Recently a young woman at San Jose State University received a copy of You Can Stop Injustice-HLA's exciting new campus supplement.
Her response was typical of students who read our materials:
Before I read your papers, I didn't have much against abortion before 3 weeks of pregnancy, but now that I know the procedure, it opened my eyes to the pure evil behind it all... No life is worth less than another, we are all equal and are all sent to earth for a reason. God loves us all... I am 110% against abortion! A life is a life...
With responses like this, no wonder we have requests to develop new materials to reach other populations.
HLA's second edition of Did You Know? is designed to fill this need for an educational resource that reaches the African American community with the pro-life message.
New articles such as "A Planned Parenthood Insider Speaks Out," "Targeting our Children" and "Abortion & Premature Birth" makes Did You Know? an essential element of your pro-life tool kit.
78% of Planned Parenthood facilities are located in poor and minority neighborhoods.
In fact, Planned Parenthood's latest fact sheet illustrates how their business progressed between 2007 and 2008:
Adoption referrals plummeted dramatically from 4,912 in 2007 to 2,405 in 2008.
Prenatal clients dropped from 10,914 in 2007 to 9,433 in 2008.
Surgical abortions increased from 305,310 in 2007 to 324,008 in 2008.
We can see that the United States' largest abortion chain is really about abortion-and nothing else.
We know they target African Americans and other minorities. [November 11, 2010, www.humanlife.org]
Do common plastics raise cancer risk? (1/09)
UAB research raises concerns about chemical additives
Animal research at the University of Alabama at Birmingham is resurrecting cancer concerns about a plastic additive commonly used in consumer products, including baby bottles, water bottles and the linings of cans.
Coral A. Lamartiniere, a top toxicologist and senior scientist at UAB's Comprehensive Cancer Center, said low levels of bisphenol-A, BPA, given orally to rodents caused tumors and genetic changes consistent with early stages of cancer growth.
Much of the research, performed over the past six years, is being prepared for review and publication, but a key paper on BPA was published last week in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives.
[CHART: Plastics by recycling numbers chart (excerpted)
Safer Plastics: 1,2,4,5
Plastics to Avoid: 3,6,7
[Source: The Ecomoderate and Mount Sinai Medical Center]
"The inference here is this compound could predispose humans toward breast cancer," said Lamartiniere, who led the study.
The U.S. National Toxicology Program raised public concern about BPA on April 14, reporting that high dose levels of the compound created health hazards in laboratory animals. The agency said some concern was warranted for human fetuses, children and girls approaching puberty.
But the agency noted that
the threat was only possible and not certain. Critical evidence was
missing, including good studies showing the impact of low doses of BPA
on lab animals and humans, the agency reported.
Shortly thereafter, the Food and Drug Administration reassured the
public that products containing BPA were safe, but noted that
alternative products without BPA were available.
In testimony before Congress in May, the spokesman for the American
Chemistry Council, an industry organization, said only traces of BPA
could be found in products, and the compound has been used for decades
and widely studied for safety.
"Recent media attention has created public concern and confusion about
some of these chemicals," Steven G. Hentges, a scientist with the
council, told a Senate subcommittee.
Lamartiniere said there was no doubt about his study results, and
animals were tested at concentrations of BPA similar to exposures
experienced by people.
"In fact, it's below the concentration that the EPA deems safe," he
said. "With BPA we're finding changes that are consistent with
oncogenisis, or cancer causation."
In the study published last week, Lamartiniere and colleagues gave
female rats with nursing litters oral doses of BPA. The result: The
baby rats matured with higher levels of breast cancer.
Beyond cancer
The issue of plastic additives and health goes far beyond cancer, and
into a new scientific frontier created by technology allowing
researchers to view genetic changes caused by chemicals.
"It's amazing how every compound has a genetic signature," said Dr.
Jose Russo of the Fox Chase Cancer Center in Philadelphia, a close
colleague of Lamartiniere and co-author of the paper published last
week.
The research is the product of an ongoing, multisite study originally
conceived to find causes of breast cancer and funded by the National
Institute of Environmental Health Sciences and the National Cancer
Institute.
Russo said researchers are looking at two types of plastic additives
that have raised red flags in animal studies - phenols and phthalates.
BPA is a phenol, and researchers suspect that girls exposed to these
compounds before puberty could become more susceptible to breast
cancer. Hormonal activity later in life - during puberty, pregnancy or
menopause - may trigger this susceptibility.
Researchers suspect phthalates may cause genetic changes in girls that predispose them to obesity.
The research is far from conclusive.
"We need to be very careful," Russo said. "Don't go crazy."
Russo said human studies are under way in New York, Ohio and California
that should produce more definitive results about relative risks.
Data likely in 2 years
In one of those studies, Dr. Frank M. Biro of Cincinnati Children's
Hospital said his team of researchers has recruited 378 young girls in
the Cincinnati area. The girls have been tested for exposure to phenols
and phthalates. Researchers have also tested the girls for exposure to
phytoestrogens - natural compounds that occur in plants such as soy and
also are believed to cause changes in hormonal cycles.
"We're looking for girls with a particular exposure profile," Biro said.
Using cutting-edge genetic technology, Biro plans to compare girls with
little or no exposure to any of these compounds to girls with heavy
exposures.
"Our hypothesis is there are certain genes that get turned on earlier,
that get turned on harder," he said. "So it's either a time issue or a
strength issue."
As Biro's work progresses, Lamartiniere intends to compare the genetic
profiles of the girls with the genetic profiles of the exposed lab
animals and see whether there is a connection.
Biro believes his team will have meaningful results from the research in two years, although he has examined some early data.
"Give our studies another couple years and there is going to be
conviction about some of these chemicals," he said. "We may not have
the definitive answers, but we'll be able to ask better questions."
[Posted by Dave Parks -- The Birmingham News, January 11, 2009,
;
http://blog.al.com/living-news/2009/01/do_common_plastics_raise_cance.html]
Current Headlines 
