Science > Abortion > Medical Journal: Research Used to Deny Abortion-Breast Cancer Link Flawed
| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"J Young" |
| Date: |
03 Dec 2005 07:47:20 PM |
| Object: |
Medical Journal: Research Used to Deny Abortion-Breast Cancer Link Flawed |
Once again, it is the LLL (Looney Liberal Left) that places a woman's life
in danger. We who plea for the right-to-life are truly the "pro-choicers";
we believe that a woman has the right to know ALL of the facts before
reaching that fateful decision
Printed from: http://www.lifenews.com/nat1871.html
Medical Journal: Research Used to Deny Abortion-Breast Cancer Link Flawed
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- A scientific review of 10 studies on the
link between abortion and breast cancer find the U.S. National Cancer
Institute (NCI) and others are using seriously flawed research to deny an
abortion-breast cancer link. The review was published in the Journal of
American Physicians and Surgeons.
Professor Joel Brind of Baruch College, the lead author of the review,
concluded, "These recent studies therefore do not invalidate the large body
of previously published studies that established induced abortion as a risk
factor for breast cancer."
Brind is the second breast cancer expert to accuse the NCI and other
researchers of bias in favor of abortion in their reviews of the
abortion-breast cancer link. He said some scientists have engaged in "shoddy
research" in an attempt to disprove the link.
The review represents Brind's first overall analysis of the total research
done on abortion and breast cancer since his seminal work published in 1996.
In that work, he found that 18 out of 23 studies reported women who have had
an abortion show a higher incidence of breast cancer.
Karen Malec, president of the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer, a women's
group which studies the link, said NCI has a history of being wrong about
other factors that cause cancer.
"The NCI was wrong about the tobacco-cancer link in 1954, and it's wrong
again today," she explained. "Scientists are behaving much as they did when
tobacco executives corrupted cancer research."
Schlafly, General Counsel for the Association of American Physicians and
Surgeons, went further and accused abortion advocates of withholding
information about abortion's link to breast cancer to avoid malpractice
lawsuits.
"The abortion industry and medical establishment withholds this information
in an attempt to prevent massive lawsuits from being filed," he said.
Scientists don't debate the secondary risk of abortion -- the longer a woman
delays a first birth, the greater her breast cancer risk is. But scientists
debate whether abortion is independently linked to breast cancer -- whether
it leaves women with more cancer-susceptible breast tissue.
.
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Medical Journal: Research Used to Deny Abortion-Breast Cancer Link Flawed |
03 Dec 2005 08:52:36 PM |
|
|
J Young <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
Once again, it is the LLL (Looney Liberal Left) that places a woman's life
_____________________
/| /| | |
||__|| | Do not feed the |
/ O O\__ | trolls. Thank you. |
/ \ | --Mgt. |
/ \ \|_____________________|
/ _ \ \ ||
/ |\____\ \ ||
/ | | | |\____/ ||
/ \|_|_|/ | _||
/ / \ |____| ||
/ | | | --|
| | | |____ --|
* _ | |_|_|_| | \-/
*-- _--\ _ \ | ||
/ _ \\ | / `
* / \_ /- | | |
* ___ c_c_c_C/ \C_c_c_c____________
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Medical Journal: Research Used to Deny Abortion-Breast Cancer Link Flawed |
03 Dec 2005 09:26:09 PM |
|
|
J Young wrote:
Once again, it is the LLL (Looney Liberal Left) that places a woman's life
in danger. We who plea for the right-to-life are truly the "pro-choicers";
we believe that a woman has the right to know ALL of the facts before
reaching that fateful decision.
Yeah, we'll see who's looney soon enough.
Printed from: http://www.lifenews.com/nat1871.html
Medical Journal: Research Used to Deny Abortion-Breast Cancer Link Flawed
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- A scientific review of 10 studies on the
link between abortion and breast cancer find the U.S. National Cancer
Institute (NCI) and others are using seriously flawed research to deny an
abortion-breast cancer link. The review was published in the Journal of
American Physicians and Surgeons.
Professor Joel Brind ...
*Brind*, again? Brind is lying. From a 1996 review of the literature:
"To evaluate the relationship between breast cancer risk and
spontaneous and induced abortion, we conducted a detailed
descriptive review of 32 epidemiologic studies that provided
data by type of abortion and by various measures of exposure
to abortion--number of abortions, timing of abortion in relation
to first full-term pregnancy, length of gestation, and age at
first
abortion. BREAST CANCER RISK DID NOT APPEAR TO BE
ASSOCIATED WITH AN INCREASING NUMBER OF
SPONTANEOUS OR INDUCED ABORTIONS."
