Skip to comments.
Abortion and Breast Cancer
New York Times ^
| 1/6/3
Posted on 01/06/2003 8:36:25 AM PST by dead
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-98 next last
To: Hildy
Compassion sometimes commands a high premium on FR. A lot of people here either can't or won't pay up.
To: Hildy
Compassion, does not mean abortion is right, however...
To: realpatriot71
Not really. How do you know that these women would readily admit to having abortions?
43
posted on
01/06/2003 12:17:34 PM PST
by
agrace
To: agrace
Obviously, you cannot help what one woman doesn't tell about her past. However, I don't see why a single study couldn't find women with abortions in their past, and their incidence of breast cancer as a population (all these questions are covered in any medical history). This incidence could easily be compared against women without abortion in heir past and thier incidence of breast cancer. It either is or isn't statistically significant.
Just because abortion may not lead to an increased risk of breast cancer doesn't make it ok. If you can't draw a link - let it go - it's just scare tactics and propaganda after that. If you want people to take you serious, then give them the facts and just the facts.
To: realpatriot71
It sounds pretty, but I have a hard time believing that women on either side of the aisle would be completely forthright, enough to create a statistically accurate study. How do you know if women who say they have NOT had an abortion - for the sake of the other study group - are actually telling the truth? What will they say when recruiting women for the study? Apply only if you can be honest? And that's not how statistics are gathered usually anyway, right - how often are formal study groups used as opposed to clinical information gathered from non-human sources like records? I'd like to think it could be done, but I'm not convinced.
I don't think at this point it is a matter of being able to draw a link or not. The suspicion is valid, based on what I've read, and proving the link is still in its beginning stages. Besides that, there's considerable opposition to these studies and their implications. It'll take time either way, and dismissing it out of hand is unwise, imo.
45
posted on
01/06/2003 12:44:05 PM PST
by
agrace
To: realpatriot71
46
posted on
01/06/2003 12:47:11 PM PST
by
Remedy
To: HumanaeVitae
I never said abortion is right. I knew what you meant.
47
posted on
01/06/2003 12:55:45 PM PST
by
Hildy
To: Hildy
Hildy,
I really don't think what anyone thinks or says over the internet is going to have any real effect on your future health, do you? The fact that you are acting so updity makes me think that you are not at peace with your decision. Why don't you get that settled before you start whinning to strangers. If you don't know if abortion is right, then how can you fault anyone for saying "mean words" that really will not change anything for you personally in the long run. Where is your sense of proportion? BTW, could you tell me why you thought it necessary to tell us about this incident in your past?
Also, most rational thinkers see a cause and effect in life in general. We, as a people take comfort in the knowledge that when we are a wronged by our fellow man, and that person is not called to account, that ultimate justice will somehow get its way on our behalf. I'm sure that most on this board see women as victims of the abortion industry that misleads people for profit while hissing at anyone who dares to contradict their mantras about "safe and available family planning" and it's refreshing to see that the tide is turning on this topic.
Hildy said: Isn't that Christian of you. I had an abortion when I was 20. Do I regret it? To be honest, I don't really know. Would you like to see me die a slow, painful death now?
Tom
48
posted on
01/06/2003 1:25:18 PM PST
by
fatboy
To: fatboy
Funny, you didn't choose to post what I was replying to.
49
posted on
01/06/2003 2:22:28 PM PST
by
Hildy
To: babygene
"I hope for only ONE thing for you...That ANYTHING you wish apon others happens to you and anyone you know or love."What you said is worse than what he said...
Ummm...Think again...
Based on what I said... HE controls what happens to himself and his loved ones by what HE wishes on others.
To: BlackElk
And, since the essence of your post is to defend the slicing and dicing of innocent babies, would you also wish that fate upon you and those you love?Nice try. I've not given any clues as to where I stand on the subject of abortion in this thread. Only where I stand on the subject of disgusting assholes.
Take your weak baiting techniques and throw them into someone elses face.
To: agrace
Wouldn't an abortion be in a woman's medical record? Were these studies completed via 'survey' or were they completed with the help of doctors counting incidents? If a survey, then yes, the results could be suspect to some degree, but the same would go for those whose studies claim there is no link.
52
posted on
01/06/2003 2:57:41 PM PST
by
MEGoody
To: fatboy
I posted this fact about my past because the poster said that women who have abortions basically deserve to get Cancer. I thought if I put a human face to that inane assertion, then maybe he would reconsider wishing ill on someone else. Foolish me.
53
posted on
01/06/2003 3:01:43 PM PST
by
Hildy
To: Johnny Shear
"Based on what I said... HE controls what happens to himself and his loved ones by what HE wishes on others."
The problem with your argument is that 2timothy3.16 did not say what you attribute to him. Of course YOU know what he realy meant, and are reacting to that, right?
54
posted on
01/06/2003 3:02:28 PM PST
by
babygene
To: dead
bump
To: MEGoody
Wouldn't an abortion be in a woman's medical record?Only if she disclosed it. Abortion clinic records aren't automatically added to other records. When a woman signs on with a new ob/gyn, for example, she is asked about prior pregnancies, births, miscarriages, abortions etc, but it is entirely up to her whether she is completely forthright. It's in her best interest to be, but I bet they're not all honest.
56
posted on
01/06/2003 3:08:06 PM PST
by
agrace
To: Hildy
Hildy, timothy said basicly two things:
1. But, if it were true, and God willing it will be
I think on the first point you would agree that it would be good if they found the cause of breast cancer (even if the cause were found to be abortion). That would enable women to avoid getting it. It would make it easy to eradicate breast cancer.
2. Would it not be poetic justice bla bla bla...
He said "would it not be poetic justics". Though this might have been insensitive and perhaps mean spirited, he didn't say he wished it on anyone.
57
posted on
01/06/2003 3:19:21 PM PST
by
babygene
To: babygene
You're putting lipstick on a pig.
58
posted on
01/06/2003 3:37:53 PM PST
by
APBaer
To: MEGoody
Medical records are strictly confidential. You can't just go digging through someone's medical record without their permission.
59
posted on
01/06/2003 3:44:37 PM PST
by
flyervet
To: babygene
The problem with your argument is that 2timothy3.16 did not say what you attribute to him. Of course YOU know what he realy meant, and are reacting to that, right?He said, and I paraphrase...
"God willing, abortion causes breast cancer."
I have no idea why you're defending this guy but it's making you look like a fool.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-98 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson