Editor's note. We have run a number of thoughtful examinations of the link between induced abortion and an increase in breast cancer. A friend sent me the following "Editorial Counterpoint" that appeared in the hyper-pro-abortion [Minneapolis] Star-Tribune newspaper.
It is an excellent overview of the case that a link does exist, and is very much worth your reading. The newspaper headlined the piece by John D. Hagen Jr. and Dr. Steve Calvin, "Don’t Dismiss Link Between Abortion, Breast Cancer." It is reprinted with permission.
************************* ****************
In recent weeks, overwhelming media pressure was brought to bear on the Minnesota Department of Health to change language on its Web site. The Web site had mentioned studies linking abortion to increased breast cancer risk. The Star Tribune has published extensive criticism of this claim. It has given no explanation, however, of the data supporting the claim:
* Breast cancer rates have increased substantially since abortion rates increased after legalization.
* Most studies show an increased rate of breast cancer in women who have had abortions.
* A coherent physiological hypothesis exists to explain this link.
Through 2002, 29 of 38 studies showed an increased breast cancer rate in women with a history of abortion. A comprehensive review of most of these studies was published by Joel Brind, an endocrinologist at City University of New York. Brind estimated a 30 percent overall increase in the risk of breast cancer due to induced abortion. The risk was even higher for young women with a family history of breast cancer. A physiological hypothesis exists to explain these findings. Breast cells divide and grow at a very high rate during the first six months of pregnancy. During the third trimester, in preparation for delivery and milk production, these cells mature and become resistant to cancer. Full-term pregnancies have a well-established protective effect against breast cancer. Breast feeding further increases this protective effect.
After an abortion, the breast cells cannot mature. They divide more rapidly than fully differentiated cells, and are more subject to mutations. A woman who has had an abortion, thus, has a larger number of cancer-vulnerable cells. This is especially true in young women who never have a full-term pregnancy.
Opponents of the breast cancer link primarily rely on one study of Danish women released in 1997. The Melbye study involved 1.5 million women, and claimed to find no increase in breast cancer rates among those who'd had induced abortions.
The Melbye study, however, involves large-scale methodological flaws. Brind points out:
* It studies women born after 1935, but counts abortions starting only in 1973 (when many subjects were in their 30s). Abortion was very widely practiced in Denmark prior to that date. Thus, the study vastly undercounts abortions among its older cohort of women.
* At the other end of the spectrum, the Melbye study includes several hundred thousand women under age 25. Almost no one is diagnosed with breast cancer that young.
Scientists, like everyone else, can be affected by ideological bias. Some researchers denied the tobacco/lung cancer link long after compelling evidence supported it. This history should be cautionary to those who would confer infallibility on medical organizations and experts on politically charged issues.
Three pro-life Minnesota medical organizations (with a combined membership of about 300 physicians) have proposed a public debate on the abortion-breast cancer link. Brind has stated his willingness to come to such a forum. The Minnesota Medical Association has been invited to designate an expert and join in sponsoring the event. Such a debate would help us all to test our ideological biases and better understand the facts.
John D. Hagen Jr., is a Minneapolis attorney. Steve Calvin is a Minneapolis physician and assistant professor at the University of Minnesota.
posted by: ScubaDiva (reply)
post date: 06.15.04 (3:26 pm)
If your 'information' is correct, then women that don't breast feed also risk breast cancer.
The study is greatly flawed and fails to take a variety of different things into account... For example, the ever-increasing amounts of chemicals and pesticides and pollutants that we are exposed to. Perhaps we can also link the skyrocketing cases of "ADHD" and autoimmune disorders to abortion rates as well?
And, the study failed to mention familial histories and relationships.
It's hogwash. And most importantly, its important to look at who is behind the study - their financing.
A woman that is considering an abortion is not going to have one because of a study that showed there might be a chance that developing breast cancer. It's like saying the death penalty discourages murder.
Editor's note. We have run a number of thoughtful examinations of the link between induced abortion and an increase in breast cancer. A friend sent me the following "Editorial Counterpoint" that appeared in the hyper-pro-abortion [Minneapolis] Star-Tribune newspaper.