Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Mayo Clinic Tells Women No Link Between Abortion and Breast Cancer
Life News ^ | 06.13.06 | Steven Ertelt

Posted on 06/15/2006 1:33:42 PM PDT by Coleus

Rochester, MN (LifeNews.com) -- The influential Mayo Clinic is advising women that there is no link between abortion and breast cancer -- a conclusion that flies in the face of numerous studies showing the link between the two. The advice comes in a response posted on Mayo's web site in reply to a question from a Wisconsin woman.  "There's no credible evidence of a link between induced abortion and breast cancer," Dr. Sandhya Pruthi wrote the woman on behalf of Mayo's web site.

As proof, Mayo cites the National Cancer Institute, but the organization has come under fire as politically charged and relying more on the political beliefs of leading officers there than scientific studies.  Pruthi goes on in her response to say that some studies have shown a link between abortion and breast cancer. It cites a "large meta-analysis" compiled by Dr. Joel Brind and other researchers in 1996. They conducted a synthesis of all the major studies done in the field to that time and concluded that women who had an abortion before their first term child had a 50% increased of developing breast cancer while women who had an abortion after their first child sustained a 30% increased risk. They published their findings in an article in the October 1996 edition of the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health.

Without offering any further explanation, Mayo told the Wisconsin woman "this study has been widely criticized for flaws in its design that may have affected the conclusions."  Yet the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists in England wrote in 2000 that "the Brind paper had no major methodological shortcomings and could not be disregarded."  Instead, the Dr. Pruthi cited more recent population-based studies from the Netherlands and Sweden that May said "found no link between induced abortion and breast cancer.' Pruthi touted the population-based studies saying they are "considered a more accurate way to examine such an issue."

However, the 2003 Sweden study the Mayo Clinic refers to has its own problems as it relied on an incomplete set of patient records, according to the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute. In a factsheet regarding the study, BCPI says records about abortions women had after their first childbirth were not included in the study's data and the study should be thrown out as a result. Of the 41 studies which have been previously published, 29 show increased risk of breast cancer among women who have chosen abortion. According to the BCPI, some 16 of those studies are statistically significant. In total, eight medical groups recognize an independent link between abortion and cancer, including the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, which says the abortion-breast cancer link is "highly plausible."

The Mayo Clinic response also ignored the results of the most recent study, where researchers at the German Cancer Research Center found a woman's risk of contracting breast cancer is lowered and the decrease is more substantial the more pregnancies a woman has had.

ACTION: Contact the Mayo Clinic with your comments about its denial of the abortion-breast cancer link. You can provide your input by going to: http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/contact-us/contactus

Related web sites:
Breast Cancer Prevention Institute - http://www.bcpinstitute.org
Association of American Physicians and Surgeons - http://www.aapsonline.org


TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: abclink; abortion; breastcancer; deathculturelies; righttolife
Pro-Life Group Upset Mayo Clinic Denied Abortion-Breast Cancer Link

Rochester, MN (LifeNews.com) -- A pro-life group that monitors the link between abortion and breast cancer is upset that the respected Mayo Clinic is advising women there is no link between abortion and breast cancer. The group also says Mayo should inform women that studies show carrying a pregnancy to term lowers the risk of contracting the disease.  As LifeNews.com reported in an exclusive news story on Tuesday, Mayo posted a response on its web site to a Wisconsin woman who asked whether a link exists.

"There's no credible evidence of a link between induced abortion and breast cancer," Dr. Sandhya Pruthi wrote the woman on behalf of the Mayo Clinic.  As proof, Mayo cites the National Cancer Institute, but the organization has come under fire as politically charged and relying more on the political beliefs of leading officers there than scientific studies.  Karen Malec, president of the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer, says the Mayo Clinic may feel like its has to toe the line of the National Cancer Institute because it receives significant amounts of federal taxpayer funding.

"The federal government funds most of the cancer research in the U.S. through [NCI]," Malec said in a statement provided to LifeNews.com. "The NCI concealed the existence of extensive research dating from 1957 and now expects women to believe there is no link."  "Experts at the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute have heard complaints from federally funded scientists who say that the NCI is leaning on them not to acknowledge an ABC link or to participate in research showing a link. The NCI rigorously enforces its ideology among scientists," Malec explained. "Mayo Clinic is a participant in the National Cancer Institute Cancer Centers Program," Malec added. "One would expect the leaders of a federally funded cancer research facility to be reluctant to risk sabotaging their research program by blowing the whistle on a government cover-up."

Pruthi goes on in her response for Mayo to say that some studies have shown a link between abortion and breast cancer. It cites a "large meta-analysis" compiled by Dr. Joel Brind and other researchers in 1996. They conducted a synthesis of all the major studies done in the field to that time and concluded that women who had an abortion before their first term child had a 50% increased of developing breast cancer while women who had an abortion after their first child sustained a 30% increased risk. "If Mayo Clinic's staff had told the truth about the ABC link, they might have helped post-abortive women to prevent the disease by encouraging them to adopt risk-reduction strategies," Malec explained. "They might have saved the lives of countless abortion-bound adolescents and college-age women."

Malec said Mayo should have told the woman that the breast cancer link is reduced by having a baby. Researchers at the German Cancer Research Center found a woman's risk of contracting breast cancer is lowered and the decrease is more substantial the more pregnancies a woman has had. "Even the NCI acknowledges that childbearing reduces breast cancer risk," Malec said.

