Archive for the ‘Cancer’ Category

Contraception kills

Friday, March 13th, 2015

beyaz_birth_control-article-2-copy

 

 

Christianity Today surprised me, and many of its readers, I would guess, with an opinion piece carried below the ironic headline, “Contraception Saves Lives.”  Even more surprising, author Rachel Marie Stone lauds Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger, making excuses for her eugenic beliefs and saying Planned Parenthood did not provide abortion in Sanger’s lifetime.  My colleague Bryan Kemper wrote about the Sanger apologetics in his blog, so I will concentrate on the dubious claim that contraception saves lives.

First, let’s refute her assertion, now so familiar, that hormonal contraceptives are not abortifacients. That’s nonsense. One of the ways the birth control pill works is by preventing implantation of the embryo in the uterus. That’s abortion to those of us who know that life begins at conception, which, by the way, is a scientific fact.

Now let’s take a look at some the other ways that contraception ends lives.

Ms. Stone’s article mentions the long-acting contraception called Depo-Provera, which is a-once-every-three-months injection. But here are some of the things she didn’t say about Depo-Provera.

In addition to a long list of nasty side effects – blood clots, breast cancer, ectopic pregnancy, depression, excessive weight gain, facial paralysis, hirsutism, cervical cancer, nipple bleeding, and a lack of return to fertility – Depo-Provera increases a woman’s risk of contracting HIV by 40 percent. This is particularly troubling for women in sub-Saharan Africa, where  25,000 million people – 70 percent of the world total – are living with HIV/AIDS.

The Pill is not much better for women, as I outlined in a chapter of my book, “Recall Abortion.” The Pill  poses numerous health risks, including blood clots, increased risks of cardiovas­cular disease,cervical and liver cancer,elevated blood pressure,decreased desire, sexual dysfunction and stroke.

Some Pills are worse than others. In 2006, Bayer Pharmaceuticals burst onto the market with Yaz and Yasmin, drugs that were touted as reliable birth control and miraculous cures for acne and pre-menstrual syndrome.

But Yas and Yasmin are not miracle drugs. As of 2014, Bayer had paid out $1.7 billion – BILLION – to settle 8,250 cases brought against it and there are still thousands of cases pending. Women are suffering from gall bladder disease, pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis and other diseases. In Canada, the deaths of 23 women have been linked to Yaz and Yasmin.

How many deaths does it take before we stop calling a drug safe? I think one death is too many, and here’s why.

After I finished giving a talk in Naples, Florida, a woman approached me to tell me a story about her friend’s daughter, who was prescribed Yaz for a serious acne condition by the campus physician. After taking Yaz for just three months, the girl collapsed one day in her dorm and was rushed to the hospital. She fell into a coma that lasted five years and ended with her death.

So please, Christianity Today, don’t tell me contraception saves lives. That is simply not true.

(For more in-depth information about the perils of the Pill, please go to www.recallabortion.com and order a copy of my book.)

 

Posted in Abortion, Breast Cancer, Cancer, Christianity, Contraception, Health Care, Maternal mortality, Women's Health | 4 Comments »
Click here to leave a comment for
the article above.

Glen Campbell and Brittany Maynard Face Their Mortality Very Differently

Thursday, November 6th, 2014

1413489817_brittany-maynard-video-article[1]This blog was originally published in the National Catholic Register on Oct. 28, just a few days before Brittany Maynard committed suicide in Oregon.

Two stories battled for my attention recently, and both of them broke my heart.

The first was about Brittany Maynard, a 29-year-old woman with brain cancer who moved from California to Oregon to gain access to legal suicide-inducing drugs. She is planning to die in bed, surrounded by her family, on Nov. 1 (the solemnity of All Saints), two days after her husband’s birthday.

The second story was about the singer Glen Campbell, who decided to go public with his struggle against Alzheimer’s disease. With his children on stage with him for a final, 151-stop musical tour, and the cameras rolling for a ground-breaking documentary, Campbell said: “I ain’t done yet. Tell ’em that.”

Maynard is fighting, through a foundation set up in her name, to expand the right to die beyond the five states that now allow it.

Campbell is allowing himself to be seen in all his vulnerability to show those suffering with Alzheimer’s — some 44 million people worldwide — and all those who will be diagnosed in the future, that, as St. John Paul said, “Life is always a good.”

Our reactions to these stories show that, as usual, we Americans seem to have a split personality. We applaud Campbell for his courage in refusing to go quietly into that good night, and yet many of us also support Maynard’s desire to “die with dignity.”

I do not.

