After coming across http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/5323894.stm on the bbc site today I was fairly confused by this sentance.
"For example, if a woman has a partner or relative with a genetic illness that they feel research would eventually help to cure, she might feel under pressure to donate her eggs to aid research."
Now correct me if im wrong, but the headline for this paragraph is Coercion is it just me or does this seem slightly propoganda-ish. They seem to be saying that a woman whos husband has cancer or similar is being coerced into donating eggs to a cause which may save her husbands life? I would not call that coercion, I would call that concern.
There are many groups that oppose stem cell research and donation of eggs for this, there is a group called "hands off our ovaries", what a load of bullshit. It should be the womans choice if she wants to give up her eggs to help others, and if it increased the chance of saving a family member I would not blame her in the slightest.
Then there was this paragraph, relating to an extremely rare disease,
"Josephine Quintavalle, co-founder of the Hands Off Our Ovaries group, said: "Eggs for research is an absolute no-no. The risks are too significant. The cost of even one woman's life is not worth it." "
Now correct me if im wrong, but is this woman trying to say that no woman should be allowed to undergo the treatment for donating eggs, even if it could save their childs life in the future?
What kind of person would try and prevent a person making their own personal sacrifice, of their decision to save the lives of millions of others in the future, I dont think someone should be told they HAVE to donate their eggs, neither am I saying the donations WILL save millions, but every donation would bring the scientists that one step closer, but someone saying that they should not even have the choice is a fucking disgrace from where im standing.
The woman says that its not worth even one life, how many womens lives are claimed by cancer? already the most reliable treatment for breast cancer has arisen from research based on stem cells, would this woman gladly sacrifice all those people?
What a Bitch.
08 September 2006
Coercion or Concerned
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I think the problem is that, no matter how much money, how many ovaries, how many fetuses are donated/given/taken, they never get closer to a cure for cancer. It's a disease that makes way too much money to be cured/prevented.
All they will ever do is create "treatments" for it. They won't cure it, because the drugs used if a patient develops cancer again, they make more money.
...so I guess these groups are just trying to not lose any more lives. The misguided women who would donate the eggs deserve to know. They're in grieving, a very vulnerable state, so they're willing to do anything, however nonsensical, when they feel it may help their loved one (even though it won't).
I cant help but disagree on that, almost 30% of cancer is now fully treatable if caught early enough, many new drugs are on the market that can slow and even stop the growth of cancer.
A lot of reoccurences of cancer are not infact from the initial cancerous material, but a new growth in people that are susceptible to cancer.
I think it is important to note however that my post though stating cancer does not exclusively mean cancer, the research carried out for medical purposes on all aspects of our life may be invaluable to future generations, as well as our own.
Given the circumstances I am not condoning that women who have just lost somebody are singled out, I am saying it should be their choice, many of the women who wish to donate are quoted as sayin htat they are doing it to prevent OTHER famalies from suffering the same as their own, I can fully understand this point of view, and I dont think a group should be made to fight this.
The hands off our ovaries group has a very clear message, and I feel that in this group pressing home and indead amplifying the fact that the eggs could become a baby, while this is a fact in itself it seems to ignore the fact that possible babies get wasted every month by most women.
I think its important to note that the group contains very few women who have actually had the proceedure, most of the signatories etc are 'concerned' women.
I love the assumption that women should just altruistically line up to be the handmaidens of a biotechnology that has not been proven to actually CURE anything yet.
I would bet that if scientists came up with a hypothetical cure for disease that involved pumping men full of hormones and removing their sperm via a surgical procedure requiring sedation, we'd see a law against it pretty darn quick.
Post a Comment