Finally, the Race for the Cure can Start in Earnest

Crista Huff
|
Posted: Feb 03, 2012 12:01 AM

When the Associated Press reported on January 31, 2012, that Susan G. Komen for the Cure was defunding Planned Parenthood abortion mills, I immediately thought, "It's about time that Komen, a cancer research foundation, stops funding Planned Parenthood, what with the well-known causal link between abortion and breast cancer."

But after reading the story, I was astonished to find no mention of the link between abortion and breast cancer (ABC).

Look, it's a rather well-known fact that many worldwide researchers have studied abortion and breast cancer, and issued statements describing their inter-relationship for decades now.  It's just that the mainstream media doesn't report on this, because they lean left, and therefore this story is not politically expedient.  However, now that the cat's out of the bag, and Komen is disassociating from Planned Parenthood, you'd think the newspaper reporter would speculate about the reason behind the disassociation.

No.  The reporter didn't discuss this news event from the breast cancer angle.  Instead, the story told the basic fact that Susan G. Komen Foundation has made a policy decision.  "Komen said it could not continue to fund Planned Parenthood because it has adopted new guidelines that bar it from funding organizations under congressional investigation."

Fair enough.

As a citizen who gives a regular percentage of my income to charity, I like to make sure that the recipients are not involved in scandal, fraud, misappropriation of funds and whatnot.  But why didn't the newspaper reporter go deeper?  The article stated that Komen's decision not to give to such organizations was a  new policy.  What led to that new policy?  Was it the research scientists at Komen crying foul at the idea of donating money to an abortion provider, which in turn performs abortions, which in turn causes breast cancer in some patients?  Was it the new Vice President, Karen Handel, steering corporate policy in a pro-life direction?

As I explored the Komen/Planned Parenthood topic with friends, I discovered that some of them had never heard about the ABC link, and eagerly wanted to learn more.  So here's some information for intelligent human beings who live by the mantra "the devil you know is better than the devil you don't know".  Those on the left will of course deny this cancer research and instead accuse me -- a la "shooting the messenger" -- of being (1) racist, (2) greedy, (3) evil and (4) homophobic.  (Am I leaving out any of the popular accusations?)

Some make the argument that Komen wasn't funding abortions, they were funding breast cancer screenings.  Come on people, that's like giving money to a pedophile organization because in addition to molesting children, they also give food to the homeless.  And as it turns out, Komen wasn't actually doing breast cancer screenings.  In an expose in 2011, phone callers posing as people who wanted breast cancer screenings and mammograms were unable to find a Planned Parenthood location with such services.

Face it: Planned Parenthood is all about abortion, and they make lots of money doing it.  They don't need donations, not from you, and not from the Federal government.  Abortions are very profitable for Planned Parenthood.

It has been known and studied for decades that abortion is a causal factor in ABC.  However, there have been groups such as the National Cancer Institute, which, purely for political purposes, have vehemently denied the ABC link.  This causes confusion on the part of citizens who are being lied to by somebody...but by whom?  And what would be the motivation for the lie?

Like most ethical problems in life the answer is money, as in government funding.  An agency which receives funding from the U.S. government can easily be threatened by the government that if they publish research linking abortion to breast cancer, their funding will not be re-authorized.  Who would make such a threat?  A politician who receives a large amount of funding from pro-abortion groups might make such a threat.

"Louise A. Brinton, largely responsible for getting the government-funded NCI to deny the abortion-breast cancer link, has reversed herself and co-authored a new study which now describes significant breast cancer risk factors including 'induced abortion'," according to American Right to Life.

ABC research has been around for fifty years. There is voluminous data available to anyone who begins clicking the links in this article and reading further.  The famous Daling study from 1994 "found an overall 50% breast cancer risk increase by age 45 for women who have had an induced abortion," says AAPLOG.  The research goes on to itemize types of women who experience an even higher risk of getting post-abortion breast cancer, including women who more than double their risk by having a family history of breast cancer combined with having one or more abortions.

Another fascinating article titled The Abortion-Breast Cancer Connection, by Joel Brind, appeared in The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly, Summer 2005. It details scientific references to the history of ABC research and media & government cover-up and denial of the validity of the research.  "Could any other medical or surgical intervention—especially one chosen by over a million healthy patients each year—that raised such a specter of mortal danger in a major, peer-reviewed study, continue unabated, and still be touted as safe?" writes Brind.

"Importantly, estrogen is implicated in most known risk factors for breast cancer; everything from taking artificial estrogens in the form of birth control pills or postmenopausal estrogen replacement therapy, to beginning menstruation at an early age and/or having menopause at a later age (both of which cause a greater lifetime exposure to estrogen). Even non-reproductive risk factors such as postmenopausal obesity and chronic alcohol consumption are explained in terms of such women having higher chronic circulating levels of estrogen (because fat cells actually make estrogen and alcohol impedes the liver’s ability to degrade estrogen)."

Oh, you hadn't heard that birth control pills can also cause cancer?  Well frankly, neither did I....and I've been taking them for decades.  "The World Health Organization (WHO) reported in its July 29, 2005 press release that a team of scientists has determined that combined oral contraceptives (estrogen plus progestogen) and combined menopausal therapy are 'carcinogenic to humans,' " reports Abortion Breast Cancer.

In Dr. Brind's article, we learn that some of the abortion references within cancer research articles for publication were edited out of the articles.  "Specifically, the 1988 data showed that South Australian women who had had an induced abortion experienced a statistically significant, 160 percent increased risk of breast cancer!"

You, the health care consumer, are being lied to by large groups of people with a pro-abortion agenda.  They do not care if you or your loved ones get breast cancer.  It is far more important for the worldwide pro-abortion faction that you make an uninformed abortion decision than that you make an informed decision, fully aware of potential cancer risks and stages of fetal development.

But thankfully the Komen folks have taken at least one step to set the record straight.