Freeper Sues Planned Parenthood - UPDATE

Freeper | December 28, 2001 | Saundra Duffy

[Saundra Duffy]

As some of you may recall, I am one of three plaintiffs in a law suit filed in California against Planned Parenthood (August 2001). It's a consumer law suit - not for money - but to force Planned Parenthood to tell the truth about the link between induced abortion and breast cancer. Here's the latest! Planned Parenthood has filed a motion to dismiss our lawsuit under California's Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation ("SLAPP") claiming that we are trying to chill their First Amendment right to free speech in connection with an issue of public importance. Our lawyers from the Thomas More Law Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan, anticipated this motion and are working on the response - that the First Amendment does not protect false and deceptive statements made in connection with an offer of services to the public.

[Saundra Duffy]

May 2002 bring VICTORY for a woman's right to know the truth about the link between abortion and breast cancer. Go to www.AbortionBreastCancer.com for more information on this subject. Thanks to all for your interest and support. For victory & freedom!!!

[Saundra Duffy]

If we are successful (and it's very possible we will be), it could change the future of the abortion debate. For victory & freedom!!!

[Saundra Duffy]

Planned Parenthood will hit us with everything they have. They stand to lose mega bucks and power if we are successful. Funny, though. All they would have to do is start admitting that there is a link between abortion and breast cancer. You know, give women a clue. Science is on our side. Many women will still choose abortion but at least they would have been informed. But as I say PP stands to lose too much and they'd have to admit they've been wrong, thereby subjecting women to untold tragedies. Anyway, we are hopeful. For victory & freedom!!!

[RightOnline]

God bless ya, Saundra, and your co-plaintiffs. GIT 'EM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Saundra Duffy]

PING BUMP BANG and TO THE TOP! For victory & freedom!!!

[Saundra Duffy]

Thanks for the encouraging words, freeper pal. For victory & freedom!!!

[rface]

Thank you Saundra Duffy.....

Ashland, Missouri

[Excuse_Me]

Don't they have to put a notice on the door of all abortion clinics in California warning that the abortion clinic contains known carcinogenic procedures? ;-)

[Humidston]

You are doing what we all must do if we're going to turn this country around - FIGHT THEM IN THE COURTS! God bless the law firm that is taking the fight to the liars and everyone should make note of their name. Use them whenever possible because they deserve to grow and grow and GROW!

Saundra, my hat's off to ya' gal!! You are the BEST!!

[Antoninus]

They should be forced to have 'warning labels' 20 feet high posted in front of their abortuaries. Great work!

Here's potential wording: "Warning: Murdering your unborn baby may cause you to get cancer."

[scouse]

God Bless you.

[SMEDLEYBUTLER]

Be sure to forward this development and an update to Blanquita.

[alnick]

Can you imagine the avalanche of lawsuits this would bring on from women with breast cancer who had abortions in their past? Should be interesting.

[Free Vulcan]

Do you know the judge's background and political leanings? Just curious of the playing field you are dealing with. It looks though at least your lawyers are countering with a sound legal argument, the 1st Amendment doesn't protect fraud.

[MSSC6644]

Thank you for your courage and wisdom. The Lord has and will continue to bless your efforts.

I hate PP. They lie, they murder, they hate women and children. They are organized evil.

My prayers are with you, that He continue to protect you and yours from the evil with which you do battle.

[workamania]

To all the Christian Freepers, we need to pray continually for the situation and for the truth to finally be exploited about organizations like PP and CARAL.

[Freedom'sWorthIt]

Wow, didn't know about this, SD! Way to go! Prayers for victory on the way!

[LiveFree2000]

Get a life!

[Log]

Let me say that I am opposed to abortion on moral grounds, but I think it is very risky to approach the argument based on "science" and "statistics." Please do some research before you pursue this risky approach. Otherwise you might find you'll get the results you do not want.

http://www.junkscience.com/news/more-abortion.html

http://www.junkscience.com/news/abortion-breast-cancer.html

---

More Abortion and Breast Cancer

The Wall Street Journal (October 11, 1996) The Washington Post (October 12, 1996)

---

New research published in the British Medical Association's Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health has again linked abortion with breast cancer. A team of researchers reviewed 23 existing studies on abortion and breast cancer, pooled the studies' data and concluded that a woman who has an abortion has a 30 percent increase in the risk of breast cancer.

But abortion is a sacred cow among the public health establishment. So I don't have to criticize this study again; the public health establishment will do it for me.

