Half of the population can be on it for decades.

Queen’s University professor Samantha King said in an interview with Maclean’s earlier this month that we weren’t asking “the hard questions about whether we’re spending [breast cancer research money] in the right way.” She went on to point out that “incidence rates have remained stubbornly high … A woman’s lifetime risk of breast cancer was one in 22 in the 1940s, but by 2004, it was one in seven.”

Ms. King wasn’t discussing the Pill per se. But given the numbers she cites, the subject should be impossible to avoid.

The amount of evidence already available is a trumpet call for further research, something like the conclusive Women’s Health Initiative study dedicated to examining hormone replacement therapy, whose results made the front pages recently. Until then, young women seeking birth control should be told of the 44% increased risk in order to make their own decisions.

There’s always the risk of this information being misconstrued as an attack on women’s rights. But the risks of suppressing information and not discussing this link are much, much higher. Unvarnished honesty will do a lot more to protect women’s health than this month’s politically correct flurry of pink.

 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Andrea Mrozek, "Use with CAUTION." National Post, (Canada) October 20, 2006.

Reprinted with permission of the National Post.

THE AUTHOR

Andrea Mrozek is Manager of Research and Communications at the Institute of Marriage and Family Canada.

Copyright © 2006 National Post

Reply #31 Top

Now some info on the Komen Foundation....

 

 


Wednesday October 6, 2010


Harding U. Drops Komen over Planned Parenthood Funding

 

By Kathleen Gilbert

SEARCY, Arkansas, October 6, 2010 (lifesitenews.com) - The campus bookstore at an Arkansas Christian university has stopped selling Susan G. Komen for the Cure items because of the organization's funding of several affiliates that fund Planned Parenthood.

The Daily Citizen of Searcy and White County reported that, according to Harding spokesman David Crouch, university vice president Mel Sansom decided to pull the items because of the Planned Parenthood connection.

Komen has come under fire from pro-life advocates for maintaining ties with about 21 affiliates that support Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest abortion provider and a top contraceptive advocate. A report by Stop Planned Parenthood (STOPP) in 2008 found that Komen affiliates donated $700 million to Planned Parenthood between April 2005-April 2006.

While Komen spokesman John Hammarley said the Planned Parenthood funding was meant to support breast health, researchers have pointed to a scientifically-supported link between abortion and contraception and breast cancer that renders the funding for the abortion and contraceptive giant questionable at best.

An April 2009 study by scientists at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center found that taking oral contraceptives while under age 18 more than tripled the risk of aggressive breast cancer, and more than quadrupled the risk in those who have used the drug recently. In addition, it found that having an abortion raises the risk of breast cancer by 40 percent. 

A study published by the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons in 2007 called abortion the "best predictor of breast cancer."

For more information on the medical connection between abortion and breast cancer, visit the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer website.

 

Reply #32 Top

Ohio bishop: no fundraising on behalf of Komen Foundation

  July 13, 2011

Bishop Leonard Blair of Toledo has directed that “Catholic fundraising efforts” to combat breast cancer should be directed to local cancer centers rather than to the Susan G. Komen Foundation.

“For some time, moral questions have been raised from various quarters about the research funded by the Komen Foundation,” Bishop Blair said in a letter. “The bishops of Ohio have discussed this and have looked into the matter. As best we can determine, at present the Komen Foundation does not fund cancer research that employs embryonic stem cells. However, their policy does not exclude that possibility. They are open to embryonic stem cell research, and may very well fund such research in the future.”

“They are also contributors to Planned Parenthood, which, though it may claim to provide needed medical services to poor women, is also the largest provider of abortions in our country,” he added. “In order to avoid even the possibility of cooperation in morally unacceptable activities, the other Bishops and I believe that it would be wise to find alternatives to Komen for Catholic fundraising efforts.”

