National Cancer Institute Researcher Admits Abortion Breast Cancer Link
U.S. National Cancer Institute researcher Dr. Louise Brinton, who was the chief organizer of the National Cancer Institute (NCI) workshop in 2003 that persuaded women that it was “well established” 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 et al. of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center examining the relationship between oral contraceptives (OCs) and triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), an aggressive form of breast cancer associated with high mortality in women under age 45, contained an admission from Dr. Brinton and her colleagues that abortion raises breast cancer risk by 40%.
The study found that “a statistically significant 40% increased risk for women who have abortions” exists, and that a ” 270% increased risk of triple negative breast cancer (an aggressive form of breast cancer associated with high mortality) among those who used oral contraceptives while under age 18 and a 320% increased risk of triple negative breast cancer among recent users (within 1-5 years) of oral contraceptives,” also exists.
This means that women who start using OCs before age 18 multiply their risk of TNBC by 3.7 times and recent users of OCs within the last one to five years multiply their risk by 4.2 times.
“Although the study was published nine months ago,” stated Karen Malec, president of the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer, in a press release, “the NCI, the American Cancer Society, Susan G. Komen for the Cure and other cancer fundraising businesses have made no efforts to reduce breast cancer rates by issuing nationwide warnings to women.”
“Obviously, more women will die of breast cancer if the NCI fails in its duty to warn about the risks of OCs and abortion and if government funds are used to pay for both as a part of any healthcare bill,” said Mrs. Malec.
Last year, studies from Turkey and China also reported statistically significant risk increases for women who had abortions.
The Turkish study reported a 66% increased risk of breast cancer for women with abortions while the Chinese study found a statistically significant 17% increased breast cancer risk among Chinese women who had induced abortions.
Mrs. Malec said, “The Chinese and the Turkish studies are relevant considering the debate over government-funded abortion through healthcare reform” in the US. “Government-funded abortion means more dead American women from breast cancer.”
[7January 2010, http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/jan/10010706.html]
Breast Cancer Link with Abortion and Hormonal Contraceptives Featured in You Tube Videos — http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/oct/09100109.html ;
Study Shows Abortion is ‘Best Predictor of Breast Cancer’ — http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/oct/07100307.html ;
Study: Breast Cancer Risk 66% Higher in Turkish Women with Abortions — http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/jul/09072903.html
2009 Study Confirms Abortion-Breast Cancer Link
An April 2009 study [see abstract below] co-authored by a researcher who has previously denied an abortion-breast cancer link shows a statistically significant increase in breast cancer risk among women who have had abortions or who use oral contraceptives.
The study by researchers including Jessica Dolle of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research contained a table reporting a statistically significant 40 percent risk increase for women who have had abortions.
According to the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer (CABC), the study listed abortion as among “known and suspected risk factors.”
The CABC says that one co-author of the study, U.S. National Cancer Institute (NCI) researcher Dr. Louise Brinton, had organized a 2003 NCI workshop on the abortion-breast cancer link. That workshop reportedly said the non-existence of an abortion-breast cancer link was “well established.”
CNA contacted Dr. Brinton for comment but did not receive a reply by publication time.
Dr. Joel Brind, who is a CBCP advisor and president of the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute and a professor of endocrinology at Baruch College at City University of New York, said that the study’s findings on abortion were not new.
Rather, they repeated the “modest but significant” findings of the 1990s which found a breast cancer risk factor increase of between 20 and 50 percent.
However, he said Dr. Brinton’s participation in the study was significant because the NCI has “firmly maintained” a position denying an abortion-breast cancer link since 2003.
The study, titled “Risk factors for triple-negative breast cancer in women under the age of 45 years,” was published in the American Association for Cancer Research’s (AACR) medical journal “Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention.”
Researchers also found a significant link between the use of oral contraceptives and a particularly aggressive cancer known as triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC).
Brind said that according to the study, women who start oral contraceptives before the age of 18 multiply their risk of TNBC by 3.7 times. Those who were users of oral contraceptives within one to five years before the study showed a risk 4.2 times the average.
TNBC is associated with high mortality. Brind suggested that oral contraceptives may function not merely as a secondary carcinogen. Rather, the synthetic estrogen-progestin combination or its metabolic byproducts may be a primary cause of the cell mutations that lead to cancer formation.
