abortion and breast cancer

FallingPianos · 03-17-07, 01:48 AM

why is it that people listen to organizations that have a moral opposition to abortion, to get information about the risks/complications of it? doesn't it seem obvious that pro-life organizations might be biased?

the link between abortion and breast cancer is a myth that refuses to die.

here is what some leading medical organizations have to say on the matter:

Quote:

American Cancer Society
“In February 2003, the US National Cancer Institute (NCI) convened a workshop of over 100 of the world’s leading experts who study pregnancy and breast cancer risk. The experts reviewed existing human and animal studies on the relationship between pregnancy and breast cancer risk, including studies of induced and spontaneous abortions. Among their conclusions were:

* Breast cancer risk is temporarily increased after a term pregnancy (resulting in the birth of a living child).

* Induced abortion is not associated with an increase in breast cancer risk.

* Recognized spontaneous abortion is not associated with an increase in breast cancer risk.

The level of scientific evidence for these conclusions was considered to be "well established" (the highest level).”

World Health Organization
“Most of the information on whether induced abortion modifies the risk of breast cancer among women comes from epidemiological studies, which are either case-control studies, or historical cohort studies. For information on abortion, all published case-control studies have relied on interviews of cases and controls with the inherent problem of recall bias. This bias occurs because women with breast cancer (cases) tend to truthfully report induced abortion while controls, who often are healthy women, have no "incentive" to provide information about personal and sensitive matters such as induced abortion. Such bias can produce elevated relative risk estimates in case-control studies. As a result, the outcome of such studies has been inconsistent, with some having indicated a small increase in risk, while others have not.

Historical cohort studies, on the other hand, are more methodologically sound. Two major studies have been carried out using this methodology, and neither found an increased risk of breast cancer associated with first trimester abortion.

Therefore, results from epidemiological studies are reassuring in that they show no consistent effect of first trimester induced abortion upon a woman’s risk of breast cancer later in life.”

National Cancer Institute
February 2003, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) convened a workshop of over 100 of the world’s leading experts who study pregnancy and breast cancer risk. Workshop participants reviewed existing population-based, clinical, and animal studies on the relationship between pregnancy and breast cancer risk, including studies of induced and spontaneous abortions. They concluded that having an abortion or miscarriage does not increase a woman’s subsequent risk of developing breast cancer. A summary of their findings, titled Summary Report: Early Reproductive Events and Breast Cancer Workshop, can be found at Summary Report: Early Reproductive Events Workshop - National Cancer Institute .

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
Washington, DC -- There is no evidence supporting a causal link between induced abortion and subsequent development of breast cancer, according to a committee opinion issued today by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). ACOG's opinion is in agreement with the conclusion reached at the National Cancer Institute's Early Reproductive Events and Breast Cancer Workshop, which met in March 2003.

ACOG's review of the research on a link between abortion and later development of breast cancer concluded that studies on the issue were inconsistent and difficult to interpret, mainly due to study design flaws. Some studies showed either a significant decrease in breast cancer risk after abortion or found no effect. The most recent studies from China, the United Kingdom, and the US found no effect of induced abortion on breast cancer risk.

1069 · 03-17-07, 08:32 AM

Yep. I posted about this awhile back:
link

Good points.
Good luck trying to convince anybody of anything, though.
Right-minded people already know the truth, while prolifers will continue to believe what they've heard in church or read on luvthatfetus.org, rather than statements by the American Cancer Association, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and every other reputable medical authority in the field.

I mean, if you actually had cancer, would you go to a priest, pastor, or politician for treatment?
Why, then, would so many trust the word of these people when it comes medical issues, especially when their opinion is in direct opposition to that of every mainstream medical authority and every legitimate medical organization in the country?

Edify_Always_In_All_Ways · 03-17-07, 08:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by star2589

why is it that people listen to organizations that have a moral opposition to abortion, to get information about the risks/complications of it? doesn't it seem obvious that pro-life organizations might be biased?

the link between abortion and breast cancer is a myth that refuses to die.

here is what some leading medical organizations have to say on the matter:

Well, I know that all them fanshy national organizashuns, they is jusht tools of them go-darned liberals, yissir. I always trusht mah pastor for my daughter's health- he ish jusht so smart!

That's why.

RightOfCenter · 03-24-07, 02:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by star2589

why is it that people listen to organizations that have a moral opposition to abortion, to get information about the risks/complications of it? doesn't it seem obvious that pro-life organizations might be biased?

the link between abortion and breast cancer is a myth that refuses to die.

here is what some leading medical organizations have to say on the matter:

Why would someone believe that stuff in the first place?

1069 · 03-24-07, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RightOfCenter

Why would someone believe that stuff in the first place?

Because they want to.
Because some people believe abortion is a heinous crime, an atrocity... and it upsets them to imagine that those who commit this crime get away scot-free. They want to believe there is some "consequence" to it, some punishment; breast cancer, post-traumatic stress syndrome, something.
They cannot reconcile themselves to a world where those who "murder children" (in their view) go on to live happily and healthily ever after.

RightOfCenter · 03-24-07, 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1069

Because they want to.
Because some people believe abortion is a heinous crime, an atrocity... and it upsets them to imagine that those who commit this crime get away scot-free. They want to believe there is some "consequence" to it, some punishment; breast cancer, post-traumatic stress syndrome, something.
They cannot reconcile themselves to a world where those who "murder children" (in their view) go on to live happily and healthily ever after.

Well, abortion is killing a child, but I've given up on trying to debate it since it's never going to be solved anyway. But the stuff that some of these groups say is just ridiculous.

1069 · 03-24-07, 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RightOfCenter

Well, abortion is killing a child, but I've given up on trying to debate it since it's never going to be solved anyway. But the stuff that some of these groups say is just ridiculous.

No, abortion is not "killing a child".
Killing a child would never be permitted by law, any more than forcing women to be slaves to biological function will (ever again) be permitted by law.

Beyond that, your attitude toward abortion is sensible and prudent.

RightOfCenter · 03-24-07, 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1069

No, abortion is not "killing a child".
Killing a child would never be permitted by law, any more than forcing women to be slaves to biological function will (ever again) be permitted by law.

Bla, bla, bla. I could throw pro-life rhetoric at you all day long too, but we both know it will never convince either of us, will it?

Quote:

Beyond that, your attitude toward abortion is sensible and prudent.

I sure

thought so.

1069 · 03-24-07, 12:23 PM

Quote:

Bla, bla, bla. I could throw pro-life rhetoric at you all day long too, but we both know it will never convince either of us, will it?

There's typically an 'h' at the end of "blah", and I have no need to convince you of anything; my beliefs are law. Yours are nothing. I debate the issue only as a matter of courtesy. In truth, your opinions (and those of other anti-choicers) are irrelevant.

Quote:

I sure

thought so.

Good.

It's nice that we agree on something.

RightOfCenter · 03-24-07, 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1069

There's typically an 'h' at the end of "blah", and I have no need to convince you of anything; my beliefs are law. Yours are nothing. I debate the issue only as a matter of courtesy. In truth, your opinions (and those of other anti-choicers) are irrelevant.

For now...but I'm just going to leave the abortion forum, since it's a lot like spinning my chair around really fast, it's fun for awhile but seeing the same thing so many times will make you sick.