How does Abortion connect to Breast Cancer?

Down in this thread David Justus wrote a thoughtful commentary, at one point wondering if the negative effects of abortion on the body (I was writing specifically about “chi” or “energy”) would be similar in the case of a miscarriage or spontaneous abortion.

Clearly, the energetic (whatever you want to call it) effects on a body would not be the same, because the circumstances are completely different in terms of human body chemistry, and I just wanted to touch briefly on that with regards to the story that routinely surfaces within the MSM only to be quickly buried – the idea that there may be a link between abortion and breast cancer.

A spontaneous abortion happens with the co-operation of the body – thus hormones and body chemistry decrease or increase and the body “knows” what is happening long before the mother does. Cells have intelligence and memory (notice you don’t have to “think” about driving your car or playing your piano) and when a mother is losing her baby, the body knows it, through all of the internal workings what must take place to expel the fetus.

While a spontaneous abortion is a tragedy for those of us who have had to endure them – they are usually not a trauma to the body.

Not so with an induced abortion. A woman considering and finally having an abortion may send all sorts of stress signals to her body, but they are not signals that decrease hormone levels or in any way prepare the body for the sudden, violent ripping out of the baby, and the odd “does not compute” message its glands receive when they are delivering a chemistry that the body suddenly does not require.

From what I have read, my understanding is that during an abortion the particular cells in the breasts which are preparing to produce and deliver milk are very abruptly distorted. While in a spontaneous abortion these cells – in accordance with the miscarriage signals – slow down and eventually stop producing, to be reabsorbed into the very intelligent human body.

These cells are not reabsorbed after an induced abortion; the body – traumatized and confused, does not know what to do with them, and these are the cells which eventually become cancer.

Perhaps it is a psychological phenomenon; we know living cells have memory. Perhaps these cells, not knowing what else to do, decide that they are meant to carry guilt, ambivalent feelings, grief, etc; they carry those feelings not only for the abortion but for other negative, black events in one’s life, and eventually run out of control.

That last paragraph is only my theory and probably a screwy one at that, but the link between abortion and breast cancer is intriguing and I wish, for the sake of so many women, that serious attention would be paid to the question, with credible research and results made public.

You’d think the feminist leadership would want it, too, but we learned a long time ago that they are not interested in helping women; they only want to advance their power.

Speaking of David Justus, btw, he has an excellent post ruminating on faith and science and his own personal musings over at his blog, which is a very good one. His blog is one of the most balanced I’ve ever read, as David really does seem to like to weigh both sides of an argument equally. He is well named!

About Elizabeth Scalia
  • Dave Justus

    Thanks for the link Anchoress, and the kind words.

    This arguement would seem to be useless as a reason to oppose things like the morning after pill, from what I understand anyway. Since the pill essencially tells the woman’s body to miscarry the child the effects you fear would not be the same.

    I presume that you oppose the morning after pill as well (as that is the Catholic position.)

    If that is the case, you are making an argument that is irrelevant as far as your position is concerned.

  • TheAnchoress

    I don’t think I am suggesting that the pill causes breast cancer. I’m talking specifically about abortion and that possible link.

    As to the rest of it, if you’re going to say the pill brings nothing negative to the party, I would suggest that you’ve opened up a whole ‘nother can o worms…but a can I am not up to the task of heating up just now! :-) I must sleep a bit.

  • Dave Justus

    My point is, that you are against all abortions in principle because of what happens to the fetus.

    I suspect that if we have the ‘perfect abortion’ that caused no harm to the woman at all you would still be against them.

    I think you are entitled to feel that way, but if you feel that way, then making an argument based upon ‘health of the mother’ issues isn’t entirely above board.

    Now, informing people of possible dangers and reprecussions of their actions is a noble thing.

  • TheAnchoress

    Ack! You’re making me dizzy watching those scales go up and down! I’m going to bed!

  • Renee P

    You may already be familiar with the secular organization Feminists for Life, but if not, here is their website:

    They have some excellent resources, esp in regards to abortion/rape, abortion/fetal defects, and abortion/feminist history.
    Their college posters are compelling~
    Renee P

  • sam

    There can never be a “perfect abortion” b/c no matter how you phrase it or time it, once a child has been conceived, a woman who has an abortion would still be killing her unborn child and that in and of itself is intrinsically harmful to a mother. Keeping in mind that until the advent of the Pill (196?) conception in all medical books and manuals was defined as when the sperm fertilized the egg…not implantation in the uterus.

  • stephanie

    “Perhaps it is a psychological phenomenon – perhaps these cells, not knowing what else to do, decide that they are meant to carry guilt, ambivalent feelings, grief, etc…and then they carry those feelings not only for the abortion but for other negative, black events in one’s life, and eventually run out of control. ”
    Does this mean that my stepmother in effect caused her own death b/c it was caused by negative emotion internalized, so to speak? I’m expanding the argument (she did not, to my knowledge, ever have an abortion) b/c she died of breast cancer when I was 17, and I’ve heard that one before. I have trouble with that argument, b/c it implies she was responsible for getting sick, which I have trouble believing.