Connect with us

World

How a study on hormonal contraception and breast cancer was distorted

Published

on

How a study on hormonal contraception and breast cancer was distorted

As misinformation about women’s health spreads faster than ever, doctors say new research on the risks of hormonal birth control underscores the challenge of communicating nuance in the social media age.

The study, which was conducted in Sweden and tracked more than 2 million teenage girls and women less than age 50 for more than a decade, found that hormonal contraception remains safe overall, but also found small differences in breast cancer risk based on the hormones used in the formulation.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

In addition, the researchers observed a small, short-term rise in breast cancer diagnoses among current or recent users. Those findings are consistent with prior large studies, including a 2017 Danish registry analysis and a 2023 meta-analysis.

It was published online on October 30 in JAMA Oncology.

Doctors say these study results won’t change how they advise patients and that women should not stop using their birth control.

Advertisement

Still, TikTok is flooded with factually incomplete warnings that contraceptives cause cancer and are as dangerous as smoking. Reproductive health advocates warn that studies like this can easily be taken out of context online and be reduced to a single alarming number.

Case in point: The study reported that women who had used hormonal birth control had about a 24 percent higher rate of breast cancer than women who hadn’t. But because breast cancer is still uncommon in younger women, that works out to an increase from roughly 54 to 67 breast cancer cases per 100,000 women per year – about 13 extra cases per 100,000 women, or about one extra case per 7,800 users of hormonal contraceptives per year.

Co-authors Asa Johansson and Fatemeh Hadizadeh, epidemiologists at Uppsala University, said the rise is modest and short-term, with risk highest during current use and fading within five to 10 years after stopping.

Rachel Fey, interim co-CEO of Power to Decide – a group whose mission is to provide accurate information on sexual health and contraceptive methods – said that kind of nuance is exactly what tends to disappear on social media.

“I get really angry at this because it’s designed to scare people like me away from birth control, which has made my life so much better in so many ways,” she said. “It’s really frustrating … especially when it’s given without context. And then in this era of social media, it can just take off without anybody who knows what they’re talking about providing that context.”

Advertisement

The researchers also found the risk was slightly higher with certain progestins such as desogestrel – found in combined oral contraceptives like Cyred EQ, Reclipsen, Azurette, and Pimtrea – but did not increase with others, such as medroxyprogesterone acetate injections, sold under the brand name Depo‑Provera.

How to interpret the findings

Some experts say the results should be viewed with care because the study counted both invasive breast cancers and early, noninvasive lesions known as in situ tumours, growths that may never become life-threatening. Including these precancerous cases could make the overall risk of clinically significant disease appear higher than it is.

“A substantial proportion of the ‘cases’ would never have progressed to invasive breast cancer,” said Lina S Morch, a senior researcher and team leader at the Danish Cancer Institute. Morch was not associated with the Swedish study. She added that experts should wait for more data separating early-stage and advanced cancers before making new rules or warnings about specific hormones.

The doctor-patient conversation

Even as scientists debate how to interpret the finer points of the data, physicians emphasise that for most patients, the study reinforces what they already discuss in the exam room: That hormonal birth control is broadly safe, and decisions should be tailored to each woman’s needs and values.

Katharine White, chief of Obstetrics and Gynaecology at Boston Medical Center, said this study won’t change how she talks to her patients.

Advertisement

“When counselling patients about their contraceptive options, I focus on their past experiences with birth control, their medical history, and what’s important to them about their birth control method and pregnancy planning (if applicable),” White wrote in an email. “Side effects and risks of methods are already a key part of my counselling about both hormonal and non-hormonal methods.”

Other doctors noted there are other contraceptive options.

Eleanor Bimla Schwarz, chief of General Internal Medicine at Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, said, “For those who prefer hormone-free contraception, the copper IUD offers safe, convenient, highly effective contraception for over a decade after placement, and is rapidly reversible when pregnancy is desired,” referring to a type of long-acting intrauterine device.

Mary Rosser, director of Integrated Women’s Health at Columbia University Irving Medical Center, said this was a large, high-quality study that looked at many types of hormones over many years. But she added that doctors shouldn’t change their advice yet.

Johansson and Hadizadeh stressed that the results should guide shared decision-making, not cause alarm. “It may be reasonable to consider formulations associated with lower observed risk in our data,” they said. They noted that products containing medroxyprogesterone acetate, drospirenone, or levonorgestrel were linked to lower risk, while long-term use of desogestrel-only contraceptives might be best avoided when other options fit.

