Obama, media, feminists push taxpayer-funded mustard gas for women
I don’t know what it’s going to take to get people to comprehend that hormonal contraceptives – i.e., the birth control pill, implants, and rings – are rated by the United Nations World Health Organization as “Group 1 Carcinogens,” as toxic and in the same class as asbestos, mustard gas, and tobacco.
IT IS A SCANDAL that President Obama, feminists, the media, and the medical establishment continue to push these virulent cancer causing artificial steroids on our women.
Not once in this October 4 puff piece promoting free contraceptives did the Associated Press author or any of the medical professionals interviewed bring up any of the deadly harms of hormonal contraceptives.
THIS IS A FLAGRANT VIOLATION OF THE PUBLIC TRUST, all to promote liberal ideology.
Yes, I’m yelling. I’m so angry. I listened on Christian radio over the weekend to a member of the Young Survival Coalition, and my heart broke. Why in the world is there the need to form a group such as this for the growing women diagnosed with breast cancer before age 35? Women are being led like sheep to the slaughter.
From what I can read on YSC’s website, even they don’t fully understand the risk of using hormonal contraceptives, in part because the medical establishment and government agencies downplay it. But the information is out there.
From Slate in September 2010:
Last summer, in a study of more than 50,000 African-American women, Boston University epidemiologist Lynn Rosenberg found a 65 percent increase in a particularly aggressive form of breast cancer among those who had ever taken the birth-control pill. The risk doubles for those who had used the contraceptive within the past five years and had taken it for longer than 10 years.
From the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in April 2012:
The first large-scale U.S.-based study to evaluate the link between an injectable form of progestin-only birth control and breast cancer risk in young women has found that recent use of a year or more doubles the risk….
The National Cancer Institute and the Department of Defense Breast Cancer Research Program funded the research.
From a 2009 study co-authored by Louise Brinton of the National Cancer Institute, about the aforementioned aggressive breast cancer:
[A]mong women ages 20 to 45 years… [o]ral contraceptive use ?1 year was associated with a 2.5-fold increased risk for triple-negative breast cancer….
Among women ?40 years, the relative risk for triple-negative breast cancer associated with oral contraceptive use ?1 year was 4.2…
On and on. Meanwhile, Obama et al use the same tactics as the tobacco industry did (affirming “commitment to public well-being”) to promote contraceptives by ignoring the long list of risks to tout supposed benefits. From CNSNews.com, October 5…
“Contraceptive care… is vital for women’s health. Doctors prescribe contraception, not only for family planning but as a way to reduce the risk of ovarian and other cancers, and it’s good for our health care system in general because we know the overall cost of care is lower when women have access to contraceptive services,” Obama said at George Mason University in Fairfax, VA.
This is absolutely not true. Two of the risks for ovarian cancer in the first place are not having children and not breastfeeding. And breast cancer isn’t the only risk that steroidal contraceptives increase. WHO also labels them as Class I carcinogens for cervical and liver cancer. They also increase the risk of blood clots, stroke, heart attacks, and more. Obama’s contraceptive push is only going to kill women.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
By demographics, the young women using birth control are the ones who may have already had abortions. A connection between some form of birth control and breast cancer could actually be a matter of abortion leading to increased likelihood of breast cancer.
You use a less effective form of BC, you get pregnant, you have an abortion, Then someone recommends a more passive, sure form of BC since the daily pill did not work for you. That is likely how many of these women ended up on long-acting BC.
It seems bizarre that you want to warn women away from what is currently the most effective way to prevent the pregnancies that end in abortion.
Yes, I want to sexuality de-emphasized.
Yes, I believe alternatives to intercourse are often best for the female.
But the fact is that effective contraception is a good way to keep abortions at a minimum.
Discourage contraception and you send business to the abortionists.
Wow, this is a really good article.
Just wanted to post that Cecil Richards will be guest speaker at an anti-gingrinch/republican fundraiser at the Hotel Miramar in Santa Monica.. Not sure of the date, yet, but saw the flier being printed up at kinko’s this morning
Denise, the correct answer to staving off unwanted pregnancies is to abstain from sex until one is ready and willing to have a baby. This isn’t a new principle. My post is only a demonstration that attempts to short-circuit this principle have unintended and unforeseen consequences.
I have to say, I am terrified. I used the Pill from ages 17 to 21. My grandmother had breast cancer several years ago, putting me at even higher risk.
I am so scared that one day I will have it, too…
DenseGnome says October 9, 2012 at 11:31 am
“Yes, I believe alternatives to intercourse are often best for the female.”
Does your song have a verse other than ’non-partnered sex’.
Do you ever take your hand out of the cookie jar?
Does your right hand, know what your left hand is doing and does it cause tension in the relationship?
On the upside, the only known side effects to having sex with yourself is going blind and hair growing on the back of your hands.
Jill, only COMBINED hormonal contraceptives are classified as Class 1 carcinogens.
Denise, the only “alternative” to intercourse is abstinence, and it’s not just better for the female. It’s better for men and women until they are married, period. The solution to “unwanted” pregnancies is not contraception. It’s abstinence and then marriage, and then a proper understanding of sexuality.
You seem to have completely missed the point that these steroidal contraceptives are very harmful to women. You’ve also missed the reality that contraception does NOT reduce the abortion rate. It increases it. Contraception will never be the solution to anything.
Cranky, not so. From the list:
So basically, those who are screaming about a supposed war on women from the GOP are actually the ones who are waging a deadly war on women…. ironic.