Following a Toledo Blade article, the diocese issued a clarification:

 

Bishop Blair's letter is neither a condemnation, censure, nor--as the Blade claimed--a "ban" on the Komen Foundation. Individual Catholics who want to contribute to Komen locally can continue to do so on the basis of Komen's assurance that no local funds go to Planned Parenthood or to embryonic stem cell research. However, there are some who in good faith continue to have misgivings about Komen's association with Planned Parenthood and its openness to embryonic stem cell research. For that reason the Bishops of Ohio determined, as Bishop Blair says, that "in order to avoid even the possibility of cooperation in morally unacceptable activities...fundraising activities carried out under Catholic auspices, including our schools, should be channeled" elsewhere.
Reply #33 Top

Birth control use by women with common vein condition raises deadly blood clot risk to 1,700%

BY JEREMY KRYN

 
 

August 10, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) –  While use of the birth control pill raises the risk of deadly blood clots by 500 percent, the risk shoots to over 1,700 percent for U.S. women with a common vein malformation, California researchers have found.

In the study published by the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Stanford University School of Medicine’s Dr. Lawrence Hofmann and his team noted that up to 25 percent of the population has a vein malformation or narrowing, known as stenosis, in the left common iliac vein.

Comparing 35 women with deep vein thrombosis (DVT), a blood clot that is potentially fatal, against 35 women without the condition, the Stanford group found the risk of DVT in women with a 70 percent venous stenosis who also use combined-oral contraceptives (COC) – containing both the hormones estrogen and progestin –  to be nearly 18 times greater. This finding compares with a risk 3.5 times for women with venous stenosis and 5 times for women with COC-use.

The study drew its conclusion using computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans to evaluate women with DVT, and comparing the women to an equal number of women of the same age who came to the emergency room with abdominal pain.

The researchers noted that about 1 to 3 young women among every 10,000 who are not taking oral contraceptives will develop DVT every year. That risk is 6 times greater for young women who take the Pill for a year.

According to Reuters, approximately 12 million women in the U.S. use the COC form of birth control pill.

The California researchers recommended further studies to investigate their conclusion and its potential clinical implications. 

Commenting on the Stanford study, National Catholic Bioethics Center Director of Education Father Tadeusz Pacholczyk told LifeSiteNews, “I knew a pharmacologist who was fond of reminding his students: ‘no drug has just one effect.’ The contraceptive Pill exemplifies this.”

“Medicine is oriented towards restoring lost or compromised function,” Father Pacholczyk said. “The Pill, when used for contraceptive purposes, does not constitute medicine in the proper sense of the term; it rather represents a decision on the part of the medical community to collude with a patient population in pursuing non-medical ends and morally problematic lifestyle agendas that threaten marriage, fidelity, and the chastity of young people.”

Reply #34 Top

October is Breast Cancer Awareness Month.....

 

Breast Cancer Awareness Month ignores the Pill’s link to cancer

 

October 18, 2011 (HLIWorldWatch.org) - The fact that campaigns promoting Breast Cancer Awareness Month have largely ignored the connection between contraception and breast cancer is prompting one doctor to challenge other medical professionals to speak up about the pill’s risk to women.

“How many hundreds of thousands of Filipina mothers have died because of cancers, stroke, hypertension, and diabetes triggered by oral contraceptive use?” asked Dr. Rene Bullecer, the Philippines country director of Human Life International (HLI), in a recent interview with CBCP for Life.

“I am challenging all doctors, nurses and midwives in this country, particularly those working in the government or NGOs who vigorously promote these products in their day-to-day campaign, and I dare them to speak up for the truth … and expose the hidden agenda of the multi-billion peso pill manufacturers at the expense of the health and lives of Filipino women,” Dr. Bullecer said.

Dr. Bullecer, who practices medicine in the Philippines and is a pro-life activist, said he was “shocked” by the lack of information being transmitted about the link between oral contraceptives and breast cancer.

