Posted on 08/09/2003 12:39:21 PM PDT by RJCogburn
It has been suggested that abortions leave the breast epithelium in a proliferative state with an increased susceptibility to carcinogenesis. Results from previous studies of induced or spontaneous abortions and risk of subsequent breast cancer are contradictory, probably due to methodological considerations. We investigated the relationship between abortions and subsequent breast cancer risk in a case-control study using prospectively recorded exposure information. The study population comprised women recorded in the population-based Swedish Medical Birth Register between 1973-91. Cases were defined by linkage of the birth register to the Swedish Cancer Register and controls were randomly selected from the birth register. From the subjects' antenatal care records we abstracted prospectively collected information on induced and spontaneous abortions, as well as a number of potential confounding factors. Relative risk of breast cancer was estimated by odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). A reduced risk of breast cancer was observed for women with a history of at least 1 compared to no abortions (adjusted OR = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.72-0.99). The adjusted OR decreases step-wise with number of abortions to 0.59 (95% CI = 0.34-1.03) for 3 or more compared to no abortions. The patterns are similar for induced and spontaneous abortions. In conclusion, neither a history of induced nor spontaneous abortions is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer. Our data suggest a protective effect of pregnancies regardless of outcome.
Would you please provide a real link to the article you are quoting?
[excerpt] A large Swedish study shows that neither induced nor spontaneous abortions are associated with increased risk of breast cancer.Primary Source: “Abortions and Breast Cancer: Record-Based Case-Control Study.” International Journal of Cancer 2003; 103:676-679.
Expert Commentary by Raquel D. Arias, MD Associate Professor
Obstetrics and Gynecology
Keck School of Medicine
University of Southern California
Los Angeles, CABREASTLINK ANALYSIS By Mary Batten
This is a large, well-designed prospective study from the highly respected Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden (Ref. 1). There are several factors in its favor. First, the study was conducted in a country where abortion is an accepted part of women’s health services and not a political issue as it is in the United States. This makes for a research climate in which an objective scientific study of abortion and breast cancer risk can be done free of political pressure and threat of violence. Second, the data were taken from very reliable sources: the Swedish Medical Birth Register, the Swedish Cancer Register, and prenatal medical records. Third, because this was a prospective study, it avoided the possible bias sometimes attributed to studies that have depended on women to report whether they had an abortion. It has been suggested that women with breast cancer might be more likely than their counterparts without the disease to report accurately previous induced abortions. If that were the case, the study results would indicate a false association between abortion and risk of breast cancer.
This study should put to rest the contention that abortion increases breast cancer risk. Indeed, the results of this study show exactly the opposite. Neither spontaneous nor induced abortions were found to increase risk of breast cancer. The researchers found a reduced risk of breast cancer among women who had had at least one abortion compared to no abortions. These data indicate that pregnancy has a protective effect against breast cancer regardless of the outcome. [excerpt]
There can be bias to prove there is no connection, too.
This study should put to rest the contention that abortion increases breast cancer risk.
We shall see.
After all,Swedish women are not representative of all women of the world. The researchers might have been a little too ethnocentric (Swedo-centric?)
Comparison of women with breast cancer in Singapore and Sweden, Karolinska Institutit
Project leader: Per Hall
Background: Singapore and Sweden are highly industrialized countries with similar health care systems. Despite similar quality of cancer registration, postmenopausal breast cancer incidence rates are two to three times higher in Sweden than in Singapore.
Life style factors such as age at first full time birth, number of children, the use of hormone replacement, oral contraceptives, and breast-feeding could explain the differences.
The Swedish Cancer and the Stockholm Breast Cancer Registry will be used to evaluate age at diagnosis and calendar period effects.
It could be argued that postmenopausal breast cancer in Singapore and Sweden differs not only in numbers but also in origin and tumor characteristics. The Swedish breast cancers could be more influenced by female sex hormones and thus have a different gene expression pattern. Our aim is to compare 50 Swedish and 50 Singaporean breast tumors on a gene expression level.
Ongoing tasks: We will compare the breast cancer incidence and mortality rates of Singapore and Sweden taking stage of the disease into consideration. We will also compare the gene expression pattern in 50+50 postmenopausal breast cancer patients from Singapore and Sweden.
You're welcome.
I was not able to answer that.
(steely)
And outcomes of "landmark" studies vary from decade to decade, too.
For decades, despite some findings that there might be a connection between hormone replacement therapy for women and breast cancer, the official position was one of reassuring women that they didn't have to worry about breast cancer resulting from HRT.
After all those years of, in effect, using a million women as guinea pigs, we learn at last... .
Long-term hormone replacement linked to breast cancer, One million menopausal women reveal risks of therapy. 08 August 2003You're certainly right, that statistics can be abused. The rightness or wrongness of abortion, itself, does not depend on its increasing or decreasing the chances of breast cancer.Women taking combination hormone-replacement therapy (HRT) may be twice as likely to develop breast cancer. So concludes a study involving a million British women, the largest ever to probe the suspected link1.In response to the findings, Britain's drug regulator today changed its HRT advice. Doctors are now required to appraise patients of the risks of prolonged therapy and to discuss the relative costs and benefits with them annually.
But I hope that women are informed of any health risks they are taking if they elect to have an abortion.
It would be terrible if we learned that these studies, which show there is no connection between abortion and cancer, were undertaken by people with an agenda.
Aborted fetuses can be of value to some researchers. Those researchers and their colleagues might hate to see the supply of fetuses dwindle, if and when women decide to forego abortion.
Correct.
It would be terrible if we learned that these studies, which show there is no connection between abortion and cancer, were undertaken by people with an agenda.
Sad to say, there are people on both sides who have an agenda with regard to the outcome, reporting and interpretation of studies of this question. Sad to say, because science should be impartial, going wherever the data lead.
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yup........should be.
Actually, life expectancy for women in China is in the low 70s now.
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.