This is so disgusting. My little sister asked me if she should go on BC because she was “irregular.” And I told her no, no, no, no! Eat healthy, exercise, and treat your body well. That’s how you can take care of yourself. Besides, when you’re an active seventeen year old, being “irregular” isn’t that odd – it’s normal. It’s okay. We need to stop viewing healthcare as ingesting drugs for symptoms – health care should be viewing what the cause of the problem is and taking care of ourselves holistically. I’m not against all medicine, but the idea that as soon as we get a cough we run to the drug store to pump our bodies full of drugs. It’s not healthy. And especially in the case of women. It’s not “health care” to fill our bodies with artificial steroids and hormones – especially when they are Class I Carcinogens.
This disgusts me. This is why people should make their own health decisions. It’s frustrating to go to an OB/GYN and be pushed to get potentially cancer-causing HPV prevention shots – especially when the ONLY people my husband and I have been with sexually is each other!! Um, no, thanks I’d not get cancer on the off-chance that my husband is lying to me. Seriously. I was told that I should get the shots because I didn’t know for sure whether my then-fiance was telling the truth and he could have picked up an STD from another girl, maybe orally, the OB suggested. If I can’t trust him to tell the truth about that, I’m going to have more serious problems than potentially getting an STD. This stuff is getting pushed in doctor’s offices and it’s frustrating.
Sorry for the rant. :) Great article, Jill. I’ll be keeping this one on hand to forward to family and friends who might be thinking of starting BC pills. There are plenty of hormone-free options for avoiding pregnancy. Maybe I can help someone out. :)
There are indeed those of us who have been yelling at the top of lungs for years about this, not to mention the countless hours documenting and presenting the science….
http://uvalies.org/response
But it seems to us that there is a very deliberate blind spot on the part of national pro life leaders with regard to colleges and universities. If planned parenthood and/or the democratic party cannot be the target, suddenly the interest in these topics evaporates. Meanwhile, colleges and universities across the nation do abortions in house, distribute steroids by the millions to their own students, and engage in the exact same regime of medical misinformation targeting millions of 17-25 year old women in their own students..
Apparently your risk of getting BC also goes up if your mother ever used the Pill, especially for extended periods of time. The estrogen just gets passed onto the offspring. Sad.
I have been telling people that hormonal birth control is actually dangerous for women for years! Right now I am studying Holistic medicine and the amount of xenoestrogens (chemicals that mimic estrogen and take their place in our bodies). These nasty chemicals actually increase one’s risk of cancer like nobody’s business. The sad thing is most people think I am blowing them out of proportion. However, there are way too many studies showing a link to cancer and xenoestrogens, I had to write a paper about them recently. What is really scary is how many doctors are prescribing hormonal birth control for reasons not related to contraception. That is blatent abuse of a medication! Xenoestrogens are NOT the answer to a hormonal imbalance, but improving your diet and adding things like folic acid and SAM-e is. I don’tunderstand America’s fixation on quick fixes for now, when tomorrow they make us sick and potentially can kill us. And yes, the absolute best way to keep from getting pregnant is (real shocker) show some self restraint and not have sex! The more we practice self restraint the easier (in a sense) it gets. The tamptation is always there, but practice of saying no makes that no easier to say. And please do not bring up the minority of rape and incest, yes they happen (rape survivor here), but that is NO excuse to poison women and our daughters.
I used this article in a discussion today. It was pointed out that the links to the carcinogen links go to wikepedia.. not real reliable.
Here is the link to the list actually from the IARC site
http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Classification/ClassificationsGroupOrder.pdf
Not to mention that, to me, the Pill is just lazy medicine.
Got acne? Here, take the Pill.
Menstral cramps? Take the Pill!
Period longer than 4 days? The Pill!!
Instead of treating the causes of women’s health problems, many doctors just prescribe the Pill and go on their merry way. When the women go off the Pill their acne/cramps/heavy bleeding/etc. return, because their problem was never fixed, it was just covered up.
And maybe I’m just too hoity toity, but I’d actually like my doctor to do his/her job and try to diagnose and cure my problems, not simply write them off and temporarily cover up the symptoms.
Denise, I have to agree with Jill and Jen that abstinence is a much better and healthier solution to avoiding an unwanted pregnancy than contraception.
Excellent article. I can appreciate your yelling – I find the degree to which some women will go to get their fix of oral contraceptives mind-boggling. It is alll so sad, this women risking their health and life, because a few people at PP want to have more sex, make a few bucks, and refute the traditional Christian teaching on sexuality.
“Not once in this October 4 puff piecepromoting free contraceptives did the Associated Press author or any of the medical professionals interviewed bring up any of the deadly harms of hormonal contraceptives.”
Pro aborts consider death a feature, not a bug.
Jill, your clarification only clarifies my point.
There are kinds of hormonal contraceptives that are progesterone-only. These kinds are not included under the W.H.O.’s Class 1 list. The two you bullet-pointed are COMBINED … progestogen and estrogen taken at the same time, or taken in sequence.
http://screening.iarc.fr/breastindex.php?lang=1
Jill Stanek says:
October 9, 2012 at 11:45 am
Denise, the correct answer to staving off unwanted pregnancies is to abstain from sex until one is ready and willing to have a baby. This isn’t a new principle. My post is only a demonstration that attempts to short-circuit this principle have unintended and unforeseen consequences.
(Denise) In the real world as we live in it now — and as it is likely to be for some time in the foreseeable future — girls and women, both single and married, engage in that type of sex even when they are completely unwilling to complete a pregnancy. I myself did not engage in it until I was sterilized but the majority of girls and women do not wait until they want to have a baby or it is impossible (through sterilization or menopause) for them to become pregnant.
Like you, I wish that activity would radically decrease. I support the revival of chaperoned dating. I support more adult supervision of teenagers. I support enforcing the statutory rape laws (and that means that doctors, Planned Parenthood, and everyone else must report such crimes).
