According to its president, the National Breast Cancer Coalition has “revolutionized” public policy in the quest to eradicate breast cancer.
But NBCC has an odd way of running its revolution.
On May 4, NBCC announced the Golden Boob Awards, to “highlight the biggest boobs of all – the organizations that are using breast cancer purely as a way to make money or to promote an ideology.”
“Biggest boobs”? That NBCC would so crassly refer to a body part carrying such deep sexual and maternal significance to those mourning or fearing its loss is shameful – the equivalent to announcing the Little Baldy Awards for child leukemia research.
NBCC’s top nominee was the Coalition on Abortion-Breast Cancer, of which I am an advisory board member.
NBCC accused CABC of “using breast cancer as a scare tactic” by “assert[ing] abortion leads to an increased risk of breast cancer.”
Meanwhile, NBCC’s president, Fran Visco, recently insisted her group had “no agenda other than to end breast cancer.”
If that were true, why would they worry whether women were scared from abortion?
NBCC’s treasurer, Cynthia Pearson, is the former director of both a San Diego abortion mill and a Colorado NARAL group. She is currently president of National Women’s Health Network, an organization promoting abortion. She has taught women to commit self abortions known as “menstrual extractions,” for over 20 years.
Allowing Pearson on the board of NBCC is like allowing a tobacco executive on the board of the American Lung Association in the 1960s. Does no one see a conflict of interest?
But I suspect it’s not just NBCC. Any breast-cancer advocacy or science organization that allows abortion proponents to hold positions of influence is suspect.
And here’s something I find remarkable. No group disputing a link between abortion and breast cancer knows the cause of breast cancer:
- “We don’t know the precise causes of breast cancer.” – Susan B. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation
- “No one knows the exact causes of breast cancer.” – National Cancer Institute
- “We want to know the cause.” – Fran Visco, NBCC
- “We do not yet know exactly what causes breast cancer.” – American Cancer Society
But each of those groups is sure abortion is not one of the causes they do not know.
“The fact is that abortion does not increase the risk of breast cancer,” stated Visco.
Really? She’s absolutely sure that a medical procedure tampering with a breast carcinogen has nothing to do with inflicting cancer in the breast?
Yes, the federal government announced five years ago that estrogen is a “known carcinogen” of breast tissue.
Estrogen is the major female hormone that tells a woman’s body to do womanly things – like grow breasts.
But too much estrogen can be problematic. This is why those ignorant breast-cancer organizations at least know the following breast-cancer risks:
- Starting menstruation early or entering menopause late, due to increased exposure to estrogen.
- Taking estrogen-progesterone birth-control pills (classified as “highly carcinogenic” by the World Health Organization).
- Undergoing estrogen-progesterone hormone replacement therapy.
Further, they agree the following factors decrease risks:
- A full-term pregnancy, the earlier the better, because only at the end of a first full-term pregnancy are breasts fully mature, and estrogen cannot damage immature breast cell DNA (explaining why lesbians and nuns have greater incidences of breast cancer).
- Irregular periods, breastfeeding, and having many children – all of which result in fewer menstrual cycles and less estrogen exposure.
And these are successful treatments for breast cancer:
- Removal of ovaries, because they make estrogen.
- Anti-cancer drugs that alter the effect of estrogen on breast cells.
Given all that, logically consider induced abortion, which interrupts the release of estrogen to a pregnant woman’s breasts during cell differentiation and maturation, leaving cells with no further instructions.
Is it plausible that this phenomenon could increase the risk of breast cancer?
Eight medical organizations think so, including the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, which called this “highly plausible” in 2003.
Meanwhile, the National Cancer Institute indicated the incidence of breast cancer rose 25 percent overall between 1973-1996. For ages 65 and younger, it rose 18 percent.
But to date, NBCC refuses CABC’s request for experts on both sides to debate the issue.
To date, no debate has ever taken place at any science meeting.
In 2003, NCI concluded there was no ABC link, refusing to allow differing opinion, discounting verified studies, leaning instead on unpublished studies.
Now I have to ask, in the crass words of NBCC: Who are the biggest boobs?