As reported in The Washington Post, Lynn Rosenberg, an epidemiologist at Boston University, said:

There is evidence that women grossly under-report abortion,... An [increase in risk of 30 percent] is indistinguishable from [such bias]... We are certainly not going to arrive at the truth by averaging all the studies.

According to Karin Michels, an epidemiologist at Harvard Medical School ,

[The studies used in the analysis] to date are inadequate to infer with confidence [a relation between abortion and breast cancer].

As reported in The Wall Street Journal, Clark Heath, a vice president at the American Cancer Society, said:

This is a fight between science people and pro-life people. It is a great mistake to start issuing warnings about risks or possible risks when the evidence is so unclear.

Thanks Lynn, Karin and Clark. I can't wait to apply your style of thinking to the epidemiology of air pollution, radon, environmental tobacco smoke, dioxin, DDT, breast implants, environmental estrogens, etc.

Material presented on this home page constitutes opinion of the author.

---

Copyright © 1996 Steven J. Milloy. All rights reserved. Site developed and hosted by WestLake Solutions, Inc.

Abortion Contortion

---

Abortion Contortion

Janet R. Daling, Louise A. Brinton, Lynda F. Voigt, Noel S. Weiss, Ralph Coates, Kathleen Malone, Janet Schoenberg, and Marilie Gammon Am J Epidemiol 1996;144:373-380

---

Over the past several years, four published studies have weakly associated abortion with an increased risk in breast cancer.

Despite the weak association, these studies have given pro-choice supporters a headache. So much so that the National Cancer Institute (NCI) even issued a press release indicating that weak association epidemiology was not very reliable.

Of course, NCI thinks that weak association epidemiology is bad only in the context of abortion. For anything else, weak association epidemiology is just hunky-dory!

In this fine tradition, Daling et al. pull off a remarkable feat by both repudiating their own abortion-breast cancer link while asking for more money to study it.

Daling et al. interviewed 1,302 women with breast cancer about their reproductive histories, including induced abortion, and reported that:

Women who had been pregnant once and had an abortion had a 20 percent higher rate of breast cancer than women who had no abortion (95 percent confidence interval, 0 percent to 50 percent).

Women who had never had a child and had a first trimester abortion had a 100 percent higher rate of breast cancer (95 percent confidence interval, 20 percent to 230 percent).

Usually, when public health researchers report their results, they FIRST try to SUPPORT their results and then, almost as an afterthought, point out flaws and weaknesses as an afterthought. Not Daling et al.

The very first sentence in the discussion section is

Some possible limitations of our study warrant discussion.

Daling et al. then go on to discuss how they were able to directly interview only about 80 percent of the women in their study. And they question the accuracy of the responses from their own interviews. Then they state

Although a positive association has been seen in a number of studies that have focused on young women, the overall magnitude is not so great that the possibility of bias... can be excluded.

Funny, I can remember how a reported 30 percent increase in lung cancer risk associated with second-hand smoke was SO definite and meaningful to the public health research crowd. But a 100 percent increase in breast cancer risk from abortion "is not so great"?

Then Daling et al. close with their shameless pitch and not-so veiled threat for more research funding on this issue:

Nonetheless, as additional studies are carried out [shameless pitch] among cohorts of women who have had legal abortions available to them for most of their lives,... there is reason to hope that in the future we [where future funding should go] will have a better understanding of the possible role of induced abortion [not-so veiled threat] in the etiology of breast cancer.

Material presented on this home page constitutes opinion of the author.

---

Copyright © 1996 Steven J. Milloy. All rights reserved. Site developed and hosted by WestLake Solutions, Inc.

[Free the USA]

FYI

[jlogajan]

Great, science mandated by courts -- just what conservatives want -- massive federal government.

[Boxsford]

Thank you for all that you are doing. God be with you and bless you in this endeavor. ~Boxsford

[VRW Conspirator]

Planned Parenthood will hit us with everything they have... But as I say PP stands to lose too much and they'd have to admit they've been wrong, thereby subjecting women to untold tragedies. Anyway, we are hopeful. For victory & freedom!!!

Food for thought.

I believe that a much higher percentage of minorities receive abortions than "white" people per capita. If you look into the study of breast cancer, you might find that a higher percentage of minorities therefore have a higher incidence of breast cancer. This could be an added punch to your lawsuit.

Obviously, if you get PP to admit that there is a link between abortion and breast cancer, than that will make them liable for damages, past present and future. Oh my! They are an evil bunch. They will fight like the devil.

Planned Parenthood is a modern day NAZI party where every abortion clinic is an Auschwitz.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

GO FOR IT! Hopefully, it will be revealed once and for all whether that is actually true (I've heard of it before; the idea is that abortion creates a hormonal imbalance that offers the woman less protection against breast cancer?).