Advertisement

Keeping the risk in perspective

Hormonal birth control provides many health benefits beyond pregnancy prevention. It can lighten heavy periods, ease pain from endometriosis, and lower the risk of ovarian and uterine cancers for years after stopping. Morch noted that even small risks are worth discussing, but said decisions should be guided by women’s “values and preferences”.

White said it’s important to see the big picture. “The risk of an unintended pregnancy is 85 percent for people who do not use contraception – so any risks of birth control need to be weighed against the risk of an unexpected pregnancy,” she wrote.

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that partners with PolitiFact and produces in-depth journalism about health issues.

World

The Iran War and Angry Voters

Published

on

The Iran War and Angry Voters

Much of Britain goes to the polls today. There are local elections in England, and parliamentary elections in Wales and Scotland. They are a big test for the government of Prime Minister Keir Starmer, whose Labour Party is bracing for crushing losses. If pollsters are right, the right-wing populist Reform U.K. party will win the highest overall vote share.

There are many reasons Europe’s political center is so unpopular. Starmer’s counterparts in Germany and France are also polling at historic lows. But the war in Iran isn’t helping. Today I write about how the economic crisis sparked by the war is accelerating the rise of the nationalist right across Europe.


Last week I was in Germany, where I met with officials, journalists and a leader of the far-right Alternative for Germany party. I was struck by how much the conversation had shifted from just a few months ago, when I was last there. People not only expect the AfD to win an outright majority in state elections in September — they openly discuss the possibility of the AfD running, or at least joining, the federal government after the next national election.

The AfD is now the strongest party in opinion polls. Recent surveys show that it would win between 26 and 28 percent of the vote if elections were held today. That puts it ahead of Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s center-right Christian Democrats, at 22 to 24 percent, and at nearly twice the level of the Social Democrats, his coalition partner.

The far right has been on the rise for years. And Merz’s government has failed to deliver on many fronts, from infrastructure to economic growth, accelerating that rise. But what’s striking is that the AfD’s most recent surge in the polls — and the latest decline of the center-right and center-left — coincide with the economic fallout from the war in Iran.

Advertisement

That’s emblematic of a wider phenomenon. Since the U.S. and Israel attacked Iran, incumbent governments around the world have been facing voters who are angry about the economic pain the war has inflicted. But in Europe in particular, where the most prominent opposition increasingly comes from right-wing populist parties, that has meant a near-continent-wide boost for the far right.

‘Crisis entrepreneurship’

The war has battered economies around the world. Protests over rising energy costs have rocked capitals from Dublin to Nairobi to Manila.

But Europe is noteworthy because populist parties across the continent have a well-honed playbook for capitalizing on just this sort of voter frustration. And they’re turning to it now.

I spoke to Mark Leonard, director of the European Council on Foreign Relations, who has interviewed far-right leaders for his new book, “Surviving Chaos.” He told me how the so-called new right in Europe thrives in the midst of crisis.

Advertisement

Right-wing populist parties use crises like the war, Leonard said, “to build their own legitimacy by showing that the mainstream parties are overwhelmed by them and unable to control the country’s destiny.” Then, they argue that the government response to the crisis highlights how these mainstream parties are not on the side of the people.

The AfD offers perhaps the starkest examples of this kind of “crisis entrepreneurship,” Leonard said. Born out of Europe’s debt crisis in the early 2010s as an anti-euro party, it used the migrant crisis of the mid-2010s to reinvent itself as an anti-immigrant party. It then tapped into anti-vaccine sentiment during the pandemic to present itself as the party of freedom.

In every one of these crises, Leonard said, the AfD argued that mainstream parties were on the side of foreigners or elites: They wanted to bail out Greeks, or let in refugees, or deprive Germans of basic freedoms.

The energy crisis resulting from the war is another opportunity for the AfD, Leonard said. It may show that not only are mainstream parties unequipped to manage a complicated world, but once again, with their efforts to, say, ban nuclear power and reduce fossil fuel reliance, they’re out of touch.

For parties like the AfD, Leonard said, an event like the war is “kind of manna from heaven.”

Advertisement

Solving the Trump problem

Starmer, who has been unpopular for a long time, was never going to have a good election.