But sometimes you have to deal with things as you are (at least until you can get them where you wish they would be).
Many years ago I read an article by a woman who had worked in an abortion clinic. She was doing an interview with a woman who had a heavy foreign accent. She asked the woman, “Have you had any previous abortions?”
The woman answered, “Thirty-two.”
The writer recalled, “I almost dropped my pen.”
The woman explained that she was from an Eastern European Communist nation. Under the unwieldy economy of communism, contraceptives were extremely difficult to obtain. Thus, the main method of “birth control” was abortion.
In many marriages, one partner or the other (usually the husband) won’t agree to abstain unless a baby is wanted or the wife has been sterilized or is post-menopausal. That is a fact of life currently. We both might wish it were otherwise but it is not.
Again, I’d like to see less of this activity. But in the real world, contraception is an absolutely necessary and important part of decreasing abortion.
Honestly, would you rather a woman be on contraceptives or have the sort of abortion history as that woman from Eastern Europe?
I know I don’t hesitate a second to prefer the Pill, Norplant, or Depo-Provera to a pile of tiny broken body parts.
http://ww5.komen.org/BreastCancer/CurrentorRecentUseofBirthControlPills.html
“But in the real world, contraception is an absolutely necessary and important part of decreasing abortion.”
But in the real world, many studies show that increased contraception access and use actually INCREASES abortion. Why do you refuse to acknowledge this Denise?
http://www.lifenews.com/2012/02/17/studies-birth-control-contraception-dont-cut-abortions/
About the comment;
DeniseNoe says:
October 9, 2012 at 3:18 pm
I can certainly understand the nature of the woman who feels she is a victim of pregnancy. In our society the crown of thorns that is reproduction is placed entirely on the women. No doubt God accounts men as well, but for now, in the world we live in, this massive burden is placed soley on the woman. In Russia there is a birth dirth, because so much of communism placed workforce labor as valuable and did not count motherhood as a job. Women had to leave the home to be considered, “workers.” that means the non-paying job of motherhood and home making became a luxury instead of a stable. So their society took a massive hit in terms of both population health, and economic health. The main “producers,’ of humans were treated by slaves, and abortion was seen as cutting the bonsd of indentured servitude. Now what was once the responsibility of just the woman is the scourge of a nation. That is the difference between a moral problem, which affects one person, and an ethical problem, one that affects more than one person, and usually an entire society.
In America, our epidemic has been ongoing as well. Abortion has decreased our population by at least 200,000 American’s, that’s about a generation and half, and a conservative figure considering most contraceptives also double up as abortifacents as well.
We treat abortions as a sexual right, because we seam to think women are slaves. We have no choice, we cannot choose weather or not we have sex. Feminists are not empowering women, they are conceding to a sad fact; lonely women are easy prey for the man who is looking for an easy lay, or who simply does not want to spend money on sex. We are treating the abortion issue as if men are no longer a part of the picture. That is absurdist politics.
Contraceptives may prevent abortion on the moral level-when you apply the problem to JUST WOMEN, but on the ethical level they have caused a haulocaust of abortions, when you also involve our MALE MATES. What women call dating, nowadays, men call partying. There is a major lack of communication going on, where men can relax and hit on women, and women have to constantly vet the truth of what a man is saying with what he is ACTUALLY saying.
Contraceptives tell men that recreational sex is a fine fantasy, promoting total ignorance of is a woman’s, and ultimately and nations, reality, that protection of our American heritage must come before our America pride. That is simply economics.
Jen says:
October 9, 2012 at 12:35 pm
Denise, the only “alternative” to intercourse is abstinence, and it’s not just better for the female.
(Denise) Do you consider relationships between gay men and relationships between lesbians to be a kind of abstinence?
Lrning says:
October 9, 2012 at 3:27 pm
“But in the real world, contraception is an absolutely necessary and important part of decreasing abortion.”
But in the real world, many studies show that increased contraception access and use actually INCREASES abortion. Why do you refuse to acknowledge this Denise?http://www.lifenews.com/2012/02/17/studies-birth-control-contraception-dont-cut-abortions/
(Denise) Such studies often include contraceptives that were improperly used or that are not of greatest effectiveness.
I’m with you in that I would prefer that people relate on a more intellectual and platonic basis.
How do we persuade people to relate on an intellectual, non-sexual basis?
It has been known for years that contraceptives contribute to an increased likelihood of cancer. Ditto abortion. There is an interesting juxtaposition here. One of the stories on the blog today is the sudden epiphany about ESCR versus adult stem cells. It seems there is a lag of a decade or two before those whose views are not in the line with those held by the politically correct and other elitists are finally seen to have credence. Perhaps the same is soon to happen re the link between “the pill” and cancer. The shame of it is is that millions of women have been misled even though credible science has been telling us for years of these links.
DenseGnome says: October 9, 2012 at 3:42 pm
“Do you consider relationships between male homosexuals and relationships between female homosexuals to be a kind of abstinence?”
I have encountered confused dogs who try to hump my leg.
It’s not likely to result in conception.
Do you consider that a kind of abstinence?
Cranky,
“Progestins began to receive more attention when it was noted that the rate of breast cell division was highest during the luteal phase of a woman’s menstrual cycle at which time progesterone levels are highest. Further studies by researchers Pike and White noted that oral contraceptive pills (OCPs) with potent progestins carried higher risks for causing breast cancer than combination OCPs that contained less potent progestins.”
