Picture
Susan G. Komen Foundation's Logo

Questions about the Susan G. Komen Foundation's donations to abortion provider Planned Parenthood, the controversy of the abortion-breast cancer link, and more lousy Wikipedia coverage

(Posted by Bryana Joy on October 11, 2011)


October is Breast Cancer Awareness Month and the Susan G. Komen Foundation is busy plastering pink ribbons on grocery items and billboards all over the country. The foundation raises millions of dollars annually through donations from others who share their stated vision of a “world without breast cancer,”  but some have recently raised questions about the appropriateness of Komen giving big bucks to the nation’s largest abortion provider, Planned Parenthood.

In the 2009/2010 fiscal year, the Susan G. Komen foundation donated over 600,000 dollars to the Planned Parenthood Federation of America. What does Planned Parenthood have to do with breast cancer? Well, you know, mammograms. Planned Parenthood provides mammograms for low-income women, right?

Wrong. Here’s the response that a Live Action actor got when she called 30 Planned Parenthood clinics in 27 different states to ask about mammograms:


Physicians for Life explains:
                       

                        NO PLANNED PARENTHOOD ON THE PLANET PROVIDES MAMMOGRAM SERVICES.     
                 
                        Why? Because they can’t. Planned Parenthood is a level one breast service provider.                                      What does that mean?  It simply means that Planned Parenthood clinics are ONLY                                         allowed to provide manual breast exams. You know, the kind you do in the shower. The                             kind you can get from any nurse or physician in any clinic. 

                        [PP] cannot provide any sort of diagnostic services…no biopsies, no breast ultrasounds,                           AND no mammograms.  That is the truth.  That is a FACT.

So no, it’s not mammograms. Nevertheless, Planned Parenthood does have a connection to breast cancer. What is it? Well, it’s abortion.  Did you know that many scientists believe abortion raises a woman’s chance of contracting breast cancer by 30%? It’s a fact that abortion providers like the Planned Parenthood Federation of America don’t want you to know.

Kathy Ostrowski wrote an excellent and compelling scientific piece on the controversial issue of the Abortion-Breast Cancer link over at Lifenews.com yesterday. She breaks down the issue into simple terms so that the most uninformed layman
can understand the connection. I consider this article a must-read for anyone who is truly interested in being intellectually honest about the issue of breast cancer.

“At my mammogram last week, I was asked a series of questions as part of the exam…”

says Kathy,


"I was asked:

                                1.       at what age did my period begin and menopause begin;
                                2.       how many pregnancies did I have;
                                3.       how many children were living;
                                4.       had I ever used oral contraceptives or post-menopausal hormones.

That is because any honest expert understands that breast cancer is largely an ‘estrogen’ story, and the questions all reflect that.

She then goes on to explain, in concise and accessible terminology, the medical reasons behind the theory of the abortion-breast cancer link.

Estrogen surges at puberty, decreases at menopause, and rises 2000% above monthly peaks during each pregnancy except during nearly all pregnancies that naturally miscarry in the first trimester. Estrogen is also affected by birth-control and menopausal hormonal regimens.

Estrogen multiplies breast cells and breast cells are vulnerable to cancer-causing agents until they mature by having become milk-producing cells.  This is why the World Health Organization has taught for over 50 years that the first, full-term birth gives the mother the strongest life-long protection from breast cancer.

The carefully-posed question #3 about living children is supposed to deduce the number of miscarriages and induced abortions. They are not the same biological events.

Miscarriages in the first trimester are predominantly due to a lack of estrogen, and thus do not increase breast cells. Later -term natural miscarriages and induced abortions (in all stages) end the pregnancy, but they leave the mother with MORE un-matured (cancer-vulnerable) breast cells than she had before pregnancy.

