• Home
  • About
  • BIO
  • Conferences
  • Contact
  • Follow Gerard on FB & Twitter
  • Speaking

Coming Home

Dr. Gerard M. Nadal: Science in Service of the Pro-Life Movement

Feeds:
Posts
Comments
« Breast Cancer, Science, Medicine, Prophets, and Hope
The ABC Literature: #11, Further Refutation of the ‘Recall Bias’ Myth »

Reporting the ABC Link: The Game Plan

October 7, 2010 by Gerard M. Nadal

For easing newcomers along , please consult the glossary of terms that I’ve written to make the terminology very understandable. Also, consult the post that explains the essential background

As I have moved forward with this project of reporting the link between induced abortion and breast cancer, I’ve realized that it involves presenting an enormous body of scientific literature to a general audience of people who were wise enough to steer clear of science as a profession. Science has its own culture fraught with politics, egos, competition for glory, grants, publications, promotions, and awards. Scientists are not saints in lab coats. Far from it. The best of us adhere to the ethical precepts that are meant to guide research , publication, and interpretation for the public.

As this project has developed, I have presented a representative sample of the various elements that comprise the debate and its foundations.

1. Normal breast physiology.
2. The effects of estrogen on breast physiology and pathophysiology.
3. The protective effects of full term pregnancy and breastfeeding.
4. The role of abortion within the context of 1-3 above.
5. The debate over recall bias.
6. The debate over retrospective vs. prospective studies
7. The debate over relative risk size and significance.
8. The politics of data interpretation vis abortion and oral contraceptives.

Admittedly, I have presented a few offerings in each area in an attempt to present the reader with a sense of the landscape. In doing so, I have attempted to integrate each piece of the puzzle, explaining its place and its relationship to the whole.

And that’s all that I have done so far.

As we progress, I shall continue to move about the landscape with a few articles in a row on one topic and then transition into a few on the next, rather than present everything on one topic, then everything on the next, etc. This would be easiest from a thematic organizational perspective, but would kill me with its repetitiveness.

Perhaps I am mistaken in this approach, and as in all things I welcome any and all feedback. However, familiarity with the integrated nature of the material seems to require the approach I have settled on.

Also, to those who think that I should only present the papers explicitly linking abortion and breast cancer, as we go along I hope that it will become evident why a consideration of all the data is vital in understanding the depths of depravity that the NCI panel has engaged in with their 2003 so-called “Fact Sheet” on the ABC link.

So, if folks tune out after a couple of weeks, they have seen the entire scope of the issue. If they hang in there over the next few months, they are as mad as I am (being mad is respectable among scientists, or at least being eccentric).

In the final analysis, I trust women. I trust them to do what is in the best interest of their health, and the health of their families. I trust women with the truth that sits on library shelves collecting dust for fear that it might upend Brinton’s, Palmer’s, Rosenberg’s and Bernstein’s narrow and pathetically distorted worldview. It is a worldview that sees the deaths of close to 2 BILLION babies worldwide through abortion as somehow essential to advancing women, the risk of breast cancer notwithstanding. It is a worldview that is hostile to women, their babies, their husbands, and their choices.

Finally, the principle of informed consent before a medical or surgical procedure leaves no room for discretion on the part of the clinician or the researcher. Risks MUST be divulged for the patient’s discernment. So when Dr. Bernstein famously declares:

“There are so many other messages we can give women about lifestyle modification and the impact of lifestyle and risk that I would never be a proponent of going around and telling them that having babies is the way to reduce your risk.”

{Editorial Note by GN: Bernstein says this in spite of all the data indicating that this is indeed the most significant means of reducing a woman’s risk.}

“I don’t want the issue relating to induced abortion to breast cancer risk to be part of the mix of the discussion of induced abortion, its legality, its continued availability. I think it should not be part of the argument.”

the response of a responsible and ethical scientific and medical community should have been a swift and stunning rebuke.

But as we shall continue to see, where abortion and contraception are concerned, the laws of physics, biochemistry, and pathophysiology are steadfastly ignored, subordinated to a radical agenda that is at its core anti-life, be it the life of the fetus or its mother.

Share this:

  • Share
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Email

Like this:

Like Loading...

Related

Posted in Breast Cancer | 1 Comment

One Response

  1. on October 8, 2010 at 5:32 PM Stacy

    Dr. Nadal,

    I’m following you and will continue to do so. I have so much to learn. I’m a convert to the faith of six years, a wife and mother, and my husband and I have advanced degrees in the field of math and science. I stay home with our little God-given creations (7th due to be born in Jan) and am currently studying for a MA in Theology…so that I can better communicate about faith and science. I do realize that science is lost without faith and the perversions required to deny God’s existence in some areas of science just astound me. That’s one reason I’m really interested in this excellent discourse on the BC and abortion issue. How far some people will go to deny that children are gifts and parenthood is a miracle!

    Sometimes I wonder if calling it “ABC” doesn’t automatically cause antagonistic people to shut down and not consider the points. It’s just a thought and I could be totally wrong, but I have seen many pro-choice people totally derail a conversation just because of that name. It’s possible the derailing would have happened based solely on predetermined stance anyway. Like I said, it’s just a thought based on some observations.

