Politivity

Biden should really know his audience. Today, he asked why parents of disabled children don’t support stem cell research.

For the sake of argument, I’m going to assume he meant embryonic stem cell research, since almost no one opposes adult stem cell research.

If Biden is bringing this up because Palin has a down syndrome child, then he should really think again. You see, Palin is against abortion and had her baby. She finds life to be worthwhile - even for babies Biden apparently has deemed worthy of murdering.

But even if it was ok to kill babies, in a real world absent of all this political crap, no one would invest in embryonic stem cell research - at least, not anymore. Embryonic stem cell research has NEVER ONCE PRODUCED A SINGLE CURE OR TREATMENT. Remember, embryonic stem cell research is conducted around the world. Don’t look at the ban on developing future lines in the U.S. to say that not enough research has been done.

Additionally, embryonic stem cells tend to produce tumors in humans. As a thyroid cancer patient/survivor, I personally want cures that will produce no more tumors in my body.

Safe sex proponents are pointing to Bristol Palin, the pregnant 17 year old daughter of Alaska Governor and John McCain VP Pick Sarah Palin as the reason why we need safe sex education.

Before I give you the statistics showing how abstinence education overwhelmingly reduces teen pregnancy rates versus safe sex education, let’s get one thing straight:

Abstinence education will not prevent all teen pregnancies. Pointing to one instance, even if she is the daughter of a conservative Governor, does not mean abstinence education does not work as well as safe sex education.

With that said, let’s look at the facts (not an exhaustive list):

• In 2004, Columbia University said that teens who are sexually active are much more likely to take drugs and drink alcohol.
• A study published in the Adolescent and Family Health journal in April 2003 showed that a 67% drop in pregnancies among unmarried teen girls aged 15 to 19 was attributed to abstinence.
• In September 2003, a report published in The Prevention Researcher showed that even with a 76% increase in the use of condoms, birthrates among unmarried, sexually active females was up 40.9% in the years 1982-1995.
• The Prevention Researcher report also said that of the 5 CDC “Programs that Work,” not one showed a decrease in STDs or teen pregnancies.

And now for a little commentary on the a widely used “statistic” that is, in fact, completely false.

Safe sex proponents love to quote a study that made news about a two years ago claiming that virginity pledgers have the same rate of STD diagnosis as non virginity pledgers.

The problem is that the data is based on 21 people. 21 people were determined to be “high risk” because they engaged in anal sex without vaginal sex. These are 21 people out of a sample of over 14,000!

When you look at the larger sample, virginity pledgers are less likely to engage in sex (anal, oral, or vaginal). And those who do break their promise, engage in sex less frequently. Virginity pledgers are, overall, at lower risk for developing an STD.

They are also at lower risk for:

- Depression

- Attempted Suicide

- Children Out of Wedlock

- Live in Poverty

- Depend on Welfare

- School Expulsion

- Dropping out of School

Now, while I fully support abstinence education for what are now obvious reasons, I still stand by what I wrote the other day about the capabilities of teenagers. I think much of their frustration, sexual and otherwise, is because they’re kept in such tight boxes, creatively, academically, professionally, and even romantically when they are fully capable of more.

That, however, is based on my own personal belief, and purely anecdotal evidence. I also am not promoting teens having sex outside of marriage either. But I do believe a large number of them are meeting people who would make great, lifelong marriage partners. I can’t tell you how many singles guys I’ve met that are hung up on a former love. And I think that this idea of putting off your life, going to college long after your dreams have developed, and magically becoming an adult at the age of 18 and no earlier, contributes to relationship dysfunction later in life.

Of course, nothing is so neatly tied up in a box with a pretty bow. There are so many factors that influence our decisions. And Sarah Palin was not the only influence in her 17 year old daughter’s life.

But regardless of society’s constrains on our nation’s teens, abstinence education clearly works. And keeping sex out of the adolescence experience, whether unfairly imposed by society or not, is obviously helpful in navigating such an inherently confusing time.

And giving everyone public healthcare won’t make everyone  healthy either.

People need choice. Companies need to compete for our $$ and our attention. When companies outperform each other, the American people win.

When the government controls our lives, we are forced to accept what they give us. Because we’re so taxed, we can’t send our kids to a better performing school.  What are we supposed to do? Call for universal public schools? Oh wait, we already have that.

The same would happen with public health care.

If you love going to the DMV, then you’ll love Government-sponsored universal health care!

If you love going to the Social Security office, then you’ll love government-sponsored universal health care!

If you love Medicare, then you’ll love government-sponsored universal health care!

If you love paying taxes, then you’ll really love government-sponsored universal health care!

If you love public schools, then you’ll go crazy over government-sponsored universal health care!

Senator Clinton said during the CNN debate tonight that she supports the right to privacy (the question was about Supreme Court Justices and abortion).

I don’t want my private income to become public tax dollars that provide abortions.