ACTION: Contact the Mayo Clinic with your comments about its denial of the abortion-breast cancer link. You can provide your input by going to: http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/contact-us/contactus

Related web sites:
Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer - http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com
Breast Cancer Prevention Institute - http://www.bcpinstitute.org

1 posted on 06/15/2006 1:33:44 PM PDT by Coleus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

The Abortion-Breast Cancer Link
2 posted on 06/15/2006 1:34:02 PM PDT by Coleus (Roe v. Wade and Endangered Species Act both passed in 1973, Murder Babies/save trees, birds, algae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndMostConservativeBrdMember; afraidfortherepublic; Alas; al_c; american colleen; annalex; ...
this is an FYI, not casting judgment: The Breast Cancer Prevention Institute has accepted money from the Komen Foundation.

Here is a quote: "That's why we wouldn't give to Komen--but we'll take it."
3 posted on 06/15/2006 1:38:21 PM PDT by Coleus (Roe v. Wade and Endangered Species Act both passed in 1973, Murder Babies/save trees, birds, algae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

Do you have that bar graph that shows about 40 studies, most of which have varying degrees of positive correlation? Someone on FR has it.


4 posted on 06/15/2006 1:44:34 PM PDT by firebrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: firebrand

As of 2003, 29 out of 39 studies show that women who had an induced abortion have an increased risk of developing breast cancer, as noted in the bar graph below.

Risk of Breast Cancer from Induced Abortion
View Printable PDF Version (article below)

5 posted on 06/15/2006 1:54:37 PM PDT by Coleus (Roe v. Wade and Endangered Species Act both passed in 1973, Murder Babies/save trees, birds, algae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Coleus; juliej; Tabi Katz
Thanks

Good one to bookmark, jj and tk

6 posted on 06/15/2006 1:59:08 PM PDT by firebrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: firebrand

The pro abortion medical centers rig their data. I won't donate to Susan Komen Breast Cancer researh because of it.


7 posted on 06/15/2006 2:28:39 PM PDT by juliej (juliej)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

Just because Mayo-Clinic says it's not true doesn't make it so. After all, wouldn't Mayo lose mucho-deniro if women stopped having abortions and as a consequence develop breast cancer. Why, they wouldn't need to be treated for breast cancer anymore. HEAVEN FORBID...


8 posted on 06/15/2006 3:19:01 PM PDT by Mrs. Darla Ruth Schwerin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Darla Ruth Schwerin

There's something unseemly about rooting for cancer.
And the Baptist Baylor University major study that showed no links... what did God have in mind with that, I wonder?


9 posted on 06/15/2006 3:30:28 PM PDT by gcruse (http://gcruse.typepad.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: juliej
The pro abortion medical centers rig their data. I won't donate to Susan Komen Breast Cancer researh because of it.

They also donate to Planned Non-Parenthood.

10 posted on 06/15/2006 3:31:19 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: gcruse

I'm not certain I understand your comment. Could you please explain it a little. Thanks...


11 posted on 06/15/2006 7:00:54 PM PDT by Mrs. Darla Ruth Schwerin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Darla Ruth Schwerin
Praying for Cancer

This isn't current, but it's still valid.
12 posted on 06/15/2006 8:08:15 PM PDT by gcruse (http://gcruse.typepad.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: 2nd amendment mama; A2J; Agitate; AliVeritas; Alouette; Annie03; aposiopetic; attagirl; Augie76; ...

ProLife Ping!

If anyone wants on or off my ProLife Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.

13 posted on 06/15/2006 9:31:30 PM PDT by Mr. Silverback (Try Jesus--If you don't like Him, satan will always take you back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 2nd amendment mama; A2J; Agitate; AliVeritas; Alouette; Annie03; aposiopetic; attagirl; Augie76; ...

ProLife Ping!

If anyone wants on or off my ProLife Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.

14 posted on 06/15/2006 10:14:54 PM PDT by Mr. Silverback (Try Jesus--If you don't like Him, satan will always take you back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

Exactly! They are birds of a feather and they do not really care about "women's health" as they so delicately put it.


15 posted on 06/16/2006 7:37:15 AM PDT by juliej (juliej)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: gcruse

I asked you a direct question, and you didn't answer it. I'm guessing that you don't like answering direct questions. I will not interpret from another set of responses, as my questions deserve better than that...


16 posted on 06/16/2006 10:09:03 AM PDT by Mrs. Darla Ruth Schwerin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Darla Ruth Schwerin

Being the author of the article which I linked and which addresses your question, I'm not inclined to simply repeat what can be read there, more especially in the comment section.

There's no point in continuing this.


17 posted on 06/16/2006 10:13:15 AM PDT by gcruse (http://gcruse.typepad.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: gcruse

You are absolutely right. So, I bid you good day...


18 posted on 06/16/2006 10:19:08 AM PDT by Mrs. Darla Ruth Schwerin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: firebrand
Without offering any further explanation, Mayo told the Wisconsin woman "this study has been widely criticized for flaws in its design that may have affected the conclusions."

Of course it's been widely criticized - by those that don't like the conclusions. But if the criticism were valid, one would think Mayo would at least describe said flaws.

19 posted on 06/17/2006 2:34:43 AM PDT by Tabi Katz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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