The Silent Scream Complete Version - ...

The Silent Scream Complete Version - Abortion as Infanticide

Posted in the Cottonwood Forum

jhon

Riverside, CA

#1 Dec 13, 2013
Dr. Bernard Nathanson's classic video that shocked the world. He explains the procedure of a suction abortion, followed by an actual first trimester abortion as seen through ultrasound. The viewer can see the child's pathetic attempts to escape the suction curette as her heart rate doubles, and a "silent scream" as her body is torn apart. A great tool to help people see why abortion is murder. The most important video on abortion ever made. This video changed opinion on abortion to many people.
Introduction by Dr. Bernard Nathanson, host. Describes the technology of ultrasound and how, for the first time ever, we can actually see inside the womb. Dr. Nathanson further describes the ultrasound technique and shows examples of babies in the womb. Three-dimensional depiction of the developing fetus, from 4 weeks through 28 weeks. Display and usage of the abortionists' tools, plus video of an abortionist performing a suction abortion. Dr. Nathanson discusses the abortionist who agreed to allow this abortion to be filmed with ultrasound. The abortionist was quite skilled, having performed more than 10,000 abortions. We discover that the resulting ultrasound of his abortion so appalled him that he never again performed another abortion. The clip begins with an ultrasound of the fetus (girl) who is about to be aborted. The girl is moving in the womb; displays a heartbeat of 140 per minute; and is at times sucking her thumb. As the abortionist's suction tip begins to invade the womb, the child rears and moves violently in an attempt to avoid the instrument. Her mouth is visibly open in a "silent scream." The child's heart rate speeds up dramatically (to 200 beats per minute) as she senses aggression. She moves violently away in a pathetic attempt to escape the instrument. The abortionist's suction tip begins to rip the baby's limbs from its body, ultimately leaving only her head in the uterus (too large to be pulled from the uterus in one piece). The abortionist attempts to crush her head with his forceps, allowing it to be removed. In an effort to "dehumanize" the procedure, the abortionist and anesthesiologist refer to the baby's head as "number 1." The abortionist crushes "number 1" with the forceps and removes it from the uterus. Abortion statistics are revealed, as well as who benefits from the enormously lucrative industry that has developed. Clinics are now franchised, and there is ample evidence that many are controlled by organized crime. Women are victims, too. They haven't been told about the true nature of the unborn child or the facts about abortion procedures. Their wombs have been perforated, infected, destroyed, and sterilized. All as a result of an operation about which they they have had no true knowledge. Films like this must be made part of "informed consent." NARAL (National Abortion Rights Action League) and Planned Parenthood are accused of a conspiracy of silence, of keeping women in the dark about the reality of abortion. Finally, Dr. Nathanson discusses his credentials. He is a former abortionist, having been the director of the largest clinic in the Western world:
OneHundrethMonke y

New Orleans, LA

#2 Dec 14, 2013
Lo and behold, I come to Sedona, Az Topix to get a good bearing of the consciousness of this area and I happen on an Anti-abortion activist from Riverside Cali no less. I thought I'd never find you! I thought you people were a media myth.

From whence did your activismal tendencies concerning the abortion of human babies come from? That would be interesting to know. Was it a religious thing?

I think it's sad when a human is killed by its parents. As sad as any of the worst situations that exist out there, but

There is no sadder situation that ignorant parents. "Look What I Can Do", and out plops another miracle claimed by just another ignorant fool. Parents that have nare a clue as to what it takes to raise a child, nor the best way to set "it" on a good path.

What say ye about the ignorance of young teens which causes pregnancy, welfare enhancement seekers, breeders, or"my parents had children, so that must be my destiny to have kids too." What say ye about ignorant parenting in general?

