Alaska Right to Life

  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size

Contact Us

Hot Topics

Abortion/Breast Cancer Link

E-mail Print PDF

I’m sure that everyone hates being lied to, as I do, but it’s especially disturbing when women are dying because of the cover-up pertaining to the abortion/breast cancer association. However, the tide is turning. U.S. National Cancer Institute researcher Dr. Louise Brinton, who previously stated that “abortion is not associated with increased breast cancer risk,” has reversed her position and now admits that abortion and oral contraceptives raise breast cancer risks. An April 2009 study by Jessica Dolle of the Fred Hutchinson Research Center, found abortion raises breast cancer risk by 40%. Data has been confirmed by 75% of the worlds’ scientific literature and shows that abortion is a causal factor in the development of breast cancer in the same way that cigarette smoking is a causal factor for lung cancer. The Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons published a study in October 2007 that showed abortion is the ‘best predictor of breast cancer.’
Over the past 35 years, breast cancer has increased by 40%. In 1975,1 in 12 women would develop breast cancer. In 2004, the risk has increased to 1 in 7 women. Breast cancer was once rare among Alaska Native women, but over the past 32 years, Alaska Native women have seen breast cancer rates skyrocket from 40 cases in 100,000 women from 1969-1973, to 132 cases per 100,000 women from 1999-2004. The cases have over tripled! Is anyone connecting the dots between abortion and breast cancer here?
There are three major influential factors pertaining to breast cancer: faulty genetic inheritance or damage to DNA, the amount of exposure to estrogen, and breast lobule maturation. Only 15% of women with breast cancer have a family history of the disease. However, medical evidence shows that ductal breast cancers account for over 80% of all human breast cancers. At the end of puberty, over 70% of the breast tissue consists of Type 1 lobules. These are the units of breast tissue consisting of milk glands and a duct, which are immature, and susceptible to cancer. This is why there is a 50% increased risk of breast cancer to those women who have an abortion before their first live birth. The good news is, after a woman undergoes her first full term pregnancy, the majority of Type 1 lobules in her breast, which are the place where ductal cancers begin, transform into Type 3 lobules, which are cancer resistant. Even so, all aborted women are still at increased risk of breast cancer.
Estrogen has been listed as a carcinogen (cancer causing agent) by the National Cancer Institute since 2001. It was found that estrogen can initiate cancer cells to form. Basically, women whose bodies experience more exposure to estrogens, whether natural or synthetic (such as birth control pills) have a higher risk of breast cancer than women who experience less exposure. Progestins seem to increase the risk of breast cancer at least as much, and maybe even more than estrogens. Experiments done by the World Health Organization on women around the world showed that women who had been injected with long-lasting progestin contraceptives such as Depo-Provera for at least 2 years before the age of 25, has doubled their risk for developing breast cancer. Science also shows that heart attacks, strokes, blood clots, and breast cancer are increased by hormonal treatments such as HRP. According to the American Cancer Society, breast cancer rates decreased by 10% between 2000-2004 because of reductions in the use of HRP.
Dr. Angela LanFranchi, a New Jersey breast surgeon, and the newly elected President for the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute, declared under oath that members of the nations’ medical elite are aware that abortion causes breast cancer. They refuse to admit this fact publicly because they believe it’s “too political.” Others have remained evasive, and some are openly hostile.
Question: Why did the Susan G. Komen Foundation, an organization that raises money for breast cancer research, contribute $700,000 to Planned Parenthood? Does the Komen Foundation Board of Directors not understand that Planned Parenthood, Inc. is the largest abortion provider in this nation and throughout the world?! Either the Komen Foundation is completely ignorant, or they are artfully deceitful. They are contributing to the disease they proclaim to try to cure.
You can reduce your risks for developing breast cancer ; avoid putting artificial chemicals into your body (such as birth control pills) and don’t have abortions.
Karen L. Lewis, Education Director

 
E-mail Print PDF

Compass Piece Not Published by ADN

By: Karen L. Lewis, Educational Director, Alaska Right to Life

In a recent NY Times Sunday Magazine section, Professor Peter Singer of Princeton University, openly admits his extreme ideological beliefs; stating that the life of an elderly American is not worth the life of a young American. Wow.

