Thank you Dr Dunjey for this article. It is logical. There is massive evidence that there is a link between breast cancer and abortion. It is only two clicks away if you care to look. There are huge studies from all over the world, confirming this link. Countries where abortion has not been available have a much lower incidence of breast cancer. No amount of denying by those who wish reality was different is going to change this reality. I care about my children, and other peoples children for that matter. I tell them.

I recall that it took World Health Organisation, the National Cancer Institute in the US, the American Medical Association and similar bodies here in Australia a long time to accept the research findings on the cancer risks of tobacco.

The abortion industry today with its advocates is powerful, and no doubt is keen to discount and suppress the possibility of cancer links to their product, just as the tobacco industry once did so successfully for far too long.

In the face of today’s ideologically driven publication bias towards upholding induced abortion as 'safe', some very credible case-control studies continue to caution that there is an increased risk of breast cancer after induced abortion.

The difficulties of measuring risk accurately remains a challenge, but I note that some of the more respected groups writing about this are emphasizing the word “currently” or the phrase “at this time” as in “There is currently no proven link…” and “at this time, the scientific evidence does not support…” .

Shrill criticism tried to discredit the disturbing result of a meta-analysis of the association between induced abortion and breast cancer risk among Chinese females, released earlier this year.
But the writing's on the wall.

So the anti-women brigade thinks it has another reason to force their beliefs about women and embryos on others. Abortion can cause cancer! A zealots wet dream. Not only "killing babies!", but now "we want to prevent you from getting cancer!"

Two clicks ELA? Below are 2 clicks from reliable sources that give lots of information. Thought I might do that seeing you are clearly too busy to do so. Or, more probably, only can cite sources that would make most of us laugh.

http://www.cancer.org/cancer/breastcancer/moreinformation/is-abortion-linked-to-breast-cancer

http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/abortion-miscarriage

Hamnas and feminist have this in common. They are prepared to use kids as human shields in order to promote their propaganda.

>>Have you thought about … ANY woman who is fighting breast cancer who are immediately condemned as the 'sinner' who must have had an abortion and thus is receiving her just rewards?
What if they never had an abortion anyway?
There are many other reasons for breast cancer development that are put forward by real, scientific, medically proven, non-religious sites .<<

I know nothing about the relation (if any) of abortion and breast cancer, however the above statements have the same truth value as:

“Have you thought about … ANY person who is fighting lung cancer who are immediately condemned as the 'sinner' because he/she used to smoke and thus is receiving his/her just rewards?
What if they never smoked anyway?
There are many other reasons for lung cancer development that are put forward by real, scientific, medically proven, non-anti-smoking (tobacco lobbyists?) sites.”

The same for car crashes and drunk driving, AIDS and you-know-what. And, of course, there are many less clear cut cases where the causal relation between a certain life style or action and its possible consequences are claimed by some, and disputed by other, medical authorities.

Ela, where is this massive amount of proof you talk about?
Are there any recent, non-religious based or funded sites you can give us links for?

George, your other examples of illnesses will not, apparently, result in a 'sin' for the sick person, and you never see anti-tobacco religious zealots pounding the pavements outside tobacco factories condemning all those within to hell!
Why not? Cancer is cancer isn't it?

You are probably right about AIDS related illnesses though. Do you believe the dreadful sin of homosexuality has condemned all those people to AIDS....including all the women, children and heterosexual males who contracted the disease as well?

People (religious or not) who care about and don't judge ALL ill patients, regardless of how they contracted their disease have more morals in their small finger than judgemental religious fundamentalists could ever have.