I say this. I see the country side filling up with all manner of human population. The land is locked and signage everywhere screams "No Trespassing"! What say ye of that big ugly word "OVERPOPULATION"? I see fierce competition amongst peers to prove who is the best. I see humans constantly "purchasing" their status in life, but doing little to actually earn it. Well, what say ye anti-abortionist activist?
jhon

Riverside, CA

#4 Dec 15, 2013
OneHundrethMonkey wrote:
Lo and behold, I come to Sedona, Az Topix to get a good bearing of the consciousness of this area and I happen on an Anti-abortion activist from Riverside Cali no less. I thought I'd never find you! I thought you people were a media myth.
From whence did your activismal tendencies concerning the abortion of human babies come from? That would be interesting to know. Was it a religious thing?
I think it's sad when a human is killed by its parents. As sad as any of the worst situations that exist out there, but
There is no sadder situation that ignorant parents. "Look What I Can Do", and out plops another miracle claimed by just another ignorant fool. Parents that have nare a clue as to what it takes to raise a child, nor the best way to set "it" on a good path.
What say ye about the ignorance of young teens which causes pregnancy, welfare enhancement seekers, breeders, or"my parents had children, so that must be my destiny to have kids too." What say ye about ignorant parenting in general?
I say this. I see the country side filling up with all manner of human population. The land is locked and signage everywhere screams "No Trespassing"! What say ye of that big ugly word "OVERPOPULATION"? I see fierce competition amongst peers to prove who is the best. I see humans constantly "purchasing" their status in life, but doing little to actually earn it. Well, what say ye anti-abortionist activist?
Research shows: Abortion increases crime rate: http://unitedfamiliesinternational.wordpress.... Another example of how the ACLU uses the downtrodden for their political agendas was “Jane Roe” from Roe vs. Wade. In 1969, an impoverished unmarried, pregnant girl was approached in a Dallas courthouse by two ACLU feminist lawyers who convinced her to claim her pregnancy was the result of rape – the only way to obtain a legal abortion at the time.

The problem was that it wasn’t true, so the Texas court refused the abortion. This is the case the ACLU took to the Supreme Court resulting in abortion becoming a form of birth control in the United States.

The ACLU lawyers persuaded “Roe” she was a lesbian and for several years was kept by lesbian handlers. When she grew up in the 1980s, she asserted that she had been the “pawn” of the ACLU. She never wanted an abortion — she was seeking a divorce from her husband — but the feminist attorney Sarah Weddington used the case as a means of attempting to overturn a Texas’ law making most abortions illegal. Weddington took the case all the way to the Supreme Court, which invalidated every pro-life state law in the nation protecting unborn children and the rest is history.

“Roe” actually never had an abortion – she gave the baby up for adoption. Many years later, she exposed the seamy, manipulative side of the ACLU and lesbian networking in a published book in 1984,‘I Am Roe’. She ‘came out’ with her real name of Norma McCorvey, renouncing lesbianism and abortion.

In 2005 she petitioned the Supreme Court to overturn the abortion law, arguing that the case should be heard once again in light of evidence that the procedure harms women, but the petition was denied. She was arrested on the first day of U.S. Senate hearings for the confirmation to the Supreme Court of the United States of Sonia Sotomayor.
OneHundrethMonke y

New Orleans, LA

#6 Dec 15, 2013
We're dealing here with immorality then. Lesbians, gays, rascist. Most every one of them harborin hate in their heart for their fellow man, because of their fears or mistreatins and misguidins due to their fellow man or parents. They want everyone to be like them and will go through great "hateful" means to "BELONG", "FIT IN", or "Manipulate" others to their cause and ways. Sounds a little like what the christian church had done in the past.
Live and let live or live and let die then die yourself in the end. No one should tell anyone else what to do with their life, or the lives of their children. No one should press their way onto others. Simply let them go their way and do not help them if they are immoral. It's just too bad we can't brand the immoral on their foreheads with their perspective wrong doings so everyone would know them and offer no help to them.
Humans have been in each others kraws for a long time. I don't think there is no one solution nor any laws pushed on by special interest Aholes that will make it better.
OneHundrethMonke y

New Orleans, LA

#7 Dec 15, 2013
By the way, I notice you folks don't listen very well nor engage in appropriate manner having to do with the current conversation. You seem to just go off without being considerate of the person you're communicating with (Me). I think the kids now call it ranting or spewing. It would even look to me like you was copying and paste ing your part of the conversation.