“I was viewing a local TV program several nights ago where the guests — [including obstetricians] — discussed the signs and symptoms of breast cancer, how to avoid breast cancer and the contributory factors on how women may be afflicted with breast cancer. I was shocked that they never mentioned the role of oral contraceptives in triggering breast cancer,” said Dr. Bullecer. “One of the doctor-panelists even denied the pill-cancer connection.”

“As a doctor of medicine and a pro-life fighter, I cannot afford to just close my eyes and ears to the truth that the use of oral contraceptive pills, as well as Depo-Provera injectables, can cause cancer,” Dr. Bullecer said. “The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) of the World Health Organization (WHO) declared on July 29, 2005 that ‘artificial contraceptives’ are ‘carcinogenic,’ on par with cigarettes and asbestos.”

HLI America (HLIA) National Director Arland K. Nichols and HLIA Fellow Dr. Denise Hunnell discussed the WHO data in a recent publication on the lack of information given to teenagers about contraception.

“[T]he World Health Organization has identified synthetic estrogen as a ‘Group 1 Carcinogen,’ which increases the risk for the most common and deadly cancers for women—most notably breast cancer, which accounts for 26% of cancers in women. Studies that show a heightened risk of breast cancer for users of oral contraception have been published in the most prestigious medical journals,” according to Nichols and Dr. Hunnell.

Additionally, “The National Cancer Institute emphasizes that contraception brings a risk of other cancers including cervical and liver cancer, and notes that teenagers constitute the group whose risk most increases with contraceptive use,” the authors said.

In October of 2006, four researchers, including Dr. Chris Kahlenborn, published a meta-analysis in the Mayo Clinic Proceedings on the subject of oral contraceptives and pre-menopausal breast cancer.

Dr. Kahlenborn and his colleagues found that, “Use of oral contraceptives is associated with an increased risk of premenopausal breast cancer, especially with use before first full-term pregnancy in parous women.”

“After reviewing all of the world’s data, we found that 21 out of 23 studies showed an increased risk of developing invasive premenopausal breast cancer if women took oral contraceptives prior to the birth of their first child, which is when most women take them,” said Dr. Kahlenborn explaining the study earlier this year. “These women incurred a 44% increased risk, which rose to 52% if they took them for at least 4 years prior to the birth of their first child.”

In the United States, one of the most recognizable organizations promoting breast cancer awareness during October, the Susan G. Komen for the Cure Foundation, has been tied to contraceptive promoter Planned Parenthood.

New figures from an American Life League study of Susan G. Komen affiliates’ federal forms 990 show 18 Komen affiliates gave $569,159 to Planned Parenthood in 2010, the latest year for which figures are available.

Though Komen admits on its website that “Women who are currently using—or have recently used—birth control pills appear to have a slightly increased risk of breast cancer,” they continue to give money to Planned Parenthood.

“I really pity our women,” said Dr. Bullecer. “For more than 40 years since the artificial family planning program started in 1967 [in the Philippines], women were never told about the horrible medical side-effects of these pills.”

“Who will speak for these helpless victims?”

Reprinted with permission from HLIWorldWatch.org

 

Reply #35 Top

Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) is scientifically linked to breast cancer.  Ran across it while scouring oncology journals.  (I am in treatment with so many women who took it for menopause or to manage side effects from hysterectomy.  And guess what?  They are generally ER+...)

And many Drs still prescribe it like it's no big deal. 

Reply #40 Top

Having all this information out there and knowing that the Obama administration is attempting by its HHS mandate to force Catholic institutions to offer health insurance plans to cover contraceptives makes me sick. 

 

Reply #41 Top

Breast cancer spike raises concerns about ObamaCare mandate, abortion

by Ben Johnson

  • Mon Mar 04, 2013 12:24 EST

 

WASHINGTON, D.C., March 4, 2013, (LifeSiteNews.com) – A recent study finding a marked increase in the worst cases of breast cancer has led some pro-lifers to ask if the Obama administration's promotion of contraception and abortion will raise the chances of more young American women developing the life-threatening disease.

