Should we do more than what has been done to limit CP? No. Honestly, no.I think we should do more about attitudes about disability.
I don't vaccinate my child because it's my right to determine which diseases come back
- Thread starter chansen
- Start date
Welcome to Wondercafe2!
A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!
Should we do more than what has been done to limit CP? No. Honestly, no.I think we should do more about attitudes about disability.
Lastpointe
Well-Known Member
Wow.
Yeah. Wow.
Lastpointe
Well-Known Member
I would never say that anyone has a life of less value.
But i find it odd to hear you say that you would be in favour of not trying to prevent damage
I think this is a discussion bound to go no where so i will back off
But i find it odd to hear you say that you would be in favour of not trying to prevent damage
I think this is a discussion bound to go no where so i will back off
I will address this and I hope you read it. I think a lot is being done to prevent damage but I don't think that CP needs to be eradicated. I don't think much more needs to be done. A lot is done. I think people with disabilities of various types add to richness and diversity of society. I think deadly illnesses, AIDS, cancer - accute diseases that are life threatening need to be cured. CP is not life threatening in the majority of cases and it is not a disease or an illness it's a condition.
chansen
Had a point all along
- Pronouns
- He/Him/His
I think this speaks to your attitude more than any other post you've ever made, and it brings clairity to many of your previous posts.
I think you're taking two mutually exclusive problems, and saying one is more important than the other.
I think attitudes of others have hurt you, people have lebeled you, and you are more emotionally damaged by them than you were by any lack of oxygen early in your life.
Here's the thing: f*** them. They don't matter. Borrow a line from Taylor Swift and, ironically, shake it off.
See what I did there? I made a little CP joke. For those who don't know, spasticity is a common symptom of CP. I was about to make the Taylor Swift reference, recognized it could be misconstrued because I'm talking to someone with CP, and instead of shying away from it, I had a little fun with it. That wasn't to denigrate you, though I pretty much expect you to take it that way. That's just being honest and trying to make people smile.
I spend two years around kids with CP and other brain injuries. Yeah, it sucks when people look at your kid like he's a freak. How they assume he's just lazy to be in a stroller at 4. But who the hell cares? If you're looking to be offended, you'll find lots to be offended about. And for what? What's in it for you? Forget them. They don't matter.
And if you take offense to people who are trying to be kind, and are joking around, you've lost sight of the big picture, that wit and laughter are some of the things that makes us human, far more than the ability to walk on two legs.
But mostly, I don't want another kid to have to go through what my son went through. Idiots who wondered to themselves why he was still alive, do not matter. They are idiots. If they say something stupid, sure, let them have it, but then let it go. Carrying it around with you does you further harm, and harms your relationship with those around you. I know. I find it incredibly difficult to ignore idiots.
But when you say "CP doesn't need to be eradicated," I reject that attitude in the strongest terms. Yeah, changing how people view disabilites is important. But that's not the big thing. If we learn to repair brains, if we can remylinate the axons that connect brain cells (it's like putting the plastic coating back on a burnt wire), we can treat not only CP more effectively, but maybe MS and other diseases as well. If it can be done, we need to go for it.
I agree with almost everything @chansen - thank you for your sharing and sensitivity - but I disagree with your last sentence because it is ableist. It assumes that humanity can't be 'perfect' without able bodied norms being met - as if there are supposed to be able bodied norms. Look around. That's changing.
Actually I reject your last paragraph because it's ableist. And you know when people say things that piss me off it's just an indication that we have a ways to go. Saw a poster somewhere "your attitude is more disabling to me than my impairment". Pretty much speaks to what has driven the PWD "community" to fight for changes in accessibility. It was they who did it - not doctors.
Try to look at it a different way. Not saying nothing should be done. Lots is done. I am saying it's okay to have a disability. How can adults with disabilities try to change things - think of themselves as equals - if stuff like CP is considered a medical mistake. Then subconsciously we remain unequal "freaks" to society even though they might be too polite to say so. Nobody's looking to isolate "LGBT" genes (i hope) to make sure everyone is straight. It's the same thing, re:CP from the perspective of someone who has had CP for over 40 years.
No. I am me. The same looks you and Carter got I get after 40 years. I deal with it pretty well believe me. My mobility had declined a little so it's more on my mind, granted. And even if personal acceptance is important to me - every PWD who ever had to put themselves out there amongst all the ignorant s**t society dishes over and over in order to eventually change anything had a personal story to tell. If you talk to other adults with disabilities you might find several others of us who think similarly to me - that they don't want to eradicate all impairment they want to see attitudes change.
chansen
Had a point all along
- Pronouns
- He/Him/His
What a selfish attitude. You're worried more about how people see you than you are about the newborn with CP.
The impaired adults I know either hope, or actively work toward a world where no child needs to experience their impairment. That's not "ableist" - that's compassion and hope. That's what we're supposed to do - make the world a better place for the next generation.
Quit it with the "ableist" line. I was worried you would screw it up, and you have. Using it on someone who dared to write, "If it can be done (eradicate impairments), we need to go for it," is going to backfire on you every single time. You are sabotaging the concept of ableism.
It's not selfish chansen no it is not - I will let the doctors worry about preventing CP but in the meantime I care about the quality of life of people who have disabilities and having an impairment is just part of who they are. It is not a scourge on society or a burden or a mistake. It just is. What's disabling is that they are seen as flawed people - that is a mistake. The people aren't.
Ritafee
Is Being Human
http://sharylattkisson.com/where-are-the-autistic-amish/
This is an interesting article written several years ago by UPI investigative journalist Dan Olmsted. It asks “Where are the autistic Amish?”
After the article was published, back when more reporters were covering the scientific links between vaccines and autism, I asked an official from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) about the supposed lack of autism in the unvaccinated Amish. She said that there could be many other reasons besides the community’s aversion to vaccines. For example, “They don’t use electricity, right?” she told me. In other words, she seemed to put lack of electricity on equal footing with lack of vaccinations when it comes to what could be responsible for the apparent lower than average autism rate in the unvaccinated Amish.
The obvious difference is there are many scientific studies supporting a link between vaccines and autism–often unreported, under-reported or dismissed by pharmaceutical interests and vaccine activists who have long fought a PR campaign to falsely portray the studies and researchers as “anti-vaccine.”
I told the CDC official that it would seem that a survey of the unvaccinated population could be a good first step in further dispelling or further confirming the possibility of a vaccine tie to autism. The CDC official acknowledged to me that the information would be worthwhile. I asked whether CDC would attempt such a survey.
Such a survey wouldn’t necessarily cost a penny because the CDC already conducts regular telephone and mail surveys to monitor childhood immunization coverage. It could just add a question: has your child been diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder?
While not necessarily conclusive, if the incidence of autism, Attention Deficit Disorder and other related disorders is roughly the same in the unvaccinated population as in the fully vaccinated, it might steer attention and research in a different direction. That would serve the interests of those who wish to debunk a vaccine-autism link.
But what if the incidence of autism and related disorders is markedly lower or higher in the unvaccinated population? That could be grounds for serious further study.
The CDC official answered my question as to whether it would attempt a survey by saying that it was something that “somebody” should do.
“Why not the CDC?” I asked. “And, if not, then will the CDC encourage such a study?”
“Somebody should do it,” she said again, noncommittally.
To date, hasn’t been done. Or if it has, the CDC hasn’t publicized the results.
The former head of the National Institutes of Health and member of the Institute of Medicine, Dr. Bernadine Healy, suggested that federal officials don’t want to do such studies. In an interview with me several years ago, she said that many of her colleagues had been too quick to dismiss evidence of the vaccine-autism link because they were “afraid” of where it might lead and how it would impact vaccination rates globally.
Incidentally, after UPI’s Olmsted embarked upon the report on the Amish and other news regarding the question of vaccines and autism, he was — like many of us — targeted by the pharmaceutical vaccine activists who attempt to squelch any such discussion. Dr. Healy, pro-vaccine and an esteemed medical ethicist, likewise became their target.
Meantime, the government was secretly conceding and paying cases of vaccine-injured children who ended up with autism and had their cases heard in federal vaccine court.
In Olmsted’s case, the pharmaceutical vaccine activists put their well-funded efforts behind disparaging him and the Amish article, falsely claiming that a vaccine-autism link has been “debunked.” One result of their efforts can be seen in the skewed editing of Olmsted’s Wikipedia biography. It’s worth reading so that you can begin to recognize the wording and hallmarks of vaccine activist propaganda in blogs, articles, ads, on the news and in social media.
Olmsted went on to found a blog called Age of Autism that, unlike much of the media, remains independent of pharmaceutical advertisers/vaccine makers and is dedicated to exposing information about vaccines and autism.
Do your own research. Consult those you trust. Think for yourself. Make up your own mind.
This is an interesting article written several years ago by UPI investigative journalist Dan Olmsted. It asks “Where are the autistic Amish?”
After the article was published, back when more reporters were covering the scientific links between vaccines and autism, I asked an official from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) about the supposed lack of autism in the unvaccinated Amish. She said that there could be many other reasons besides the community’s aversion to vaccines. For example, “They don’t use electricity, right?” she told me. In other words, she seemed to put lack of electricity on equal footing with lack of vaccinations when it comes to what could be responsible for the apparent lower than average autism rate in the unvaccinated Amish.
The obvious difference is there are many scientific studies supporting a link between vaccines and autism–often unreported, under-reported or dismissed by pharmaceutical interests and vaccine activists who have long fought a PR campaign to falsely portray the studies and researchers as “anti-vaccine.”
I told the CDC official that it would seem that a survey of the unvaccinated population could be a good first step in further dispelling or further confirming the possibility of a vaccine tie to autism. The CDC official acknowledged to me that the information would be worthwhile. I asked whether CDC would attempt such a survey.
Such a survey wouldn’t necessarily cost a penny because the CDC already conducts regular telephone and mail surveys to monitor childhood immunization coverage. It could just add a question: has your child been diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder?
While not necessarily conclusive, if the incidence of autism, Attention Deficit Disorder and other related disorders is roughly the same in the unvaccinated population as in the fully vaccinated, it might steer attention and research in a different direction. That would serve the interests of those who wish to debunk a vaccine-autism link.
But what if the incidence of autism and related disorders is markedly lower or higher in the unvaccinated population? That could be grounds for serious further study.
The CDC official answered my question as to whether it would attempt a survey by saying that it was something that “somebody” should do.
“Why not the CDC?” I asked. “And, if not, then will the CDC encourage such a study?”
“Somebody should do it,” she said again, noncommittally.
To date, hasn’t been done. Or if it has, the CDC hasn’t publicized the results.
The former head of the National Institutes of Health and member of the Institute of Medicine, Dr. Bernadine Healy, suggested that federal officials don’t want to do such studies. In an interview with me several years ago, she said that many of her colleagues had been too quick to dismiss evidence of the vaccine-autism link because they were “afraid” of where it might lead and how it would impact vaccination rates globally.
Incidentally, after UPI’s Olmsted embarked upon the report on the Amish and other news regarding the question of vaccines and autism, he was — like many of us — targeted by the pharmaceutical vaccine activists who attempt to squelch any such discussion. Dr. Healy, pro-vaccine and an esteemed medical ethicist, likewise became their target.
Meantime, the government was secretly conceding and paying cases of vaccine-injured children who ended up with autism and had their cases heard in federal vaccine court.
In Olmsted’s case, the pharmaceutical vaccine activists put their well-funded efforts behind disparaging him and the Amish article, falsely claiming that a vaccine-autism link has been “debunked.” One result of their efforts can be seen in the skewed editing of Olmsted’s Wikipedia biography. It’s worth reading so that you can begin to recognize the wording and hallmarks of vaccine activist propaganda in blogs, articles, ads, on the news and in social media.
Olmsted went on to found a blog called Age of Autism that, unlike much of the media, remains independent of pharmaceutical advertisers/vaccine makers and is dedicated to exposing information about vaccines and autism.
Do your own research. Consult those you trust. Think for yourself. Make up your own mind.
revjohn
Well-Known Member
revjohn
Well-Known Member
Or even:
http://www.autismsocietycanada.ca/
http://www.autismsocietycanada.ca/