In 2007, Mr. Singer stated, “Human babies are not born self-aware or capable of grasping their lives over time. They are not persons. Hence, their lives would seem to be no more worthy of protection than the life of a fetus.”

In case you’re wondering, Mr. Singer is also a vigorous animal rights activist, and believes that animals should be viewed as legal persons with legal protections;protections that he believes should be denied to unborn and young children.

This extremist, humanistic view is more pervasive than you may care to know.

Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, health advisor to the President, and brother to White House chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, has been appointed as a member of the Federal Council of Comparative Effectiveness, and is an influential architect of the Congressional health care plan. Dr. Emanuel believes that true reform must include redefining doctors’ ethical obligations. Huh?

Emanuel complained that doctors take the Hippocratic Oath too seriously, “As an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of the cost of effect of others.”

In the Lancet, January 31st, 2009, Dr. Emanuel co-authored a ‘complete lives system’

which produced a priority curve on which individuals aged roughly 15-40, get the most substantial chance; conversely, the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated.

Take a closer look into government-run health care in the United Kingdom.

Sarah Capewell, a young British woman, began premature labor at 21 weeks and four days. She was told that she was not allowed injections to try to stop labor, or a steroid injection to help strengthen her baby’s lungs, because she was 2 days short of 22 weeks gestation. The medical guidelines for Health Service hospitals state that babies should not be given intensive care if they are born at less than 22 weeks. The doctors refused to even see her son, Jayden. Sarah pleaded with one pediatrician, “You have got to help.” His heartless reply was, “No we don’t.” Sarah kept asking for the doctors, but the midwife said, “They won’t come and help, sweetie. Make the best of the time you have with him.“ Sarah held her baby and tried to comfort him as he gasped for breath for almost two hours. After his death, she had to fight for his birth and death certificates, as the authorities wanted to label this ordeal a miscarriage. What made Sarah feel even worse, was finding that there was a baby girl born in the USA before 22 weeks, that survived and is thriving.

Sarah’s hospital likely weighed cost vs. benefit. Should money ever outweigh life?

Apparently so, in the eyes of some policy makers.

The protocols in place under Britain’s ‘care pathway’ requires that when a patient is deemed near death, life sustaining fluids and medicines are withdrawn and the patient is placed under heavy sedation; in some cases causing death, known as terminal sedation. In 2007, about 95,000 citizens were killed in this manner! For this same year, statistics show that 16.5% of deaths in Britain came about after continuous deep sedation. That’s twice as many as the Netherlands, a country infamous for high euthanasia deaths.

There is a major incentive to usher out the elderly and the disabled; their medical costs. New laws under government health care, will likely make victims of patients that are the most expensive to care for. The Baby Boomers, who are an enormous group, are entering into their final phase of life. With the new laws in place, the government has a financial motive to hasten their deaths, and will also have a legal means to do so. When we surrender our health care approaches to bureaucratic panels who make decisions based upon cost, age, and quality of life, the weakest and most vulnerable among us will be sacrificed. Can you say ‘death panels’?

 
E-mail Print PDF

Alaska Personhood Initiative certified by Lt. Governor

October 22, 2009

Alaska Lt. Governor Craig Campbell certifies the initiative entitled "An Act recognizing the legal personhood of all human beings including unborn children." This act is an attempt to protect all human beings from fertilization to the point of natural death. Please join us in support of this initiative.

An Act recognizing the legal personhood of all human beings including unborn children.

"Be it enacted by the People of the State of Alaska that all human beings, from the beginning of their biological development as human organisms, including the single-cell embryo, regardless of age, health, level of functioning, condition of dependency or method of reproduction, shall be recognized as legal persons in the state of Alaska."

Contact:

Christopher Kurka

(907) 854-8482
www.PersonHoodAlaska.com
www.PersonHoodUSA.com

 
E-mail Print PDF


 


Choose Life

Fill out our membership form and join Alaska Right To Life today.