 

A report by Rebecca Johnson, pubished in the Journal of the American Medical Association on February 27, found that the incidence of advanced breast cancer for women ages 25-39 has increased nearly 90 percent in 33 years.

In these cases, the cancer had spread from the breast to other parts of the body before being diagnosed. This level of cancer rose from 1.53 percent in 1976 to 2.90 percent in 2009.

The fatality rate of advanced cases is more than five times higher than among other stages of breast cancer.

Some in the pro-life movement say the Obama administration's health care policies will increase the disease's deadly toll.

“Many more young women are at risk for developing advanced breast cancer in the future because of an ObamaCare mandate requiring employers to purchase insurance that will provide 'free' cancer-causing hormonal contraceptive steroids and abortion-inducing drugs,” said Karen Malec, president of the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer.

“Abortion and use of hormonal contraceptive steroids among teenagers are the elephants in the living room that the medical establishment ignores,” she said. “It doesn’t matter to government officials how many lives are destroyed because of it.”

Although the strong link between oral contraception and breast cancer is well known, the Obama administration has championed “free” access to the pill as fundamental women's health care.

Because of the tensions between politics and science, international organizations have a conflicted relationshiop with the birth control pill, which is simultaneously declared a “human right” by the UN Population Fund and a Group One carcinogen by the World Health Organization.

 

The National Cancer Institute notes that oral contraceptives are also associated with increased cervical cancer, as well as liver tumors.

Dr. Angela Lanfranchi, a breast surgical oncologist and co-founder of the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute, has called the oral contraceptive pill a “molotov cocktail” for breast cancer.

The Breast Cancer Prevention Institute also says that there is a link between abortion and increased breast cancer. Malec told LifeSiteNews.com last year that “52 out of 68 [epidemiological] studies now show” an independent link between abortion and breast cancer.

The JAMA article noted that black women had a higher rate of advanced breast cancer than non-Hispanic white women.

Malec asked, “Is this any wonder when the abortion rate for African American women is more than double that of white women?”

Malec said the fact that the paper did not offer a hypothesis about the increase was “peculiar but not surprising.” 

Related Stories

Rick Santorum raises abortion-breast cancer link

Surgeon: birth control pill a ‘molotov cocktail’ for breast cancer

World Health Organization Classifies Contraceptives as Highly Carcinogenic

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/breast-cancer-spikes-raises-concerns-about-obamacare-mandate-abortion?utm_source=LifeSiteNews.com+Daily+Newsletter&utm_campaign=a90268c984-LifeSiteNews_com_US_Headlines_03_04_2013&utm_medium=email

 

Reply #42 Top

Birth control, abortion, breast cancer all connected?

Posted by Charlie Butts (American Family News) - March 06, 2013

While a new study finds a nearly 90-percent increase in advanced breast cancers over a 33-year period, scientists are ignoring two important links to the disease: the use of contraceptive steroids (birth-control pill), and abortions.

Karen Malec of the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer reports that the study, led by Dr. Rebecca Johnson and reported in The Journal of the American Medical Association, involves cases where the cancer had already spread to other parts of the body among women ages 25-39.

"The increased incidence among women, young women between ages 25 and 39, had jumped by nearly 90 percent over a 33-year period between 1976 and 2009," Malec details. "These are very aggressive breast cancers and very low survival rates."

The Coalition spokesperson finds it strange that the researchers did not hypothesize the reasons and that they totally ignored "two elephants in the living room that the medical establishment sees but ignores."

"The use of hormonal contraceptive steroids -- for example, the birth-control pill, Depo-Provera and other devices that are offered to women -- and they're ignoring the [birth control]/breast cancer link as an explanation for this increase in advanced breast cancers," Malec laments.

Advanced breast cancers among African-American women in the same age group and during the same period are shown to have doubled.