    I spend time on Facebook discussion boards (along with AMC who introduced me to your website) and have been initiating discussions about this topic you are covering, using the data here and there to answer questions. It literally comes down to “pro-lifers are liars” and some adamant pro-choice people refuse to even address the contradictions made by scientists in their own work within the scientific community and the fact sheets issued for the general public. I guess that’s to be expected but perhaps it helps to at least plant a seed. There’s so much anger and pain associated with abortion and I’ve found that many of the women so strongly opinionated in favor of abortion “rights” are post-abortive and, sadly, many times also rape victims.

    Thanks for your work on this blog and I pray your message makes it to all the right places. God guide the internet!

    Blessings,
    Stacy



Comments are closed.

  • Archives

    • July 2021 (1)
    • January 2021 (7)
    • November 2020 (1)
    • May 2020 (2)
    • September 2019 (1)
    • May 2019 (2)
    • April 2019 (1)
    • February 2019 (1)
    • April 2018 (2)
    • January 2017 (1)
    • December 2016 (1)
    • November 2016 (1)
    • October 2016 (10)
    • July 2016 (2)
    • June 2016 (1)
    • May 2016 (1)
    • April 2016 (1)
    • March 2016 (1)
    • February 2016 (3)
    • December 2015 (1)
    • November 2015 (2)
    • October 2015 (1)
    • September 2015 (1)
    • August 2015 (3)
    • April 2015 (1)
    • February 2015 (1)
    • December 2014 (3)
    • November 2014 (1)
    • October 2014 (4)
    • September 2014 (15)
    • August 2014 (6)
    • June 2014 (5)
    • May 2014 (1)
    • April 2014 (2)
    • March 2014 (2)
    • February 2014 (1)
    • January 2014 (3)
    • December 2013 (17)
    • November 2013 (9)
    • October 2013 (12)
    • September 2013 (4)
    • July 2013 (2)
    • June 2013 (5)
    • May 2013 (2)
    • April 2013 (3)
    • March 2013 (6)
    • February 2013 (2)
    • January 2013 (1)
    • December 2012 (18)
    • November 2012 (6)
    • October 2012 (13)
    • September 2012 (1)
    • July 2012 (10)
    • June 2012 (13)
    • May 2012 (8)
    • April 2012 (1)
    • March 2012 (11)
    • February 2012 (21)
    • January 2012 (5)
    • December 2011 (18)
    • November 2011 (3)
    • October 2011 (23)
    • September 2011 (24)
    • August 2011 (22)
    • July 2011 (22)
    • June 2011 (29)
    • May 2011 (8)
    • April 2011 (11)
    • March 2011 (18)
    • February 2011 (42)
    • January 2011 (26)
    • December 2010 (30)
    • November 2010 (34)
    • October 2010 (33)
    • September 2010 (16)
    • August 2010 (15)
    • July 2010 (7)
    • June 2010 (21)
    • May 2010 (33)
    • April 2010 (14)
    • March 2010 (41)
    • February 2010 (36)
    • January 2010 (59)
    • December 2009 (59)
  • Categories

    • Abortion (258)
    • Advent (26)
    • Biomedical Ethics (82)
    • Birth Control (51)
    • Bishops (87)
    • Black History Month (10)
    • Breast Cancer (65)
    • Christmas (26)
    • Cloning (4)
    • Condoms (16)
    • COVID-19 (1)
    • Darwin (2)
    • Development (6)
    • Dignity (119)
    • Divine Mercy Novenas (10)
    • DNA (3)
    • Embryo Adoption (2)
    • Embryonic Stem Cell Research (6)
    • Eugenics (29)
    • Euthanasia (8)
    • Family (44)
    • Fathers of the Church (11)
    • Fortnight for Freedom (1)
    • Golden Coconut Award (3)
    • Health Care (14)
    • HIV/AIDS (5)
    • Infant Mortality (2)
    • IVF (4)
    • Joseph (6)
    • Lent (17)
    • Margaret Sanger (19)
    • Marriage (6)
    • Maternal Mortality (2)
    • Motherhood (12)
    • Neonates (1)
    • Personhood (20)
    • Physician Assisted Suicide (4)
    • Planned Parenthood (64)
    • Priests (50)
    • Pro-Life Academy (23)
    • Quotes (10)
    • Radio Interviews (3)
    • Right to Life (34)
    • Roots (1)
    • Sex Education (25)
    • Sexually Transmitted Disease (12)
    • Stem Cell Therapy (7)
    • Transgender (1)
    • Uncategorized (206)
  • Pages

    • About
    • BIO
    • Conferences
    • Contact
    • Follow Gerard on FB & Twitter
    • Speaking

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

WPThemes.


Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Follow Following
    • Coming Home
    • Join 866 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Coming Home
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Copy shortlink
    • Report this content
    • View post in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

    loading Cancel
    Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
    Email check failed, please try again
    Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.
    %d bloggers like this: