Subject: Teen Girls Targeted for Breast Cancer? (fwd)
To: Chris Stamper <stamper@supermodels.com>
Cc: Adam Rifkin <adam@cs.caltech.edu>, Shana <psy40036@frank.mtsu.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Teen Girls Targeted for Breast Cancer?
(Mike Richmond)
Is it true that women who never bear children (called 'nulliparous')
have an elevated breast cancer risk? In a word, YES. How much of a risk?
Researcher Emily White (Ph.D.) informs us (American Journal of Public
Health, 1987, vol. 77, pp. 495-497) that nulliparous women have a 90% higher
breast cancer risk than parous women (who bear children). Other estimates
are higher, some are lower but it is universally accepted that not bearing
children increases BC risk. Thus, teenage women need to avoid any medical
decisions that increase their risk of not bearing children. Are there any
such decisions? One is induced abortion. Some abortion clinics warn
that STERILITY is a possible complication, others warn of possible
INFERTILITY. STERILITY (unless reversed) will assure that the teenager
will never bear children. Does the same consent form that warns of STERILITY
also inform the teenager of the associated increased risk of breast cancer?
In a word, NO!!! The word cancer does not appear on any abortion consent
form in the U.S.A. or Canada. Is this misinformed consent and thus,
MALPRACTICE? Is France French?
But what if the induced abortion does not result in infertility or
sterility? Joel Brind (Ph.D.), breast cancer researcher, has stated
that if a 15 year old brings her pregnancy to term, her life-time breast
cancer risk is 7% (i.e. a full term pregnancy is BC PROTECTIVE). But if
she has an induced abortion, her life-time breast cancer risk is 15%.
She has more than doubled her risk (vs. having the birth). Do
'pro-choicers' believe in INFORMED consent?
According to USA Today (June 2-4, 1995, Kim Painter) the average
award in a successful breast cancer law suit in 1994 was $307,000 US;
44% of BC malpractice cases resulted in payments to patients. The
first medical journal article to find that induced abortion increases
BC risk was published is 1957. It has been well accepted by the medical
profession for over 2 decades that not bearing children is a breast cancer
risk factor. There is NO EXCUSE for not telling women contemplating
an induced abortion, that STERILITY carries an associated breast cancer
risk.
References:
Reproductive factors in the aetiology of breast cancer, L.A. Brinton, et al.,
British Journal of Cancer, 1983, 47:757-762
Risk of Breast Cancer Among Young Women: Relationship to Induced Abortion,
Janet R. Daling, et al., JNCI, 1994, 86:1584-1592
Risk of breast cancer in relation to reproductive factors in Denmark, M.
Ewertz, S.W. Duffy, British Journal of Cancer, 1988, 55:99-104
Reproductive and Hormonal Risk Factors, Epidemiologic Reviews, Jennifer
L. Kelsey, et al., 1993, 15:36-47
Age of First Birth and Breast Cancer Risk, B. MacMahon, et al., Bulletin of
the World Health Organization, 1970, 43:209-221