So as many scientists continue to ignore the birth control/breast cancer link, Malec believes such cases will increase under the ObamaCare mandate, as more women are expected to use birth control in the future.

- See more at: http://instantanalysis.net/latest-headlines-from-american-family-news/2013/03/06/birth-control,-abortion,-breast-cancer-all-connected#sthash.HRo8u6s8.dpuf

 

http://instantanalysis.net/latest-headlines-from-american-family-news/2013/03/06/birth-control,-abortion,-breast-cancer-all-connected

 

Reply #43 Top
Ideological Bias Risking the Lives of Young Women
Breast Cancer Dramatically on the Rise in 25-39 Age Group

By Denise Hunnell, MD

WASHINGTON, D.C., June 12, 2013 (Zenit.org) - Scientific studies from around the world show that younger women, specifically those between the ages of 25 and 39, are increasingly being diagnosed with aggressive breast cancer—which has often spread further in the body by the time of diagnosis. A study on cancer rates in Geneva, Switzerland, published in 2007 found that breast cancer in this age group of women increased at the alarming rate of 46.7% per year from 2002 to 2004[i].

An analysis of breast cancer epidemiology in the United States noted a similarly accelerating diagnosis of metastatic breast cancer beginning in 1976 and extending to the last year for which data was available, 2009. The American findings, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) in February 2013, noted that this trend was not seen in older women diagnosed with breast cancer. The authors did not speculate on any specific causes of this increase, instead attributing it to a vague multifactor etiology. They did make it clear that the results measured a true increase in the incidence of breast cancer and were not simply the outcome of better diagnostic techniques[ii].

British researchers affiliated with the organization Cancer Research UK reported that between1993 and 2010 there was an 11% growth in the incidence of breast cancer in women under the age of 50. Currently, one in five breast cancer cases in the UK are occurring in this younger female demographic. Unlike their American counterparts, however, Cancer Research UK did postulate possible causes for this exponential growth in aggressive breast cancer affecting younger women: use of hormonal contraceptives,  women waiting until later in life to have children, and having fewer children or even no children overall.[iii]

The increased use of contraceptives has led to women being older at their first full-term birth or never giving birth, both of which are well-established risk factors for breast cancer.[iv] The pattern of increased incidence of breast cancer among younger women over the last four decades correlates well with the accelerating use of oral contraceptives over these same decades. However, the correlation is likely more than just an indirect effect linked to the timing of the first pregnancy carried to term. 

The World Health Organization classifies the hormones used in the oral contraceptives as Group 1 carcinogens, right along with substances like arsenic and asbestos[v], so there is also a direct cancer-causing effect of oral contraceptives. This link was most dramatically illustrated in a study published in 2009 in Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention. Researchers from the Fred Hutchinson Cancer research Center, the University of Washington, and the National Cancer Institute looked at a large cohort of young women diagnosed with a particularly aggressive form of breast cancer. They found that use of oral contraceptives doubled the risk of this aggressive breast cancer in women aged 41-45 and quadrupled the risk for women under the age of 40.[vi]

In addition to an increasing prevalence of hormonal contraceptive use, the last four decades have also seen an increasing incidence of induced abortion. Numerous scholarly studies have found a link between induced abortion and breast cancer.[vii] A 2007 study published in the Journal of Physicians and Surgeons found that the rate of induced abortions was the best predictor of the incidence of breast cancer in a population[viii]. The 2009 study linking oral contraceptives and aggressive breast cancer in young women also found that induced abortion was an independent risk factor for breast cancer.[ix]

We now have at least three independent research groups documenting the exponential rise of breast cancer among young women since the 1970s in both the United States and Europe. During this same time frame there has been a similar rise in the use of oral contraceptives and the incidence of induced abortions. Numerous studies published in medical literature link breast cancer in young women to the use of hormonal contraceptives and induced abortion. Therefore, while the rise in the number of young women diagnosed with breast cancer is most certainly the result of many factors, abortion and the use of hormonal contraceptives must be considered leading etiologies. These are risks that are easily modified by behavior, so one would expect the researchers who are alarmed by the growing number of young women with breast cancer would be vigorously encouraging women to avoid both contraceptives and abortion. Unfortunately, this is not the case.