Although lowering one’s statistical risk of breast cancer is not a reason to become pregnant, it sure is information pertinent to remaining pregnant. In fact, breast surgeon Dr. Angela LanFranchi writes,


               'It amounts to child abuse to take a teenager in a crisis pregnancy for an abortion. At best, it                     will give her a 30% risk of breast cancer in her lifetime. At worst, if she also has a family                         history of breast cancer, it will nearly guarantee this. As a mother, I need to be informed of                    this to protect my daughter.' "

Sadly for women and young girls at risk, this issue is so emotionally charged for so many that objective research seems to have been neglected. Many big-time information sources refuse to acknowledge the possibility of a link between abortion and breast cancer. Wikipedia states,
  
            The Susan G. Komen organization allows its affiliates to award grants to Planned                                             Parenthood and other clinics. This partnership has garnered criticism from some pro-life                     advocates because Planned Parenthood also provides abortion and birth control services.                         More recent studies reported by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes for                 Heath show that there are no links between breast cancer and abortion. Komen says its                            affiliates provide funds for screening, education and treatment programs in dozens of                                 communities in which Planned Parenthood is the only place that poor, uninsured or under-                insured women can receive these services.

While the author of this encyclopedia piece attempts to come across as objective, they neglect to add that the issue is hardly cut and dried and that there is debate within the established scientific community concerning the abortion-breast cancer link. The Association of American Physicians

and Surgeons states that,              

              While there is a difference of medical opinion concerning the abortion breast cancer link,                       there is a considerable volume of evidence supporting this link, which is, moreover, highly                    plausible. We believe that a reasonable person would want to be informed of the existence                    of this evidence before making her decision.

An article entitled, "The Abortion-Breast Cancer Link: How Politics Trumped Science and Informed Consent," was published by the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons.


Many other medical organizations, including the National Physicians Center for Family Resources 
, the Polycarp Research Institute, the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute, and the American Association of Pro-life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, also recognize that abortion raises a woman's risk for breast cancer.

The Komen Foundation, doubtless realizing that many potential donors were being scared away by the fact that the foundation funds an abortion provider, issued a statement explaining their relationship with Planned Parenthood. Among other things, they said:
               

                Under no circumstances are Komen funds used to fund abortions or other non-breast                                 services…

The fact that anyone would actually swallow this story leaves me truly despondent, but the American Life League
has already debunked this popular misconception so eloquently that I’ll allow them to take the stage for a moment:


To conclude, there is one really big reason to think twice about donating to the Susan G. Komen foundation – even if you’re pro-choice: it just doesn’t seem appropriate for a fundraising group dedicated to eradicating breast cancer to give money to an organization performing surgeries that may be linked to breast cancer.

Especially since that organization doesn’t even provide mammograms in the first place.


For Further Reading:


Check out the research compiled by the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer


National Cancer Institute Researcher Admits Abortion Breast Cancer Link


Helpful links and articles on the Abortion-Breast Cancer Link and Pink Money foundations like Komen for the Cure


Angela Lanfranchi, M.D., writes about The Reasons Hormonal Contraceptives and Induced Abortion Increase Breast-Cancer Risk

 
 
Picture
Reggie Littlejohn of Women's Rights Without Frontiers
a remarkable women's rights advocate, a powerful testimony by a forced abortion victim who suffered under China's "one-child policy", and questions about Wikipedia's coverage of coercive family planning methods in China

(Posted by Bryana Joy on October 02, 2011)

                                                                                                                                                                    Wikipedia doesn’t have much to say about forced sterilizations and abortions in China. While I try to remain optimistic about the possibility of great things from the “people’s encyclopedia,” almost every visit I’ve made to Wikipedia lately has left me feeling increasingly discouraged about the prospects that the truth has of getting out. Here’s the extent of what the online encyclopedia has to say about China on the Compulsory Sterilization page:

Coercive sterilization to enforce the one child policy has occurred in China. This is not permitted by the law, and some local officials have been jailed for their actions. In 2010, Amnesty International accused authorities in Puning of compelling people to be sterilized by imprisoning their elderly relatives. See also Iron Fist Campaign.


The author of this pitiful little blip seems to be in an enormous hurry to get the whole thing over with: Yes, OK, there have been a couple of forced sterilizations. Amnesty International complained a bit and yadda yadda yadda. Can we just stop talking about this already? The United States, (which, by the way, no longer performs compulsory sterilizations) gets 847 words on this page! China gets 163.

