China: Significant correlation between abortion and risk of breast cancer

[serpretetsky]

Most research deals with correlations. You rarely see studies that say X caused Y, it is usually that one independent variable (abortion) is associated with an increase of the dependent variable (cancer). If you develop a significant body of research that all shows this correlation and you feel like you have adequately controlled for other variables, a reasonable conclusion would be that abortion causes breast cancer.

The only thing is that in this case the most credible evidence generally points the other way, that there is no link.

ah. I missed your post from before. Thanks.

 

[Atreus21]

Everything I read in the abstract goes to great lengths to not imply one leads to the other. They use the term "association" repeatedly. Which leads me to believe there is a statistical coorelation, but having one is not necessarily cause for having the other.

For example (warning, this example may not be true!): Women that have abortions very often may also be statistically more likeley to ingest some sort of carcogen. The carcogen is the cause of the increased cancer. Simply getting more abortions does not increase cancer.

Without being able to get into the nuts and bolts of the study (as if I'd be able to decipher it anyway), we can ask a whole lot of questions about their methodology without many good answers.

One would like to think they'd controlled for as many external variables as they could.

 

[alzan]

I never said I wished cancer on anyone.

You are jumping to conclusions.




You have your opinion and I have mine.

True but by expressing that "they got what they deserve" you've judged them and you're saying that you agree with the punishment. It's not wishing cancer on someone but it's close enough for hand grenades and horseshoes.

And has been already pointed out breast cancer can strike women who've carried to term.

 

[Texashiker]

True but by expressing that "they got what they deserve" you've judged them and you're saying that you agree with the punishment.

Are you old enough to remember Jeffrey Dahmer?

When Jeff was killed in prison, did you rejoice and say the bastard got what he deserved?

Or did you feel sorry for him?

When Timothy McVeigh had that needle put in his arm, did you say he got what he deserved?

Or did you feel sorry for him?

 

[TheVrolok]

Are you old enough to remember Jeffrey Dahmer?

When Jeff was killed in prison, did you rejoice and say the bastard got what he deserved?

Or did you feel sorry for him?

When Timothy McVeigh had that needle put in his arm, did you say he got what he deserved?

Or did you feel sorry for him?

Yea, Dahmer and McVeigh are absolutely equivalent to someone who gets an abortion. Are you fucking nuts? (rhetorical question)

 

[CottonRabbit]

Don't present this like it's the first time this has been studied. Better studies have shown no correlation. The official statement by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists puts it better than I can:

ABSTRACT: The relationship between induced abortion and the subsequent development of breast cancer has been the subject of a substantial amount of epidemiologic study. Early studies of the relationship between prior induced abortion and breast cancer risk were methodologically flawed. More rigorous recent studies demonstrate no causal relationship between induced abortion and a subsequent increase in breast cancer risk.

The relationship between induced abortion and the subsequent development of breast cancer has been the subject of a substantial amount of epidemiologic study. Early case– control studies that reported an association between induced abortion and subsequent development of breast cancer had significant methodological problems, most notably reliance on retrospective reporting of abortion history. A key methodological consideration in interpreting the evidence for any relationship between abortion and breast cancer risk is the sensitive nature of abortion, which could affect the accuracy in retrospective studies that rely on participant reports of having had an abortion.

In contrast to retrospective studies, prospective studies conclude there is no association between induced abortion and breast cancer. A world-wide meta-analysis of 83,000 women examined the relationship between induced abortion and breast cancer and found a significant difference between the overall estimate of relative risk (RR) from studies that had recorded information on induced abortion prospectively (RR, 0.93; 95% confidence interval, 0.89–0.96) and the overall estimate of RR from studies that had recorded such information retrospectively (RR, 1.11; 95% confidence interval, 1.09–1.14), suggesting that reporting bias was probably present in studies using retrospective reporting of abortion history (1).

In 2003, the National Cancer Institute convened the Early Reproductive Events and Breast Cancer Workshop to evaluate the current strength of evidence of epidemiologic, clinical, and animal studies addressing the association between reproductive events and the risk of breast cancer (2). The workshop participants concluded that induced abortion is not associated with an increase in breast cancer risk. Studies published since 2003 continue to support this conclusion (3–7).

Early studies of the relationship between prior induced abortion and breast cancer risk were methodologically flawed. More rigorous recent studies demonstrate no causal relationship between induced abortion and a subsequent increase in breast cancer risk.

http://www.acog.org/Resources_And_P...ctice/Induced_Abortion_and_Breast_Cancer_Risk

Notice that in the meta-analysis in the OP, 94% (34/36) of the studies reviewed were retrospective case-control studies.

 

[alzan]

Are you old enough to remember Jeffrey Dahmer?

When Jeff was killed in prison, did you rejoice and say the bastard got what he deserved?

Or did you feel sorry for him?

When Timothy McVeigh had that needle put in his arm, did you say he got what he deserved?

Or did you feel sorry for him?

Yes

No. I don't agree with state-sponsored murder. Executing someone who killed another person is a "two wrongs make a right" mentality.

I felt compassion for portions of our society that demand an eye for an eye.

See answer(s) for Dahmer.

 

[shira]

From what the abstract sez, the more abortions you have, the higher your risk for breast cancer.

Did the authors control for the fact that the more unwanted pregnancies a woman has is obviously highly correlated with a general carelessness about health issues? (Which in turn is highly correlated with getting all sorts of diseases, including cancers.)

 

[mikeymikec]

You have your opinion and I have mine.

