Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New Breastfeeding Studies: Mainstream Media Still Ignores the Obvious
Trevor Grant Thomas.com ^ | 11/25/15 | Trevor Grant Thomas

Posted on 11/25/2015 6:37:35 AM PST by DWW1990

About two weeks ago I linked to a piece from the Christian Post entitled "Women at Risk: Abortion and Breast Cancer [ABC] Linked." It reports, "Of the approximate 74 research studies conducted on the ABC link since 1973, 58 show a direct connection between increased breast cancer rates and induced abortion. All of these studies were conducted by international medical organizations. A more recent study, conducted by a research fellow at Johns Hopkins University, also supports the ABC link."

...No less than The New York Times, ABC News, and the Atlanta-Journal Constitution (AJC) have, in the last few days, reported on the benefits that breastfeeding provides mothers. In a bold headline, The New York Times declared, "Breast-Feeding Is Good for Mothers, Not Just Babies, Studies Suggest."

Most significantly, one study shows that "breast-feeding may help protect women from a particularly vicious type of breast cancer." As the AJC puts it, "Researchers found that mothers who breastfeed reduce their risk of a particularly aggressive type of breast cancer by 20 percent."...

Of course, it is seemingly lost on these liberals that an abortion violently, abruptly, and unnaturally interrupts all of this.

(Excerpt) Read more at trevorgrantthomas.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: abortion; breastfeeding; cancer; media

1 posted on 11/25/2015 6:37:35 AM PST by DWW1990
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: DWW1990

Perhaps the only time the MSM is willing to ignore breasts.


2 posted on 11/25/2015 6:53:17 AM PST by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DWW1990
The studies which indicate that abortions have a direct cause and effect on higher breast cancer risk have been suppressed for years. The Progressives absolutely believe that the termination of an inconvenient child is preferable to the stress bearing said child would have on the mother, even if that "choice" results in a horrible, cancerous death for Mom years later.

It's all for the Revolution, doncha' know...

3 posted on 11/25/2015 6:55:38 AM PST by Thommas (The snout of the camel is in the tent..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Thommas

The American Cancer Society once supported Big Tobacco’ s denial of smoking-lung cancer link.


4 posted on 11/25/2015 6:59:05 AM PST by CharlesOConnell (CharlesOConnell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DWW1990
When these studies were first coming out in the late 1980s, I read a great description of the ABC link.

As a woman goes through a pregnancy, the breast tissue begins to go through changes that hormonally prepare the breasts for breastfeeding.

To use a layman's language - the cells of the lobes which prepare milk are opened and slowly close after the birth of the baby when the mother begins to breastfeed. If a woman does not breastfeed after the birth of the baby the breast cells will close naturally and hormonally. Although it is best to breastfeed at least a little bit to make sure.

When a woman has a spontaneous miscarriage the hormones kick in the way they do after a full pregnancy when the hormones do their work to shut off the system, so to speak.

Now, if a woman has an abortion, these cells remain open and do not close because they are given the hormonal signal to close. When the cells remain open they have no protection from invading cancer cells. That is why breastfeeding is one of the best ways to protect the breasts from getting cancer.

To sum it up - an abortion keeps the breast tissue in an open position which is an invitation to cancer.

5 posted on 11/25/2015 6:59:36 AM PST by Slyfox (Will no one rid us of this meddlesome president?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Thommas

There’s no denial of it outside the borders of The Land of Free Speech.


6 posted on 11/25/2015 7:00:07 AM PST by CharlesOConnell (CharlesOConnell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Slyfox

CORRECTION:

Now, if a woman has an abortion, these cells remain open and do not close because they are NOT given the hormonal signal to close.


7 posted on 11/25/2015 7:01:37 AM PST by Slyfox (Will no one rid us of this meddlesome president?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Slyfox

In other words, newly developing breast cells crash against a hormonal brick wall. (They’re Not wearing their pink ribbons.)


8 posted on 11/25/2015 7:02:09 AM PST by CharlesOConnell (CharlesOConnell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog

Ha! So true!


9 posted on 11/25/2015 7:10:38 AM PST by DWW1990
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog

Absolutely right! In fact, big boobs are all you need to be the next super star.

And .. then they end up in bed with multiple partners; end up pregnant; end up having abortion after abortion.

However, I’m hoping it will finally become information young women can use to make that choice to have unprotected sex .. believing that having an abortion is a safe practice.

Lots of prayers are needed to get more and more women to see the truth of their breast cancer.

And .. not all women who have breast cancer .. had an abortion .. but they may have had a miscarriage .. and they had no idea breast cancer might be a result.


10 posted on 11/25/2015 7:11:47 AM PST by CyberAnt ("The fields are white unto Harvest")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Thommas

Yes, I’m really surprised that the media stumbled this way. These new studies make it harder to continue to hide the truth.


11 posted on 11/25/2015 7:12:08 AM PST by DWW1990
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Slyfox

GREAT Post! I’ve been wondering aloud this morning what was the biological difference between an abortion and a miscarriage. THANKS!


12 posted on 11/25/2015 7:15:35 AM PST by DWW1990
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DWW1990

Studies?

They never call me!


13 posted on 11/25/2015 7:17:51 AM PST by G Larry (ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS impose SLAVE WAGES on LEGAL Immigrants.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DWW1990

When I tried to breast feed my mother told me she only liked me as a friend.

Rodney Dangerfield


14 posted on 11/25/2015 7:21:20 AM PST by Vaduz (women and children to be impacted the most.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Thommas

Yes-—this has been suppressed for decades. It fits the Malthusian, demonic “meme”.

No Truth is ever allowed in the public square since they banned Jesus Christ from the public square and schools using “Just Law”.

Censorship has been with us since forever....the Malthusians, though, had the Germans/Fichte and Wundt as their base to know how to create minds like the Hitler Youth-—Prussian mandatory public schools-—and then by 1920s and 30s, they got control over the newspapers, textbooks and universities (science) and radio. Marketing was controlled by Freud’s nephew, Bernays, to get women to smoke, etc. It worked.

You hear on MSM-—including “fair and balance” Fox News——what the Malthusian, sodomite elites WANT you to “think” (over and over and it becomes the “truth’). All your emotions are artificially controlled-—they want you dehumanized-—destroying mother/child bond and forcing mom into the work force was No. 1 target.

To dehumanize you start with removing human touch from the infant-—esp. that mother/child skin/skin loving “touch” and holding while nursing (bonding).

Destroy bonding in a baby and you will destroy all future relationships. You will be an emotional cripple-—and owned by vice—unless you find God.


15 posted on 11/25/2015 7:28:13 AM PST by savagesusie (Right Reason According to Nature = Just Law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DWW1990

The Mob of Political Correctness will happily stand truth on its head to deny ANY scientific study.

Science has become a weapon of State Security, which is why they spend so much time and energy spreading pabulum about climate change.


16 posted on 11/25/2015 7:52:51 AM PST by Jack Hammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Slyfox

Best explanation I ever heard. Thanks for your post.


17 posted on 11/25/2015 8:19:03 AM PST by georgiegirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: georgiegirl

It was my pleasure.


18 posted on 11/25/2015 9:07:02 AM PST by Slyfox (Will no one rid us of this meddlesome president?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: DWW1990

You are welcome.


19 posted on 11/25/2015 9:08:54 AM PST by Slyfox (Will no one rid us of this meddlesome president?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Vaduz

Ha! Classic Dangerfield!


20 posted on 11/25/2015 10:14:04 AM PST by DWW1990
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson