Several months ago, Steven Ertelt contacted me about writing a weekly column for LifeNews.com. After some unavoidable delays in getting this newest project off the ground, I am honored to finally join Steven and the talented staff here at LifeNews.com.
The objective of this column flows from the mission of my blog, Coming Home, (https://gerardnadal.com) and the career path that I have taken as a scientist, which is to bring to light the abundance of scientific data that refute the most cherished of the Culture of Death’s most sacred institutions. Abortion, contraception, in vitro fertilization, embryonic stem cell research all strike at human dignity and lead to unimaginable levels of disease, death and human misery.
I’m an unapologetic Roman Catholic Christian, loyal to my Church’s teaching authority as articulated by her Bishops. For this I am pilloried by the opposition, who claim such respect and obedience a fundamental impediment to my being able to approach the scientific literature objectively.
Turning that argument around, one might question whether an individual who is ardently pro-abortion can read or represent the scientific literature in an objective manner, especially when the data conflict with their world view. One may question whether such people are capable of telling the truth when in the position to influence public policy.
Tragically, the answer is, “No”.
This column will show a clear, consistent pattern of denial, obfuscation, and outright deception on the part of pro-abortion scientists at the highest levels. Nowhere is this more disturbingly true than in the area of breast cancer epidemiology. Dr. Louise Brinton, branch chief of epidemiology at the National Cancer Institute, has done violence to the truth, to the way scientific debate is conducted, and to a half century of clear consistent scientific data indicating that induced abortion raises a woman’s lifetime risk of breast cancer.
Over at Coming Home, I have decided to do what Dr. Brinton failed to do at her 2003 sham National Cancer Institute workshop, ostensibly gathered to analyze the scientific data on the abortion/breast cancer link.
She put together a dog and pony show, stacking the panel with pro-abortion researchers such as Dr. Julie Palmer and Dr. Lynn Rosenberg, who each were paid expert witnesses by abortion groups to testify against legislation in Florida and Alaska that would require parental notification and consent for minors seeking to procure abortion. So I have decided to run my own workshop examining all of the data in this field, and am providing the sort of critical evaluation of the literature that would make Palmer, Rosenberg, and Brinton somewhat dyspeptic.
I’ll be posting weekly summaries here of what I’m doing in my own little seminar over at Coming Home, which should last sometime into early next year. I’ll also be posting articles on other timely scientific issues in the news. If folks have questions or comments, I welcome your emails.
This is the decade when the scientific literature breaks free from the shackles that have for too long kept lifesaving knowledge from the general public. There are several scientists and physicians out here doing this work, and our numbers are growing.
With October being Breast Cancer Awareness Month, and many rightly disturbed by Susan G. Komen giving millions of dollars to Planned Parenthood, the question has been asked of me repeatedly if there aren’t good Christian organizations worthy of their donations. There are three excellent groups who merit the consideration of pro-lifers seeking faithful stewards.
The first is the Coalition On Abortion/Breast Cancer under the direction of president Karen Malec.
The second is the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute under Breast Surgeon Dr. Angela Lanfranchi and Endocrinologist Dr. Joel Brind.
The third is the Polycarp Institute under Dr. Chris Kahlenborn, M.D. Dr. Kahlenborn wrote the excellent book, Breast Cancer, It’s Link to Abortion and the Birth Control Pill. This book is must reading for anyone who wants one easy to read source on this issue that will make them sound like a pro by the time they are done.
These three Institutes under the people named have been responsible for the overwhelming majority of the critical opposition to the Brinton Gang. They desperately need the support of pro-lifers to aid in their work. I am not a member of any of these institutes and receive no money from them, whatsoever.
So thank you Steven for your vision, your warm welcome, and for giving a forum for the truth of science to be heard. On we go.