In all there were 493,242 deaths in England and Wales from ‘all causes’.
This includes 224 babies ‘dying before, during or after birth’. However this total of 224 does not include 189,574 human deaths in 2010 from abortion in England and Wales.
Abortion has for some years now been the leading cause of human death in Britain.
If we add the pre-born babies who died as a result of abortion in 2010 the total number of human deaths in England and Wales comes to 682,816.
In other words, 189,574 out of 682,816 deaths, or 27.76% were due to abortion.
The other main causes of human death in England and Wales in 2010 (apart from abortion) were as follows:
Circulatory diseases – 158,084 deaths
Cancers and Neoplasms – 141,446
Respiratory diseases - 67,276
Digestive diseases - 25,662
Mental disorders - 19,916
Diseases of the nervous system - 18,483
Accidents and external – 17,201
Genitourinary diseases – 12,406
Abortion is against the Hippocratic Oath, against the Declaration of Geneva, against the International Code of Medical Ethics and against the Judeo-Christian ethic on which the laws of our country were originally based.
In 1947 the British Medical Association called abortion 'the greatest crime'.
But it is now so commonplace in Britain that we don’t even bother to mention it as a cause of human death despite the fact that every abortion stops a human heart beating.
The fact that abortion deaths are excluded from official death statistics is a symptom of how far we have fallen since abortion was effectively legalised in Britain 45 years ago this week on 27 October 1967.
There is no one in Britain more innocent, more vulnerable and killed in greater numbers than the pre-born baby.
It is so sad that the culture of death is so prevalent and accepted in our world.
ReplyDeletePeter,
ReplyDeleteI don't know if you saw it, but I wrote about this and updated the graphic when the Guardian originally put out the data to show what would happen if we included abortions with this (link: http://thegroveisonfire.com/2011/01/accurate-mortality-graphic.html). I e-mailed the Guardian too, and they replied saying that they didn't include abortion as the department of statistics released abortion data separate to mortality data. One could imagine the furore if the Guardian did such a thing too. A couple of things the data shows is that that year, only 56 abortions were carried out to save the life of the mother, which undermines the "but sometimes you have to abort to save the life of the mother" argument somewhat.
A couple of things I thought at the time and since. One is, I can't think of an even remotely accurate way of estimating who many babies lives are ended from the morning after pill. How you'd go about estimating the 'effectiveness' of the drug and the likelihood of the person taking the drug actually being pregnant, I don't know. I did some superficial research, but nothing I could come up with could anyway count as a reasonable guess. Secondly, what I should do, is update this graphic to include miscarriages as well. I'm assuming that all miscarriages pre-24 week don't count for mortality stats, and also, vast numbers of miscarriages go un-reported (or even, un-aware). If we're to rightly insist that life begins at conception, then we need to include miscarriages as well as abortions.
Thanks very much Mark. No I hadn't seen your graphic. Can I add it to this post?
DeleteYes to be accurate miscarriages should also be added but the statistics may be hard to track down.
As you say, very early miscarriages or chemical abortions without a lost menstrual period would be at best a rough estimate.
It is misleading to exclude spontaneous abortions if you want to include medically initiated abortion. Given reproductive loss is more like 50% of conceptions from these natural causes this would make your figures less polemic.
ReplyDeleteThanks. I agree these should be included in the totals. I'll readjust the figures in a later blog once I've established an estimate.
DeleteIt will still leave induced abortion as the major cause of human death but it will also mean that an even higher percentage of human deaths are those of pre-born babies.
That will in one way make it 'more polemic'.
Thank you for the stand you are taking on this, Peter. A friend and I have recently set up a website to alert pregnant women to the realities of abortion and to try to raise consciousness about what really lies behind abortion for so many women. www.abortion-alternativeinformationandsupport.org We have been there at the frontline and come back, and it is not pretty.
ReplyDeletehello!,I like your writing so a lot! proportion we communicate extra approximately your article
ReplyDeleteon AOL? I require a specialist in this house to solve my problem.
Maybe that's you! Looking ahead to peer you.
my web site :: diets that work
You rеаlly mаke іt
ReplyDeleteѕeem sο еaѕy with youг pгesentation but I find this mattеr to be really
something which I thinκ I would neveг undeгstanԁ.
It seеms too complеx аnԁ νeгy broaԁ for me.
I am loоking forωaгd for youг
next ρost, Ӏ ωill tгy to get thе hаng of it!
Fеel fгeе to visіt my blog - silk'n reviews
My blog ; silk'n sensepil review
There is a scripture that is well-known to pro-life Christians (there are Atheists for Life, Feminists for Life, Jews for Life and others): "Therefore, choose Life so that you AND YOUR CHILDREN may live". Think of it, when a child is aborted then so are all its progeny. The Population Research Institute has four short videos explaining how extinction works. There are over 100 countries, according to CIA and UN data, who are below the replacement rate of 2.1, that is the ability of these countries to replace native populations. Spain is in dire straits. Singapore, @ 0.9 babes per Mum, is really in trouble. These lost lives cannot be measured.
ReplyDeleteBanning abortion would not really solve the birth rate problem in countries like Singapore.
DeleteHow many of those abortions were spontaneous miscarriages done with the approval of your god, Peter?
ReplyDelete