Study from Finland links IUD to breast cancer






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.”

One Response to “Study from Finland links IUD to breast cancer”

  1. George Smiley says:

    There is no scientific study which suggests that levonorgestrel containing emergency contraception prevents implantation of an embryo – it only prevents ovolation and therefore does not have an abortive effect. This is on contrast to ulipristal acetate containing emergency contraception which might prevent implantation, although it depends on which day of the cycle the pill is taken, prior to ovulation is has the same effect as levonorgestrel, later it might prevent implantation. It does however not induce abortions since the dosage is significant lower than in those pills used to induce abortions (30mg v. 600mg). So when we discuss emergency contraception we have to differentiate between different ingredients if you will. Levonorgestrel was never intended to be used as a form of permanent contraceptive in the first place. Studies relating the use of triphasic oral contraceptives to an increased risk of breast cancer always use therm “may increase the risk of breast cancer” but never “does increase the risk of great cancer”. The reason is relative simple since breast cancer caused by multiple factors, including the number of children and the age when the first menstruation occurred as well nutrition and probably other factors such as the presence of hormone analogous in the environment – originating from multiple sources including plastic.
    The study you are citing for Levorngestrel-IUD actually concludes (Citation from Pubmed) “The results suggest that the use of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system is not associated with an increased risk of breast cancer.” So please report facts not fiction.
    See also a study from 2008: ” In contrast, levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device or progestin-only pills may offer long-term health benefits over oral contraceptives and should be preferred to oral contraceptives for women in their forties and/or with metabolic risk factors for cardiovascular diseases and type 2 diabetes mellitus.” (Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008 Nov;199(5):529.e1-529.e10. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2008.04.013. Epub 2008 Jun 4. Comparison of metabolic and inflammatory outcomes in women who used oral contraceptives and the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device in a general population).
    With all due respect for the position of the Catholic Church, please do not cite studies wrongly. Before I forget; yes I am Catholic. But as a scientist it makes my heart cringe to see Catholic organizations quoting science wrongly.

Leave a Reply

WP-SpamFree by Pole Position Marketing