Huffington Post article by Dr. Weiss

Rubyeye:  Law suits are not proof.  I am stating this from my perspective as a long time litigation attorney in the United States.   The "fact" that a "General Counsel" --a fancy name for another lawyer--states that some women some where in the world prevailed in a some lawsuit against some medical center IS NOT A FACT and does not prove or disprove anything especially as it may relate to good research on  "causation."  We do not know the exact legal claim that was before the court, the burden of proof, or under what laws there was a finding and who or what made the finding. 

 This is NOT the place to place blame, which is essentially what happens when this type of "causation" is promoted on a website like this.  There are likely many women on this website who have had abortions or miscarriages who now also have breast cancer.  Your posts can only hurt those women regardless of your motive or intentions.  

Thank you, Bikerbabe1.   Funny, I know of several women who have had abortions but they did not get breast cancer.  I've never had an abortion, but I did get it.  Hmmmmmmm.  I hope those women who won the lawsuit, who Never had cancer but were "upset" that they weren't told their abortions may have caused breast cancer, are happy now.  What did they get for this ridiculous lawsuit?

2tzus,

Just to clarify, the first and second articles you linked to both analyze the same cohort, assembled between 1990 and 1992 in the Seattle area, with BC cases occuring from 1983 to 1990.  What is new about the second article (published in 2009) is that the authors went back and looked at ER, PR and HER2 status in all those cases (because that information was not available at the time of their original paper, the first article you linked to).  The information about abortion cited in the second paper is FROM the first paper, which the authors themselves state.  That's probably why the authors didn't say anything about abortion in the abstract, or in the Discussion/Conclusions of the body of the paper.

I'm a little confused by your statement that the 3rd article was "under the auspices of the NIH."  It was a study from Northeast China, published in Medical Oncology -- I don't see the NIH connection (not that it needs to be an NIH study or publication to be credible, but I was just confused by your statement).

If the vast majority of miscarriages and abortions happen within the first trimester, and with both there is an interruption in the natural course of hormones, how can you isolate abortions as a possible contributing factor to some breast cancers?  It doesn't make sense.

I answered that question or rather i posted a study that explained the difference between miscarriage and abortion.  It is probably on the previous page - to Esti

Reported Angle Blah's posts for very abusive and hateful language.

I hope those women who won the lawsuit, who Never had cancer but were "upset" that they weren't told their abortions may have caused breast cancer, are happy now.  What did they get for this ridiculous _____________________________________________________

Why would they have won the lawsuits  - several different countries - if they could not establish the burden of proof ??????????????????????  

What I have a problem with is ultra right wing conservatives pushing anti abortion propoganda on this website that results once again blaming the female gender for exercising legal rights. I don't hear anybody making similar blanket statements related to the male gender.

That is not what this is about atty Biker. Have you read anything in the medical studies posted?  It is hard to believe you are an atty.  rushing to judgment without reading the facts of the case

You did not need to use abusive language in your post.

Esti - you complained but did not comment on by article you asked about.   No there is no excuse for poor behavior "F" bomb. 

I don't know who "Daisy" is.  I thought you were talking about one of the studies called D.A.I.S.Y.

I am only responding to attacks.  Another group of gals all came in here at the same time calling me all kinds of horrible hateful abusive names.  For what, posting medical studies?

Was hoping to help...think maybe before you put an 18 year old on "the Pill"

OK I logged in for the last time.  The article is at the top of this page with footnotes

Here is the main point

Therefore, if a woman who has gone through some weeks or months of a normal pregnancy chooses abortion, she is left with more of these cancer-vulnerable cells in her breasts than were there before she got pregnant, which raises her risk of breast cancer later in life.

In contrast, most pregnancies which abort spontaneously do not generate normal quantities of estrogen ^39,40. Thus most miscarriages (at least 1st trimester miscarriages) do not raise breast cancer risk ³⁶.

Rubyeye/Daisy -

I don't see anyone calling you horrible hateful abusive names, but I do see YOU reporting quite a few posts that do not break the rules. 

Enjoyful .. I agree.  Accusing people and saying something over and over again doesn't make it true.

Rubyeye/Daisy, the moderators of this site are not stupid.  They will see that you are stirring the pot, lying and stalking again. Are we having fun yet? 

The most upsetting thing about the article hasn't been mentioned yet as far as I can see, and that is about other people's perception that we are to blame, including our own families. 

I find that people who are not well educated about BC tend to think that we have caused our cancer after they read or hear "prevention" information or articles in the media.

One of my sisters actually told me she thought I had caused it by being unemotional. The so called 'C' personality.  I do have strong emotions but I just don't fall apart in public. I told her there were many extremely emotional people with BC and other cancers and the 'C' personality had been disproved.

Three of my grandparents, both parents and all five siblings have been substantially obese for  decades.  My siblings all smoked but have since stopped.  I have been the one who eats healthy foods, doesn't drink or smoke, has only been a little overweight, and generally looks after my health.  My father had cancer at age 76, and lucky old me, but none of the others did.  I started menses at 16 and was on the old stronger pill for nine years. I never used HRT but didn't hit menopause till around 56.  I had three full term births at a late age (37 to 41), one miscarriage at 36, where the baby had not developed, just an empty sac.  I breast fed both of my babies, the second baby was stillborn at full term (no known cause).

So I resent people pointing the finger and I would like these prevention articles to clearly state that most breast cancers have no known cause and it's grossly upsetting to be blamed for something we have no control over, by ill informed people, after all the physical and emotional pain we have been through with the diagnosis, treatment and fear of mets.

I wonder how many other people are blaming us but not rude enough to say it to our faces?  These articles and the media reports are inadvertently encouraging blame and judgement of the most unfortunate people, cancer patients!