Pilgrims. No wonder no one wants to listen to you guys. Learn to listen sometimes, most importantly, know when to shut up.
ted

Riverside, CA

#8 Dec 15, 2013
the birth control Review volumes 1 through 3 edited by Margaret Sanger. More children from the fit less from the unfit is the cheif issue in birth control. The emphasis is on control rather then prevention: http://books.google.com/books...
Birth Control Review, Volumes 5-6 Margaret Sanger editor: Birth Control: to create a race of thoroughbreds: http://books.google.com/books...
Correspondence between Sanger and McCormick: Where the present need of financial support is most needed, and B. What the present prospects are in contraceptive research. I will answer B. first because I consider that the world and almost our civilization for the next twenty-five years, is going to depend upon a simple, cheap, safe contraceptive to be used in poverty stricken slums, jungles, and among the most ignorant people. Even this will not be sufficient, because I believe that now, immediately, there should be national sterilization for certain dysgenic types of our population who are being encouraged to breed and would die out were the government not feeding them. Contraceptive research needs tremendous financial support: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search...
henry

Riverside, CA

#9 Dec 15, 2013
one hundredth monkey supporter of baby slaughter. I should not be forced to pay for somewone to have an abortion. if somewone wants to have an abortion they should pay for it themselves out of their own pocket it should not be taxpayer funded. So planned parenthood should be defunded. Simple as that. 95 percent of what planned parenthood does is abortions despite their claims in ads to the contrary. Barbara My cleaning lady told me a year ago that she meet a lot of women who were irreversably physically and mentally damaged for life by the abortion they had. So it hurts the women also. not just kills the baby in their womb. That is why it should not be tax payer funded.
henry

Riverside, CA

#10 Dec 15, 2013
There is a lack of adoptable babies because abortion is legal. Over two million couples are waiting to adopt babies, and only 134,000 US children are available to be adopted as of June 2002. [28] [29] The percentage of infants given up for adoption has declined from 9% of those born before 1973 to 1% of those born between 1996 and 2002 (447 KB) . [53] Instead of having the option to abort, women should give their unwanted babies to people who can not biologically conceive. Selective abortion based on genetic abnormalities (eugenic termination) is overt discrimination. Physical limitations don’t make those with disabilities less than human. Abortion is an instrument of genocide against African Americans. Black women are 4.5 times as likely as white women to have an abortion. [30] 1,876 black babies are aborted every day. Between 1882 and 1968, 3,446 Blacks were lynched in the US. In less than three days in 2010 more black babies are killed by abortionists. The abortion industry makes an estimated $831 million annually. [32] An abortion can cost anywhere from around $350 to more than $1,000. [33] Abortion entrepreneurs are more interested in making money than assisting their clients.
frank

Riverside, CA

#12 Dec 15, 2013
They were stolen from their homes, locked in chains and taken across an ocean. And for more than 200 years, their blood and sweat would help to build the richest and most powerful nation the world has ever known. But when slavery ended, their welcome was over. America’s wealthy elite had decided it was time for them to disappear and they were not particular about how it might be done. What you are about to see is that the plan these people set in motion 150 years ago is still being carried out today. So don’t think that this is history. It is not. It is happening right here, and it’s happening right now through abortion, birth control sterilization, and forced eugenics. source: Black Genocide in the 21st century: http://www.maafa21.com/watch-online/... Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, is often hailed as a champion of women’s rights in historical texts and classes. However, chronically neglected is her true disdain for minority groups in America and how she saw birth control as a way of limiting the populations of those she deemed unworthy of bearing children, even going so far as to advocate that married couples must submit applications in order to have children!
Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger. Sanger published articles in her newsletter, the ”Birth Control Review,” that depicted her opinions that certain groups of people should have “never should have been born” and that birth control was intended to “create a race of thoroughbreds,” and ensure that society had “more children from the fit, less from the unfit.”
Eugenics-advocate groups like the American Eugenics Society, of which Sanger was a listed member until 1956, suggested that the government should consider putting birth control chemicals in the food and water supplies in certain areas of the nation, specifically in urban areas that were dominated by minority groups. Sanger even suggested imposing a law that would disallow women from having children without first obtaining a permit from the government—a permit that would good for only one baby—and if approved, the couple would receive an antidote to counter the effects of the involuntarily ingested birth control chemicals.
The Planned Parenthood founder made her views even more blatantly obvious in a letter she wrote to a woman named Katherine Dexter McCormick in 1950, saying she thought that “…there should be national sterilization for certain dysgenic types of our population who are being encouraged to breed and would die out were the government not feeding them.” McCormick was very wealthy and she later went on to assist Sanger in developing and funding the birth control pill.
That’s funny, because Planned Parenthood never mentions any of these views upon which they were founded in 1942. Although they honor Margaret Sanger annually (with the “Maggie Award”), they conveniently pick and choose which of her values to publicly celebrate and which to sweep under the rug. They would never consider condemning the twisted ideologies of this woman.
However, Sanger’s opinions are still apparent today in Planned Parenthood, and the true intention of birth control is still deliberately hidden under the guise of “women’s liberation.” Their most recent epitome of this was portrayed when Planned Parenthood built the largest abortion facility in the western hemisphere in the center of four heavily minority areas; they blatantly showed that they still to this day target minority groups and continue to play out Sanger’s intentions for the organization: http://liveaction.org/blog/racist-planned-par...
rand