But in January, before the war, he gave a speech about how Britain had turned a corner. Growth was projected to be 1.3 percent this year and an interest rate cut seemed imminent. Now, in the face of rising inflation, that cut has been shelved and the economy is barely expected to grow at all. With Britain predicted to take the biggest hit of any major economy as a result of the war, polls show Labour could lose three-quarters of its current seats.

In Germany, no far-right party has held power at the state or federal level since the end of World War II. But polls show the AfD could win an outright majority in the eastern state of Saxony-Anhalt this fall. That would render the firewall — the longtime consensus among other parties never to go into coalition with the far right — irrelevant.

Britain and Germany are not set to hold national elections until 2029, provided their weakened governments last that long. The next big European country to hold a national election where the far right might triumph is France in April next year.

Advertisement

When Trump was re-elected, Europe’s nationalist right celebrated. But his tariffs and threats to invade Greenland increasingly made him a liability with voters. The Trump boost became a Trump problem.

Ironically, perhaps, the war in Iran — which is as unpopular in Europe as anything the president has ever done — is helping far-right parties to solve that problem now.

For more: A sense of disaffection and frustration is rampant across Britain, opinion polls suggest. It will likely fuel an electoral disaster for Starmer’s party. Here’s what to know about the elections.


Iran and the U.S. offered contradictory and rapidly changing assessments on the state of the war and peace talks yesterday.

Trump, hours after threatening more attacks on Iran, said in remarks from the Oval Office that the U.S. had “very good talks” with Iran in the last 24 hours. “We’re in good shape, and now we’re doing well, and we have to get what we have to get,” he said.

Advertisement

Iran gave a different take. Its Foreign Ministry spokesman said yesterday that the government was reviewing an American plan to end the war and would give its response to Pakistan, which is mediating talks. Earlier in the day, another official dismissed a reported proposal to end the war as “more a list of American wishes than a reality.”

For more: For Iran, lifting the U.S. military blockade of its ports and relieving pressure on its economy is one of the main incentives to seek a deal, my colleague Farnaz Fassihi writes. The country is running out of space to store its oil.

An analysis of satellite images, photos and videos verified by The Times shows the scope of Israel’s campaign in southern Lebanon. Widespread demolitions have flattened expanses in at least two dozen towns and villages near the border, with damage to government offices, schools, hospitals and mosques.

Israel says its operations are aimed at dismantling Hezbollah’s military infrastructure. Videos show that Israeli soldiers are using the same tactics in Lebanon that they employed in Gaza, including controlled demolitions. Take a look.


Football: Paris Saint-Germain defeated Bayern Munich to set up a Champions League final against Arsenal. Read the highlights.

Advertisement

That’s what Aiden, an 8-year-old from California, asked the Artemis II astronauts, who were guests on “The Daily” podcast this week. The crew members shared their reflections about what it feels like to be so far from Earth, and much more.


An inheritance dispute in the family that runs LG is pulling back the curtain on chaebols, the massive conglomerates that dominate South Korea’s economy.

The widow and daughter of the former LG chairman filed a criminal complaint in 2024 that said they were made unwitting participants in an illegal ownership structure that reduced their rightful inheritance and favored a male heir. They also say the chairman’s wealth was far greater than publicly disclosed. Read about the secret recordings at the heart of their claim.

It’ll be tough for Argentina fans at the World Cup this year. Supporters have always flocked to the tournament in the tens of thousands. But this year, for the first time, FIFA has adopted dynamic pricing.

Argentina’s struggling economy often forces people to work two or even three jobs to make ends meet. And the new pricing system, similar to the way airline and concert tickets are sold, means tickets to see the most popular teams have spiked to staggering levels. Individual tickets for Argentina games now top $800, double the price of equivalent tickets for other teams in their group.

Advertisement

“It’s like they are trying to make some business with our passion,” one fan said. Still, some are selling their cars, maxing out credit cards and sleeping 10 to a room, just so they can go. Read more about the most expensive World Cup ever.

Cremini mushrooms, chickpeas and bulgur wheat mimic the texture of ground meat in this vegetarian twist on Swedish meatballs. Seasoned generously with allspice and nutmeg and blanketed in a velvety mushroom gravy, they are excellent over egg noodles or mashed potatoes.


