opinions on "AFA opposed stem cells experiment on the Deaf babies"

qawaearata · 05-27-2012, 05:25 AM

"AFA Denounces FDAs Approval of Newborn Stem Cell Experimentation
Audism Free America (AFA), a grassroots Deaf activist network, condemns the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for its approval of a study which will use cord blood stem cells on infants as young as six weeks old in an effort to eradicate the Deaf population of the United States."

I'm told this is only HoH but i have no confirmed 100%

Rather old topic by now (i'm sure) however, i would like to know YOUR opinion and why.

Personally i think if this affects stem cell study in general from being illegal that it is complete bullshit, the act if denied should just be for the Deaf/HoH approval not stem cells in general. That being said, if it puts an infants life in danger, even 0.00000001% i would 100% against it, which im sure it would be. I Feel as if they should be able to choose, though we know that would never be able to happen at under 6 weeks... parents are close minded and should also have no say in my opinion. other than that i really wold like your BLUNT opinions
(i'm hearing)

**Sares** · 05-27-2012, 08:20 AM

I would guess it all depends on the view, when does life start and at what stage do you call an embryo a baby and is it a baby if it is crated in a test tube or only if created inside a woman?
Scientist like to call it a “blastocyst” and that is another word for baby but I am sure the word change helps them to deal with the fact they are working with a potentially new born person. What happens when they find the cure for everything using “blastocyst”? Do we start growing babies for harvest?
I do not thing the human animal is smart enough to decide when life is life and it scares me to see the future “baby farms” so that the rest of us might live, and that would be the ones with the money to have the procedure”. I cannot carry a child but have known others that told me they knew the moment life began inside them. My wish is they could get stem cells without destroying a potential baby.
For me if I have to “kill a baby” to hear I guess I will never will hear. If I have to kill to live I guess it has been a great 33 years, see you next time unless I am sacrificed for stem cell research.

**Foxrac** · 05-27-2012, 10:51 AM

Funny, I thought AFA is called American Family Association.

green427 · 05-27-2012, 12:46 PM

**Ausrider** · 05-27-2012, 03:53 PM

"eradicate the Deaf population"......i didnt realise we were a disease that needed eliminating

**Sares** · 05-27-2012, 06:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ausrider

"eradicate the Deaf population"......i didnt realise we were a disease that needed eliminating

Ausrider, did you not know we are imperfect, like blind people and have no place in the new order. All this time I thought I was safe being blond and blue eyed but even that requirement changed.
I have been “fixed” enough and would not know what to do with sound.

Bebonang · 05-27-2012, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Foxrac

Funny, I thought AFA is called American Family Association.

Bebonang · 05-27-2012, 07:34 PM

Why it always have to be the baby to be as young as 6 weeks old after birth? It is not necessary to implant with CI or have a stem cell on the baby. This is really ridiculous and absurd. That is why I need the babies to be left alone without those trying to put them in without their will. This is their bodies, not the parents or the authorities. It is always better to wait until they are old enough to understand if they want CI or Stem Cell. Beside, stem cell is probably not going to work. Yes, it can be risky.

**Foxrac** · 05-27-2012, 07:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ausrider

"eradicate the Deaf population"......i didnt realise we were a disease that needed eliminating

If it is true then...

It means all deaf schools will be closed due to low enrollment and Gallaudet University probably turned into non-deaf university that use ASL as primary language.

The cause of hearing loss will be restricted to elderly people and anyone who exposed to unsafe, extremely loud environment.

I don't see that happening right now.

Rubella vaccine has caused to reduce the numbers of deaf babies.

kokonut · 05-28-2012, 12:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bebonang

Why it always have to be the baby to be as young as 6 weeks old after birth? It is not necessary to implant with CI or have a stem cell on the baby. This is really ridiculous and absurd. That is why I need the babies to be left alone without those trying to put them in without their will. This is their bodies, not the parents or the authorities. It is always better to wait until they are old enough to understand if they want CI or Stem Cell. Beside, stem cell is probably not going to work. Yes, it can be risky.