[IM2Phat4U]

bump

www.AbortionBreastCancer.com

www.abortioncancer.com

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Excellent! How about the link between abortion and increased risk of death to the mother? Someone posted an article about a month ago that reviewed a study where it was found that the risk of death to the mother during an abortion was 4 times the rate of the risk of death to the mother during natural childbirth.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Get a life!

Up your nose with a rubber hose!

Well, it makes about as much sense as your remark!

[gunnrmike]

Go Sandra! GO!

Gunnrmike

[Sloth]

Can you imagine the avalanche of lawsuits this would bring on from women with breast cancer who had abortions in their past? Should be interesting.

I would pay good money to see a huge class action like that. Baby-killers screwed by the selfish, litigious society they've helped create.

[ArGee]

But as I say PP stands to lose too much and they'd have to admit they've been wrong, thereby subjecting women to untold tragedies.

They would also have to explain why they've been quiet for so long considering the fact that they profess to be pro-woman.

God bless you, Saundra.

Shalom.

[Dan from Michigan]

Go get them. That's less money for them now to use on politics.

[hsmomx3]

And then maybe they ought to reimburse taxpayers for the monies they used in which to falsely advertise.

[curmudgeonII]

Good luck.
And God bless you and the others working on this.

[monkeywrench]

Maybe he meant, 'Take a life', since that is what baby-jihaddists do.

[Dr. Brian Kopp]

Please do some research before you pursue this risky approach

The research is fully on her side.

The propaganda, and efforts to refute the link, are what she is fighting.

--Dr. Kopp

[pcl]

It is going to be interesting when the PP shows that Catholic Nuns and other non-childbearing, post menopausal women have an abnormally high rate of breast cancer. Could it be that there is something else besides abortion at work here?

If the breast cancer to abortion link is not established beyond a shadow of a doubt, the counter-suits are going to be a very serious financial threat to those involved in the original suit. It would be very wise for the three plaintiffs to have all their assets well protected.

[Saundra Duffy]

Regarding the high incidence of breast cancer among Nuns - that's old news. We all know that having a full-term first pregnancy at an early age offers a protection against developing breast cancer in later life. That's not controversial. For victory & freedom!!!

[Saundra Duffy]

I like that "warning" sign you propose! For victory & freedom!!!

[Saundra Duffy]

It's about time OUR SIDE got some trial lawyers kicking butt. For victory & freedom!!!

[Saundra Duffy]

You're right! Blanquita Cullum (radio talk show host from New York) did ask me to keep her posted. Ack!! I'll do it. For victory & freedom!!!

[Saundra Duffy]

Remember the women who came forward - those who had suffered from dangerous silicon breast implants? They were successful in their class action law suit. I'd like to see the same thing happen here - to benefit women and their families who were lied to by Planned Parenthood. For victory & freedom!!!

[Saundra Duffy]

"Do you know the judge's background and political leanings?" Good question. I don't know. All I know is that the Thomas More Law Center will do its best. For victory & freedom!!!

[Campion]

It is going to be interesting when the PP shows that Catholic Nuns and other non-childbearing, post menopausal women have an abnormally high rate of breast cancer.

Yeah, especially when the people who are making millions by selling celibacy to young women as a "health care option" are sued for not telling the whole truth about the consequences of that option.

Oh, wait, there are no such people. Never mind.

[Saundra Duffy]

Science is on our side. No kidding! The pro abortionists have lied to women long enough. And bureaucracies such as the American Cancer Society have been complicit. It's time for the truth to come out. Countless lives - both women and unborn babies - hang in the balance. For victory & freedom!!!

[Saundra Duffy]

"I believe that a much higher percentage of minorities receive abortions than "white" people per capita." Yep. I think you're right. Have you ever seen an abortion clinic/mill in the nice part of town? No! I believe many abortionists think they're doing society a big favor - ridding us of undesirables every time they perform an abortion. And the fact that many minority women will die of breast cancer is just icing on their cake. You are right. The abortion business stinks to high heaven. For victory & freedom!!!

[Saundra Duffy]

". . . counter-suits are going to be a very serious financial threat to those involved in the original suit. It would be very wise for the three plaintiffs to have all their assets well protected." Well, as for me, I'm poor and I don't have financial assets. Don't even own a home. The lawyers warned us that PP may come after us individually. Actually, I'm glad to sacrifice all I have if it will result in saving one life. For victory & freedom!!!

[marshmallow]

Planned Parenthood Seeks Boost In Clientele"

Give 'em hell!