Riverside, CA

#13 Dec 15, 2013
Permission to have Babies People won’t be allowed to have babies just because they want to or because they are careless. Most families would
be limited to two. Some people would be allowed only one, however outstanding people might be selected and allowed to have three. But most people would be allowed to have only two babies. That’s because the zero population growth
rate is 2.1 children per completed family. So something like every 10th family might be allowed the privilege of the third baby. To me, up to this point, the words ‘population control’ primarily connoted limiting the number of babies to be born. But this remark about what people would be ‘allowed’ and then what followed, made it quite clear that when you hear ‘population control’ that means more than just controlling births. It means control of every endeavour of
an entire world population; a much broader meaning to that term than I had ever attached to it before hearing this. As you listen and reflect back on some of the things you hear, you will begin to recognise how one aspect dovetails
with other aspects in terms of controlling human endeavours.
Redirecting the Purpose of Sex Well from population control the next natural step was sex. He said sex must be separated from reproduction. Sex is to pleasurable, and the urges are to strong to expect people to give it up. Chemicals in the food and water supply to reduce the sex drive are not practical. The strategy then would be not to diminish sex activity but to increase sex contraceptives. If school sex programs would lead to to more presidencies in children, that was really seen as no problem. Parents who think they are opposed to abortion on moral or religious grounds will change their minds when it is their own child who is pregnant. So this will help overcome opposition to abortion. Before long, only a few die-hards will still refuse to see abortion as acceptable, and they wont matter anymore: http://www.refusesmartmeters.com/NWO_Plans_Ex...
rand

Riverside, CA

#14 Dec 15, 2013
This film called eclipse of reason produced by Bernard N. Nathanson, M.D. documents the intra-uterine life of a little boy at 5 months of age as seen through a fetoscope – a camera placed inside the pregnant uterus. Riveting images of a late abortion are then shown with a camera both inside and outside the uterus. Consistently verifiable statistics emphasize that this horror takes place 400 times a day in the US alone. In addition, there are deeply moving interviews with the other victims of abortion, women who have been irreparably injured by abortion, physically and psychologically:
Bill Gates said at a ted conference in 2010 that :“The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s heading up to about nine billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent!”(About 1 Billion People!) Here is a 3 minute clip from the ted conference in 2010 of Bill Gates saying this: http://tv.naturalnews.com/v.asp... “Each day 1,786 African American children are aborted.” According to the U.S. Census of 2006, African Americans are at 1.96 birth rate which is beneath the replacement level of 2.1.[107] At the continued rate, racism by abortion will decimate the black population of the U.S.

According to writer George Grant, the author of Killing Angel:

“During the 1980s when Planned Parenthood shifted its focus from community-based clinics to school-based clinics, it again targeted inner-city minority neighborhoods…Of the more than 100 school-based clinics that have opened nationwide in the last decade [1980s], none has been at substantially all-white schools….None has been at suburban middle-class schools. All have been at black, minority or ethnic schools.”[108]

Planned Parenthood itself reported that its abortions on minorities in 1991 were 42.7% of its total abortions.[109]. However, during that time period, minorities comprised only 19.7% of the U.S. population.[109]

According to Cybercast News Service:“An analysis by the Cybercast News Service compared the location of Planned Parenthood abortion clinics with population data from the U.S. Census in 2000. The results appear to bolster the charge that the organization targets black communities. Forced abortion caused by China’s One-Child Policy leads to deaths of mothers[99], as well as “gendercide”.[100] Because men tend to be higher wage earners, many families choose to abort their female children, opting instead for males.[101] Photos in 2012 of these forced abortions led to national outrage and calls to end China’s One-Child Policy.[102] The sex-selective abortion policy has led to a huge gender disparity in China, 122.66 boys for every girl born, the highest ratio in the entire Asia Specific region[103], and resulted in 32 million single males.[104] Logically this is a driving force behind human trafficking, prostitution, and the female slave trade which occurs near China.
mike