In terms of acquiring sound at a critical time of brain development allowing the ability to make sense of sound and language, it is not better to wait. It's a simple medical fact. Waiting until a child is 10, 12, or 14 years old would be too late would almost guarantee certain failure.

Eventually stem cell will work.

Quote:

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has recently approved our groundbreaking trial to evaluate the safety of using a child’s own cord blood stem cells to regenerate damaged cells in the inner ear and potentially restore the child’s hearing. This trial builds on Dr. Baumgartner’s prior success treating traumatic brain injury (TBI) with stem cells, and encouraging pre-clinical data from Italy showing that cochlear damage in mice may be repaired by transplantation of human umbilical cord hematopoietic stem cells (HSC).

In the mouse study, researchers administered HSC intravenously to a mammalian mouse model in which permanent hearing loss had been induced by ototoxic medication, noise or both. Hair cell regeneration and repair of the Organ of Corti was only observed in mice that received HSC transplants. This experiment provided a proof of concept for our trial by suggesting that under certain conditions, mammals, like birds and reptiles, could replace their damaged hair cells.

Empowering the Body to Fix Its Parts | Guest Blog, Scientific American Blog Network

It's coming...

qawaearata · 05-28-2012, 02:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ausrider

"eradicate the Deaf population"......i didnt realise we were a disease that needed eliminating

:/

This is what i was quoting Btw, i briefly skimmed it at the time.
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2012/1/prweb9108761.htm

Quote:

Originally Posted by kokonut

In terms of acquiring sound at a critical time of brain development allowing the ability to make sense of sound and language, it is not better to wait. It's a simple medical fact. Waiting until a child is 10, 12, or 14 years old would be too late would almost guarantee certain failure.

Eventually stem cell will work.

Yes, Your right, development of language occurs between the ages of 1-6. That is the problem, a long with the idea of letting the child hear now, and he can choose later" mindset. In reality, he would have no idea of who he would of been as a person, so its like apples in oranges.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ausrider

"eradicate the Deaf population"......i didnt realise we were a disease that needed eliminating

To Clarify i BELIVE it would be to use stem cells to repair a HoH child's hearing, I dont believe it can be used to "fix" a profoundly deaf baby. What i do not understand is having a gene that can be passed on, or a chromosome mutation causing HOH/Deaf children to not hear, is not going to completely counteract the result. If this passes then who is to say when it will stop which i believe someone posted before. Is being gay a genetic "disease" as well. From someone who is not HoH OR deaf I feel that if my son or daughter was born Deaf, and i couldnt speak with him/her because i (my parents) chose to go thru with the surgery that it would affect my child if no one pays attention to the genetical map of the family before me. I mean if you have diabetes in your family, you dont just avoid all sugar and pretend it doesnt exist, you are just more aware of the situation. IDK, the genetics are never going to phase out, there will always be cases, and just chalking it up to "we can make them better" is bullshit...you could also sew my toes so i can swim faster but somehow that sounds ridiculous? am i just rambling or are these making sense...I feel like this is all a tug of war between; is the child half hearing? or is he half deaf?....

kokonut · 05-28-2012, 08:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by qawaearata

:/

This is what i was quoting Btw, i briefly skimmed it at the time.
AFA Denounces FDAs Approval of Newborn Stem Cell Experimentation

Yes, Your right, development of language occurs between the ages of 1-6. That is the problem, a long with the idea of letting the child hear now, and he can choose later" mindset. In reality, he would have no idea of who he would of been as a person, so its like apples in oranges.