I have watched people close to me die, and, with the rest of the world, I watched St. John Paul suffer with the debilitating and ultimately fatal effects of Parkinson’s disease. It was heartbreaking, and while I prayed for a miracle for all of them, I also prayed that each would have a peaceful death.

But we are not the architects of our own lives, no matter what we think and no matter how many misguided politicians and activist judges we can convince that we are. What Maynard is doing is wrong, and my fervent prayer is that she changes her mind.

With palliative care, we can hope for a death without pain for ourselves and our loved ones, and there is nothing wrong with that. We can refuse extraordinary, unnatural treatments. But to choose suicide — and to further legalize it in this country — is a catastrophic mistake.

Take a look at what assisted suicide and euthanasia are doing to Belgium and Denmark.

In a piece for Front Page magazine last month, Stephen Brown wrote:

“Holland was the first European country to betray its Judeo-Christian heritage regarding the sanctity of life when it legalized euthanasia in 2001. Holland also has the dubious distinction of leading the way in killing babies, as the Dutch euthanasia policy was expanded in 2006 to babies born with severe birth defects.

It therefore should not surprise that Holland is another country where euthanasia appears out of control. In 2011, 3,695 people were reported medically killed, including 13 psychiatric patients, while 4,188 were euthanized in 2102, accounting for three percent of all Holland’s deaths that year.”

Brown wrote that, in 2012, Holland also began sending mobile death teams to the homes of people who want to die but whose doctors refuse to help them. And Belgium, if possible, is worse.

According to Brown:

“Originally, Belgium’s euthanasia law, passed in 2002, was meant for gravely ill adults suffering unbearable physical pain. Now, as mentioned, it includes those experiencing ‘unbearable psychological suffering.’ So relatively healthy people suffering mental stress or disorders are now being killed, among them a 44-year-old person who had undergone a failed sex change operation. So it is no wonder the number of euthanasia victims in Belgium has grown from 24 people in 2002 to 1,807 in 2013, an average of five per day and a 27 percent increase from 2012.”

Brown also reported that Belgium’s King Philippe signed a law last March allowing euthanasia for children of any age and dementia sufferers upon request. Last month, Belgium — a country without the death penalty — made headlines again when it granted a convicted murderer the right to die under the country’s euthanasia laws. Another 15 inmates have made the same request.

Could this happen in the United States? Could we have mobile death squads and legalized murder of babies born with birth defects? In a country that has aborted 55 million children in the last generation, and where “choice” is well on its way to becoming the new religion, it absolutely could. We are already headed that way.

Since Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act was passed 14 years ago, 1,100 people have asked for the lethal prescription, and two-thirds of them have ended their lives with it. Please pray with me that Maynard does not join that group and changes her mind about her date with death.

Life is always a good, even if it is cut tragically short by a disease we cannot control.

Read more: http://www.ncregister.com/blog/JMorana/glen-campbell-and-brittany-maynard-face-their-mortality-very-differently#ixzz3IKRDcfuL

Posted in assisted suicide, Cancer, Catholic Church, Christianity, Faith, Family, Health Care, Priests for Life | 1 Comment »
Click here to leave a comment for
the article above.

Study from Finland links IUD to breast cancer

Wednesday, July 9th, 2014

IUD[1]As the outrage continues over the Supreme Court’s decision to put Americans’ religious liberty ahead of their right to free contraception, a new study from Finland shows that a type of IUD has been linked to an increase incidence of breast cancer.

CNN is reporting that, according to a study published in the journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) or progesterone-releasing IUD, may be associated with a higher than expected incidence of breast cancer.

What caught my eye, though, is that levonorgestrel, a hormone that regulates ovulation, is also the used in the Plan B contraceptive, better known as the morning after pill. Millions of American women are now going to receive the IUD and Plan B free, thanks to Obamacare, and most of them will have no idea they could be increasing their risk of breast cancer.

CNN doesn’t delve into that possibility, but here’s what the Polycarp Institute, a Catholic research think tank, has to say about Plan B and breast cancer:
Does Plan B cause breast cancer?
Ironically, this question has never been asked. Theoretically, this is certainly possible especially in women who use Plan B often as a method of “birth control.” How could this be? Plan B is composed of the hormone named levonorgestrel, which is a potent progestin which is also found in some of today’s birth control pills. Birth control pills have been declared a Class 1 carcinogen (ie, the most dangerous type) by the World Health Association in June, 2005. In addition, the most recent meta-analysis published in the Mayo Clinic Proceedings (October, 2006) noted that taking the birth control pill before pregnancy results in a 44% increased risk of developing breast cancer prior to age 50. Finally, levonorgestrel’s progestin “cousin” (ie, Depo Provera) has been noted to increase breast cancer by 190% in women who take 12 shots prior to age 25 (JAMA, 1995: 799-804). These data theoretically implicate Plan B if taken often enough. In addition, when a woman takes Plan B she ingests 1.5 mg of levonorgestrel within a twelve hour period of time which is nearly equivalent to the amount of progestin contained in an entire month’s worth of some of today’s low dose birth control pills (ie, 1.925 mg).