CBCP president Karen Malec criticized that the NCI, the American Cancer Society, Susan G. Komen for the Cure and other cancer organizations for not issuing nationwide warnings to women on the basis of the study. [7 Jan 2010, Bethesda, MD, CNA, http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/2009_study_confirms_abortion-breast_cancer_link/]
Risk Factors for Triple-Negative Breast Cancer in Women Under the Age of 45 Years
* Jessica M. Dolle,* Janet R. Daling,* Emily White,* Louise A. Brinton,* David R. Doody,* Peggy L. Porter,* and Kathleen E. Malone
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev April 2009 18:1157-1166; Published OnlineFirst March 31, 2009, doi:10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-08-1005
Little is known about the etiologic profile of triple-negative breast cancer (negative for estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor/human epidermal growth factor), a breast cancer subtype associated with high mortality and inadequate
We undertook this study to assess the risk for triple-negative breast cancer among women 45 years of age and younger in relation to demographic/lifestyle factors, reproductive history, and oral contraceptive use.
Study participants were ascertained in two previous population-based, case-control studies. Eligible cases included all primary invasive breast cancers among women ages 20 to 45 years in the Seattle–Puget Sound area, diagnosed between January 1983 and December 1992, for whom complete data was obtained for estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and human epidermal growth factor status (n = 897; including n = 187 triple-negative breast cancer cases). Controls were age matched and ascertained via random digit dialing.
Oral contraceptive use ≥1 year was associated with a 2.5-fold increased risk for triple-negative breast cancer (95% confidence interval, 1.4-4.3) and no significantly increased risk for non-triple-negative breast cancer (Pheterogeneity = 0.008).
Furthermore, the risk among oral contraceptive users conferred by longer oral contraceptive duration and by more recent use was significantly greater for triple-negative breast cancer than non-triple-negative breast cancer (Pheterogeneity = 0.02 and 0.01, respectively).
Among women ≤40 years, the relative risk for triple-negative breast cancer associated with oral contraceptive use ≥1 year was 4.2 (95% confidence interval, 1.9-9.3), whereas there was no significantly increased risk with oral contraceptive use for non-triple-negative breast cancer among women ≤40 years, nor for triple-negative breast cancer or non-triple-negative breast cancer among women 41 to 45 years of age.
In conclusion, significant heterogeneity exists for the association of oral contraceptive use and breast cancer risk between triple-negative breast cancer and non-triple-negative breast cancer among young women, lending support to a distinct etiology. (Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2009;18(4):1157–66)
UPDATE JANUARY 2010
Why is National Cancer Institute Covering up Link?: Abortion Breast Cancer Coalition Letter to Congress
The US National Cancer Institute (NIC) has again denied the link between abortion and breast cancer to a Globe and Mail reporter, despite one of their leading researchers being named as co-author on a study that admitted up to a 40 per cent increased risk of breast cancer associated with induced abortion.
In 2003, Louise Brinton, NCI’s chief of the Hormonal and Reproductive Epidemiology branch, was an organizer of the NCI workshop in 2003 that told women it is “well established” that “abortion is not associated with increased breast cancer risk.”
Then, in 2009, Brinton was co-author of study, published in April 2009 by the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, in which she admitted that abortion raises breast cancer risk.
The study listed abortion among the “known or suspected risk factors” found to be associated with a 40 per cent increased risk of breast cancer in women under age 45 in the Seattle region. The observed risk elevation found was matter-of-factly reported to be “consistent with the effects observed in previous studies on younger women.”
Despite the admission by one of their leading researchers, the NCI website continues to carry the “well established” claim that there is no connection between abortion and breast cancer.
On January 8 the Globe and Mail’s Gloria Galloway wrote that she received another denial from the NCI when she attempted to receive confirmation on the study. The NCI’s Michael Miller told Galloway in an email, “NCI has no comment on this study.” Instead, Miller forwarded a link to the NCI’s official statement denying the breast cancer link that refers back to the 2003 workshop. Further requests for information, Galloway said, went unanswered.
At the same time, the Washington-based Coalition for Abortion/Breast Cancer has issued a letter to Congress asking that the NCI be called to the carpet for what the coalition says is NCI’s ongoing efforts to ignore or cover up the evidence supporting the link.
“We ask Congress to exercise its proper oversight authority and investigate the US National Cancer Institute’s failure to protect American women by issuing timely warnings about breast cancer risks,” the letter said.
The letter is signed by Karen Malek, the group’s president, Dr. Joel Brind, a professor of endocrinology and deputy chair of Biology and Environmental Sciences at City University of New York, and Dr. Angela Lanfranchi, Clinical Assistant Professor of Surgery at Robert Wood Johnson Medical School. It says that thousands of women’s lives are put at risk “in part due to confusing and conflicting messages from our own National Cancer Institute.”
The letter states that researchers invited to participate in NCI’s 2003 workshop, despite the claim that it would comprise a “comprehensive review” of the existing data, were explicitly prohibited from reviewing current data demonstrating a link between abortion and breast cancer.