Chris Kahlenborn, MD
“we conclude from our analysis that the burden of proof regarding progestins has now shifted. One must now prove that an estrogen/progestin combination is safe with respect to breast cancer rather than having to prove it harmful”
Pubmed
“The previous assumption that progestin does not promote breast cancer development needs to be re-examined since a growing body of evidence indicates the opposite”
Pubmed
The links will work via our webpage if they do not here..
http://uvalies.org/breastcancer
kenthebirther says:
October 9, 2012 at 4:23 pm
DenseGnome says: October 9, 2012 at 3:42 pm “Do you consider relationships between male homosexuals and relationships between female homosexuals to be a kind of abstinence?” I have encountered confused dogs who try to hump my leg.
It’s not likely to result in conception.
Do you consider that a kind of abstinence?
(Denise) Perhaps we should consider that abstinence. As I’ve previously pointed out, we might be able to persuade more people to abstain from the type of sex that leads to pregnancy by making the point that they won’t really be missing much.
Since the subject of breast cancer comes up frequently on this website, perhaps we should discuss the possible relationship between cancer and bras. Is it likely that wearing bras increases the likelihood of a woman getting breast cancer?
Michele says:
October 9, 2012 at 2:00 pm
Not to mention that, to me, the Pill is just lazy medicine.
Got acne? Here, take the Pill.
(Denise) Acne can be kind of fun. I remember sitting on the counter of the sink in the bathroom. I would conscientiously cleanse the pimple and surrounding area with a cotton ball soaked with astringent. Then I would squeeze quite gently to make the yellow-white pus become more evident. Finally, I would press hard and — pop! — the pus would shoot right to the mirror.
Did anyone else get a thrill from popping pimples?
Ken, take it away…
One view of abstinence might be found in an organization for virgins. I saw members of this organization on the old Phil Donahue Show. A spokesperson said, “We define a virgin as someone who has not had either vaginal or anal intercourse.”
As one who has taught “Sex Ed” in public schools to 5th grade boys and girls, I developed my education plan with the basic premise that at the onset of puberty young people become biologically capable of becoming a parent…… then I supported that premise with basic facts that support responsible parenthood. From there I would explain the what it takes to become a responsible parent. It was not an easy assignment because children come from such diverse backgrouds. Most children understand that a baby needs both a mother and a father if at all possible. I always trusted that regardless of anyones background, the ideal would be what children would want to to aspire too. I never had any parents object to my approach to the subject.
“Such studies often include contraceptives that were improperly used or that are not of greatest effectiveness.”
Helloooooooooo, why would a study of contraception access and use and the impact on abortion in the real world NOT include real world effectiveness?
You, Denise, as someone that is “horrified” by abortion should absolutely acknowledge that in the real world, access and use of contraception INCREASES abortion.
In many marriages, one partner or the other (usually the husband) won’t agree to abstain unless a baby is wanted or the wife has been sterilized or is post-menopausal. That is a fact of life currently.
Denise, How do you know many spouses won’t agree to abstain? How many spouses do you have? Where did you get this fact? Do you know how many days a month a woman is fertile? If women start saying no to intercourse during their fertile times, will all these husbands become rapists or divorce their wives? Do you understand anything at all about Natural Family Planning? Are you still grounded to your room?
Lrning says:
October 9, 2012 at 6:18 pm
“Such studies often include contraceptives that were improperly used or that are not of greatest effectiveness.”
Helloooooooooo, why would a study of contraception access and use and the impact on abortion in the real world NOT include real world effectiveness?You, Denise, as someone that is “horrified” by abortion should absolutely acknowledge that in the real world, access and use of contraception INCREASES abortion.
(Denise) During the Communist period, reliable contraceptives were very hard to access in the Eastern Bloc nations. As a result, many women depended on abortion as their method of “birth control.” You ended up with women like the one referred to in that awful anecdote.
You can’t have an abortion if you are not pregnant. Thus, preventing pregnancies among those who don’t want to get pregnant, or at least are unwilling to carry pregnancies to term, lessens abortions.
Very often people use condoms but they slip off, leak, or break. Women are counted as using “contraception” if they use methods such as foam or diaphragm that aren’t really that effective. Many women forget to take the Pill when they are supposed to take it.
I believe that those using methods that really work such as Norplant or Depo-Provera are unlikely to become pregnant. I also think the Pill when used as it is supposed to be is effective.
Praxedes says:
October 9, 2012 at 6:25 pm
In many marriages, one partner or the other (usually the husband) won’t agree to abstain unless a baby is wanted or the wife has been sterilized or is post-menopausal. That is a fact of life currently.
Denise, How do you know many spouses won’t agree to abstain? How many spouses do you have? Where did you get this fact? Do you know how many days a month a woman is fertile? If women start saying no to intercourse during their fertile times, will all these husbands become rapists or divorce their wives? Do you understand anything at all about Natural Family Planning? Are you still grounded to your room?
(Denise) I stayed in my room in HIGH SCHOOl because I wanted to ensure against pregnancy. That doesn’t mean I had no activities as I had a radio and TV. I often bounced on my bed as if it were a kind of trampoline except of course I didn’t stand up on it. The “bouncing” was not related to sexual tension or pleasure. I read and did homework.
Regarding spouses abstaining: I’m all for it. In fact, I knew a woman who was legally “married” for 6 years — and remained a virgin all that time! Her best friend was a man and they wanted to move in together. They believed it would look best if they legally married so they did so. During the marriage, they changed clothes in different areas but slept beside each other in their pajamas without any sexual activity of any kind. This woman has every intention of remaining a virgin all her life. She doesn’t believe that sexuality “has anything to offer.” While they later split up, it wasn’t because of the celibacy.
I’m not at all opposed to Natural Family Planning. I honestly don’t know how many husbands would be open to it. For those who are, that is fine with me!
