an After abortion

3,400 confidential and totally free groups to call and go to in the U.S...1,400 outside the U.S. . . . 98 of these in Canada.
Free, financial help given to women and families in need.More help given to women, families.
Helping with mortgage payments and more.More help.
The $1,950 need has been met!CPCs help women with groceries, clothing, cribs, "safe haven" places.
Help for those whose babies haveDown Syndrome and Other Birth Defects.
CALL 1-888-510-BABY or click on the picture on the left, if you gave birth or are about to and can't care for your baby, to give your baby to a worker at a nearby hospital (some states also include police stations or fire stations), NO QUESTIONS ASKED. YOU WON'T GET IN ANY TROUBLE or even have to tell your name; Safehaven people will help the baby be adopted and cared for.

Wednesday, August 9, 2006

"Rep. Henry Waxman said vulnerable teens are getting false health information. Pregnancy centers mislead women about abortion, report finds." July 18, 2006 (may require free registration).
Federally funded "pregnancy resource centers" are incorrectly telling women that abortion increases the risk of breast cancer, infertility and deep psychological trauma, a congressional report said...The pregnancy resource centers, which are often affiliated with anti-abortion religious groups, have received about $30 million in federal money since 2001 [that's ~ $6 million/year vs. Planned Parenthood's $265.2 million in fed dollars in '04 alone], according to the report, requested by Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif."
By Marc Kaufman, Washington Post and printed in The Seattle Times , The Houston Chronicle, San Francisco Chronicle.

Here we go again. Feel free to email/post your comments to these various publications:
  • Washington Post Ombudsman Deborah Howell, also via their online contact page.
  • and Diane Albert, Letters Editor.
  • Email Houston Chronicle.
  • Email Dick Rogers, San Francisco Chronicle readers' representative, and/or Letters.
  • Or post a comment after mine here, at the Utah Daily Herald.
    Dear Editors: You might as well also wrongly malign and "go after" the Texas Dept. of State Health Services:

    Regarding Marc Kaufman's Washington Post article "Pregnancy centers mislead women about abortion, report finds," Rep. Henry Waxman has tried to malign and scuttle CPCs for over 2 years now and he won't be happy until he's succeeded in tarring, feathering and running them out of business. His alleged "reports" are chock full of gross and willful ignorance, and he should be exposed for this once and for all.

    Waxman is: 1) a politician, 2) a Democratic Congressman (not known to be pro-life; apologies to my Democrats for Life friends), 3) not a medical doctor or scientist, AND 4) Waxman has "already tried to abolish some $50 million in abstinence-education funding and replace it with sex-education money states could use for either safe sex or abstinence programs. Waxman's bid failed, but others are in the works."

    That was reported in January '04. It was suspicious at best and damning at worst that Waxman then proceeded, 11 months later, to produce a report on condoms, abstinence and birth control that was full of inaccuracies and insufficiently-backed claims, not to mention total ignorance of his own government's CDC, that appeared engineered to the results he wanted to see in this regard.

    Now comes Waxman's latest ill-informed report.

    Since Surgeon General C. Everett Koop's infamously-misinterpreted Jan. 1989 letter (, there have been at least 22 published, vetted studies finding that there is post-abortion trauma --physical and psychological--to women.

    Please tell us why all of you, Rep. Waxman and others disregard these published, peer-reviewed research studies.

    These 22 later studies and reports occurred between January 1989 (when Koop called for a comprehensive study) and June 2005. None of this was available to Koop but, while available to Waxman, The Washington Post, The Seattle Times and all, you have ignored it.


    1989-1995: The published book, Lime 5, compiled by Mark Crutcher, detailed many maternal deaths as late as 1995 plus many more cases of harm done to women by legal abortions in those years.

    1996: An American Cancer Society pamphlet "Cancer Facts and Figures" said that abortion was indeed a risk factor that increased one's chances of getting breast cancer.

    1997:, Women who aborted are 3.5 times more likely to die within a year than women who gave birth at term. [Acta Obsetricia et Gynecolgica Scandinavica (1997) [Gissler M., et. al., "Pregnancy-associated deaths in Finland 1987-1994" 76:651-657]

    Two criticisms were published in the New England Journal of Medicine of the 1997 Melbye (or Danish) study (which said the ABC link is false) [Brind & Chinchilli, "Induced Abortion and the Risk of Breast Cancer," 336 NEJM (1997) 1834-35]; Katrina Armstrong, Feb. 2000, [NEJM 342:564-71].

    1999 & 2000:

    1., "Women who had one, two, or more previous ... abortions are, respectively, 1.89, 2.66, or 2.03 times more likely to have a subsequent pre-term delivery, compared to women who carry to term. Premature delivery increases the risk of neo-natal death, and always results in low birth weight babies." [Zhou, Weijin, et. al., "Induced Abortion and Subsequent Pregnancy Duration", Obstet. Gynecol (Dec. 1999), 94(6):948-953]

    2., this study's findings "suggest a positive association between one or more first trimester induced abortions and the risk of low birthweight in subsequent singleton [single-baby] term live births when the interpregnancy interval is longer than 6 months." [Beijing Zhou, Henrik Toft Sørensen, and Jørn Olsen, "Induced abortion and low birthweight in the following pregnancy", International Journal of Epidemiology (2000); 29:100-106.]