Not to get off topic, but it’s also worth mentioning that while the mainstream media is dutifully regurgitating the “fact” that Plan B is not abortifacient, the scientists at Polycarp feel differently:

Is Plan B a contraceptive or an abortifacient?
The truth is, no one knows for sure but it probably does work by causing early abortion at least part of the time. The 2010 Physician’s Desk Reference notes that Plan B “may inhibit implantation by altering the endometrium.” In addition, Croxatto et al noted that Plan B only fully stops ovulation 12% of the time when given within two days of ovulation (Contraception, 2004: 442-450). This would point to an abortifacient method of action since ovulation and consequent fertilization would likely be occurring much of the time, yet visible pregnancy is usually absent. Finally, Mikolajczyk and Stanford showed via a sophisticated mathematical model, that if Plan B really were to be 75% effective, it likely would be working as an abortifacient at least some of the time (Fertility and Sterility, 2007: 565-570). In the future, researchers might be able to “prove” if and how often Plan B is an abortifacient by employing the use of a very early pregnancy tests which turn positive within the first 7 days of pregnancy (eg, EPF: Early Pregnancy Factor).

As CNN notes, most women use the progesterone-releasing IUD to treat heavy periods. That’s also the reason millions of women start taking birth control pills as teenagers. Dr. Anne Nolte, a pro-life, pro-woman obstetrician and gynecologist, points out that this is bad medicine. Instead of trying to get to the source of the problem and fix it, hormonal contraceptives like the Pill and some IUDs just shut down the system and restart it artificially. This gives doctors an easy way out and sometimes, it gives women breast cancer.

For a longer look at the Pill and its symbiotic relationship with abortion, please read my book, “Recall Abortion.”

Posted in Abortion, Breast Cancer, Cancer, Catholic Church, Contraception, Health Care, Uncategorized, Women's Health | 2 Comments »
Click here to leave a comment for
the article above.

CVS should pull contraceptives from its shelves

Wednesday, February 5th, 2014

k-bigpic[1]

It’s great news that CVS has taken the bold and proactive step of committing to remove tobacco products from its shelves by Oct. 1. I applaud the decision.

But I would like to see the company go one step further by banning the sale of contraception and abortifacient drugs.

In announcing the ban on the sale of cancer-causing nicotine products, Larry J. Merlo, CEO and president of CVS, said: “Ending the sale of cigarettes and tobacco products at CVS/pharmacy is the right thing for us to do for our customers and our company to help people on their path to better health. Put simply, the sale of tobacco products is inconsistent with our purpose.”

But what is the company’s purpose in regard to women’s health?

As I pointed out in my book, “Recall Abortion,” oral contraceptives that combine the hormones estrogen and progesterone, as most birth control pills do, have been designated Class I carcinogens by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, an arm of the World Health Organization.

Beyond cancer, the Pill causes numerous – and serious – health risks to women, including blood clots, increased risk of cardiovascular disease, cervical and liver cancer, elevated blood pressure and stroke.
Shouldn’t CVS care about these known and demonstrated risks to women?

And what about “emergency contraception,” like Plan B, which is now available without a prescription to girls of any age. This is bad medicine too. The makers of Plan B don’t know exactly how it works, and no studies have been done to see how it would impact those with liver or kidney diseases. No studies have been done to determine overdose levels. This is a powerful and dangerous drug, being placed into to the hands of minors who can’t even buy cold remedies over the counter anymore.

And finally there’s Ella, another mystery drug whose manufacturers insist it is not abortifacient, even though it can be taken up to five days after unprotected sex. But if conception took place one day after, what an unsuspecting woman is doing four days later is causing a very early abortion of her fertilized embryo. Like Plan B, many of the potential hazards of Ella have simply not been studied.

If CVS is serious about wanting to protect the health of its customers, I hope they took a good hard look at the women and girls whose health and fertility are jeopardized by continued sales of contraceptives and abortifacients.

To learn more about the harmful effects of contraception, please go to www.RecallAbortion.com.

Posted in Breast Cancer, Cancer, Contraception, Health Care, Parental Consent, Women's Health | 2 Comments »
Click here to leave a comment for
the article above.