“Women need to be aware that abortion can affect both her breast cancer risk and health of future children,” the letter said. It notes that the NCI website was updated on January 12 this year, after news about the recent study broke, and now includes the claim that “the evidence overall still does not support early termination of pregnancy as a cause of breast cancer.”
“In the face of recent publication of results to the contrary … reported by an NCI Branch Chief Dr. Brinton, this appears disingenuous,” says the coalition’s letter.
“The evidence is overwhelming that the NCI is in direct conflict with its own mission. The NCI is not providing accurate information that would permit women making choices about contraception and abortion to avoid the dangers of the increased risk posed by these exposures, even though they are reported by one of NCI’s top scientists in the field.”
National Cancer Institute Researcher Admits Abortion Breast Cancer Link
[21Jan10, Hilary White, Washington, www.LifeSiteNews.com, http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/jan/10012101.html]
National Cancer Institute Researcher Admits Abortion-Breast Cancer Link True
The National Cancer Institute gained a reputation for putting politics over science when it did everything possible to deny dissenting opinion during a meeting to establish whether or not a link exists between abortion and breast cancer.
Now, the main NCI acivist who got the agency to deny the abortion-breast cancer link has co-authored a study admitting the abortion-breast cancer link is true, calling it a “known risk factor.”
Scientists and educators about the abortion-breast cancer link point to a new study that shows a top NCI official may be re-thinking the refusal to acknowledge the link.
The study, conducted by Jessica Dolle, appears in the April, 2009 issue of the prestigious cancer epidemiology journal Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention.
The Dolle study, conducted with the prestigious Janet Daling group of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle — one of the first to receive recognition for highlighting the abortion-breast cancer link — concerns the link between oral contraceptives and breast cancer.
The study examined women for triple-negative breast cancer, a subset of breast cancer cases with a particularly aggressive and treatment-resistant cancer type.
The data yielded a strong association between TNBC and oral contraceptives and found a 320% risk increase for breast cancer over those who never used contraception.
When it comes to the abortion link, the study did not produce any new results but it cited the Daling studies from 1994 and 1996 that showed between a 20 and 50 percent increased breast cancer risk for women having abortions compare to those who carried their pregnancies to term.
As Dr. Joel Brind, a prominent breast cancer researcher, says, “what was striking was the way in which the finding of a significant ABC link was characterized.”
“Specifically, abortion appears in the data table which lists the associations found for ‘known and suspected risk factors,'” he explains. “In the text, the effect of the significant risk factors, including induced abortion, were described as ‘consistent with the effects observed in previous studies on younger women.'”
“Hence, this paper provides clear support for the existence of the abortion-breast cancer link,” Brind said.
Brind says the kicker is that one of the coauthors of this new study is Louise A. Brinton of the NCI.
While the NCI maintains no abortion-breast cancer link exists, Brinton is the co-author of a study that is cited in this new research.
“Importantly, Brinton was the chief organizer for the 2003 NCI (U.S. National Cancer Institute) ‘workshop’ on ‘early reproductive events and breast cancer,’ a panel which reported that the lack of an ABC link had been ‘established,'” Brind says.
“In other words, since 2003, the NCI has firmly maintained the position that there is no ABC link; that the studies which had reported such a link were deemed unreliable. However, two of these prior studies were the very studies by the Daling group (of which one Brinton also was a co-author),” he continues.
“Now, in 2009, Brinton is on record reiterating findings of the ABC link and reporting them as ‘consistent’ with earlier studies that found induced abortion to be a risk factor,” Brind says. “Can it not therefore be argued that the NCI is backing off its denial of the ABC link? This is big news, to be sure, but no one has challenged the NCI with it, yet.”
Karen Malec, president of the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer, a women’s group that educates about the abortion link, calls the admission a scandal.
“Less than two months since the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force issued new guidelines recommending against routine mammograms for women in their forties, a second breast cancer scandal involving a U.S. government panel of experts has come to light which has implications for healthcare reform,” she told LifeNews.com.
“Although the study was published nine months ago, the NCI, the American Cancer Society, Susan G. Komen for the Cure and other cancer fundraising businesses have made no efforts to reduce breast cancer rates by issuing nationwide warnings to women,” she added.
She says Dolle’s team reported in Table 1 a statistically significant 40% risk increase for women who have had abortions and listed it among “known and suspected risk factors.”
“Obviously, more women will die of breast cancer if the NCI fails in its duty to warn about the risks of OCs and abortion and if government funds are used to pay for both as a part of any healthcare bill,” Malec said.
Last year, studies from Turkey and China also reported statistically significant risk increases for women who had abortions.