Additionally, there are some marriages in which people start abstaining after a certain period of time. This isn’t necessarily a decision but just kind of happens.
It is kind of like my mother and her food choices. She never made a decision to become a vegetarian but “just lost the taste for meat” at a certain point and stopped eating it.
I’m all for encouraging non-sexual relations.
Denise, your consistent lack of concern for women’s health is astounding.
Denise at 5:06 – I literally burst out laughing on the bus! You are my fave.
I had a trampoline at my house when I was in high school. I wish I’d had the chance to invite you over so that you could bounce standing up, in the sunlight, laughing with me and my sisters. You wouldn’t have gotten pregnant, I promise.
Alexandra says:
October 9, 2012 at 8:33 pm
Denise at 5:06 – I literally burst out laughing on the bus! You are my fave.
I had a trampoline at my house when I was in high school. I wish I’d had the chance to invite you over so that you could bounce standing up, in the sunlight, laughing with me and my sisters. You wouldn’t have gotten pregnant, I promise.
(Denise) It is possible that some people confused this bouncing with a sexual thing but it wasn’t related. I’d had this practice of lying on the bed and bouncing or else sitting on side of the bed and bouncing since I was a very small child. I continued to bounce into my teen and young adult years. Often I had the radio on and would rhythmically bounce. One time my brother said, “Could you please stop trying to get the bed pregnant?”
Why don’t you look up my writing, Alexandra? Just google “Denise Noe” and see what else I’ve written.
You know it was my understanding that abortifacents (and birth control that causes abortion), is also a cause of cancer because of the fact that it cuts short the biological hormonal life of breast growth caused by pregnancy.
It was my understanding, that once the massive spontaneous soft celled breast tissue that begins it’s hormonal cycle at the earliest stages of pregnancy is cut short, even after of only a few weeks of healthy surging growth, it creates enough tissue to largely increase a woman’s chance of getting breast cancer, especially if she has it in the family and is genetically prone.
The cells, extremely soft in the first trimester, are not treated with the unique hormone produced upon birth, which hardens the tissues and makes them even more cancer retardent than regular breast tissue. Unless the pregnancy finishes up to it’s final minuets of gestation, a woman will be carrying cancer incubators in their ta ta’s.
Right? That was my understanding. With more than two and a half American women who are daily dealing with breast cancer, shouldn’t we, as women who want to protect women, be vetting it’s causes more thoroughly? I know alot of young women on birth control.
As they get older, will they suffer from cancer?
If they were pregnant for a few weeks before the embryo, unable to attach the uterine lining because of the birth control, was aborted during a period, how susceptible are they to breast cancer if they have it in the family?
And how long can a woman be pregnant, allowing the soft celled breast tissues to bloom, before her period ejects the unattached embyo? That would affect the amount of tissue that is produced, right?
Anyone?
Again: I’ve read bras may be a factor in breast cancer. How can we battle bra wearing?
ninek says October 9, 2012 at 5:16 pm
“Ken, take it away…”
ninek,
Reading the meandering musings of DenseGnome reminds me of Ted ‘the unibomber’ Kaczynski’s ‘Manifesto’.
DenseGnome too has moments of lucid thought but her train of thought randomly jumps the track.
DenseGnome is not un-intelligent, she/he is insane.
You cannot have a rational conversation with a lunatic.
He/She has ‘played the fool’ so long, she no longer has to act the part.
She/He is a living example, a warining to the wise, that ‘post modernism’ extrapolated to the extreme produces a DenseGnome.
ninek says October 9, 2012 at 5:16 pm
“Ken, take it away…”
ninek,
Mark Twain said that a cat who jumps on a hot stove will never jump on another one, he won’t jump on a cold stove either.
I injured two of my fingers disposing of someone else’s trash.
I am going to avoid trash.
Lrning says:
October 9, 2012 at 7:53 pm
Denise, your consistent lack of concern for women’s health is astounding.
(Denise) I AM concerned for women’s health. We might be harming ourselves through the bra wearing custom.
Few things are as upsetting to women’s mental and physical equilibrium as an unwanted pregnancy. As far as abstinence from the sort of sex that leads to pregnancy, I completely support it.
Yes, you should rage against bra wearing while continuing to insist that we all pump our daughters full of synthetic hormones as soon as they hit puberty to prevent pregnancy in case they get raped. Oh, and we can’t forget that we should pump synthetic hormones into our water too. And get ourselves injected with long-lasting poison, forget this remembering to take a pill a day garbage. Yes, you’re soooo concerned about women’s health.
You know what’s more upsetting to a woman’s physical equilibrium than an unwanted pregnancy? A heart attack, a blood clot, a stroke, and cancer.
hi Denise & gang,
You may have found Denise’s comments re. bouncing and women’s health – ‘strange’. It isn’t! Unusual -definitely; poor – NO. As a matter of fact, bouncing, whether on a trampoline; a mini-trampoline(rebounder); skipping-rope; blanket-toss(Eskimo); bouncing on a bed; or, polka dancing, stimulates very specifically a region of the brain called the cerebellum. The motion can be noted in people with mental deficiencies needing to rock, to sooth. It is also noted in raising an infant: almost without thiking an adult will giggle the babe in an up-down-up fashion or, rock him/her, to appease an anxious, fussy toddler.
Giggling is a usual and wonderful(healthy) response. This motion moves the body’s lymph for 16 hours past the exercise. {the lymph is one of our best and normal ways our bodies get rid of waste. [The lymph is also the main carrier for many hormones like melatonin and thymosin …. very beneficial when trying to get rid of any cancer!]}
We should also be fair in mentioning that the pill has also been shown to LOWER the risks of ovarian and endometrial cancers.. The risk is still far greater as the three cancers it causes are far more common – but if you have a severe family history of these two, it may be a good move..