Cancer Research UK, the organization whose own report even mentioned the use of contraceptives as a possible etiology for the increase of breast cancer in young women, responded on May 31, 2013 by calling for more studies of chemotherapy and radiation protocols aimed at the younger patients. Professor Dianna Eccles, a principle researcher for Cancer Research UK, stated, “Research is the key to improving survival for these women and we urgently need trials to help us develop new treatments tailored specifically at this age group.”[x] Instead of looking at strategies of prevention, they are focusing on treatment after the damage is done.

In the United States there is a similar denial of the potentially lethal consequences of abortion and hormonal contraceptives use. The Department of Health and Human Services has mandated that all insurance programs must provide hormonal contraceptives as essential “preventive health care” with no regard for the adverse medical outcomes of their use. It has been well documented that there was a deliberate bias to exclude any objection to the inclusion of contraceptives in all health insurance plans.[xi]

When it comes to the link between abortion and breast cancer, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) still insists that the definitive word on this question was issued at their 2003 workshop that reported no association between abortion and breast cancer.[xii]  However, the president of this workshop is one of the authors of the 2009 study previously mentioned that found a 40% increase in breast cancer after induced abortion. The NCI workshop has also been soundly criticized for its ideological bias that rejected all evidence which did not conform to preconceived views.[xiii]

What is clear is that young women are developing breast cancer in record numbers. There is solid evidence that both abortion and hormonal contraceptives are linked to an increased risk of breast cancer, and this is particularly true in younger women.  Yet too many health care professionals and health care policy makers regard providing abortions and contraception as sacrosanct and above criticism. Those who dare to speak the truth and highlight the significant risks of abortion or contraception are accused of waging a “war on women.” But this ideological intransigence is costing lives.

Those who think contraception and abortion are the lynchpins of women’s equality are wrong. It is demeaning to women to suggest that they cannot be valued or successful if their fertility is intact. It is time to give women the whole truth. Unnatural manipulations of the female reproductive system are dangerous. We cannot allow young women to continue to die because the facts challenge the norms of our contraceptive culture.

* * *

Denise Hunnell, MD, is a Fellow of Human Life International, an international pro-life organization. She writes for HLI's Truth and Charity Forum.

---

[i] http://www.nature.com/bjc/journal/v96/n11/full/6603783a.html

[ii] http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1656255

[iii] http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/may/03/breast-cancer-increase-younger-women

[iv] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3117094/

[v] http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Classification/ClassificationsGroupOrder.pdf

[vi] http://cebp.aacrjournals.org/content/18/4/1157.full

[vii] http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/ABC_Research/index.htm

[viii] http://www.jpands.org/vol12no3/carroll.pdf

[ix] http://cebp.aacrjournals.org/content/18/4/1157.full

[x] http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/cancer-info/news/archive/pressrelease/2013-31-5-breast-cancer-trial-yung-women?rss=true

[xi] http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2011/09/4031/

[xii] http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/abortion-miscarriage

[xiii]http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/nci/workshop/

Reply #44 Top

Where's the link to the original article?

Reply #47 Top

http://www.christianpost.com/news/women-with-induced-abortions-20-times-more-likely-to-get-breast-cancer-study-says-102296/

 

Women With Induced Abortions 20 Times More Likely to Get Breast Cancer, Study Says

By Stoyan Zaimov, Christian Post Reporter

August 14, 2013|4:43 pm

A report on the risk factors for breast cancer published by the Journal of Dhaka Medical College in Bangladesh has determined that women who have induced abortions increase their chances of getting cancer by as much as 20 times.