Riverside, CA

#15 Dec 15, 2013
ABORTION CAUSES BREAST CANCER

By Dr. James Howenstine, MD.
December 26, 2003
NewsWithViews.com
Most women in the United States are unaware that having an abortion increases the risk of developing breast cancer. The fact that abortion causes breast cancer has been nearly completely suppressed by the media because it is a politically incorrect issue. More than 30 studies have confirmed a relationship between having an abortion and the subsequent development of breast cancer. Since 1960 there has been a surge in the number of women developing breast cancer in the USA. Currently every woman in this nation has between a 10 and 12% chance of developing breast cancer.

Dr. Joel Brind, Professor of Biology and Endocrinology at Baruch College of the City College of New York has been crusading to get the information that abortion is a major factor in the causation of breast cancer to the public. Not one magazine or newspaper was willing to print his findings. His research was finally reported in Lancet, a fine English medical journal.

When you enter a Planned Parenthood Clinic to have an abortion do they tell you that this procedure increases your chance of breast cancer by 50%? If a woman has an abortion at anytime, her chance of developing breast cancer goes up by at least 50%.

In November 1994, a National Cancer Institute (NCI) study done at Hutchinson Cancer Center in Seattle, Wash. showed a clear link between having an abortion and the subsequent development of breast cancer. This NCI research disclosed that if the abortion was performed before age 18, the risk was increased by 150 %. If the woman was over 30 and had a family history of mother, sister, grandmother, or aunt with breast cancer the risk went up by 270%. The most ominous finding was that every woman who had an abortion before age 18 and had a family history of breast cancer developed breast cancer by the age of 45. There were only 12 women in this study who fit this category, but they all developed breast cancer.(Source: November 1994 National Cancer Institute report of a study performed at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington).

A Howard University study in December 1993 confirmed these NCI findings but had a longer follow up. By the time the women who had an abortion reached the age of 50 the chance of breast cancer had increased by 370%.

The story for multiple abortions is even worse. The more abortions a woman has the greater the risk of breast cancer. A study from France showed that a woman with a family history of breast cancer who had 2 or more abortions increased her risk of breast cancer 6 fold.

In Lithuania it is common for women to have had 5 abortions by the time they reach 25. They are experiencing an explosive increase in breast cancer in young women.

Many women believe that there is nothing wrong with having an abortion. Proverbs 14:12 states” There is a way that seems right unto man, but the end thereof is death.” Abortion not only kills the child it jeopardizes the life of the mother.

Why does abortion increase the chance of breast cancer?

Dr. Brind believes that abortion leaves the breast cells in a permanent suspended state where they are neither dormant nor mature and that these cells are susceptible to undergo malignant change: http://www.newswithviews.com/Howenstine/james...
cruz

Riverside, CA

#17 Dec 15, 2013
During Breast Cancer Awareness Month, the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer encourages women to send cancer groups the links to two You Tube videos that expose the cover-up of two breast cancer risks – abortion and hormonal contraceptives (containing estrogen and progestin). The videos reveal the cruel impact that the cover-up has had on women. U.S. National Cancer Institute researcher Louise Brinton co-authored a study in 2009 by lead author Jessica Dolle. They reported significant risk increases for women with abortions and users of oral contraceptives. Video produced by Ken Houldsworth features Karly Houldsworth as narrator. At least five women have successfully sued their abortionists for keeping them clueless about the risks of breast cancer and emotional harm. The first video produced by Ignatius Productions, features, a victim of breast cancer, who states that abortion and hormonal contraceptive use at a young age destroyed her health. She fights desperately to beat the disease so she can raise her children.: http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/index/ At least five women have successfully sued their abortionists for keeping them clueless about the risks of breast cancer and emotional harm.[2,3]“Cancer groups lied to women about the risks of using combined (estrogen + progestin) hormone replacement therapy and ‘the pill’ when conclusive evidence of a breast cancer risk became available in the 1980s,” said Karen Malec, president of the Coalition,“and they are still lying about abortion.[4,5,6]“I realize that the breast cancer epidemic has been tremendously profitable for the cancer establishment,” continued Malec “but those who’ve participated in this cover-up should be deeply ashamed of themselves for the incredible suffering they’ve inflicted. These people are not pro-choice. They are cold, calculating abortion zealots driven by greed and fear of widespread medical malpractice lawsuits. Some cancer groups’ officials formerly worked for the abortion industry.” 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: http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/press_rel... An Abortion / Breast Cancer Victim. In February of 2002 Charnette Messé was diagnosed with breast cancer. In this video, she reported she had an induced abortion and used the birth control pill and Depo Provera before first full term pregnancy (the most cancer-susceptible time in a woman’s life). Sadly, Charnette lost her battle against breast cancer and passed away on December 3, 2011:
&fe ature=player_embedded
paul

Riverside, CA

#18 Dec 15, 2013
A first trimester miscarriage is quite a different situation from induced abortion of a normal pregnancy in its effect on the woman’s breasts. The longer a woman is pregnant before an induced abortion, the higher her risk of breast cancer. This is because high estrogen levels of the 1st and 2nd trimesters cause breast growth of type 1 & 2 lobules. When her pregnancy is terminated before the breast cells reach full maturity, she is left with more immature type 1 & 2 breast lobules than before her pregnancy started, and therefore is at increased risk. Her breasts never mature to type 3 & 4 lobules, which would have occurred in the 3rd trimester and would have lowered her risk. This risk is especially high for teenagers who have an abortion in the late 1st or 2nd trimester and for those women who have never have a child, since their breasts never mature. Premature deliveries before 32 weeks are known to double breast cancer risk.

A teenager, who has an abortion between 9 and 24 weeks, has a 30% chance of developing breast cancer in her lifetime. If that same teenager also has a family history of breast cancer, the risk increases so much that one study showed all such women developed breast cancer by the age of 45: http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/reproduct... Birth control pills and hormone replacement therapy increase breast cancer risk through increased exposure to estrogen: http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/exposuret...
The principle of breast cancer risk relating to cell maturity can explain other well documented breast cancer risks as well. If a woman does not have a full-term pregnancy (meaning she is childless or nulliparous), she has increased risk for breast cancer, since she never develops type 3 and 4 lobules. If she has children later in life (after age 30), she has increased risk, because, for most of her menstrual life, her estrogen has been stimulating immature type 1 and 2 breast lobules. If she has children as a teenager, she has decreased risk of breast cancer, since her breast tissue matures very early in her menstrual life to type 3 and 4 lobules. If a woman breast feeds, she often has low estrogen cycles or misses menstrual cycles altogether. She has decreased risk due to two factors: less exposure to estrogen and breast tissue maturity to type 4 lobules. Risk decreases more with longer duration of breastfeeding.The risk factors of estrogen exposure and breast maturity can also act in concert with one another, causing greater risk. For example, if a teenager, who has not had a full-term pregnancy (she is nulliparous), takes birth control pills, her risk of breast cancer is much higher than a woman who has had several children and then takes birth control pills. The longer your exposure to increased levels of estrogen, the higher your risk will be. Taking hormone replacement therapy after menopause for 1 to 2 years does not significantly increase breast cancer risk. However, a woman who has taken hormone replacement for years, especially if she had not had a full-term pregnancy and had taken birth control pills most of her life, will have significantly increased breast cancer risk.: http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/maturity....
pod

Riverside, CA

#21 Dec 15, 2013
A leading breast cancer researcher says abortion has caused at least 300,000 cases of breast cancer causing a woman’s death since the Supreme Court allowed virtually unlimited abortion in its 1973 case.

With tens of millions of abortions since the high court’s decision and research confirming abortion increases the risk of contracting breast cancer, undoubtedly a large number of breast cancer cases, caused by abortion, have occurred over the last 38 years.

Professor Joel Brind, an endocrinologist at Baruch College in New York, worked with several scientists on a 1996 paper published in the Journal of Epidemiol Community Health showing a “30% greater chance of developing breast cancer” for women who have induced abortions. He recently commented on how many women have become victims.