Additionally, I am really tired of the constant insults to all democrats, all feminists, and all liberals suggesting they are all abortion cheerleaders. FOCA would be law in all 50 states if DEMOCRATS had not stopped it in 2009. And feminists for Life is a great organization.
Jill I am ready to write a book on all this from the medical-scientific perspective. Will you help me? Any advice?
Lrning says:
October 10, 2012 at 10:13 am
Yes, you should rage against bra wearing while continuing to insist that we all pump our daughters full of synthetic hormones as soon as they hit puberty to prevent pregnancy in case they get raped.
(Denise) This is a distortion of my position. When a girl enters puberty, someone should DISCUSS with her what her reaction might be to pregnancy through rape. Some will answer, “If I get raped, I definitely want to get pregnant! I’d just love to have a baby by a psychopathic brute and monster!” I don’t suggest contraception for this group. I have no wish to deprive girls who would be utterly overjoyed at the thought of getting pregnant by a rapist from doing so.
It’s the OTHER group that should at least be given the opportunity to take effective contraceptives, the ones who say, “I’m not sure I could stand to have a baby through rape.”
“I’d just love to have a baby by a psychopathic brute and monster!”
Oh, how compassionate and reasonable you are, Denise, to assume that every woman that gets pregnant through rape and doesn’t abort was asking for it.
Why oh why do I read her insane ramblings?
Lrning says:
October 10, 2012 at 12:39 pm
“I’d just love to have a baby by a psychopathic brute and monster!” Oh, how compassionate and reasonable you are, Denise, to assume that every woman that gets pregnant through rape and doesn’t abort was asking for it.
(Denise) I’m not making any such assumption. Several times I’ve recommended the novel “Son of the Morning” by Joyce Carol Oates. 15-year-old Elsa Vickery is brutally gang-raped. She is left to walk home with blood dripping down her legs, no underpants, and her little finger pulled out of its socket. The novel NEVER suggests Elsa “asked for it.”
She does not want an abortion.
The child of that horror, Nathan Vickery, becomes a famous Christian minister.
Sean saysOctober 10, 2012 at 11:22 am
“We should also be fair in mentioning that the pill has also been shown to LOWER the risks of ovarian and endometrial cancers.. The risk is still far greater as the three cancers it causes are far more common – but if you have a severe family history of these two, it may be a good move..
Additionally, I am really tired of the constant insults to all democrats, all feminists, and all liberals suggesting they are all abortion cheerleaders”
There is a commonality in these two previous statements.
Like hormonal contracetptives, in some isolated cases the inherent risks associatd with liberals, democRATs and feministas, may not outweigh the benefit to be derrived from them.
Or, to put it more succinctly: Rest assured the devil can do a gentlemanly thing….if it suits her/its/his purposes.
I would be the source of most of those insults to feministas, democRATs and liberals.
If you want to avoid the insults, then end your emotional investment and dis-associate yourself from the left.
Start by spending your own money to salve your conscience, not by using the power of the state to steal someone elses and re-distribute it according to your priorities.
“Few things are as upsetting to women’s mental and physical equilibrium as an unwanted pregnancy.”
I can think of a few things that are more unsettling to a woman’s emotional and equilibrium than an unplanned or unwelcome pregnancy.
1. Being diagnosed as sterile/infertile.
2. Being diagnosed with breast cancer or cervical cancer.
Yes Denise.
I will sit my 12 year old daughter down tonight and ask her what she wants to do if she should ever conceive after she is raped!!!
Do you have any idea how INSANE that sounds?
Maybe I am insane for responding to your comment.
Carla says:
October 10, 2012 at 1:43 pm
Yes Denise.
I will sit my 12 year old daughter down tonight and ask her what she wants to do if she should ever conceive after she is raped!!!
Do you have any idea how INSANE that sounds?
(Denise) She is at the age when she might get pregnant. You should discuss with her what her reaction might be if she is impregnated through rape. This is now a possibility. Would she want to carry to term?
Would she feel unable to carry to term and want to abort? If the latter, contraception should be seriously considered.
Again, I advocate chaperoned dating and greater adult supervision. I don’t want young girls having partnered sex. But we live in an imperfect world.
I do not need your advice.
Ok, but this, off of the SGK site sounds like a complete cover up:
thank you LORI for this:
http://ww5.komen.org/BreastCancer/CurrentorRecentUseofBirthControlPills.html
BUT, it seams like a ‘weak link,’ if you will.
Here is my rebuttle to the SGK coverage of the above breast cancer studies linK.
So they are saying that this study is outdated because ALL THE NEW BIRTH CONTROL IS WEAKER THAN THE OLD BIRTH CONTROL? Well if that is the case, then you can just take the amount it was deduced by and use that to compare the amount of women getting cancer from it now. And they are not covering this in a satisfactory matter. THIS IS THEIR BUSINESS. This their JOB. STOPPING breast cancer is their focus, and if they are instead, defending birth control in way that is dishonest, in a way that can actually encourage cancer in women who would not use it, had they been educated on the risks, that is illegal.
I find their lack of coverage on the connection to be horrific and highly exploitive of, not only women, but breast cancer! SHAME.
They should have a MODERN study, and chart, and witness testimony explianing fully the risks, and also the history of the cover up of the connection. And also, they should have a study that reveals the connection between the soft celled breast tissue that doesn’t harden because of a pregnancy that is cut short. Those are cancers caused by birth control as well, because birth control DOES cause abortions.
I know women close to me who are taking this chemical.
