tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8060003097513753942.post1313626464932956291..comments2024-02-24T16:30:33.798-08:00Comments on GPS: PAUL CORBY NEEDS A NEW HEARTRonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07353695791008715393noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8060003097513753942.post-12218294000668145272012-09-02T04:33:46.187-07:002012-09-02T04:33:46.187-07:00Perhaps an illustration to clarify the above: &qu...Perhaps an illustration to clarify the above: "Again, remember that Autistism is NOT genetically transferable, ie cannot be 'passed on' or 'inherited'."<br /><br />...in other words, just as a broken bone in your arm, damaged AFTER birth during the development of the arm, is not genetically transferable, ie cannot be 'passed on' or 'inherited'. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8060003097513753942.post-13306849000364806422012-08-30T07:13:59.736-07:002012-08-30T07:13:59.736-07:00The thing that really astounds me as one who studi...The thing that really astounds me as one who studied genetics at the university research level, is that autism is not a genetic thing. In other words, autism is not likely 'caused' by genetically-defective parents. And so, autism cannot be 'passed on' to future generations. (Autism is a brain condition, a brain-development problem, that is usually caused by damage AFTER birth, during the development of the infant brain, likely through excessive levels of multiple concurrent doses of 'environmental' disruptors/invaders, such as 'harmless' adjuvants in vaccines..but that is another story). <br /><br />What this means is that the genes (and the information contained in the genes) of the autistic child are probably quite normal, and that means that the children of autistic people can very much be normal. <br /><br />Again, remember that Autistism is NOT genetically transferable, ie cannot be 'passed on' or 'inherited'.<br /><br />So an autistic person can have a lineage of descendants who are quite normal genetically speaking. Letting Paul die prematurely would deny him this potential lineage. Unless of course, if someone wants to stop potential descendants from populating the world.. <br /><br />And again, that is another story..Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8060003097513753942.post-32444961515136870682012-08-29T13:02:33.587-07:002012-08-29T13:02:33.587-07:00Then the real core issue is revealed: from the qu...Then the real core issue is revealed: from the question of just 'what' is considered to be 'contributing' 'to society', to a heart of the matter.. the question of just 'what' is considered to be 'valuable' ... 'to society'.<br />Then the question arises: just who will be 'qualified', shall I daresay 'wise' enough to make that determination, and the whole case will boil down to defining just who can make such a decision, and who is the owner of 'life in general'. Only two answers will result, both from different worldviews. Owner of life is oneself, or owner of life is not oneself. And one answer will end up in self-contradiction and horrible unavoidable disaster, while one answer will not.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8060003097513753942.post-4200641593468820882012-08-25T11:39:56.913-07:002012-08-25T11:39:56.913-07:00It is another way to say, why bother to use up val...It is another way to say, why bother to use up valuable time and public resources for a non-contributing member of society. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8060003097513753942.post-62511557582830978722012-08-19T11:27:52.650-07:002012-08-19T11:27:52.650-07:004) “and the unknown and unpredictable effect of st...4) “and the unknown and unpredictable effect of steroids on behavior.”: is it really true that steroids have never been used on people like Paul because of his autism? So stearoids have never been given to autistic people? And there is nothing to counteract side-effects if there is really an adverse effect on behavior? And there is no alternatives to use of steroids? This is all sounding more than fishy.<br /><br />What puts this over the top for me is the following: <br />“.. He (Paul) may compromise the surgical work. Recovery and convalescence may be jeopardized if he pulls out intravenous tubes and otherwise interferes with the outcome”.<br />I have worked in emergency rooms and ICU’s (Intensive Care Unit). People regularly tend to pull out their tubes and otherwise interfere with the outcome because it is uncomfortable, and foreign to them to have tubes stuck in their various orifices or needles inserted into their skin where there were no holes in the first place. And this is with normal adult people who may be a bit groggy or disoriented. Babies and kids try to pull out their tubes all the time. So are there ways to deal with this? Of course there are. There are preventative measures available so that they can’t do this. Why isn’t this mentioned? Why is this clever tube story proffered as an excuse for denial of treatment, a life-saving treatment in particular?<br /><br /><br />In the face of this, I can’t help wondering if there is another reason for this smooth-sounding but illogical set of reasons for denying lifesaving treatment for Paul the autistic child so that he can survive and live out the rest of his valuable life.<br /><br />Or is this more about just not helping someone with an undesireable trait (ie.autism here) to survive. On the basis of these shameful shoddy excuses for denial of life-saving treatment, it is looking more to me like it could be that autism is simply being viewed by the decision-makers to be not a desireable trait (perhaps under the questionable presumption of helping only the fittest to survive, based on the principle of Survival of the Fittest?)<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8060003097513753942.post-67783622056982844902012-08-19T11:23:07.529-07:002012-08-19T11:23:07.529-07:00The key lies in the proffered 'issues' be...The key lies in the proffered 'issues' being used to deny the target (the autistic: Paul). Specifically, issues conjured up sound so reasonable on first glance, but are at best, ambiguously worded. However, on closer scrutiny the issues are glibly sounding as hollow as a wooden leg, because they may be misleading. <br />For example, we are told this person with his undesireable condition[autism], is being refused help for this heart problem because of " his psychiatric issues, autism, the complexity of the process, multiple procedures and the unknown and unpredictable effect of steroids on behavior." Sounds very official to the naked eye, the undiscerning eye.<br /><br />More specifcally:<br />1)”his psychiatric issues,”: what are these Thought Process issues specifically and how would it affect the successful outcome of a Physical Surgical procedure? Please explain how a Thought Process issue directly affects the success of a Physical Surgical procedure. Also, it is irrelevant to be talking about speculative assumptions after the surgery as to what the patient might or might not do, as this would be pure speculation and likely biased without real facts and authentic justification.<br /><br />2) “autism..”: put as a reason for denial of treatment, it makes this sound like autism is a hopeless disease that heart surgery will not cure .. “so why waste time and money”, as the blanket saying goes. However, what does a condition like autism, which is a brain-related condition, have to do with a mechanical heart-related condition. <br />It’s like saying the following: your car’s airconditioner is not working properly, so that is the reason we cannot work on your engine to replace your spark plugs, and you will just have to live with defective spark plugs because your airconditioning system is a problem and not functioning as expected.” Of course you can see the obvious: what does the airconditioner malfunction have to do with the engine sparkplugs? Obviously nothing.<br /><br />3) “complexity of the process,multiple procedures”: since when is a heart surgery not complex and consist of multiple procedures? Outrageous that this is even put down as a ‘reason’ to deny treatment. Hey, why not let us use this reason to deny treatment to all other cases that have treatment processes that are complex and that have multiple procedures? Won’t that save us a lot of trouble, and valuable resources, to be used for treatment on only the deserving members of society? (continued..)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com