Continue Reading

World

What Israel wants from an Iran peace deal: No enrichment, missile limits and strict enforcement

Published

on

What Israel wants from an Iran peace deal: No enrichment, missile limits and strict enforcement

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

As President Donald Trump signals progress toward a possible agreement with Iran, Israeli officials and analysts increasingly are outlining what Jerusalem believes any deal must include to prevent Tehran from rebuilding its military and regional power.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Wednesday that Israel and the United States remain in “full coordination” as negotiations continue.

“We share common objectives, and the most important objective is the removal of the enriched material from Iran, all the enriched material, and the dismantling of Iran’s enrichment capabilities,” Netanyahu said at the opening of a security cabinet meeting.

US AND IRAN CLASH OVER URANIUM ENRICHMENT AS NUCLEAR TALKS RESUME IN ROME

Advertisement

Bushehr nuclear plant in Iran, on April 29, 2024. (Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto via Getty Images)

“We’ve had very good talks over the last 24 hours, and it’s very possible that we’ll make a deal,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office Wednesday. 

At the same time, Trump warned that if negotiations fail, “we’ll have to go a big step further.”

For Israel, the question is not simply whether the war ends, but whether Iran emerges from negotiations weakened or repositioned to rebuild. Israeli officials fear a weak agreement could allow Tehran to preserve strategic capabilities, regain economic breathing room and eventually restore the regional network of armed groups that threatened Israel before the war. Jerusalem is also seeking guarantees that any future deal preserves military leverage and freedom of action if Iran violates its commitments.

Against that backdrop, Israeli analysts say Jerusalem’s red lines focus on four core areas: dismantling Iran’s enrichment infrastructure, restricting its ballistic missile program, preventing Tehran from rebuilding Hezbollah and Hamas, and ensuring the regime does not gain political legitimacy or strategic relief from the negotiations.

Advertisement

No enrichment, no sunsets

On the nuclear issue, former Israeli National Security Advisor Yaakov Amidror said Israel’s position remains uncompromising.

“Weaponized uranium must leave Iran,” Amidror said. “The Iranians must not be allowed to enrich uranium.”

Israeli journalist and commentator Nadav Eyal agreed, adding that Israel is seeking a much stricter framework than previous agreements. 

“Israel wants Iran to stop enrichment for as long as possible and for the enriched material to leave Iran,” Eyal said, adding that Jerusalem is looking for “an arms control agreement that would be extensive and robust.”

An unclassified image released by U.S. Central Command showing strikes on Iran. (U.S. Central Command/Reuters)

Advertisement

Avner Golov, vice president of the Mind Israel think tank, told Fox News Digital that Israel also wants Iran’s underground nuclear infrastructure dismantled entirely. 

“In the nuclear arena, what matters is the removal of the enriched material, the destruction of the underground facilities, including those still being built, and a prohibition on new sites,” Golov said.

Golov also warned against “sunset clauses” that would allow restrictions to expire after several years. 

“There must be an agreement without sunsets,” he said, calling for “unprecedented monitoring and supervision, anywhere, under any conditions and not dependent on Iranian approval.”

Jonathan Ruhe, Jewish Institute for National Security of America (JINSA) fellow for American strategy, told Fox News Digital, “Ultimately the United States and Israel should have strongly similar redlines for an acceptable deal,” he said, including “shutting down Iran’s nuclear weapons program completely, permanently and verifiably.”

Advertisement

Ruhe said that goes beyond Iran handing over highly enriched uranium and includes shutting down remaining enrichment-related facilities at Pickaxe and Isfahan.

UN’S ATOMIC AGENCY’S IRAN POLICY GETS MIXED REVIEWS FROM EXPERTS AFTER US-ISRAEL ‘OBLITERATE’ NUCLEAR SITES

President Donald Trump speaks with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at Ben Gurion International Airport in Tel Aviv on Oct. 13, 2025. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Missiles seen as equal threat

Alongside the nuclear issue, Israeli analysts say Iran’s ballistic missile program has become equally central to Israel’s security concerns.

“One of the key questions is whether there will be any sort of limitation on the ballistic missile program of the Iranians,” Eyal said. “Israel sees this as no less of an existential threat than the nuclear issue.”

Advertisement

Amidror warned that without missile restrictions, the threat could eventually extend beyond Israel and Europe. 

“If there are no restrictions on the missile program, then missiles that today can reach half of Europe will, within five to 10 years, be able to reach the United States,” he warned.

Golov argued that a nuclear-only agreement would leave Iran free to rebuild a missile shield protecting a future nuclear breakout. 