How is this OK, for them to be told their chances of getting cancer are nothing to worry about.
If there is even a 1% chance then that means that one out of every one hundred women taking the pill will get a cancer directly caused by it, and that who knows how many more women, will get a cancer caused by an abortion that pill causes. RIGHT?
deniseno, wearing a bra doesn’t cause cancer.
Taking birth control does cause cancer.
Taking the life of another human being by not granting them the simple, Right To Know, is retarding your personal and mental growth, as it is with many other men and women across the country who choose to sterilize both their bodies and minds.
I am a woman and I not only want the facts, I DESERVE the facts.
CityOfAngelsNativeMission.com says:
October 11, 2012 at 5:13 pm
deniseno, wearing a bra doesn’t cause cancer.
Taking birth control does cause cancer.
(Denise) There are studies showing a statistical link between bra wearing and cancer. It also makes sense because the bra “traps” the breast in “cups,” often for very long periods of time, and impedes the natural movement of the breasts. It makes sense that this “harnessing” of a body part could have negative effects on it. Allowing free movement, a natural bounce and swing, would appear healthier on the surface of it. However, bra wearing is a very widespread custom in Western societies. It may very well be a major factor in breast cancer and other breast related problems.
Well, provide the study, and we’ll talk more. I don’t see that one on the SGK site, and I don’t understand why wearing a bra would cause cancer in spite of your amusing theory.
It sounds like your posting an ‘off-topic issue,’ to try to distract me. I’m not one of the sterilized women your used to dealing with. I don’t use birth control, which also stifles the phernomes your body naturally releases, deniseno. It drives men crazy, btw, but if your sterilized by birth control, and not doing your research, you wouldn’t know that, would you?
—-
This specific blog is about birth control, and I would like to know what the studies show on the link. The SGK site even mentions that studies have been done, but only references one that was hardly comprihensive and they treat the entire concept it as if it’s a misnomer, which is outrageous.
http://all-natural.com/bras.html
There was a book called “Dressed to Kill” in which it was asserted bras may be a factor in breast cancer.
Personally, I don’t know with certainty that either hormonal contraceptives or bra wearing are factors in cancer. However, it seems like a good idea to question whether or not it is good for women’s health to trap our breasts in cups for hours per day.
http://www.amazon.com/Dressed-Kill-between-Breast-Cancer/dp/1930858051/ref=sr_1_10?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1349999644&sr=1-10&keywords
I should probably admit that I own bras. On special or formal occasions I will wear them. But I always look forward to getting home and divesting myself of the contraption!
Kate says:
October 9, 2012 at 12:13 pm
I have to say, I am terrified. I used the Pill from ages 17 to 21. My grandmother had breast cancer several years ago, putting me at even higher risk.
(Denise) Do you wear bras? If so, you might want to consider stopping this practice as a way to decrease your chances of breast cancer.
Ok, you made me laugh. Thank you. BUT–I want more details. I think the bra thing is, like-ok, unless you sleep with your bra on, then you can let those babies breathe every night, and it’s like not wearing your contacts to bed, or completely covering every pore of your skin with paint for over 24 hours. our systems are fluctuating and breathing systems, delicate, fragile, alive! and rely on oxygen to survive. Contraptions, thought are not the same as contraceptives! That’s like messing with the weather, you don’t mess with spring, especially. You take a chemical hormone to engineer your bodies natural reproductive cycle, which fluctuates in response to your emotional and environmental responses, and there is a healthy balance there. You throw in a chemical on top of some regulatory contraption things will start to wobble, and if you do that for an extended period of time, the system will crakc and become unhinged, you will get a cancer if you have it as a genetic vulnerability in your blood already. That’s a fact. And I don’t think it would be a bad idea for SGK to actually have a web[age or a brochure that warns us what can and cannot cause cancer. That’s what they SHOULD be doing. Sure, if wearing a bra for 72 hours straight is something you regularly do, then you should be told by a breast cancer society that you are 125% more susceptible to cancer. People don’t do that as often as they take chemical hormonal birth control, and Planed Parenthood is telling young girls in highschool in Boyle Heights, L. A. to practice “safe,” birth control, while the results of the studies linking them to cancer are burried on the womens breast cancer webpage. You can’t tell me there is a not a massive imbalance of the truth and what is being constantly repeated to young women, and it has gone on for long enough that it is becoming a structural failure within our society. Women are just not being protected from dangerous abortifacents, and enough is enough. SB 623 went over the edge, The exploitation of your children, mothers and sisters, this should infuriate any one who gives to the SGK for a reason better than social gratification. For those who truly want to stand up for women, the laws must be addressed to increase the standard of care, and decrease the lowering of that standard of care, with bandaide solutions like abortion and chemical birth control. i understand it helps some women with their acne, but then you could easily market it as achne medication, and put a disclaimer on the package and let women know it is also a dangerous abortifacent that kills pre-born human beings, and carcinigens and cancer susceptible cells. I thought this was all about protecting women, and yet we’re the ones taking all the hits. A wise man once told me in the middle east they used to pack their gaping wounds with sand in order to prevent infections, but often times this ‘solution,’ would just deepen the wound and cause further infection. Those inds of solutions are even more tragic in instances where there was never really a problem to being with, and especially in instances, like in Boyle Heights Roosevelt High, where you have a population of Salvidorian and Latino immigrant teens, (Less Mexican’s in this area), grouped together against, essentially the world they are surrounded by, there they don’t fit in, even with their own immigrant population, and where gang violence often times results in horrific gang bangs, where girls are either raped or beaten by a group that is adopting them. All that most of them need, is ONE PERSON to care for them, and they get a Planned Parenthood school nurse who gives them a solution that directly violates the one pure thing they have, their faith, often times, Catholic. Of course that is only one textbook case of sexual exploitation of a minor in American, but these “solutions,” and “controls,” well, it’s poisoned kool-aide. t
Deniseno bra wearing to bed!! now you kno!