"Almost all the women are married (97% currently married; the rest widowed) and with child by the time they are 20, and all of the kids are breastfed. Ninety percent had their first child at age 21 or younger (99% of controls did)," explained Professor Joel Brind of Baruch College, City University of New York, noting that the high risk elevation is a measure of relative risk and that in general, Bengali women have traditional childbearing patterns that reduce breast cancer risk.

"They typically neither take contraceptive steroids nor have any abortions. Nulliparity (childlessness) or abortion before first full term pregnancy (both of which mean no breastfeeding) in a population in which breast cancer is almost unheard of, makes the relative risk very high," Brind continued, who is a professor of biology and endocrinology.

The raw data of the study, reported by the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer, showed a 95 percent confidence interval of 12.85-32.51, which makes abortion the strongest risk factor observed in the women who were studied.

"In plain English, women in this population who had any induced abortions were more than 20 times as likely to get breast cancer, compared to women with no abortions," Brind added.

Other factors that might influence the risk of breast cancer include use of oral contraceptives (1.47-fold increased risk); early first birth at or before age 21 (0.35-fold reduced risk); having two or more children (0.29-fold reduced risk); and increased number of months spent breastfeeding (0.30-fold reduced risk), according to the Journal report.

Various other studies have been done on the link between abortion and the risk of breast cancer, coming up with different results, and some showing no link at all.

The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists said in a June 2009 report that the topic has been the subject of a great deal of epidemiologic study, but noted that "more rigorous" recent studies have failed to demonstrate a casual relationship between induced abortion and an increase in breast cancer risk.

"In 2003, the National Cancer Institute convened the Early Reproductive Events and Breast Cancer Workshop to evaluate the current strength of evidence of epidemiologic, clinical, and animal studies addressing the association between reproductive events and the risk of breast cancer," ACOG wrote.

"The workshop participants concluded that induced abortion is not associated with an increase in breast cancer risk. Studies published since 2003 continue to support this conclusion."

The Breast Cancer Prevention Institute, on the other hand, compiled a list of 68 different worldwide studies since 1957 that analyzed the supposed link between induced abortion and the development of breast cancer. Of those studies, 53 showed some kind of association, while 15 studies did not show such a link.


Read more at http://global.christianpost.com/news/women-with-induced-abortions-20-times-more-likely-to-get-breast-cancer-study-says-102296/#fhiJg2GRKRulpxru.99

Reply #48 Top

Neb. priest contributes to medical article linking contraception, breast cancer

 

LINCOLN, NEB., July 21 (CNA) .- In an upcoming issue of The Linacre Quarterly, the official journal of the Catholic Medical Association, an article entitled, “The Breast Cancer Epidemic: 10 Facts,” will explore the scientific evidence that connects artificial contraception to breast cancer.

Father Christopher Kubat, executive director of Catholic Social Services of southern Nebraska and a medical physician, is one of the co-authors. He was asked to contribute a small portion of the article by two of the main authors, A. Patrick Schneider II, M.D., M.P.H., and Christine Zainer, M.D.

Father Kubat became acquainted with Dr. Zainer when he was still practicing medicine in Milwaukee, before he entered the seminary. Drs. Schneider and Zainer also received contributions from Nancy K. Mullen, M.D. and Amberly K. Windisch, M.D.

“It was a collaborative effort that took considerable time,” Father Kubat said. “It’s very lengthy, and there are tons of references.”

With one in eight U.S. woman diagnosed with breast cancer at some point in their lives, the article is addressing a crucial topic. Multiple medical studies have shown that women who use oral contraception experience an increased risk for developing breast cancer.

“The epidemiological data in the article is, for the most part, unknown to the general public,” Father Kubat said. “That evidence has largely been suppressed and ignored. This article is an attempt to overcome this and bring it to light.”

He added, “If one looks hard enough, they can find evidence in the medical literature between using chemical contraceptive drugs and having an abortion with breast cancer.”