[capitalization mine]
Source: (Cancer Causes Control 1997 Jan;8(1):93-108
Since that review, several other studies, including the famous Melbye
study, have corroborated this finding.
Brind is a laughingstock, not an "expert". He isn't even a medical
doctor. He's a Ph.D., and his field of expertise is sex hormones, not
epidemiology. And just to further help you connect the dots, Brind is
*not* unbiased. He is the former president of a right-to-lie
organization.
Brind's speculations are not supported by medical research. In fact,
he has done no original research on abortion and breast cancer himself.
Instead, he has done meta-analyses of previous studies. Meta-analysis
of clinical research is questionable, since it is subject to bad study
design and researcher bias in deciding which studies to look at and how
to weight the data in each study. Combining the results of several bad
studies doesn't magically improve the results. In short, garbage in =>
garbage out.
Brind wouldn't dare to attempt to publish his unfounded assertions in a
professional, peer-reviewed medical journal like the New England
Journal of Medicine. The editors would boil him alive, assuming they'd
bother to publish such crack-pottery.
From - http://my.webmd.com/content/article/1728.74203
"'Based on the scientific evidence,' [Dr. Carmen Rodriguez, senior
epidemiologist with the American Cancer Society] tells WebMD, 'We
really think there is no association between breast cancer and
abortion.' Rodriguez and others feel that political action groups
are
likely pushing the issue into the public arena, despite the
research
findings. 'Some groups are always interested in getting the topic
in
the news, but we feel there is no evidence.'"
So now we see that the looney here is once again JYoung/IBen/whatever.
Around and around you go, never stopping to rent some clues so you can
be spared the ignomity of displaying your stupidity on a world-wide
discussion forum. Don't you feel even the slightest bit stupid, being
shot down in flames every time you try another line of hypocrisy?
Don't you ever wonder about how you could avoid having your own words
jammed sideways down your becankered pie hole?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Smith" |
|
| Title: Re: Medical Journal: Research Used to Deny Abortion-Breast Cancer Link Flawed |
03 Dec 2005 07:58:43 PM |
|
|
J Young wrote:
Once again, it is the LLL (Looney Liberal Left) that places a woman's life
in danger. We who plea for the right-to-life are truly the "pro-choicers";
we believe that a woman has the right to know ALL of the facts before
reaching that fateful decision
Printed from: http://www.lifenews.com/nat1871.html
[Snip]
Scientists don't debate the secondary risk of abortion -- the longer a woman
delays a first birth, the greater her breast cancer risk is. But scientists
debate whether abortion is independently linked to breast cancer -- whether
it leaves women with more cancer-susceptible breast tissue.
And herein lies the true problem. Even "lifenews.com," an obviously
biased source, admits that there is no evidence of a direct *causal*
link between abortion and breast cancer. Even if there is a
corolation, there is no reason to believe that it's unlike the
corrolation between violent crime and ice cream sales.
- Bill
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: Medical Journal: Research Used to Deny Abortion-Breast Cancer Link Flawed |
04 Dec 2005 06:48:38 AM |
|
|
"Bill Smith" <wsmith76@sprynet.com> wrote in message
news:1133661523.524576.228210@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
J Young wrote:
Once again, it is the LLL (Looney Liberal Left) that places a woman's
life
in danger. We who plea for the right-to-life are truly the
"pro-choicers";
we believe that a woman has the right to know ALL of the facts before
reaching that fateful decision
Printed from: http://www.lifenews.com/nat1871.html
[Snip]
Scientists don't debate the secondary risk of abortion -- the longer a
woman
delays a first birth, the greater her breast cancer risk is. But
scientists
debate whether abortion is independently linked to breast cancer --
whether
it leaves women with more cancer-susceptible breast tissue.
And herein lies the true problem. Even "lifenews.com," an obviously
biased source, admits that there is no evidence of a direct *causal*
link between abortion and breast cancer. Even if there is a
corolation, there is no reason to believe that it's unlike the
corrolation between violent crime and ice cream sales.
You really think so?
I am sure your amateur mathematics status would lead you to believe such,
but why lie?