You may have responded to my questions with an attitude of "why doesn't this person respect my opinion?", but your response very much suggests that you're forgetting that this site isn't your personal blog (where you can probably get away with presenting your opinion without qualification/justification), but is a discussion forum. On a discussion forum, if you present your opinion about something, you should expect it to be a point that is up for discussion.

IMO, what you're doing on this thread is thread-crapping, because one's personal morals have nothing to do with one's susceptibility to disease, certainly in the case of breast cancer.

 

[Texashiker]

IMO, what you're doing on this thread is thread-crapping, because one's personal morals have nothing to do with one's susceptibility to disease, certainly in the case of breast cancer.

I am thread crapping because someones actions come back to bite them in the butt?

Would you be saying that if a drunk driver was sentenced to prison after killing someone?

Would you be saying that is some heroin addict caught hiv?

Would you be saying that if a smoker developed lung cancer?

No, you would not.

This is not about morals or values (well, it is a little bit), this is mostly about someone being irresponsible and their actions causing other problems.

 

[Atreus21]

Did the authors control for the fact that the more unwanted pregnancies a woman has is obviously highly correlated with a general carelessness about health issues? (Which in turn is highly correlated with getting all sorts of diseases, including cancers.)

Don't know. Furthermore, I don't know if that's possible.

 

[mikeymikec]

I am thread crapping because someones actions come back to bite them in the butt?

I'm amazed that I'm having to explain this, but anyway.

This thread is not about a particular person getting an abortion or anything else. So labelling all people who have had (or would consider) getting an abortion as "deserving cancer" is:

a) irrelevant
b) disgusting

For example, someone might have had an abortion as a life-saving operation, but by your rationale, they deserved to die instead of both the mother and the child dying. You may see this as "picking holes in your argument", but that observation is also irrelevant. You've come into a thread which is about a possible scientific link between x and y and you've used it as an opportunity to bring morals into it and cast sweeping judgements on people.

This is not about morals or values (well, it is a little bit), this is mostly about someone being irresponsible and their actions causing other problems.

Utterly irrelevant, for reasons already stated. Hence, you're thread crapping.

 

[Texashiker]

I'm amazed that I'm having to explain this, but anyway.

Hence, you're thread crapping.

You are avoiding the very topic of this thread.

And that is being irresponsible coming back and biting you in the butt.

 

[Sonikku]

At least now we know why so many Chinese are coming down with cancer in recent years.
All the abortions.

 

[nixium]

Texashiker, you really are a fucking disgusting pile of human crap.

According to you, a rape victim deserves cancer because she had an abortion.

How can you call yourself Christian, you disgrace to humanity.

 

[CottonRabbit]

You are avoiding the very topic of this thread.

And that is being irresponsible coming back and biting you in the butt.

Except abortions do not cause cancer. Your schadenfreude is misplaced.

Quoting myself here, because people just read the headlines instead of examining the evidence:

Don't present this like it's the first time this has been studied. Better studies have shown no correlation. The official statement by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists puts it better than I can:

"Early studies of the relationship between prior induced abortion and breast cancer risk were methodologically flawed. More rigorous recent studies demonstrate no causal relationship between induced abortion and a subsequent increase in breast cancer risk."

http://www.acog.org/Resources_And_P...ctice/Induced_Abortion_and_Breast_Cancer_Risk

Notice that in the meta-analysis in the OP, 94% (34/36) of the studies reviewed were retrospective case-control studies.

 

[Texashiker]

According to you, a rape victim deserves cancer because she had an abortion.

Negative, you are wrong in that statement.

 

[Paul98]

Disgusting post because I object to the slaughter of innocent children?

In the womb - open season, kill as many as you want.

Out of the womb - oh the horror of anyone harming a child.

That mindset makes me sick.

I will find women who will have an abortion just to piss you off and have them impregnated for the specific purpose to abort them.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Justice will be served, one way or another.

Kill a child, get breast cancer, you get what you deserve.

Justice will be served, one way or another.

Troll a forum, get ass cancer, you get what you deserve.

What? I never said I wished cancer on anyone. You have your opinion and I have mine.

 

[Texashiker]

Justice will be served, one way or another.

Wow, just wow. Do you always go around telling people what they think?

What are you, physic or something? You must be rich from winning all of the lotteries.

You do not know the difference in being a victim, and doing something to yourself?

 

[Atreus21]

ass cancer

heh.

 

[Jaskalas]

All this tells me is that there may be grounds for continued study.

Particularly with other nations involved to try and determine a risk.

 

[CountZero]

These kinds of studies need to be taken with a grain of salt. This isn't the gold standard of studies, ie actually following a population of people and trying to account for variations that can't be controlled. This is taking other studies, cranking it through the math machine and seeing if anything interesting comes out.

This is the kind of study that might lead to a better study if there appears to be correlation worth looking at but it is not the kind of study that should lead to any conclusions. This is the kind of thing that the media gets wrong time and again and leads to the constant 'X causes cancer!' 'X is good for your heart' 'X cures blindness'.

 

[Fayd]

Did you know that carrying a child to term and giving birth also increases the risk for breast cancer?

By the way, yet another disgusting post out of you.

any responsible study would be using mothers who have carried to term as a control...

this summary odds ratio should be relative to that group.

if it is as you say (i doubt) then inducing abortions is *even more* likely to cause cancer than carrying to term...conditioning on getting pregnant in the first place. At least, that's the conclusion the paper is putting forward.

CottonRabbit's quote makes a good case against this conclusion, though.

 

[nehalem256]

I will find women who will have an abortion just to piss you off and have them impregnated for the specific purpose to abort them.

I eagerly await the L&R thread you start about the woman you impregnated to piss off Texashiker and now no longer wants to go through the abortion and instead wants you to "man up"