Joel Brind

Joel L. Brind
Fields Endocrinology
Institutions Baruch College
Alma mater
Thesis Studies on the androgen-dependent differentiation of cells of the mouse preputial gland : metabolism of testosterone and effects of selected drugs and hormones (1981)
Known for Abortion-breast cancer hypothesis
Website
Brind's faculty page

Dr. Joel Brind is a professor of human biology and endocrinology at Baruch College, City University of New York since 1986, a research biochemist since 1981, and CEO of Natural Food Science, a maker of glycine supplement products founded in 2010. Brind is a leading advocate of the abortion-breast cancer hypothesis, which states that abortion increases the risk of breast cancer.[1] This idea is rejected by mainstream medical professional organizations despite overwhelming evidence in the peer-reviewed medical literature since 1957. (Recent evidence confirms the “ABC Link”, in dozens of studies from Asia, just within the last 10 years.)[2][3][4][5][6] Brind is therefore openly contemptuous of mainstream medical professional organizations and journals, accusing them of conducting a deliberate cover-up[7] with the goal of "protecting the abortion industry",[8] and asserting in print that the National Cancer Institute "...is just another corrupt federal agency like the IRS and the NSA."[9]

Early life, education, and religious conversion

Brind grew up in Laurelton, Queens, where he decided he wanted to become a biochemist at the age of 10 after reading an issue of Life Magazine where the cover story described the discoveries scientists had recently made about the inner workings of the cell, using electron microscopy.[1] He has a bachelor's degree from Yale (1971)[10] and a Ph.D. from New York University in biochemistry, immunology and physiology.[11] Four years after receiving his PhD in 1981, Brind had a spiritual awakening, after which he converted to Christianity,[12] reinvigorating his belief in the use of science to advance human life and health.

Advocacy

Working on studies concerning amino acid metabolism and aging, Brind concluded that most diets are deficient in the amino acid glycine, and that this deficiency is responsible for illnesses caused by chronic inflammation, including arthritis, diabetes, cardiovascular disease and cancer. These conclusions have yet to be examined by mainstream researchers, who tend to ignore glycine as a “non-essential” amino acid. He also attributes what are thought to be normal responses such as pain and stiffness following strenuous exercise and injury, to glycine deficiency. In 2010, Brind founded Natural Food Science, LLC, through which glycine supplement product Sweetamine is manufactured and sold.[13]

Following his conversion to Christianity,[12] Brind began working as a consultant and expert witness for pro-life groups and states (such as Florida, Texas and Alaska) seeking to publicize the ABC link. He fought against the legalization of RU-486 testifying at a federal hearing that "thousands upon thousands" of women would develop breast cancer as a result of using the drug.[14] Brind was an invitee to the National Cancer Institute's conference on the abortion-breast-cancer issue[15] where he was the only member to file a dissenting opinion.[16] In a meeting between Colorado Right To Life and the Denver affiliate of Susan G. Komen for the Cure regarding Komen grants to Planned Parenthood, Brind urged the breast cancer group to re-consider the idea that abortion is linked to breast cancer.[17]

In 1999, in collaboration with several physician colleagues, Brind founded the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute. The Breast Cancer Prevention Institute is a non-profit corporation, which, through research publications, lectures, and the internet, promotes a link between abortion and breast cancer.

Meta-analysis

Dr. Brind et al. (1996) conducted a meta-analysis of 23 independent epidemiologic studies.[18] It calculated that there was on average a relative risk of 1.3 (1.2 - 1.4) increased risk of breast cancer. The meta-analysis was criticized in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute for ignoring the role of response bias and for a "blurring of association with causation."[19] for selection bias by using studies with widely varying results, using different types of studies and not working with the raw data from several studies, and including studies that have methodological weaknesses.[20][21] The statistician who collaborated with Brind later stated of their findings: "I have some doubts. I don't think the issue has been resolved. When we were talking about the conclusions, he [Brind] wanted to make the strongest statements. I tried to temper them a little bit, but Dr. Brind is very adamant about his opinion."[22]

Most recently (2015), in collaboration with the Population Research Institute, Brind published a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of the injectable contraceptive, depo medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) on the transmission of HIV. This study was in perfect agreement with two other new, independent meta-analyses on the subject: All three meta-analyses reported the same statistically significant, 40% - 50% increased risk of HIV transmission among women using DMPA.