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Chief Instigator" |
|
| Title: Re: Medical Journal: Research Used to Deny Abortion-Breast Cancer Link Flawed |
04 Dec 2005 10:34:54 AM |
|
|
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Bill Smith" <wsmith76@sprynet.com> wrote in message
news:1133661523.524576.228210@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
J Young wrote:
Once again, it is the LLL (Looney Liberal Left) that places a woman's life
in danger. We who plea for the right-to-life are truly the "pro-choicers";
we believe that a woman has the right to know ALL of the facts before
reaching that fateful decision
Printed from: http://www.lifenews.com/nat1871.html
[Snip]
Scientists don't debate the secondary risk of abortion -- the longer a
woman delays a first birth, the greater her breast cancer risk is. But
scientists debate whether abortion is independently linked to breast
cancer -- whether it leaves women with more cancer-susceptible breast
tissue.
And herein lies the true problem. Even "lifenews.com," an obviously
biased source, admits that there is no evidence of a direct *causal*
link between abortion and breast cancer. Even if there is a
corolation, there is no reason to believe that it's unlike the
corrolation between violent crime and ice cream sales.
You really think so?
I think it's safe to say that he understands the article far better than you
ever will - because he's sane and literate, both of which you are assuredly
not.
I am sure your amateur mathematics status would lead you to believe such,
but why lie?
Precisely where is his lie? (Free clue: disagreeing with the official
crackpot of South Carolina does not automatically equal lying.)
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2005-06 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Houston 7, Cleveland 2 (November 30)
NEXT GAME: Sunday, December 4 vs. Cleveland, 7:05
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Smith" |
|
| Title: Re: Medical Journal: Research Used to Deny Abortion-Breast Cancer Link Flawed |
04 Dec 2005 11:46:49 AM |
|
|
Johnny wrote:
"Bill Smith" <wsmith76@sprynet.com> wrote in message
news:1133661523.524576.228210@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
J Young wrote:
Once again, it is the LLL (Looney Liberal Left) that places a woman's
life
in danger. We who plea for the right-to-life are truly the
"pro-choicers";
we believe that a woman has the right to know ALL of the facts before
reaching that fateful decision
Printed from: http://www.lifenews.com/nat1871.html
[Snip]
Scientists don't debate the secondary risk of abortion -- the longer a
woman
delays a first birth, the greater her breast cancer risk is. But
scientists
debate whether abortion is independently linked to breast cancer --
whether
it leaves women with more cancer-susceptible breast tissue.
And herein lies the true problem. Even "lifenews.com," an obviously
biased source, admits that there is no evidence of a direct *causal*
link between abortion and breast cancer. Even if there is a
corolation, there is no reason to believe that it's unlike the
corrolation between violent crime and ice cream sales.
You really think so?
I am sure your amateur mathematics status would lead you to believe such,
but why lie?
I "really think" that is what the article, as quoted says. The article
itself says "scientists
debate whether abortion is independently linked to breast cancer." No
lie, that's what it says - verify it for yourself.
I have no idea what you mean by "amateur mathematics status."
- Bill
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: Medical Journal: Research Used to Deny Abortion-Breast Cancer Link Flawed |
04 Dec 2005 06:50:42 PM |
|
|
"Bill Smith" <wsmith76@sprynet.com> wrote in message
news:1133718409.002455.285980@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Johnny wrote:
"Bill Smith" <wsmith76@sprynet.com> wrote in message
news:1133661523.524576.228210@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
J Young wrote:
Once again, it is the LLL (Looney Liberal Left) that places a woman's
life
in danger. We who plea for the right-to-life are truly the
"pro-choicers";
we believe that a woman has the right to know ALL of the facts before
reaching that fateful decision
Printed from: http://www.lifenews.com/nat1871.html
[Snip]
Scientists don't debate the secondary risk of abortion -- the longer a
woman
delays a first birth, the greater her breast cancer risk is. But
scientists
debate whether abortion is independently linked to breast cancer --
whether
it leaves women with more cancer-susceptible breast tissue.
And herein lies the true problem. Even "lifenews.com," an obviously
biased source, admits that there is no evidence of a direct *causal*
link between abortion and breast cancer. Even if there is a
corolation, there is no reason to believe that it's unlike the
corrolation between violent crime and ice cream sales.
You really think so?
I am sure your amateur mathematics status would lead you to believe such,
but why lie?
I "really think" that is what the article, as quoted says. The article
itself says "scientists
debate whether abortion is independently linked to breast cancer." No
lie, that's what it says - verify it for yourself.
