FIRST U.S. ABORTION-BREAST CANCER LAWSUIT SETTLED

Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer ^ | October 21, 2003 | Karen Malec

[Saundra Duffy]

COALITION ON ABORTION/BREAST CANCER P.O. Box 152 Palos Heights, IL 60463 Toll Free 1-877-803-0102 www.AbortionBreastCancer.com response@abortionbreastcancer.com

Press Release Contact: Karen Malec For Immediate Release Date: October 21, 2003

FIRST U.S. ABORTION-BREAST CANCER LAWSUIT SETTLED

PHILADELPHIA: The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer announced today that the first U.S. abortion-breast cancer (ABC) lawsuit settled for an undisclosed amount on October 17, 2003. The case was filed in Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas. The plaintiff was a 17-year-old Pennsylvania resident when a second-trimester abortion was performed in New Jersey without parental knowledge or consent. Although she hasn't developed breast cancer, she sued her abortion provider, Charles Benjamin, for neglecting to warn her about the physical and emotional risks of abortion.

Karen Malec, the coalition's president, declared, "This settlement will teach the medical establishment that it can no longer profit by keeping women in the dark about the breast cancer risk. This case also establishes that abortion providers can be sued for battery if the abortion provider performs no parental consent abortions on minors from neighboring states (with parental consent statutes), even if the state where the abortion is performed does not have a parental consent statute."

The plaintiff's attorney, Joseph P. Stanton, will hold a press conference on a later date. For further details, contact his office at: 405 Old York Road, Jenkintown, Pennsylvania; phone 215/886-6780.

The ABC link has been called "the elephant in medicine's parlor." Medical experts privately say abortion causes breast cancer, but the volatility of the issue prevents them from publicly acknowledging it.

According to a National Cancer Institute (NCI) commissioned study, teens who procure abortions before age 18, more than double their risk. [1] Girls and women have a predominance of immature, cancer-vulnerable Types 1 & 2 breast lobules, which aren't matured into cancer-resistant Types 3 & 4 lobules until a term pregnancy takes place. Abortion can increase the statistical odds of developing breast cancer in two ways: 1) It delays a first term pregnancy; and 2) It increases the number of cancer-vulnerable breast cells because estrogen overexposure during a normal pregnancy stimulates cell multiplication. Women don't receive protection from estrogen overexposure until third trimester hormones mature their breast tissue into milk-producing Types 3 & 4 lobules.

Scientists have proven themselves incapable of refuting the biological explanation for the ABC link. Thirteen out of 16 U.S. studies report risk elevations. The NCI provided at least partial funding for 10 studies.

Minnesota and Texas state legislators passed informed consent legislation earlier this year. Massachusetts is considering similar legislation. Five medical organizations say abortion is one of the causes of breast cancer. [2]

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer is an international women's organization founded to protect the health and save the lives of women by educating and providing information on abortion as a risk factor for breast cancer.

References: 1. Daling et al. (1994) J Natl Cancer Inst 86:1584-92. 2. National Physicians Center for Family Resources, Catholic Medical Association, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Polycarp Research Institute, Breast Cancer Prevention Institute.

[TheAngryClam]

Notes on the packaging often aren't enough to provide informed consent, actually. There's a whole line of cases in product liability that say such warnings are not sufficient.

Time for my smokes!

[nickcarraway]

Did that researcher compare the percentage with those who hadn't had abortions? Did he do any research to eliminate other possible causes of cancer such as smoking or alcoholism? Did he find any information that would explain how a surgical procedure can cause cancer over a decade later to a part of the body that wasn't involved in the procedure? Without answers to those question all of the abortion cancer linkage is pure under researched junk science and statistical tom foolery.

Yes, on all those questions. Shouldn't you even bother to read about the studies before you say these claims haven't been researched?

[nuffsenuff]

Pardon my ignorance. You see I am male and honestly have never heard of this link.

Can you provide a link with some info?

This is the first I've ever heard of this.

