Stress prevention, not just a cure

We are seeing a lot of pink these days as the breast cancer fundraising raises millions to “find a cure,” although 86 percent of patients are already being cured through chemotherapy, surgery and radiation. From corporate and product endorsement, to neighborhood walks, relays and social events, pink money, not cancer prevention, is the theme.

These so-called women’s-health organizations, which are largely led by abortion industry feminists, are loathe to inform women about politically incorrect risk factors, such as the birth control pill and induced abortion. Evidence for these risks and combined hormone replacement therapy was available in the 1980s. Sadly, the national press, not cancer groups, informed women about the HRT risk in 2002. The total number of expected breast cancer cases (invasive and in situ) has jumped from 261,100 in 2010 to an astounding 288,130 in 2011.

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer is making an urgent appeal for a strong emphasis on breast cancer prevention — not just paying lip service to it, as most groups now do. Medical texts reveal that the disease can be prevented by having more children, starting before age 24, and breast-feeding them longer. Induced abortion deprives women of the protective effect of childbearing and delays their first full-term pregnancies. The woman who has an abortion has a higher risk than does the one who has a full-term pregnancy.

Dr. Angela Lanfranchi, president of the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute, confirms that women are not being told about the risks of using the pill and induced abortion. Two recent studies have strongly linked the pill’s use to the aggressive, deadly, triple-negative breast cancer.

Don’t women have the right to know? Isn’t that a civil rights issue?

Karen Malec

Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer

Hoffman Estates