Denise
THE PILL is a LEVEL ONE CARCINOGEN! I wouldn’t want any woman being told to take this to “prevent pregnancy”. Abstinence is best. It takes self control, but at least it doesn’t put a woman at risk for cancer!
LizFromNebraska says:
October 12, 2012 at 1:16 pm
DeniseTHE PILL is a LEVEL ONE CARCINOGEN! I wouldn’t want any woman being told to take this to “prevent pregnancy”. Abstinence is best. It takes self control, but at least it doesn’t put a woman at risk for cancer!
(Denise) I’ve got nothing against abstinence. I did not engage in the sort of sex that can lead to pregnancy until I was 24 years of age and sterilized.
However, I would much rather girls and women use contraceptives than have abortions.
LizfromNebraska: What is your position regarding bras?
How can we decrease this custom that may harm women’s health?
Bras do NOT cause cancer! That sounds like some absurd thing that a feminist from the 1960s would say…the type that would tell women to burn their bras!
Pumping a woman’s body full of artificial hormones (which is what the pill has it in, Denise) is a bad idea, a very bad idea. And the pill does not protect against STDs (one of these which has a connection to CERVICAL CANCER) or a Broken heart!
Maybe teach teenagers abstinence and self control and that they don’t have to have sex with every boy or girl who claims to “love them”? or that not everyone is “doing it”?
I like the way that Jason Evert teaches abstinence. He has a talk for secular (public schools) and Christian/Bible based (for Catholic or other Christian schools). He tells it like it is….and it makes people THINK.
LizFromNebraska says:
October 12, 2012 at 4:02 pm
Bras do NOT cause cancer! That sounds like some absurd thing that a feminist from the 1960s would say…the type that would tell women to burn their bras!
(Denise) How do you know bras don’t cause cancer? There was a book called “Dressed to Kill” that made cross-cultural comparisons between cultures that have the bra wearing custom and those that don’t. The bra-wearing societies had MUCH higher rates of breast cancer. There are other studies that have shown a positive correlation between bra wearing and breast cancer.
It also makes sense. After all, bras trap breasts and impede their natural movement.
Don’t over-react. I’m not suggesting bras should be outlawed. But can’t we discourage women from this dangerous practice?
Maybe I should mention how I left behind the bra habit. I was about 19 and noticed another woman (also flat-chested) who never wore bras. I thought: My God, what am I doing? At that time, my cherry-sized breasts didn’t even fit into the A-cup. The cup would actually “indent” because there wasn’t anything to “fill” it. In addition, I realized that for YEARS I had been putting straps and hooks on myself that left indentations on my skin — and for WHAT?
Now that I’m large-breasted, I wear bras on occasion. However, since they aren’t “natural” but a Pill and surgery combo, my breasts remain quite perky sans cups, straps, and hooks. I don’t trap them into cups as a general rule nor is my chest area full of red indentations from being hobbled in a health hazard.
did those bra wearing societies have a higher rate of contraceptive use? Or high rate of abortion?
There are also environmental causes of breast cancer. Its ridiculous to claim that wearing a BRA causes CANCER!
Oh, btw, the claims the book you read made?
The book’s claim that bras cause breast cancer has been dismissed by the medical and scientific communities; the National Cancer Institute,[1] the American Cancer Society,[2] and the National Institutes of Health[3] have all concluded that there is no link between bra use and breast cancer.
I’ll take the word of the American Cancer Society on this one (though I disagree with them on the fact that they deny the breast cancer and abortion link).
LizFromNebraska: Its ridiculous to claim that wearing a BRA causes CANCER!
No, it’s not. A bra “traps” the breasts in its cups. The breasts evolved to freely move. Bras deliberately damage their ability to move freely. It makes sense that this custom is dangerous.
The cultures in which bras are regularly worn are the same cultures in which birth control is regularly ingested. The fact that a class one carcinogen is being sold to women as “healthcare” is an outrage.
It’s ok to get angry about doctors pushing cancer inducing drugs onto unsuspecting women!
As long as the fire tempers the metal into gold, we’re winning. Test your fire into gold. Get real.
Deniseno included a link that was talking about the money that is being made off of breast cancer, and that was actually quite interesting.
It is weird seeing these pink ribbons everywhere, and the women who have gotten cancer because of abortion don’t even get a ribbon. They suffer in silence, often even feeling guilt for the sorrow they feel, because the pro-aborts see them as nuisance to their cause.
Cancer causing drugs need to go.
And yet the SGK, White Ribbon Alliance, and N.O.W. are not only silent, but intentionally distracting away from the injustice.
A woman is on the Pill.
She reads an article that scares her from taking the Pill.
She gets pregnant and aborts.
Would it have been better to take the Pill?
This isn’t the best of all possible worlds and a woman who drops contraception might end up getting pregnant — and aborting.
It is not good to trap breasts, which naturally move and bounce, in cups or for women’s chests to be regularly marred by straps and hooks.
What can be done to work against this unhealthy custom?
Women shouldn’t be allowed to choose weather or not they want to risk and unwanted pregnancy or contracting cancer?
There should be a warning label on all products including toxic abortifacents and contraceptives, a large one that says Class 1 CARCINOGEN.
Women DEMAND Right To Know LAWS, NOW!
Contraceptives and abortions are killing young women without warning under the banner of “Women’s Health Care.” The responsible parties should be brought to justice.
Deniseno, your scale of justice is broken.