Furthermore, I want to maintain my right to keep my private healthcare!

10 million of them are illegal immigrants

Others qualify for Medicaid but haven’t applied

Another group makes $50,000 or more but doesn’t purchase health insurance

Another group is unemployed for a temporary time

It’s a shifting number.

So you say, “There are still uninsured in this country.”  Still, government healthcare is not the answer.

In the UK, doctors told a woman pregnant with twins that one of her boys was not developing properly. He was way too small and his heart was too big. He would die, no doubt about it. And if he died in the womb, he might cause his brother to die.

Abortion was the obvious choice.

But not for baby Gabriel. He decided he just wouldn’t put up with this abortion stuff and decided to live. Doctors tried to cut the umbilical cord, but it was too thick. Then they split the placenta so that Gabriel’s death would be less likely to cause his brother’s death.

It turns out that the splitting of the placenta actually helped Gabriel get the nutrients he needed to live (his brother was sneaking them all for himself prior to the split). Why didn’t they just try this method in the first place, in an attempt to save his life not end it?

The saving grace for Gabriel was that his mother’s decision to abort him included the plan to let him die inside her womb. If he’d been removed from the womb, then the aforementioned inevitable death would have surely occurred.

It’s going to be awkward when Gabriel finds out his mom agreed to let the doctors try and kill him.

When I was in college, I minored in Psychology. One of my classes visited North Shelby School, a public school dedicated solely to the developmentally disabled. We split up to visit the individual classes and I had the privilege of spending time with children who couldn’t articulate words, couldn’t feed themselves, and were strapped into motorized wheelchairs.

And yet, I realized that they could communicate. It took patience, and it took a kind of listening I’d never used before. But I learned to communicate with them. And it was one of the best moments of my life.

It’s a shame that there is such stigma against people who are developmentally or mentally challenged. And it’s dangerous that some have decided that a life that isn’t normal is not a life worth living. Even more dangerous is the lack of knowledge in the medical community as to what the brain is actually capable of.

The Weekly Standard has a great piece on pulling the cord on people who are considered brain dead.

It starts off with the case of a wife who asked to pull the cord just 9 days after her husband’s injury. His mom was able to intervene legally and he is now wide awake and walking.

Another case in Massachusetts where a 12 year old girl was almost beaten to death. Just 8 days after the beating, Social Services, judges and doctors decided her life was over. But before the cord was pulled, she started responding.

Last September, the Washington Post published an article about a study was done that shows that there is brain activity even when people do not respond physically. One doctor said he was sure that Terry Schaivo would not have shown any brain activity. How could anyone be certain of that when they were shocked of the results from the study in the first place? Another doctor said that sometimes even healthy people don’t show brain activity. So a lack of activity doesn’t even determine whether a person is truly brain dead.

And ABC reported that survival could depend on which state you live in. In Virginia, patients must undergo seven tests to determine brain activity. The state of Pennsylvania doesn’t even require a neurologist to be involved in the diagnosis of a persistent vegitative state.

I know it’s a shock to watch a ‘healthy’ person go to such an altered state. But that does not mean their life is over. It simply means it is different. It’s time for society to improve and let go of stigma once and for all.

UPDATE: City Journal explains the statistics.

Questions are raising over the accuracy of Giuliani’s recent radio ad on prostate cancer. In the ad, Giuliani claims that US survival rates for prostate cancer are 82% while the British have a scary 44%. These numbers come from the City-Journal, a publication of the conservative think tank, Manhattan Institute.The problem is that the British government claims that the survival rate is 74.4%.

Good news: US survival rates are actually above 90%.

Bad news: No matter which British number is correct - more men in England are dying in prostate cancer because they do not have quick access to care.

MSNBC in their “fact-checking” inquired with a doctor from Johns Hopkins. Dr. Patrick Walsh says you can’t compare death rates because many prostate cancer victims actually die of pneumonia.

In this case, it’s possible that the 44% might be true. The reason would be that patients are more susceptible to disease when their immunity system is weakened by the treatment. However, many of these patients would not have pneumonia if they had treated the cancer early and entered into remission.

Naturally, we must ask the question if US death rates are lower too. It is less likely. The reason being that men have quicker access to treatment for prostate cancer and less likely to have aggressive courses of treatment, which weaken their immune system and make them more susceptible to pneumonia.

There’s an ad circulating on TV and the internet by the American Cancer Society. It talks about cancer patients who can’t afford health care.

You might be tempted to think “We need government healthcare so these people can get treatment.”

Think again.

In countries with government healthcare, the rate of death among cancer patients is higher. 

If the United States were to enact a government healthcare program, more Americans would die of cancer. 

The reason is that when people are diagnosed of cancer in countries with these programs, they have to wait for treatment. We all know that early detection and treatment is the key. And more Americans receive early detection and treatment than the citizens living in countries with government health programs.

We do need to work on our health system so that more people have access, but that’s not going to happen through government programs.