“If we take the overall risk of breast cancer among women to be about 10%(not counting abortion), and raise it by 30%, we get 13% lifetime risk,” Brind explains. Using the 50 million abortions since Roe v. Wade figure, we get 1.5 million excess cases of breast cancer. At an average mortality of 20% since 1973, that would mean that legal abortion has resulted in some 300,000 additional deaths due to breast cancer since Roe v. Wade.”

Brind said his estimate excludes deaths from the use of abortion to delay first full term pregnancies – a recognized breast cancer risk.

Karen Malec, the head of the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer, a public awareness group, says the number of studies showing the abortion-breast cancer link continues to grow in the years since Brind’s groundbreaking 1996 analysis of the major studies at that time.

“During the last 21 months, four epidemiological studies and one review reported an abortion-breast cancer link,” she noted.“One study included National Cancer Institute branch chief Louise Brinton as co-author. We count nearly 50 published epidemiological studies since 1957 reporting a link. Biological and experimental studies also support it.”

“Experts proved in medical journals that nearly all of the roughly 20 studies denying the link are seriously flawed (fraudulent). Like the tobacco-cancer cover-up, these are used to snow women into believing abortion is safe,” Malec added.

Surgeons like Dr. Angela Lanfranchi, a Clinical Assistant Professor of Surgery at Robert Wood Johnson Medical School in New Jersey who has extensively explained how abortion increases the breast cancer risk, have seen first-hand how abortion hurts women.

In 2002, Angela Lanfranchi, MD testified under oath in a California lawsuit against Planned Parenthood that she had private conversations with leading experts who agreed abortion raises breast cancer risk, but they refused to discuss it publicly, saying it was “too political.”

As the co-director of the Sanofi-aventis Breast Care Program at the Steeplechase Cancer Center, Lanfranchi has treated countless women facing a breast cancer diagnosis. Lanfranchi was named a 2010 Castle Connolly NY Metro Area “Top Doc” in breast surgery.

In an article she wrote for the medical journal Linacre Quarterly, Lanfranchi talks about why abortion presents women problems and increases their breast cancer risk:

Induced abortion boosts breast cancer risk because it stops the normal physiological changes in the breast that occur during a full term pregnancy and that lower a mother’s breast cancer risk. A woman who has a full term pregnancy at 20 has a 90% lower risk of breast cancer than a woman who waits until age 30.

Breast tissue after puberty and before a term pregnancy is immature and cancer-vulnerable. Seventy five percent of this tissue is Type 1 lobules where ductal cancers start and 25 percent is Type 2 lobules where lobular cancers start. Ductal cancers account for 85% of all breast cancers while lobular cancers account for 12-15% of breast cancers.

As soon as a woman conceives, the embryo secretes human chorionic gonadotrophin or hCG, the hormone we check for in pregnancy tests.

.
danny

Riverside, CA

#22 Dec 15, 2013
HCG causes the mother’s ovaries to increase the levels of estrogen and progesterone in her body resulting in a doubling of the amount of breast tissue she has; in effect, she then has more Type 1 and 2 lobules where cancers start.

After mid pregnancy at 20 weeks, the fetus/placenta makes hPL, another hormone that starts maturing her breast tissue so that it can make milk. It is only after 32 weeks that she has made enough of the mature Type 4 lobules that are cancer resistant so that she lowers her risk of breast cancer.

Induced abortion before 32 weeks leaves the mother’s breast with more vulnerable tissue for cancer to start. It is also why any premature birth before 32 weeks, not just induced abortion, increases or doubles breast cancer risk.

By the end of her pregnancy, 85% of her breast tissue is cancer resistant. Each pregnancy thereafter decreases her risk a further 10%.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Cottonwood Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Red Haired Tweaker Roaming Verde Valley Aug 18 Martha 42
Pulsic sucks (Oct '14) Aug 11 Youll Never Know 18
Considering relocating to Sedona..what's it lik... (Dec '08) Aug 10 Tucsons Next Mare 273
Sedona has the WORST Music Scene in Arizona! (Jul '13) Aug 8 Your Daddy 13
Review: Cornerstone Church (Nov '15) Aug 2 Richard 2
The Dome house and the occupants. Only One in D... Jul '17 joe smith 3
What Ever Happened to Steve DeVol? Jul '17 Hippie Chick 1

Cottonwood Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Cottonwood Mortgages