Criticism

Experts believe Brind overlooks methodological weaknesses of some studies he uses as evidence for an abortion-breast cancer link. Furthermore, medical researchers note Brind overstates his findings since his own research shows a "barely statistically significant" increase in breast cancer rates.[21] In reaction to the criticism an editor of the journal that published Brind's study noted with concern:

However, in the light of recent unease about appropriate but open communication of risks associated with oral contraceptive pills, it will surely be agreed that open discussion of risks is vital and must include the people – in this case the women – concerned. I believe that if you take a view (as I do), which is often called 'pro-choice', you need at the same time to have a view which might be called 'pro-information' without excessive paternalistic censorship (or interpretation) of the data.[23]

Selected publications

References

  1. 1 2 "Research and Destroy" by Chris Mooney
  2. ↑ "The Care of Women Requesting Induced Abortion" (PDF). Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2007-10-31. Retrieved 2007-11-07.
  3. ↑ "Is Abortion Linked to Breast Cancer?". American Cancer Society. 19 June 2014. Retrieved 8 September 2014.
  4. ↑ "WHO – Induced abortion does not increase breast cancer risk". who.int. Archived from the original on 13 January 2011. Retrieved 11 January 2011.
  5. ↑ Safe abortion: technical and policy guidance for health systems (PDF) (2nd ed.). World Health Organization. 2012. p. 49. ISBN 9789241548434. Sound epidemiological data show no increased risk of breast cancer for women following spontaneous or induced abortion.
  6. ↑ Committee On Gynecologic, Practice (June 2009). "ACOG Committee Opinion No. 434: induced abortion and breast cancer risk". Obstetrics and Gynecology 113 (6): 1417–8. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181ac067d. PMID 19461458.
  7. ↑ "A primer on how to recognize a cover up of the abortion-breast cancer link (ABC link) - NRL News Today".
  8. ↑ "The scientist who hated abortion". Discover Magazine.
  9. ↑ "http://www.lifenews.com/2013/12/02/bombshell-study-finds-44-increased-breast-cancer-risk-for-women-having-abortions/
  10. ↑ short bio of Brind
  11. ↑ "Joel Brind, Department of Natural Sciences, Baruch College".
  12. 1 2 "PublicEye.org - The Website of Political Research Associates".
  13. ↑ "About Natural Food Science". Proglyta. Retrieved 7 August 2013.
  14. ↑ "Concerned Women for America - Family Voice". Archived from the original on 1 March 2012.
  15. ↑ "Summary Report: Early Reproductive Events Workshop". National Cancer Institute.
  16. ↑ Minority dissenting opinion at the Wayback Machine (archived September 23, 2006)
  17. ↑ "Race for the Cure Protest".
  18. ↑ Brind J, Chinchilli VM, Severs WB, Summy-Long J (1996). "Induced abortion as an independent risk factor for breast cancer: a comprehensive review and meta-analysis". Journal of epidemiology and community health 50 (5): 481–96. doi:10.1136/jech.50.5.481. PMC: 1060338. PMID 8944853.
  19. ↑ Weed DL, Kramer BS (1996). "Induced abortion, bias, and breast cancer: why epidemiology hasn't reached its limit". J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 88 (23): 1698–700. doi:10.1093/jnci/88.23.1698. PMID 8943995.
  20. ↑ "Planned Parenthood - Anti-Choice Claims About Abortion and Breast Cancer published". plannedparenthood.org. Archived from the original on October 25, 2008. Retrieved 2007-11-04.
  21. 1 2 SkepticFiles.org: Study Linking Breast Cancer, Abortion Widely Criticized
  22. ↑ Yeoman, Barry; Michael Lewis (1 February 2003). "Scientist Who Hated Abortion". Discover. Retrieved 9 September 2014.
  23. ↑ Donnan S (December 1996). "Abortion, breast cancer, and impact factors--in this number and the last". J Epidemiol Community Health 50 (6): 605. doi:10.1136/jech.50.6.605. PMC: 1060372. PMID 9039374. Retrieved 2008-08-21.

External links

This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the Monday, April 18, 2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.