Father Kubat said that even in the recent news about Hobby Lobby’s appeal to the Supreme Court to refrain from paying for four specific contraception options that cause abortion, there is a great deal of misunderstanding.

“The narrative suggests that some contraceptive drugs are not abortifacients and others are,” he said. “Make no mistake; all contraceptive drugs have as one of their mechanisms of action the abortive dimension – all of them.”

This article in The Linacre Quarterly also carefully provides the worldwide evidence for this link between an induced abortion and breast cancer.

“The recent increase in breast cancer began more than 40 years ago and was abrupt,” he pointed out. “This is no accident.”

Father Kubat said the article also will make it clear that “many of the cases of breast cancer in the world are preventable.”

It frustrates Father Kubat that in society, physicians remain ignorant of the facts and contraception has become the “sacred cow that must not be sacrificed.” He laments the heavy price that is being paid by the women who use it.

“This is the real war against women,” he maintained.

Father Kubat said he hopes that people will read the article and learn the truth. In the meantime, he is available to talk to parishes, women’s groups and anywhere else he is invited to discuss the medical evidence regarding contraception and female health. He can be reached at the Catholic Social Services office, (402) 474-1600.

Continuously published since 1934, The Linacre Quarterly is the oldest journal in existence dedicated to medical ethics. The Linacre Quarterly provides a forum in which faith and reason can be brought to bear on analyzing and resolving ethical issues in health care, with a particular focus on issues in clinical practice and research.


This article was originally published in the Lincoln, Neb., diocesan paper, the Southern Nebraska Register. Reprinted here with permission

Reply #49 Top

Thu May 7, 2015 - 1:14 pm EST

Planned Parenthood endangers women by hiding the truth on link between pill and breast cancer

By STOPP

May 7, 2015 (STOPP.org) -- “The most recent literature suggests that the pill, or other combined methods, have little, if any, effect on the risk of developing breast cancer.” So said Vanessa Cullins, vice president for external medical affairs at Planned Parenthood Federation of America in 2005. The very same year, the International Agency on Research of Cancer, part of the World Health Organization, listed the pill as a Group 1 carcinogen.

In fact, as early as 2000, the National Toxicology Advisory Panel had already put the estrogen found in birth control pills on its list of known carcinogens. 

In 2006, a meta-analysis undertaken by Dr. Chris Kahlenborn and colleagues published in the Mayo Clinic Proceedings showed a 44 percent increase in risk of breast cancer in women who took the pill before having a child.

In 2009, a study funded by the National Institutes of Health found a year or more of oral contraceptive use was associated with a 4.2-fold increased risk of triple-negative breast cancer for women 40 and under. Longer duration of use and early age of first use further increased the risk.

New studies continue to emerge that show the connection between hormonal contraceptives and breast cancer. A just-released study from researchers at Slone Epidemiology Center at Boston University concluded that recent oral contraceptive use, particularly of long duration, is associated with increased risk of breast cancer in African American women. It goes on to say: “Increases in risk associated with OC use were apparent for up to 15 years or more after cessation of use.”

Long-term pill use also increases the risk of cervical cancer. Women who use the pill for five to nine years have twice the risk of cervical cancer. Those who use it for 10 years or more have more than three times the risk of cervical cancer.

Primary liver cancer—rare in developed countries—increased 50 to 70 percent in women who use the pill.

A 2015 study published in the British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology shows that taking the combination estrogen progestin pill increases the risk of primary brain cancer (glioma) by 50 percent. Long-term use almost doubles the risk. Women on the progestin only regimen are at even higher risk of brain cancer. And though glioma accounts for 33 percent of primary brain tumors, when Time.com reported on the finding, the author used the word “rare” five times in describing the tumors.

Planned Parenthood today continues to maintain that the pill is so safe and vital to “women’s health” that every woman should have free access to it. Join American Life League on June 6 to expose the lies that surround birth control. See thepillkills.org for all the details.

Reprinted with permission from STOPP.