What do I mean by the ABC connection? The Abortion - Breast Cancer Connection.
Isn't it funny how the 'pro-choice' feminists want all women to have the freedom to "choose," but they don't really care about women making a truly informed choice!
They only want the choice to be made based on their own promotion of a de-population agenda and to remove any short-term consequences for irresponsible sexual behavior.
But they have been deliberately quashing any and all references in the mainstream media to the undeniable connections between women who have abortions and breast cancer.
It is in fact a biological phenomenon that is perfectly explainable without invoking any kind of "pro-life" or "religous fundamentalist" type of argument. And these revelations are nothing new...
Scientists first observed in the 17th century that women’s reproductive histories impacted their risk for breast cancer when it was noticed that nuns were at high risk for the disease. Scientists surmised that childbearing provides women with increased protection.
Today’s medical experts agree that the best way women can reduce their lifetime risk for breast cancer is by: 1) Having an early first full term pregnancy (FFTP) starting before age 24; 2) Bearing more children; and 3) Breastfeeding for a longer lifetime duration. It’s undeniable that abortion causes women to change their childbearing patterns. It leads them to forego the protective effects of early FFTP, increased childbearing and breastfeeding. Consequently, scientists do not debate that it increases breast cancer risk in this first of two ways.
Despite these truths, there is not one cancer fundraising business that uses the phrase, "Abortion raises breast cancer risk." Not one of them has ever denounced Planned Parenthood for depriving women of the protective effect of childbearing or acknowledged that abortion contributes to the nation’s breast cancer rates at least in this way.
If childbearing reduces breast cancer risk, then choosing not to have that child means a greater breast cancer risk for the woman. Therefore, there is no debate among scientists that the woman who aborts has a greater breast cancer risk than does the woman who has a baby (assuming that her pregnancy lasts at least 32 weeks).
However, it's not just the fact that a woman that has an abortion never realizes the protection she gets from carrying a pregnancy to full term when she is young, there is another effect that occurs when a female becomes pregnant and has an abortion...
Abortion has been implicated with breast cancer in yet another way, however, and estrogen overexposure is the explanation for it. There is staggering evidence of an independent link between abortion and breast cancer. What this means is that a woman who has an abortion is left with more cancer-vulnerable cells than she had before she ever became pregnant. Biological evidence and more than two dozen studies worldwide support a cause and effect relationship. Fifteen studies were conducted on American women, and 13 of them reported risk elevations. Seven found a more than a twofold elevation in risk. Seventeen are statistically significant, 16 of which demonstrated a positive association. The term “statistical significance” means that scientists are at least 95% certain that their findings are not due to chance or error.
The evidence of a causal relationship between abortion and breast cancer isn’t only based on a statistical relationship either. Scientists also require biological evidence and a reasonable biological explanation before concluding that there’s a causal relationship. These requirements have been met.
In summary, when a woman becomes pregnant, her body chemistry changes dramatically. Her body produces massive amounts of estrogen in the beginning stages of a pregnancy, and part of that is to prepare the breast tissue to begin producing milk.
These biological facts are the basis for making the abortion/breast cancer connection:
The explanation for the independent link makes good biological sense. It remains un-refuted and unchallenged by scientists because it is physiologically correct.
A never-pregnant woman has a network of primitive, immature and cancer-vulnerable breast cells which make up her milk glands. It is only in the third trimester of pregnancy - after 32 weeks gestation - that her cells start to mature and are fashioned into milk producing tissue whose cells are cancer resistant.
When a woman becomes pregnant, her breasts enlarge. This occurs because a hormone called estradiol, a type of estrogen, causes both the normal and pre-cancerous cells in the breast to multiply terrifically. This process is called “proliferation.” By 7 to 8 weeks gestation, the estradiol level has increased by 500% over what it was at the time of conception.
If the pregnancy is carried to term, a second process called “differentiation” takes place. Differentiation is the shaping of cells into milk producing tissue. It shuts off the cell multiplication process. This takes place at approximately 32 weeks gestation.
If the pregnancy is aborted, the woman is left with more undifferentiated -- and therefore cancer-vulnerable cells -- than she had before she was pregnant. On the other hand, a full term pregnancy leaves a woman with more milk producing differentiated cells, which means that she has fewer cancer-vulnerable cells in her breasts than she did before the pregnancy.
In contrast, research has shown that most miscarriages do not raise breast cancer risk. This is due to a lack of estrogen overexposure. Miscarriages are frequently precipitated by a decline in the production of progesterone which is needed to maintain a pregnancy. Estrogen is made from progesterone, so the levels of each hormone rise and fall together during pregnancy.
For a thorough biological explanation of the abortion-breast cancer link, see this second website for the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute, and click on its online booklet, “Breast Cancer Risks and Prevention.”
The fact that such scientific research is not widely known...despite having a "Breast Cancer Awareness Month" and the million and one charities and foundations supposedly dedicated to eradicating breast cancer only goes to show what the mainstream establishment and the feminist movement value more - there sacred sacrament of infanticide over the lives of the very women they supposedly care so much about.
Shouldn't every woman contemplating an abortion be educated on the biological truth that having one can increase the likelihood of developing breast cancer later on in her life?
Why wouldn't a pro-choice advocacy want women to know about the dangers of an elective procedure?
Answer: because the real agenda is global depopulation. Just as millions of babies are murdered in their wombs, so to are millions of women who are exposed to much higher risks of dying from cancer. It's a win-win situation for the global elite that want to reduce the number of proles...so that they can achieve there primary goal of environmental "sustainability."