[Catspaw]

Wendy's is in trouble. That double with cheese I didn't order today? Tomorrow, I file my suit for all the heart attacks that they didn't warn about.

Can I sue myself? I just made a batch of rolls last night--with butter & sugar in the recipe, to say nothing of the salt. And when they came out of the oven, I put MORE butter on two of them. And some raspberry jam. And then I ate them.

There's got to be SOME WAY I can get money out of someone. I mean I know who made the butter and who made the sugar and who made the salt (but the raspberry jam was homemade). Gotta be a lawsuit in there somewhere.

[nickcarraway]

Did he find any information that would explain how a surgical procedure can cause cancer over a decade later to a part of the body that wasn't involved in the procedure?

Haven't you read? I believe it causes breats cancer because of the hormone release in the first three days after pregnancy. The hormones released cause a change in breast tissue, which dramatically increases the risk of cancer. But don't take my word for it, I'm no M.D., look it up yourself.

[Kuksool]

This settlement is mighty interesting. We just might see Sen. John Edwards and other RAT Senators advocate tort reform in the next few weeks.

[Hillary's Lovely Legs]

My neighbor wants to sue me for my TV antennea that DIDN'T fall on her car, but it could have. ( before I took it down.)

She claims to be an attorney. I hope she doesn't get this judge, who knows what I will be liable for.

[discostu]

I had a friend who picked his smokes based on their warning label. He went for "quitting smoking now reduces serious risk to your health" (almost makes smoking sound healthy) and "smoking increases your chance of birth defect" (being a guy who would therefore never get pregnant). He stayed away from anything that talked about heart disease or cancer, just a silly humorous superstition but maybe he has a case.

[discostu]

Sure link 'em up.

[Poohbah]

Anything nyou don't agree with is junk science. How nice. I guess you'd like to go back to the days where doctors wore scary masks to scare away the bad spirits. Science is a little too scary for you.

If it's real science, why didn't this case have a real victim of breast cancer who'd had an abortion?

[nickcarraway]

Did he find any information that would explain how a surgical procedure can cause cancer over a decade later to a part of the body that wasn't involved in the procedure?

Absolutely, these were by the book studies. One of the researchers in New York, Janet Daling, is 100% pro-abortion, but her research still found the link.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

Its not the suit that is the art - its finding somebody to sue even though you never used the service or consumed the product that didn't harm you. That takes a true master.

[Hillary's Lovely Legs]

Who are women going to sue for miscarriages that might cause breast cancer?

Is it possible to sue nature?

[nickcarraway]

woman’s breast is especially sensitive to carcinogenic (ie, cancer producing) influences before she delivers her first child. When a woman becomes pregnant, a number of hormone levels increase dramatically in her body. Three especially notable ones are estradiol, progesterone (ie, the female sexual hormones), and hCG (human Chorionic Gonadotropin). All of these hormones, especially the latter, serve to stimulate immature breast cells to mature into fully differentiated cells [1]. If this process is artificially interrupted by way of an induced abortion, the hormone levels drop suddenly and dramatically, thereby suspending the natural process of maturation of many of the woman’s breast cells. This is referred to as a “hormonal blow” by researchers. These cells are now “vulnerable” to carcinogens because they started the maturation process but were never able to complete it. (Cells that have fully matured are less vulnerable to carcinogens than cells that are in the process of maturation).

[discostu]

That's what YOU BELIEVE. The courts aren't about belief they're about PROOF, can you PROVE it?

Link it up. It's your claim and your duty to back up with proof.

[kidd]

You can sue anyone you want.

You probably wouldn't win using the example that you cited. There was no legal precident set in this case. And I doubt the theme parks that you want to sue would settle.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

Because they can't find one.

[Diva Betsy Ross]

All in a couple of days. Death merchants: be on gaurd.

[Catspaw]

Who are women going to sue for miscarriages that might cause breast cancer?

I've had five miscarriages, ranging from about 2 months to 4 1/2 months. I want to know who I can sue (and the "your husband" can't be the answer).