Wikipedia’s coverage of forced abortions is barely any better. To start off with, there is no page for forced abortion. On the page for the Chinese one-child-policy, there are some references to 2001 “reports” of forced abortions, although the encyclopedia hurriedly asserts that, “In 2002, China outlawed the use of physical force to make a woman submit to an abortion or sterilization…”

Perhaps my indignation and distress is best explained by one of the victims of the very tragedy that these anonymous Wikipedians are so anxious for us to know nothing about: Let me introduce you to one of my favorite feminist sites – a site that actually does something to prevent the abuse of women and isn’t primarily concerned with the feminine pocketbook.

Women’s Rights Without Frontiers
was founded by Yale-educated lawyer Reggie Littlejohn as an attempt to stop forced abortions, sterilizations and sexual slavery in China and to educate the world about the plight of Chinese women. There is an extensive amount of useful information on this site, but, in my opinion, the most valuable evidence offered is the personal testimony of the victim Wuijan,

who testified before the United States Congressional Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission on November 10, 2009.  To protect her identity because of the risk of repercussions against her family still in China, Wujian testified with a black scarf wrapped entirely around her head.  In addition, she sat behind a privacy screen.  

Wuijan’s testimony is riveting and traumatic. She writes of her initial emotions upon the discovery that she was pregnant without a birth permit:

It was the winter of 2004 when I found out that I was pregnant. It was beautiful to sense this life growing inside of me: what a miracle! Meanwhile, I was also very fearful since I did not have the Permit for Pregnancy or the Birth Permit, which means, according to Chinese law, this baby was not allowed to be born into this world. This baby would have to die in my womb.

She then goes on to write about the arrest of her father by Family Planning Officials:

Eventually, the Family Planning government officials found out about my pregnancy. So they searched all over trying to arrest me, and while they could not find me, then they caught my father instead. They put my father into the detention center and beat him every day. On the fourth day after they caught my father, one neighbor came and told me that my father was dying: they would continue beating my father – even to death – until I went to the local hospital to get abortion.

She tells of horrors she saw on her trip to the hospital after she was discovered and arrested herself:


As soon as I got into the van, I found that another Mom was already inside the van. She told me she was carrying her first baby, and that she was 28 years old. She did not have the Permit of Pregnancy or the Birth Permit, and she was 7 months pregnant. She was so eager to keep this baby that she was fighting with the government officers in the van……..

….As soon as I was drug out of the van, I saw hundred of pregnant Moms there – all of them, just like pigs in the slaughterhouse…….

…..The room was full of Moms who had just gone through a forced abortion. Some Moms were crying, some Moms were mourning, some Moms were screaming, and one Mom was rolling on the floor with unbearable pain….


She tells of how she pleaded with the unsympathetic nurse:

At that moment, I was the only Mom in the room. I began begging the nurse while I cried, , “I have already had the oxytocin injection, please let me go; I will go as far away as possible and I will not tell anyone else what you had done for me and I will be grateful for you for the rest of my life.” The nurse did not respond to my begging—she looked like wood. Then I kept saying to her, “You are an angel, as a nurse or a doctor who is helping people and saving peoples’ life; how could you become a killer by killing people every day?”   I could hardly see her face because she wearied a big mask. Soon she became very angry at what I said, and told me that I talked too much. She also told me that there was nothing serious about this whole thing for her. She did these all year. She also told me that there were over 10,000 forced abortions in our county just for that year, and I was having just one of them.

Read the rest of Wuijan’s disturbing testimony here.

Now does it suddenly seem just a teeny bit outrageous that Joe Biden “fully understands” and refuses to “second-guess” China’s one-child policy? Does it seem at all important that we reconsider our policies with regards to China? Or is the United States so dependent on those “made in China” stickers that we’re willing to turn a national blind eye, avoid the research, and let Wikipedia keep its pathetic little un-articles dangling in cyberspace?


For Further Reading:

Check out Washington Post columnist Kathleen Parker’s story here to learn more about forced abortion in China and Reggie Littlejohn’s work to stop it.


What support does Planned Parenthood offer to the effort to stop abuse of women in China? Learn about Steve Mosher’s experiences here in this article at the American Spectator.

Read about Reggie Littlejohn’s address to British members of parliament in London last March.



 

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...