    2001: , British Medical Journal, Dec. 2001: An early look at NLSY data found that, an average of 8 years after abortion, married women were 37% more likely to be at high risk of clinical depression, compared to similar women who carried their unintended first pregnancies to term. However, women having abortions instead of carrying to term in their first marriages were 50% more likely to be in that "high risk range" than those in second or later marriages [324: 151-152].

    1., American Journal of Orthopsychiatry: A comparison of outpatient mental health claims over 5 years, including records of 173,000 California women, found that women were 63% more likely to receive mental care within 90 days of an abortion, than after giving birth. Also, significantly higher rates of later mental health treatment persisted over the entire four years of data examined. Abortion was most strongly associated with later treatments for neurotic depression, bipolar disorder, adjustment reactions, and schizophrenic disorders." [Vol. 72, No. 1, 141-152]

    2., American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology: "History of induced abortion in relation to substance use during pregnancies carried to term." Dec.02; 187(5).]

    3. [Steve Baguley, Jan Savage, AIDS/STD Program, CDC Darwin, Henry Cho, Head, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology,Royal Darwin Hospital, Sarah Huffman,Infectious Diseases Physician, AIDS/STD Program, CDC Darwin, published in the Northern Territory Disease Control Bulletin, Vol. 9 No. 3, Sept. 2002.]

    4., Southern Medical Journal revealed that women who abort versus those who give birth are almost twice as likely to die in the two years following the pregnancy outcome. [Reardon DC, Ney PG, Scheuren F, Cougle J, Coleman PK, Strahan TW, "Deaths associated with pregnancy outcome: a record linkage study of low income women," Southern Medical Journal (Aug. 2002), [95(:834-841.]

    5. Diana Lopez died on February 28, 2002. The Los Angeles County Coroner determined that Diana died from a massive hemorrhage caused by "traumatic perforation of the cervix" subsequent to an abortion at Planned Parenthood.

    1. , Medical Science Monitor study found that, at an average of 8 years after the first pregnancies, women who chose abortions were 8% more likely to score in the "high-risk" range for clinical depression than women who gave birth. This was regardless of age, race, marital status, divorce history, education, income, and previous psychological state.

    2., Canadian Medical Association Journal study found that psychiatric admissions were more common among women at anytime between 90 days to 4 years after an...abortion, than among those who carried a pregnancy to term. The risk was "significantly higher."

    3. , "First U.S. Abortion-Breast Cancer Lawsuit Settled." The teenager "sued her abortion provider...for neglecting to warn her about the physical and emotional risks of abortion;" they settled out of court.

    1., Eve Sanchez Silver resigned her position as a charter member of The Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation's National Hispanic/Latina Advisory Council. She had learned "that Komen's affiliates have helped fund Planned Parenthood." She said, "It makes me wonder what other abortion related agendas Komen may be supporting...Is one hand washing the other?"

    2., Human Reproduction, "History of induced abortion as a risk factor for preterm birth in European countries," 2004 Mar, Ancel PY, Lelong N, Papiernik E, Saurel-Cubizolles MJ, Kaminski M; EUROPOP. Vol. 19, No. 3, 734-740.

    3., Science, Technology, and Space Hearing on "The Impact of Abortion on Women," Wednesday, March 3, 2004, to the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation.

    2005: , British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology: "After studying data on 1,943 very pre-term births, 276 moderately pre-term babies and 618 full-term controls, Dr. Caroline Moreau of Hopital de Bicetre and colleagues concluded that women with a history of abortion were 1.5 times more likely to give birth very prematurely (under 33 weeks gestation), and 1.7 times more likely to have a baby born extremely (under 28 weeks gestation) pre-term."

    REGARDING THE BREAST CANCER/ ABORTION LINK:These have found evidence of this:

    1. American Cancer Society's brochure "Cancer Facts and Figures, 1996",
    2. Phyllis Wingo (a CDC researcher prior to working for American Cancer Society and then doing an about-face), and three other epidemiologists (including Bruce Stadel, National Institutes of Health)
    3. Pro-choice Dr. Janet Daling in a 1994 NCI Journal article. "If politics gets involved in science, it will really hold back the progress we make. I have three sisters with breast cancer, and I resent people messing with the scientific data to further their own agenda, be they pro-choice or pro-life. I would have loved to have found no association between breast cancer and abortion, but our research is rock solid, and our data is accurate. It's not a matter of believing. It's a matter of what is."
    4. Dr. Clark Heath, while he was a Vice President for the American Cancer Society,
    5. Dr. Joel Brind, Baruch College endocrinologist, president of the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute,
    6. Harvard's Dr. Brian MacMahon, Dr. Dimitrios Trichopoulos, et al.; International Journal of Cancer,
    7. Dr. Lynn Rosenberg, Boston University Medical School epidemiologist,
    8. Dr. Jane Orient, M.D., executive director, Association of American Physicians and Surgeons,
    9. National Physicians Center for Family Resources,
    10. American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
    11. Breast cancer surgeon, Clinical Assistant Professor, Dept. of Surgery, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, NJ, Dr. Angela Lanfranchi, M.D., F.A.C.S.


    Annie Banno,

  • 0 comment(s): (ANONYMOUS ok -but mind our rules, please)                                      << HOME