By Kathy Ostrowski, Legislative Director, Kansans for Life
Abortion supporters have grossly mischaracterized the provisions of the Pro-Life Protections Act–HB 2598–and, as expected, the Wichita Eagle blindly editorialized against it, characterizing the proposal as a measure that “defies mainstream science.”
One of the purposes of HB 2598 is to codify basic elements of the informed consent pamphlet, so it cannot become a political football as it had been in the administration of former Governor Kathleen Sebelius, currently President Obama’s Secretary of Health and Human Services.
HB 2598 says that the booklet “shall also contain objective information… including risk of premature birth in future pregnancies, [and] risk of breast cancer…”
Anti-life opponents try to frighten legislators by saying that the national medical advocacy groups do not acknowledge the abortion-breast cancer link. But the Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE) has already recognized their duty to inform women about the link.
Two full paragraphs about abortion links to pre-term birth and breast cancer are ALREADY published here on page 24 of the online version of the Kansas Woman’s Right to Know pamphlet. The pre-term information is accurate but the breast cancer section still needs tweaking to more clearly convey these relevant biological facts.
FACT: Most women who have abortions will not get breast cancer, and most women with breast cancer did not have abortions.
However, consider that while most people who smoke won’t get lung cancer, the government goes full bore to stigmatize smoking. The point is that abortion prevents a woman from the breast maturation that reduces her vulnerability to breast cancer.In the last 40 years, during which time there have been over 54 million abortions, the national figures show a 400% increase in breast cancer “in situ.” (This is breast cancer that is treated by radiation and removal of all, or part, of the breast). This means that the statistical risk of getting breast cancer in a woman’s lifetime has risen during that time from 1 in 12 to 1 in 7.
FACT: For over fifty years, it has been known that the first full-term birth affords a woman lifetime risk reduction for breast cancer.
What cannot be denied by mainstream medical groups (and usually isn’t) is that
· The number of a woman’s breast cells increase dramatically with every pregnancy.
· Breast cells that make milk (at full term birth) become cancer-resistant.
· Induced abortion denies a woman the breast-cancer risk-reduction of having experience a full-term birth.*
· Abortion is an immutable risk for future pre-term birth. *
What abortion supporters claim is in dispute is the independent effect of induced abortion itself on breast cancer. That is, that having an abortion increases the chances of a woman having breast cancer. But such a link has been consistently confirmed by world-wide studies, including those produced by National Cancer Institute researchers.
Contrary to what critics insist, HB 2598 is not pushing any medically-inaccurate facts, only undisputed facts of maternal biology not promoted by the federal health bureaucracy that are nonetheless highly relevant to already-pregnant women considering abortion.
*A naturally-occurring miscarriage in the first trimester is mostly produced by a lack of estrogen, the hormone that makes cells increase, and thus does not increase breast cancer risk beyond that of a woman who has never become pregnant.)