I have no idea what you mean by "amateur mathematics status."
Your reference to violent crime-ice cream sales correlation as being not
unlike the abortion-breast cancer correlation data.
- Bill
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cleopatra" |
|
| Title: Re: Medical Journal: Research Used to Deny Abortion-Breast Cancer Link Flawed |
04 Dec 2005 02:55:26 PM |
|
|
X-No-archive: yes
Bill Smith wrote:
J Young wrote:
Once again, it is the LLL (Looney Liberal Left) that places a woman's life
in danger. We who plea for the right-to-life are truly the "pro-choicers";
we believe that a woman has the right to know ALL of the facts before
reaching that fateful decision
Printed from: http://www.lifenews.com/nat1871.html
[Snip]
Scientists don't debate the secondary risk of abortion -- the longer a woman
delays a first birth, the greater her breast cancer risk is. But scientists
debate whether abortion is independently linked to breast cancer -- whether
it leaves women with more cancer-susceptible breast tissue.
And herein lies the true problem. Even "lifenews.com," an obviously
biased source, admits that there is no evidence of a direct *causal*
link between abortion and breast cancer. Even if there is a
corolation, there is no reason to believe that it's unlike the
corrolation between violent crime and ice cream sales.
- Bill
While correlation certainly doesn't equate with causation, there's an
enormous, qualitative, difference between linking violent crime and ice
cream and breast cancer wirh abortion. Such a flippant analogy strains
credulity, Bill, in that with abortion and breast cancer we have two
traumas to the organism, possibly working in tandem, and as a purely
medical matter it's not at all far fetched they might concievably be
related. It's an established medical fact that certain injuries and
traumas can lead to cancers.
However, with your comparison no such connection between ice cream and
crime would ever be seriously entertained by anyone with more than ten
neorons firing up there.
Cleopatra
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Smith" |
|
| Title: Re: Medical Journal: Research Used to Deny Abortion-Breast Cancer Link Flawed |
04 Dec 2005 04:27:36 PM |
|
|
The quibble I have is with the rather loose usage of terms such as
"link" and "connection."
For example, you may recall a previous unrelated discussion we had
about the link between states (and counties) with uneducated
populations and states (and counties) with populations that voted for
Republican presidential candidates. The trend is that the more highly
educated the adult population, the more likely it is that the state
will vote for the Democratic candidate. Now, even though it is "not at
all far fetched" that education and voting behavior "might concievably
be related," such a statistic does not, without more, prove that higher
education causes people to vote for the Democrat. You pointed that
out.
There is, however, an undeniable statistical "link" (or "connection" if
you would prefer), between a state's propensity to vote for the
Democrat and the education level of its population. It may be because
well educated people tend to vote for Democrats because they are well
educated. It may be because educated people, like Democratic voters,
tend to live in urban areas. It may be because a substantial portion
of the Democratic base consists of union members who, like educated
people, tend to work for large companies and live near their jobs. It
may be for any number of other reasons.
There is also a "link"/"connection" between violent crime and ice cream
sales. That doesn't mean that the solution to the violent crime
problem is to ban ice cream -- instead it means that ice cream sales,
like the violent crime rate, tends to be higher in warm weather. The
ice cream/violent crime "connection" is simply a device to illustrate
the difference between correlation and causation.
Even if there were a "link" or "connection" between abortion and breast
cancer, that wouldn't mean that abortion causes breast cancer. It
could mean that women who have abortions, like women who get breast
cancer, tend to have their first babies later in life. It could also
mean that any number of other demographic similarities exist between
women who have abortions and women who get breast cancer. When the
most even you can say is that " it's not at all far fetched they
[abortion and breast cancer] might concievably be related," we are a
far way from having evidence that even hints at justifying any kind of
policy change.
- Bill
Cleopatra wrote:
X-No-archive: yes
While correlation certainly doesn't equate with causation, there's an
enormous, qualitative, difference between linking violent crime and ice
cream and breast cancer wirh abortion. Such a flippant analogy strains
credulity, Bill, in that with abortion and breast cancer we have two
traumas to the organism, possibly working in tandem, and as a purely
medical matter it's not at all far fetched they might concievably be
related. It's an established medical fact that certain injuries and
traumas can lead to cancers.
However, with your comparison no such connection between ice cream and
crime would ever be seriously entertained by anyone with more than ten
neorons firing up there.
Cleopatra
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
