Herman,

There was never a new study, just data mining of the old study.

If you really look at the study, you will see that about 900 women are studied, most of whom were using a version of the pill, a portion of whom fell pregnant, a smaller portion of whom had abortions, and of whom a tiny fraction developed breast cancer.

If for example 7 develop BC instead of the average expected 5, this may be a statistically significant 40% increase. However, it could also be entirely due to chance, or other factors.

This is at best an indication that further research is required, not a signal that the religious loonies can begin baying from the roof tops.

I seem to recall Herman once claiming not to be a Christian fundy.

However, he sure seems to walk like a duck, talk like a duck and keep the company of ducks...

Shadow you beat me to it again.
Nothing much else for me to say.

And Herman, can I ask were you actually aware of those bits of information Shadow provided? (Which you can see for yourself on your own article).

But thanks for the data, it really helps!

Most abortions - I'd be willing to suggest - aren't done for lifestyle choice - which is the only reason an increased risk of breast cancer would affect your decision making.

What religions ARE pro-choice 'by default'?.

Sorry, and why can't someone be pro-life without being Christian?

Hermie,
SM has it right and is being polite.
Sorry old boy but the test methodology specifically the the sample size was flawed. No kewpi doll or ceegar.
This proves nothing of any value.
I hope the govt didn't pay for the research WO flaming T