Oh, I like that quote. Nice little twist of words there.
It's a quote from a book title that came from Michael Ramirez, who is a two-time winner of the Pulitzer Prize for editorial cartoonists at Investors Business Daily. So, when I blog, everyone has a right to my opinions, of course. I won't deny you that right.
The focus on what AGBell believed and understood in the past is really moot nowadays. It's a 120 year old difference. And it's even more ridiculous to go after him and declare him as being ignorant about genetics (i.e. hereditary deafness) and genetic diversity when the field of genetics began in 1866 by the work of the Augustinian friar Gregor Johann Mendel. Alexander Graham Bell had a very weak understanding of what genetics and how it worked, and even less so about on the concept of genetic diversity when he gave a lecture "Memoir upon the formation of a deaf variety of the human race" to the National Academy of Sciences in 1883, a time when the field of genetics was only 17 years old. The concept of genetic diversity was absent during those times simply because the field of genetics was new. Even into the early 1900s genetics was still in its infancy in terms of understanding the importance of genetic diversity.
Back then it was a different era. A different way of thinking. A different cultural crowd of the time. People need to understand that. Unfortunately, some continue to try and find a single scapegoat.
The lack of knowledge in the field of genetic diversity in humans cannot be compared to the lack of heterogeneity of potatoes or diversity of potatoes. The lack of diversity of potatoes in Ireland resulted in the well known Irish potato famine. Had there been a good diversity of potatoes such a famine could have easily prevented when more resilient potatoes would thrive and others would succumbed to deadly crop diseases.
"Genetic diversity" as it relates to humans wasn't even a concept developed back then. Also, the word "eugenics" had a very different conceptual meaning and understanding back in the late 1800s and early 1900s than how we view it today, especially in light of Hitler's own personal brand of gruesome eugenics program of the mid-1930s and early 1940s.
Silly little arguments and scape-goating.
Yes, people have a right to my opinion!
Showing posts with label genetics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label genetics. Show all posts
Saturday, March 12, 2011
Friday, March 04, 2011
Aborting a deaf baby......
The year is 2025.
The two young hearing couple, vibrant and excited with the news that the wife is along three weeks pregnant. Hopeful that their first child will turn out fine just like all soon-to-be Moms and Dads would hope for. A healthy baby. But they have a nagging concern about their baby. They are apprehensive about the prospect that their child may carry the deafness gene and be born with a hearing loss. Their concerns are rightly noted since both of their parents and grandparents have a history of genetic deafness with a nasty habit of skipping around within each new generation. What makes this even more troublesome for the parents is that both the wife and husband each carry the deafness gene. And they discovered recently that there is high probability that their child would be born profoundly deaf.
With help of biotechnology genetic deafness can easily and quickly be determined in an embryo and with that valuable information the couple can prepare themselves the decision on whether to keep the baby or abort it. Genetic results for embryos are de riguer. So is giving out abortion pills. Doled out like Halloween treats but the consequences of swallowing that pill comes with a terrible cost to the unborn.
The genetic results came in.
Not good.
Their doctor confirmed that their baby if carried to term will be born profoundly deaf in both ears.
The wife wept quietly with a soft sobbing sound at the prospect of giving birth to a completely deaf baby. Her husband wrapped his arms around her and hugs her softly in a shared solace.
The doctor continues with the news and gave them two choices. Keep the baby or the wife can take an abortion pill to help abort their three week old embryo. With the new law in place a final decision cannot be accepted until three days after being informed of the choices. The doctor also warns that because the husband and wife both carry the deafness gene they have a 10% chance of producing a child with full hearing the next time they try and conceive another child. That means after 10 conceptions 1 baby will be born with full hearing.
Three days later. The wife decides to take the abortion pill to abort the embryo diagnosed with the deafness gene. The doctor nods his head and gives her a single white pill, easy to swallow pill. Her hands trembles seeing the white dot of a pill sitting in the middle of her right palm knowing that the pill would end a precious life. She grabs a glass of water and quickly swallowed the abortion pill. She cries and sobs. She made the decision to end a life and, in her mind, to spare a child's lifelong dealing with deafness that she finds cruel, unnecessary and unwanted.
They will try again for another baby very soon. Even if it means doing it 10 times until they get what they want.
From the NIH see graph below (SOURCE):
The two young hearing couple, vibrant and excited with the news that the wife is along three weeks pregnant. Hopeful that their first child will turn out fine just like all soon-to-be Moms and Dads would hope for. A healthy baby. But they have a nagging concern about their baby. They are apprehensive about the prospect that their child may carry the deafness gene and be born with a hearing loss. Their concerns are rightly noted since both of their parents and grandparents have a history of genetic deafness with a nasty habit of skipping around within each new generation. What makes this even more troublesome for the parents is that both the wife and husband each carry the deafness gene. And they discovered recently that there is high probability that their child would be born profoundly deaf.
With help of biotechnology genetic deafness can easily and quickly be determined in an embryo and with that valuable information the couple can prepare themselves the decision on whether to keep the baby or abort it. Genetic results for embryos are de riguer. So is giving out abortion pills. Doled out like Halloween treats but the consequences of swallowing that pill comes with a terrible cost to the unborn.
The genetic results came in.
Not good.
Their doctor confirmed that their baby if carried to term will be born profoundly deaf in both ears.
The wife wept quietly with a soft sobbing sound at the prospect of giving birth to a completely deaf baby. Her husband wrapped his arms around her and hugs her softly in a shared solace.
The doctor continues with the news and gave them two choices. Keep the baby or the wife can take an abortion pill to help abort their three week old embryo. With the new law in place a final decision cannot be accepted until three days after being informed of the choices. The doctor also warns that because the husband and wife both carry the deafness gene they have a 10% chance of producing a child with full hearing the next time they try and conceive another child. That means after 10 conceptions 1 baby will be born with full hearing.
Three days later. The wife decides to take the abortion pill to abort the embryo diagnosed with the deafness gene. The doctor nods his head and gives her a single white pill, easy to swallow pill. Her hands trembles seeing the white dot of a pill sitting in the middle of her right palm knowing that the pill would end a precious life. She grabs a glass of water and quickly swallowed the abortion pill. She cries and sobs. She made the decision to end a life and, in her mind, to spare a child's lifelong dealing with deafness that she finds cruel, unnecessary and unwanted.
They will try again for another baby very soon. Even if it means doing it 10 times until they get what they want.
From the NIH see graph below (SOURCE):
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)