“A deal that focuses only on the nuclear program would allow the Iranians to produce thousands of missiles and create a protective shield around their nuclear program.”

Ruhe similarly said limiting Iran’s missile arsenal must include preventing Iran from rebuilding production capabilities damaged during the war.

Advertisement

IRAN DRAWS MISSILE RED LINE AS ANALYSTS WARN TEHRAN IS STALLING US TALKS

Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system intercepts projectiles over Tel Aviv on Feb. 28, 2026, amid retaliatory missile barrages from Iran targeting Gulf states and Israel. (Jack Guez/AFP)

Hamas, Hezbollah and the proxies question

Another major Israeli concern is that sanctions relief or renewed trade could funnel money back to Iran’s regional proxies.

“Israel is demanding that the Islamic Republic isolate itself from involvement with Lebanon and Gaza and stop supporting armed groups that operate against Israel,” Eyal said.

“For Israel, it is a material issue that the money injected into Iran will not be used to rebuild the proxies in the region,” he added.

Advertisement

Amidror said Iran’s ability to support Hezbollah and Hamas has already been weakened by the collapse of regional supply routes. 

“The Iranians cannot effectively support the proxies because there is no longer a land bridge from Iran to Syria,” he said, but warned that if negotiations leave the impression that Washington backed down, Iran’s regional proxies could emerge stronger even after the war.

No ‘victory image’ for Tehran

Ruhe similarly argued that Israel wants to avoid any agreement that restores legitimacy to the Iranian regime without fundamentally weakening it.

“Avoiding anything that legitimates Iran’s regime and abandons the Iranian people” is critical, Ruhe said, including “giving guarantees against future attacks or compensating Tehran for wartime damages.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Advertisement

Satellite imagery shows reinforcement efforts at the Pickaxe Mountain nuclear site, a heavily fortified, deep underground tunnel complex near Iran’s Natanz enrichment site. (Vantor/Handout via Reuters)

Ruhe warned that for Israel, a “bad deal” is ultimately any agreement that restrains Israel’s future freedom of action against Iran and its proxies.

“This is one big reason Iran wants to ensnare the Trump administration in open-ended negotiations that sideline military options and create daylight between Washington and Jerusalem,” Ruhe said.

Continue Reading

World

North Korea says it is not bound by any treaty on nuclear non-proliferation

Published

on

North Korea says it is not bound by any treaty on nuclear non-proliferation

Pyongyang says its status as nuclear-armed state ‘will not change based on external rhetorical claims’.

North Korea’s envoy to the United Nations has declared that Pyongyang will not be bound by any treaty on atomic weapons and that no external pressure will change its status as a nuclear-armed state.

Ambassador Kim Song’s statement – carried by state media on Thursday – came as the United States and other countries criticised North Korea’s nuclear programme at the ongoing UN conference reviewing the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

Pyongyang withdrew from the NPT in 2003 and has since conducted six nuclear tests, promoting multiple UN Security Council sanctions.

Advertisement

The country is believed to hold dozens of nuclear warheads.

“At the 11th NPT Review Conference currently under way at UN headquarters, the United States and certain countries following its lead are groundlessly calling into question the current status and exercise of sovereign rights,” Kim said, according to the official Korean Central News Agency.

“The status of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea as a nuclear-armed state will not change based on external rhetorical claims or unilateral desires,” he added.

“To make it clear once again, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea will not be bound by the Non-Proliferation Treaty under any circumstances whatsoever.”

He continued that the country’s status as a nuclear-armed state has been “enshrined in the constitution, transparently declaring the principles of nuclear weapons use”.

Advertisement

North Korea has long insisted that it will not give up its nuclear arsenal, describing its path as “irreversible” and pledging to strengthen its capabilities.

It has sent ground troops and artillery shells to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and observers say Pyongyang is receiving military technology assistance from Moscow in return.

The nine nuclear-armed states – Russia, the US, France, the United Kingdom, China, India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea – possessed 12,241 nuclear warheads in January 2025, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) reported.

The US and Russia hold nearly 90 percent of nuclear weapons globally and have carried out major programmes to modernise them in recent years, according to SIPRI.

The nuclear issue has been at the heart of the US and Israel’s war on Iran, with US President Donald Trump saying that Tehran – a signatory to the NPT – can never have a nuclear weapon.

Advertisement

Iran denies seeking an atomic weapon and has long demanded Washington acknowledge its right to enrich uranium.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending