The Study of Racialism

Discussion of U.S. Racialism
About This Study Group and its Site
'
It is currently Fri 03 Sep 2010 20:46

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Disallowed: ad hominem, straw man, faith-based dispute, semantic dispute
Allowed: unsubstantiated factual claim, moral advocacy, mere feelings



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Eugenics in 2008
PostPosted: Thu 04 Dec 2008 12:57 
Offline
Wizard
Wizard
User avatar

Joined: Wed 07 Feb 2007 17:02
Posts: 1876
Location: Lookin DC Metro, Feelin Geneva
Quote:
New screening halves the number of children born with Down syndrome
Research paper: Impact of a new national screening policy for Down syndrome in Denmark: Population based cohort study, BMJ Online
A new national screening strategy in Denmark has halved the number of infants born with Down's syndrome and increased the number of infants diagnosed before birth by 30%, according to a study published on bmj.com today.

Many countries, including England, Australia and New Zealand, are trying to introduce national screening strategies for Down's syndrome, but are facing a variety of problems because of a lack of consensus about the screening policy and logistical challenges.

In 2004, the Danish National Board of Health issued new guidelines for prenatal screening and diagnosis. These included the offer of a combined test for Down's syndrome (based on combination of maternal age, plus serum and nuchal screening) in the first trimester. This test gave women a risk assessment for Down's syndrome at an early stage in the pregnancy. Women whose risk was higher than a defined cut off were referred for invasive diagnostic tests (chorionic villus sampling or amniocentesis).

In the previous guidelines screening for Down's syndrome was based on maternal age and a diagnostic test was mainly offered to women above 35 years.

Professor Ann Tabor and colleagues from Denmark, evaluated the impact of the new national screening strategy on the number of infants born with Down's syndrome and the number of referrals for invasive procedures. They analysed data from the 19 Danish departments of gynaecology and obstetrics and the national cytogenetic registry, for an average of 65,000 births each year, between 2000 and 2007.

Uptake was good, by June 2006 all 15 Danish counties followed the guidelines from 2004 and offered the new screening strategy. In 2006 approximately 84% of pregnant women had a risk assessment for Down's syndrome.

The researchers found that the new strategy was associated with improved earlier detection of Down's syndrome, low false positive rates, and more than a 50% decrease in the number of invasive tests carried out each year.

They report that the number of infants born with Down's syndrome decreased from 55�� per year during 2000��, to 31 in 2005 and 32 in 2006. The total number of invasive tests fell sharply from 7524 in 2000 to 3510 in 2006.

The detection rate in the screened population was 86% in 2005 and 93% in 2006. With 3.9% (17) of women receiving a false positive result in 2005 and 3.3% (7) in 2006.

The authors point out that the value of this new screening strategy is that all women can be assessed early in pregnancy (in the first trimester). The national guidelines emphasise that risk assessment should only be done if women choose the test on the basis of informed choice, therefore despite the programme being available to all pregnant in women in Denmark, some will still choose not to be screened.

The authors conclude by emphasising Denmark's success at building a strong national organisation for fetal medicine and a national quality database that allows follow-up of all screened women at a national level and quality control of the new national screening programme.




Most people will think that testing for illnesses like this are good things...even anti-abortion people...like Sarah Palin knew her son would have a disorder before he was born and prepared for it. Here is the rub:

1) We have just mapped the human genome, but we don't know what most of our genes do yet. As we discover more genes, we will be ... Read Moreable to test for more things. Imagine testing for % chance of cancer, heart disease, even allergies (I have all three in my family). If a test shows a fetus has a 70% chance of getting serious allergies. Would insurance companies want to cover it or will they see it as a preexisting condition??

2) I have a gay friend. He insist he was born gay and so gay rights are like civil rights for minorities. Many disagree and there is no affirmative proof either way (yet). What if gay people are born gay...due to a group of genes (I'm going to guess something that complex involves more than one gene). If we can test for that. In Middle America... Read More...typical moderate folks...will most of them bring a gay child to term when confronted with a 70-80% chance of having a gay child, in the privacy of their doctor's office? I doubt it.

Sounds like the movie Gattica is inevitable.

_________________
My Site:
http://evocausality.ipbhost.com/

George Bernard Shaw: “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.”


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu 04 Dec 2008 13:20 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator

Joined: Sat 27 Nov 2004 21:42
Posts: 3028
I predict, at least in the U.S., fierce opposition to more genetic research and the expansion of what Denmark currently does. Denmark can probably get away with this because it is a relatively homogeneous society.

Denmark and other Scandinavian countries did have secret eugenics programs up until the late 20th Century.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu 04 Dec 2008 13:24 
Offline
Wizard
Wizard
User avatar

Joined: Wed 07 Feb 2007 17:02
Posts: 1876
Location: Lookin DC Metro, Feelin Geneva
G-Man wrote:
I predict, at least in the U.S., fierce opposition to more genetic research and the expansion of what Denmark currently does. Denmark can probably get away with this because it is a relatively homogeneous society.

Denmark and other Scandinavian countries did have secret eugenics programs up until the late 20th Century.


We do this already.

Sarah Palin could have aborted her child, she knew ahead of time.

I agree there will be opposition to further genetic research, but when has someone been able to bottle science?

ONce rich people start doing it, poor people will demand it from their politicians as part of "national health care".

:lol:

This will be interesting for conservatives.

Economic and Financial conservatives will promote free market and ideas...they won't want to keep science bottled...because there is money in it.

Religous rights will go nuts...as abortion will likely increase, because we will be able to test for these genes long before we can "fix" them.

Liberals will go nuts if they found a gay gene or some intelligence genes...

This could realign U.S. politics.

_________________
My Site:
http://evocausality.ipbhost.com/

George Bernard Shaw: “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.”


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat 06 Dec 2008 12:25 
Offline
Moderator-at-Large
Moderator-at-Large
User avatar

Joined: Fri 14 Sep 2007 14:06
Posts: 958
Location: Florida
Dragon Horse wrote:
This could realign U.S. politics.


Or wipe out the human race. :lol:

_________________
"Who the cap fit, let them wear it."
~Bob Marley

Have you checked out <a href="http://www.mulatto.org/">mulatto.org</a> lately?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group