![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
neadodsFascinating article in today's Washingon Post showing how Rubella (German Measels) has been eradicated in the US, and how it could eventually be eradicated in the world.
Rubella isn't much for someone who's already born, but apparently it's pretty much the natural version of thalidimyde for pregnant women; a mild case in mama means autistic, blind, heart-damaged, retarded infants (and more) if they don't outright miscarry. So I'm reading about how this has been completely eliminated in the US and thinking "this is so COOL!" and I suddenly get ambushed by this paragraph:
[The inventor of the vaccine] recalled last week that opponents of abortion briefly questioned whether it was ethical to use the vaccine, because it was developed with virus isolated from an infected fetus that had been legally aborted in Pennsylvania in 1965.
Because it's so much more ethical to let millions of children be deformed or die naturally? According to the article, In 1964 and 1965, rubella exploded. There were 12.5 million infections here, which gave rise to 20,000 cases of the congenital syndrome, about 6,200 stillbirths, and at least 5,000 abortions.
For all the anti-choice folks who argue "what if that kid could have cured cancer?" well, *that* "kid" DID cure rubella!
Rubella isn't much for someone who's already born, but apparently it's pretty much the natural version of thalidimyde for pregnant women; a mild case in mama means autistic, blind, heart-damaged, retarded infants (and more) if they don't outright miscarry. So I'm reading about how this has been completely eliminated in the US and thinking "this is so COOL!" and I suddenly get ambushed by this paragraph:
[The inventor of the vaccine] recalled last week that opponents of abortion briefly questioned whether it was ethical to use the vaccine, because it was developed with virus isolated from an infected fetus that had been legally aborted in Pennsylvania in 1965.
Because it's so much more ethical to let millions of children be deformed or die naturally? According to the article, In 1964 and 1965, rubella exploded. There were 12.5 million infections here, which gave rise to 20,000 cases of the congenital syndrome, about 6,200 stillbirths, and at least 5,000 abortions.
For all the anti-choice folks who argue "what if that kid could have cured cancer?" well, *that* "kid" DID cure rubella!
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-03-21 04:51 pm (UTC)I notice that the article said "briefly". Apparently someone got a severe Reality Check.
OTOH... I just had a really nasty thought. Given that the present leaders of the soi-disant "pro-life" movement have demonstrated an equally severe inability to distinguish between reality and fantasy, perhaps we should put that bug back into their ears. I can't think of anything which would do their goal more long-term damage!
no subject
Date: 2005-03-21 05:52 pm (UTC)Not only was it informative and interesting, it is a stellar example of why it burns me up when I hear about people voluntarily not having their children immunized.
no subject
Date: 2005-03-21 06:22 pm (UTC)That is a whole 'nother rant. I kinda agree with the guy who wrote "The Story of the Baby" (a hilarious rant about fatherhood from the POV of a smartass who loves baby and wife but knows he isn't quite father material; it's coming out as a book called The Poo Bomb shortly, or I'd direct you to the website.)
Anyway, he summed it up beautifully in a chapter that I hope made it to the book - you should only be able to opt out of vaccines after you write a 5 page paper, with references, on Why Polio Is Cool.
no subject
Date: 2005-03-23 02:27 am (UTC)The Why Polio Is Cool paper so needs to be researched by my aunt--but that, again, is a whole 'nother rant. Yeesh.