A large study in California released Monday found that cancer may be nearly twice as prevalent among gay men as among straight men.
The study relied on self-reported data from the California Health Interview survey, the largest state survey of its kind in the United States, and included more than 120,000 people over three years: 2001, 2003 and 2005.
A total of 3,690 men reported a cancer diagnosis as adults. Gay men were 1.9 times as likely as straight men to have been diagnosed with cancer, said the study published in the peer-reviewed journal Cancer.
There was no such difference witnessed among lesbian and straight women, but gay and bisexual females were twice as likely to say they were in fair or poor health after a cancer diagnosis compared to their heterosexual counterparts.
[…]The survey did not address how cancer survival rates may differ among those of varying sexual orientation, and may not reflect a true difference in the actual cancer rate because it relied on data from survivors only.
But researchers believe that higher anal cancer rates, caused by the sexually transmitted human papillomaviruses, as well as complications from human immunodeficiency virus, may be at least partly to blame.
“The greater cancer prevalence among gay men may be caused by a higher rate of anal cancer, as suggested by earlier studies that point to an excess risk of anal cancer,” said the study.
Researchers “did not have data available on the rate of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection, which is higher among gay men, and may have contributed to the significant association of cancer prevalence and sexual orientation.”
HIV and AIDS have been linked to a series of cancers including Kaposi sarcoma and non-Hodgkin lymphoma as well as anal, lung, testicular cancer and Hodgkin lymphoma.
Fishermen on New Hampshire’s Seacoast are warning that new fishing regulations could destroy their industry and have already caused them severe emotional stress.
[…]”If they don’t do something to modify the fishing regulations, we won’t have a fishing industry on the Seacoast, is what it boils down to,” said Hampton Town Manager Fred Welch.
[…]The new regulations are known as “catch-share.” The team said they are not there to look at possible changes to the rules but rather to see what effects they are having.
[…]”One of the fishermen from Rye had said that there had been three suicide attempts and a half dozen divorces during this first year of catch-shares,” said Bob Campbell of the Yankee Fisherman’s Cooperative. “Commercial fishermen are usually pretty tight-lipped, and for something this serious to come out, I mean, you know that the whole situation is grave.”
Campbell said the cooperative has lost about $750,000 in business since the new regulations went into effect.
“We’re off 1.1 million pounds of fish from last year, and over a million and a half pounds from the year before,” he said.
This is what regulations made in Washington do to a business running in New Hampshire.
A bill that allows women a chance to see an ultrasound of their unborn baby before an abortion is now headed to Governor Rick Perry, who plans to sign the pro-life measure into law.
After the Texas Senate signed off on the legislation, the state House, on a 94-41 vote, voted to concur on the Senate changes to HB 15, the sonogram bill. Now the state will become the latest to give women the kind of information about the development of their unborn child the normally don’t receive at abortion clinics — information that may prompt many to choose abortion alternatives.
The Senate passed the bill on second reading on a 21-10 vote and all hostile, pro-abortion amendments by Sens. Wendy Davis, Jose Rodriguez, and Leticia Van de Putte were defeated.
[…]For women who reside in counties with more than 60,000 people (more than 92% of women seeking abortions), the sonogram must be performed at least 24 hours before the abortion, and the consultation must be given in person. For women who reside in smaller counties or more than 100 miles from an abortion provider (less than 8% of women seeking abortions), the sonogram may be performed at least two hours before the abortion and the 24-hour private consultation may be done by phone.
[…]When used in pregnancy centers, ultrasounds convince more than 80 percent of women considering an abortion to keep their baby or consider adoption.
Florida senators on Thursday voted to send two pro-life bills to the state governor, including a bill that would mandate that women be given an opportunity to view an ultrasound and hear a description of their unborn child before having the child killed through an abortion.
The ultrasound bill (HB 1127) passed easily, 24-15. Its passage was a significant victory for pro-life advocates in the state, given that a similar bill was vetoed last year by then-Gov. Charlie Crist.
However, with pro-life Governor Rick Scott now in office, there is little chance of the bill meeting a similar fate this time around.
The state senate also passed on Thursday a bill (HB 1247) that would tighten up the state’s parental consent law, making it more difficult for minors to get a judicial bypass to avoid having to tell their parents. That bill passed 26-12.
“You can’t give a child an aspirin in school without permission. You can’t do any kind of medication, but we can secretly take the child off and have an abortion?” said Sen. Steve Oelrich, R-Gainesville, according to the Associated Press. “We should support it with all our hearts and souls if parental responsibility means anything to us.”
Since the election of Gov. Scott, as well as strong pro-life Republican majorities in both the House and the Senate in last November’s election, the state of Florida has drawn attention for the sheer volume of pro-life legislation that is making its way through the legislature.
Late last month Florida legislators had passed a number of other pro-life bills, including a constitutional amendment that would ban public funding for abortion and prevent the state courts from interpreting a right to privacy to include abortion.
Abortion is all about making money – it’s a business. The more regulations you can introduce to reduce the profit margin, the fewer abortionists will want to get into the business. That will raise the prices of abortions and send a signal to abortion consumers about the costly outcomes of careless sex. As a society, we care about whether people are responsible with sex – they should be ready to deal with any children that are produced because children are people too. Why should society have people engaging in recreational activities that can kill another person and then lower the costs of their taking that risk? It makes no sense. Unborn babies are people too, and we don’t make it easier for people to be reckless about sex and put the lives of other people at risk. We don’t make it easier for people to engage in recreational activities that can get other people killed.
Parental consent laws are also proven to reduce the number of abortions. Ideally, you want young people to understand the facts about contraception failure rates and to know that their parents will be involved in the abortion decision. It’s better for young people to understand the normal outcomes of sex (babies) before they decide to do it, so that children will only come along when adults have decided that they are prepared to accommodate them. The natural outcome of sex is a baby, and people should understand that society is serious about protecting babies and giving them what they need.
WINTERY KNIGHT 