Archive for Sterility

Does abortion impact future pregnancies what are the risks?

Posted in Abortion, Abortion and infertility, Abortion clinic, Abortion complication, Abortion Consent form, abortion facility, Abortion future pregnancies, abortion risks, Infant Mortality, infertility, Maternal Mortality, Pregnancy risks with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on May 30, 2019 by saynsumthn

It’s no myth: Studies, documents say abortion can cause infertility, miscarriage

miscarriage, infant loss

Can abortion negatively affect future pregnancies or possibly even contribute to infertility? Conflicting claims abound. While some, like one author at Yahoo.com, believe any potential negative effects on future fertility caused by abortion are just a “prevailing myth,” multiple studies say otherwise. And women deserve to know this.

Karen Fratti, the Yahoo! author, has tweeted her support of abortion, and chose to pepper her article with images of Planned Parenthood tweets. She also tipped her hand when she referred to pro-lifers as “anti-choice,” and dismissed the abortion-breast cancer link (which even a pro-choice filmmaker found compelling) without citing an ounce of proof. Fratti concluded:

“[…T]here have been no studies that show having an abortion, whether it is a surgical or medical abortion, will negatively affect your chances of getting pregnant later on in life…. As long as abortion remains legal and safe going forward, a woman’s future fertility will most likely not be affected whatsoever.”

Image: Karen Fratti tweet on abortion (Image: Twitter)

Karen Fratti tweet on abortion (Image: Twitter)

But this “health expert” must not be aware of studies which show that women who have abortions are at higher risk of Pelvic Inflammatory Disease, which can cause infertility. Abortion has connections to endometritis, infections, and PID, all known to cause infertility.

In 2015, Live Action News contributor Calvin Freiburger detailed studies that showed abortion can affect future pregnancies:

  • British Journal of Gynecology, 2006: Post-abortive women have a 60% higher risk of future miscarriage.
  • International Journal of Epidemiology, 2003: “prior history of induced abortion was significantly associated with increased risk of miscarriage (<28 weeks of gestational age) and first-trimester miscarriage (<14 weeks of gestational age).”
  • British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 1991: Post-abortive women have a 1.5-1.7% higher risk of ectopic pregnancy compared to women who’ve previously carried a pregnancy to term.
  • Journal of the American Medical Association, 1980: “Women who had had two or more prior induced abortions had a twofold to threefold increase in risk of first-trimester spontaneous abortionloss between 14 to 19 and 20 to 27 weeks,” although “No increase in risk of pregnancy loss was detected among women with a single prior induced abortion.”
  • “Why Can’t We Love Them Both?” — by Dr. John and Barbara Willke — identifies nine additional studies from between 1971 and 1983, published in the above and other mainstream medical journals, linking abortion and miscarriage.

Fratti acknowledged that the “risk of damaging the cervix or uterus can go up if a woman gets multiple surgical abortions,” but failed to point out that repeat abortions are becoming more common.

Yahoo’s “expert” Dr. Jennifer Wider, actually admitted to Glamour:

There is some research that suggests that women who have had multiple surgical abortions may be more likely to have future pre-term births or infants with low birth weight…. More studies are needed to further delineate to get a clearer picture.

Women deserve to know about this research. “Myths” don’t usually appear in multiple medical journals.

In the video below, former abortionist Anthony Levatino explains that future pregnancies are “at a greater risk for loss or premature delivery due to abortion-related trauma or injury to the cervix.”

Live Action News previously discovered that what abortion facilities tell women in the fine print of consent forms are quite different than Fratti’s conclusions.

1. Sterility is listed as a possible “complication” for surgical and medical abortion on this Planned Parenthood abortion consent form.

Planned Parenthood abortion consent form risks

Sterility means “failing to produce or incapable of producing offspring.” Note that it is listed as a risk even for “medical/non-surgical abortion” — something Fratti denies in her article.

2. A second Planned Parenthood parental consent form shows sterility as a risk of surgical abortion.

Planned Parenthood abortion consent of minor form risks of surgical abortion Sterility

3. Under medication abortion, the form states, “Fertility can be diminished in very rare instances as a consequence of infection.”

Planned Parenthood abortion consent of minor form — medication abortion fertility diminished

3). Maryland’s Gynemed Surgical Center abortion facility consent form states that a surgical abortion can result in a lacerated uterus, infection, perforation, scar tissue and even death, and “inability to have children.”

Scar tissue can occur in the cervix…and may require repeat dilation. Scar tissue in the uterus… may result in the inability to have children.

Gynemed consent form abortion affects ability to have children

4. If seeking a medication abortion, the patient is notified that “no guarantees about my future fertility can be offered to me…. I understand that there is evidence that women who have more than three induced abortions may be at increased risk for premature labor.”

Gynemed consent form abortion future pregnancy premature labor

 

The abortion industry has one thing in mind, and it’s not a woman’s “fertility” or “future pregnancies.” Its concern is to portray abortion as a safe or minimally risky procedure, close the deal, collect the money, and kill the developing baby. If a woman’s future pregnancies are affected, or she experiences infertility, the industry will simply blame it on other causes, while they count their profit.

    • This article is reprinted with permission. The original appeared here at Live Action News.

Study: Genetically Modified Foods cause Sterility – EUGENICS ?

Posted in Eugenics, Genetically Modified Food, Population Control with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , on June 7, 2010 by saynsumthn

“Genetically Modified Soy Linked to Sterility, Infant Mortality

“This study was just routine,” said Russian biologist Alexey V. Surov, in what could end up as the understatement of this century. Surov and his colleagues set out to discover if Monsanto’s genetically modified (GM) soy, grown on 91% of US soybean fields, leads to problems in growth or reproduction. What he discovered may uproot a multi-billion dollar industry.
After feeding hamsters for two years over three generations, those on the GM diet, and especially the group on the maximum GM soy diet, showed devastating results. By the third generation, most GM soy-fed hamsters lost the ability to have babies. They also suffered slower growth, and a high mortality rate among the pups.

And if this isn’t shocking enough, some in the third generation even had hair growing inside their mouths—a phenomenon rarely seen, but apparently more prevalent among hamsters eating GM soy.

The study, jointly conducted by Surov’s Institute of Ecology and Evolution of the Russian Academy of Sciences and the National Association for Gene Security, is expected to be published in three months (July 2010)—so the technical details will have to wait. But Surov sketched out the basic set up for me in an email.

He used Campbell hamsters, with a fast reproduction rate, divided into 4 groups. All were fed a normal diet, but one was without any soy, another had non-GM soy, a third used GM soy, and a fourth contained higher amounts of GM soy. They used 5 pairs of hamsters per group, each of which produced 7-8 litters, totally 140 animals.

Years of Reproductive Disorders from GMO-Feed

Surov’s hamsters are just the latest animals to suffer from reproductive disorders after consuming GMOs. In 2005, Irina Ermakova, also with the Russian National Academy of Sciences, reported that more than half the babies from mother rats fed GM soy died within three weeks. This was also five times higher than the 10% death rate of the non-GMO soy group. The babies in the GM group were also smaller (see photo) and could not reproduce.

In a telling coincidence, after Ermakova’s feeding trials, her laboratory started feeding all the rats in the facility a commercial rat chow using GM soy. Within two months, the infant mortality facility-wide reached 55%.

When Ermakova fed male rats GM soy, their testicles changed from the normal pink to dark blue!

Italian scientists similarly found changes in mice testes , including damaged young sperm cells. Furthermore, the DNA of embryos from parent mice fed GM soy functioned differently.
An Austrian government study published in November 2008 showed that the more GM corn was fed to mice, the fewer the babies they had , and the smaller the babies were.

Central Iowa Farmer Jerry Rosman also had trouble with pigs and cows becoming sterile. Some of his pigs even had false pregnancies or gave birth to bags of water. After months of investigations and testing, he finally traced the problem to GM corn feed. Every time a newspaper, magazine, or TV show reported Jerry’s problems, he would receive calls from more farmers complaining of livestock sterility on their farm, linked to GM corn.

Researchers at Baylor College of Medicine accidentally discovered that rats raised on corncob bedding “neither breed nor exhibit reproductive behavior.” Tests on the corn material revealed two compounds that stopped the sexual cycle in females “at concentrations approximately two-hundredfold lower than classical phytoestrogens.” One compound also curtailed male sexual behavior and both substances contributed to the growth of breast and prostate cancer cell cultures. Researchers found that the amount of the substances varied with GM corn varieties. The crushed corncob used at Baylor was likely shipped from central Iowa, near the farm of Jerry Rosman and others complaining of sterile livestock.

In Haryana, India, a team of investigating veterinarians report that buffalo consuming GM cottonseed suffer from infertility, as well as frequent abortions, premature deliveries, and prolapsed uteruses. Many adult and young buffalo have also died mysteriously.

Denial, Attack and Canceled Follow-up

Scientists who discover adverse findings from GMOs are regularly attacked, ridiculed, denied funding, and even fired. When Ermakova reported the high infant mortality among GM soy fed offspring, for example, she appealed to the scientific community to repeat and verify her preliminary results. She also sought additional funds to analyze preserved organs. Instead, she was attacked and vilified. Samples were stolen from her lab, papers were burnt on her desk, and she said that her boss, under pressure from his boss, told her to stop doing any more GMO research. No one has yet repeated Ermakova’s simple, inexpensive studies.

In an attempt to offer her sympathy, one of her colleagues suggested that maybe the GM soy will solve the over population problem!

Surov reports that so far, he has not been under any pressure.

Read Rest Here

Who do we see behind these foods? Can you say – Bill Gates? More here