New study shows sharp spike in breast cancer in young women since 1973

Friday, March 1st, 2013

Journal-American-Medical-Association[1]Authors of a new study that shows a dramatic increase in aggressive breast cancer in young women say they can’t identify a cause.

The study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) looked at data from 1973 to 2009 and found that the incidence of “distant disease” – which means breast cancer that spread to the bones, brain, lungs or elsewhere – increased from 1.53 women per 100,000 in 1976 to 2.90 in 2009. The increase doesn’t seem that startling by itself, but take into account that there are 62 million women of child-bearing age in the U.S. and the math becomes hard to ignore.

What could be behind this increase in breast cancer for young women? What changed in 1973 that might be a contributing factor?

Two things.

In 1972, in Eisenstadt vs. Baird, the U.S. Supreme Court made it legal for unmarried people to use contraceptives. The birth control pill already had been on the market for over a decade, and its use among young women began to grow exponentially. More than 12 million women in the U.S. currently swallow the Pill to prevent pregnancy, cure acne, relieve menstrual cramps and for a host of other reasons.

In 1999 oral contraceptives were identified as Class 1 carcinogens by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, an arm of the World Health Organization.  Following a 2005 review, the designation did not change.  Therefore, young women who have been taking the Pill for years, even decades, have been ingesting a cancer-causing agent every day. Might this be a factor in the spike in breast cancer diagnoses?

A year later, the Supreme Court made abortion in the United States legal throughout pregnancy. Today and every day, more than 3,000 women in the United States will end their pregnancies through abortion and the vast majority belongs to the demographic group identified in the JAMA study.

It was long ago accepted as gospel truth that abortion has no link to breast cancer.  That “fact” is repeated in the mainstream media over and over, as if it’s indisputable and without controversy. The reason has nothing to do with health and everything to do with the fact that in this country, no one dare speak ill of abortion.

But some breast surgeons are willing to speak the truth about the abortion breast cancer link and the Pill’s influence on breast cancer rates. In both cases, it’s all about the estrogen. An increased exposure to estrogen increases breast cancer risk, and no one disputes that. But according to Dr. Angela Lanfranchi, a breast cancer surgeon in practice since 1984, government health organizations and the mainstream media somehow manage to overlook  70 studies about induced abortion and breast cancer performed all over the world. Fifty-five of these studies show a positive correlation between abortion and breast cancer, and of those, 33 show a statistically significant increase in breast cancer risk. (Go to www.bcpinstitute.org to learn more). Dr. Lanfranchi points out that many of the studies were performed in countries where abortion is part of public policy and information on it is readily available. In the United States, any attempt to collect information on abortion becomes a political and ideological battle. Currently, states submit abortion data voluntarily. California, the state with the most abortions, keeps its information to itself.

The new JAMA study showing dramatic increases in the deadliest cancers has to be a wake-up call to the American medical establishment. We can no longer bury our heads in the sand to avoid seeing the links between abortion, hormonal contraception and breast cancer.  Women’s lives are at stake.

Posted in Abortion, Abortion Complications, Breast Cancer, Cancer, Contraception, Health Care |
Click here to leave a comment for
the article above.

Why It Matters That Your Doctors Are Pro-Life

Monday, October 15th, 2012

Attorney Linsey Sowinski of Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, was 32 years old and a newlywed when she and her husband, Scott, found out Linsey had B-cell lymphoma. She wanted to live, and she wanted her baby to live as well. Her doctors waited until after her first trimester to begin chemo, conscious of the fact that the baby was receiving the powerful drugs as well. When she was 37 weeks pregnant, doctors induced labor and Lena was born. Right after the birth, Linsey began radiation. Lena was hospitalized at one month old with an infection likely caused by an immune system weakened by chemo drugs. But today she is a healthy five-month-old, right where she’s supposed to be developmentally. Linsey is on the road to remission.

Linsey’s story, which was featured on the Today Show this morning, highlights the importance of finding doctors who don’t immediately leap to the abortion conclusion when presented with any kind of obstacle during a pregnancy. A pro-abort doctor might well have scared Linsey with a terrible prognosis of her own chances, and reassured her that she could “try again” once she was well. But she wouldn’t have had Lena, and she would have carried the burden of knowing her survival came at the cost of her daughter’s life.

A common argument as to why we need to have legal abortion in this country is to protect the lives of mothers at risk. But that argument grows weaker every day, when courageous couples like Linsey and her husband Scott, and doctors who can see beyond their own malpractice risk, show us there is another way.

Choosing life is always the right choice, even when it’s hard, even when it’s scary, even when the outcome is unclear.

Tags: ,
Posted in Abortion, Cancer, Pro-life |
Click here to leave a comment for
the article above.