Related web sites:
Brind analysis of new study — http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/download/Brind_Dolle_2009_analysis.PDF
Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer –
[6January 2010, http://www.lifenews.com/nat5850.html ; Steven Ertelt, Washington, DC, www.LifeNews.com] ]
Surgeon Says Abortion Ups Breast Cancer Risk, Full-Term Pregnancy Helps Lower Risk
A prominent breast cancer surgeon and professor has written a new article for a medical publication saying that abortion increases a woman’s risk of contracting breast cancer. On the other hand, miscarriage has no effect while a full-term pregnancy lowers the breast cancer risk.
Dr. Angela Lanfranchi is a surgeon who deals with breast cancer and is also a Assistant Professor of Surgery at the Robert Wood Johnson Medical School and president of the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute.
She published a paper this week in the medical journal Linacre Quarterly that shows how different pregnancy outcomes influence breast cancer risk.
Citing 52 years of breast cancer research, she said the evidence shows that, during pregnancy, unborn children “produce hormones that mature 85 percent of the mother’s breast tissue into cancer-resistant breast tissue.”
This accounts for the protective effect of full term pregnancy (FTP) that experts universally recognize.
According to Lanfranchi, a delayed first FTP is associated with a temporary risk increase because it lengthens the period during the reproductive years when nearly all of the breast lobules are immature and cancer-susceptible and exposed to the cancer-causing effects of estrogen during menstrual cycles.
However, in terms of lifetime risk, the mother will eventually benefit from the protective effect of FTP, provided it lasted at least 32 weeks.
At the same time, the physician says short pregnancies like abortions that end before 32 weeks, except for first trimester miscarriages, leave the breasts only “partially matured” and “with more places for cancers to start.”
“Induced abortion is a recognized cause of premature birth…. and prematurity more than doubles breast cancer risk if it is before 32 weeks,” Lanfranchi writes.
Most first trimester miscarriages do not raise risk because “inadequate levels of the pregnancy hormones” during an abnormal pregnancy do not stimulate breast growth and “leave the mother’s breasts unchanged.”
Lanfranchi explains in greater detail how carrying a pregnancy to term is so beneficial for women as opposed to having an abortion.
Among women experiencing breast cancer during pregnancy, those who had FTPs had the longest survival rate in comparison to women who miscarried and had “slightly shorter survivals,” and those who chose abortion and had the “shortest survivals.”
Karen Malec, president of the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer, a women’s group that informed the public on the link between the two, tells LifeNews.com that anti-cancer groups need to acknowledge this.
“We encourage the public to send Dr. Lanfranchi’s paper to the American Cancer Society and Susan G. Komen for the Cure,” she said.
“Ask them if they can find any inaccuracies concerning the physiology presented in her paper. Challenge them to defend their position in the customary way – before their peers – by stating their objections in a letter to the editor of the medical journal,” she added.
Lanfranchi’s paper is entitled, “Normal breast physiology: The reasons hormonal contraceptives and induced abortion increase breast cancer risk.”
Lanfranchi, A. Normal breast physiology: The reasons hormonal contraceptives and induced abortion increase breast cancer risk. The Linacre Quarterly 2009;76:236-249. Available here…
[8Sept09, www.LifeNews.com, DC, http://www.lifenews.com/nat5441.html ]
National Cancer Institute Researcher Admits Abortion/Breast Cancer Link
NCI Senior Researcher Louise A. Brinton Reverses Herself: Brinton, largely responsible for getting the government-funded National Cancer Institute to deny the abortion-breast cancer link, has co-authored a new study which describes significant risk factors, including “induced abortion.” The study also says that these risk factors are “consistent with the effects observed in previous studies on younger women.”
Endocrinologist Dr. Joel Brind of NYC’s Baruch College discusses the 320% increase in risk for women taking the birth control pill to develop TNBC, Triple Negative Breast Cancer, a particularly aggressive and treatment-resistant cancer.
Learn more at www.AbortionBreastCancer.com
Further, while the U.S. study shows that abortion is the “best predictor of breast cancer” two more studies in 2009, from China and Turkey, and other more recent studies, continue to show the link between breast cancer and abortion.
“Risk Factors for Triple-Negative Breast Cancer,” Brinton, et al., American Assoc. for Cancer Research, 2009:
Read Dr. Brind’s report on this NCI researcher’s paper: Study Pinpoints Oral Contraceptive-Breast Cancer Link (OCBC link); Resurrects Abortion-Breast Cancer Link (ABC link), 3 Jan 2010, by Joel Brind, Ph.D;
“Risk Factors for Triple-Negative Breast Cancer,” Brinton, et al., American Assoc. for Cancer Research, 2009