Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Mom's pregnancy drug caused breast cancer in four daughters, lawsuit alleges
CBS News ^ | January 4, 2013 | Unknown

Posted on 01/07/2013 8:07:34 PM PST by madison10

...The four sisters are now suing Eli Lilly and Co., the former maker of DES (or diethylstilbestrol), in a case set to unfold in federal court on Friday when it will become one of the first of scores of such claims around the U.S. to go to trial. The Melnick women are seeking unspecified damages...

(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...


TOPICS: Chit/Chat; Health/Medicine; Miscellaneous; Science
KEYWORDS: cancer; daughters; des; diethylstilbestrol; health; lawsuit; women

1 posted on 01/07/2013 8:07:45 PM PST by madison10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: madison10

What does not seem to be mentioned is whether or not the women’s family has/had a weakness for cancer in the first place. Some may be genetically inclined that way.


2 posted on 01/07/2013 8:10:20 PM PST by madison10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: madison10

I saw an ad for a mens medicine or something that talked about serious side affects for wives and children... dang


3 posted on 01/07/2013 8:43:49 PM PST by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: madison10
DES has been blamed for cervical cancer in DES babies for years. Didn't know about the connection with breast cancer. Of course, without DES many of these women would have been miscarriages and never lived to begin with.
4 posted on 01/07/2013 8:53:02 PM PST by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: madison10

Everyone searching for the “victims’ payoff”.

The list of “possible cancer risks” is lo infinitely long, it is difficult to put a finger directly on a specific, irrefutable cause in most cases. There are, of course, some specific cancers that have some distinct likely causes, but overall - too many possible causes.


5 posted on 01/07/2013 9:15:13 PM PST by TheBattman (Isn't the lesser evil... still evil?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: madison10

The (hormone) pill is associated with a 50% increase in the rate of breast cancer in women. Where is the class action suit?


6 posted on 01/07/2013 9:19:46 PM PST by St_Thomas_Aquinas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hinckley buzzard
DES has been blamed for cervical cancer in DES babies for years.

That's interesting. I knew that DES was linked with certain diseases. I wonder if it is still considered a cause of cervical cancer now that papillomavirus is considered responsible for over 99% of cervical cancers and is implicated in many other cancers.

7 posted on 01/07/2013 9:44:53 PM PST by exDemMom (Now that I've finally accepted that I'm living a bad hair life, I'm more at peace with the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: madison10
Much more likely that the use of chemical hormones to keep the body from becoming pregnant are to blame. Particularly in women genetically predisposed to breast or other cancers.

With ALL the sisters getting breast cancer, it would be more likely that they where exposed to some other source. Radon in a former home. High tension power lines (remember that one!) but More likely BIRTH CONTROL PILLS. No one can tell me that ingesting massive doses of chemical hormones daily for the majority of a persons adult life will have no effect on their future health!

Just remember all the dumb asses that are concerned about hormones in cows milk and GMO foods, yet never seem to worry about the whopping doses of lab made chemicals that are now in the drinking water from fifty years of women pissing it out into the water supply. Ethanol oestradiol the primary chemical in birth control pills is fifty times more concentrated than Estrogen and passes through sewage treatment and into the water supply. It has been linked to a loss of fertility amongst fish populations and the possible 25% decrease in male fertility since 1970.

8 posted on 01/07/2013 10:21:07 PM PST by Jim from C-Town (The government is rarely benevolent, often malevolent and never benign!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson