Abortion/breast cancer link in China demonstrated beyond dispute, paralleled China’s enforcement of “One-Child” policy


By Dave Andrusko

ABCLINKOn Monday we published two posts on a new study, “A meta-analysis of the association between induced abortion and breast cancer risk among Chinese females” which found a 44% increased risk for breast cancer among Chinese women having one abortion. Professor Joel Brind who wrote the lead story, aptly called the results “a bombshell.”

The conclusion of Dr. Yubei Huang et al.?

“In summary, the most important implication of this study is that IA [Induced Abortion] was significantly associated with an increased risk of breast cancer among Chinese females, and the risk of breast cancer increased as the number of IA increases.”

But even with two stories there was much we could not get to that is very much worth discussing today.

For example, the connection between the increase in breast cancer risk (which was 76% for women having two abortions, and 89% for women having “at least” three abortions) and China’s brutal one-child policy.

Publishing in the prestigious, peer-reviewed international cancer journal, “Cancer Causes and Control,” Huang et al. observed in the first sentence of the “Introduction” that “Chinese females historically had a lower risk of breast cancer compared to their counterparts in the USA and other Western countries.” The “alarming rate” of increase in breast cancer over the past two decades “was paralleled to the one-child-per-couple family policy, which became legal in China since the early 1980s.”

Women’s Rights Without Frontiers President Reggie Littlejohn, an outspoken critic, noted that the One-Child Policy has received criticism for perpetuating gendercide, forced abortion, and other forms of coercion, but that this new study shows an additional harm to women. She explained

“This groundbreaking study reveals yet another human rights violation in connection with China’s One Child Policy: forcibly aborted women are also at significantly higher risk of breast cancer. Not only do the women of China have to endure the tremendous trauma of late term forced abortion, taking their babies from them; but also, years later, breast cancer, taking their health and even their lives from them. The strong association of abortion and breast cancer established by this study brings the women’s rights violations under the One Child Policy to a new level: a woman pregnant in China without a birth permit is subjected to both government imposed forced abortion, and also breast cancer as a result of it. Where abortion is forced, the subsequent development of breast cancer becomes a violation of women’s rights in itself.”

In addition, it’s important to remember that the study is a meta-analysis — a study of studies in which results from many studies are pooled. In this instance Huang et al. combined 36 articles covering 14 provinces in China.

These results, the authors wrote, “were consistent with a previously published systematic review.” This is a reference to the meta-analysis compiled by Dr. Brind and his colleagues and published in 1996 which found a 30% increased breast cancer risk. As noted Huang et al’s new meta-analysis found a 44% increase risk.

But in addition to buttressing the conclusions drawn by Brind et al., the new study is also consistent with more recent evidence. Two new studies from India and Bangla Desh have reported breast cancer risk increases of over 600% and over 2,000%, respectively, among women who had any induced abortions.

Writing in NRL News Today last August (“ABC link explodes in Asia; cover-up continues in the West,” Prof. Brind observed, “This latest study has the dubious distinction of showing by far the strongest ABC link ever observed: Women in Bengla Desh who had an abortion were found to have a 20-fold increased risk of developing breast cancer!”

This takes on added significance because of the size of the population in places like Bengla Desh, India, and China. Brind wrote

“Even a very conservative estimate results in some deeply troubling numbers for the world’s most populous nations. If abortion doubles a woman’s lifetime breast cancer risk from, say, 2% to 4%  that would add a 2% lifetime risk. There are over a billion women in India and China alone. Two percent of a billion is 20 million! With a mortality rate of 50% (It’s a lot higher in Asia than in the US), that makes 10 million women dying of breast cancer because they chose abortion!”

In that article, Brind deftly summarized the reasons there is a link between abortion and breast cancer:

“The ABC link essentially has two prongs. First, it is universally accepted that having a child decreases a woman’s risk of breast cancer, because the maturation of the cells in the breast into milk-producing cells renders them less susceptible to becoming cancerous

“Second, pregnancy hugely increases the number of breast cells vulnerable to cancer. A live birth provides enough time for these ‘progenitor cells’ to differentiate into more mature, more cancer-resistant cells.

“Therefore, abortion leaves a woman’s breasts with more places for cancer to start than were there before the pregnancy began.”

Finally, as we have explained many times [most recently in “CNN explains why a woman should tell her OB-GYN she has had an abortion,” it only makes sense that an abortion would increase the likelihood that a woman would experience preterm births. Abortion involves not only the destruction of the unborn child, but an aggressive assault on the woman’s reproductive organs.

Writing in The American Thinker, Mary L. Davenport, MD, observes

“Unfortunately, the ABC link is not unique in suffering a systematic cover-up by ideologically-driven medical organizations intent on suppressing information about complications of abortion. Preterm birth is the leading cause of neonatal death in the USA, taking the lives of hundreds of thousands of infants annually, with a cost of 26 billion dollars. It has risen 20% in the last two decades. It causes cerebral palsy, long-term intellectual and visual handicaps, and much suffering. There are 135 studies from diverse locations world-wide that link abortion and preterm birth [emphasis added].”

You can judge how much the Abortion Establishment fears a particular truth by the ferocity with which it smears anyone who dares to tell it like it is. So it is no accident that in NARAL’s vocally public attack on Crisis Pregnancy Centers they insist CPCs are “lying” when they say there is a link between abortion and an increased risk of breast cancer.

The only ones lying are NARAL and its ilk.

Please join those who are following me on Twitter at twitter.com/daveha. Send your comments to daveandrusko@gmail.com.