To Clarify i BELIVE it would be to use stem cells to repair a HoH child's hearing, I dont believe it can be used to "fix" a profoundly deaf baby. What i do not understand is having a gene that can be passed on, or a chromosome mutation causing HOH/Deaf children to not hear, is not going to completely counteract the result. If this passes then who is to say when it will stop which i believe someone posted before. Is being gay a genetic "disease" as well. From someone who is not HoH OR deaf I feel that if my son or daughter was born Deaf, and i couldnt speak with him/her because i (my parents) chose to go thru with the surgery that it would affect my child if no one pays attention to the genetical map of the family before me. I mean if you have diabetes in your family, you dont just avoid all sugar and pretend it doesnt exist, you are just more aware of the situation. IDK, the genetics are never going to phase out, there will always be cases, and just chalking it up to "we can make them better" is bullshit...you could also sew my toes so i can swim faster but somehow that sounds ridiculous? am i just rambling or are these making sense...I feel like this is all a tug of war between; is the child half hearing? or is he half deaf?....

No babies are born Deaf. It's a cultural deaf thing to be called Deaf (i.e. Deaf with the big D). They are either born with a hearing loss (could be just be a mild hearing loss) or deaf. 90 to 95% of all babies are born to hearing adults.

Language development actually begins in the womb for babies with intact hearing. (Babies' Language Learning Starts From The Womb). Best time for language development (speaking and listening) for the brain occurs between 0 and 4 years old, an optimal time period. However, for a critical time to tap into the plasticity of the brain would be between 0 and 2 years old.

For those who say wait until a child is much older (say 7, 9, or 10 years old) to make their own decision do not understand how the plasticity of the brain works in children from 0 to 4 years old, a time sensitive implantation for it to work optimally. Not just implantation but even wearing a hearing aid. The earlier the better.

http://www.utdallas.edu/~assmann/hcs...on_mount05.pdf

http://www.colorado.edu/slhs/eeglab/...Dorman2009.pdf

**Oddball** · 05-28-2012, 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kokonut

In terms of acquiring sound at a critical time of brain development allowing the ability to make sense of sound and language, it is not better to wait. It's a simple medical fact. Waiting until a child is 10, 12, or 14 years old would be too late would almost guarantee certain failure.

Eventually stem cell will work.

Empowering the Body to Fix Its Parts | Guest Blog, Scientific American Blog Network

It's coming...

So, you wish you are going to become hearing eventually? For me, I'd rather use stem cell to cure my stupid diabetes.

**Foxrac** · 05-28-2012, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oddball

So, you wish you are going to become hearing eventually? For me, I'd rather use stem cell to cure my stupid diabetes.

Yup, I want stem cell to cure my usher syndrome, IBS, Social Anxiety and OCD.

qawaearata · 05-28-2012, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kokonut

No babies are born Deaf. It's a cultural deaf thing to be called Deaf (i.e. Deaf with the big D). They are either born with a hearing loss (could be just be a mild hearing loss) or deaf. 90 to 95% of all babies are born to hearing adults.

Language development actually begins in the womb for babies with intact hearing. (Babies' Language Learning Starts From The Womb). Best time for language development (speaking and listening) for the brain occurs between 0 and 4 years old, an optimal time period. However, for a critical time to tap into the plasticity of the brain would be between 0 and 2 years old.

For those who say wait until a child is much older (say 7, 9, or 10 years old) to make their own decision do not understand how the plasticity of the brain works in children from 0 to 4 years old, a time sensitive implantation for it to work optimally. Not just implantation but even wearing a hearing aid. The earlier the better.

http://www.utdallas.edu/~assmann/hcs...on_mount05.pdf

http://www.colorado.edu/slhs/eeglab/...Dorman2009.pdf

if you are not born completely deaf what do they mean by "only Hoh" as in if they are not 95% lost of hearing already? also, is that due to morality or stem cells just not being able to repair it physically?

kokonut · 05-28-2012, 09:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oddball

So, you wish you are going to become hearing eventually? For me, I'd rather use stem cell to cure my stupid diabetes.

I'd still be deaf in my left ear.

kokonut · 05-28-2012, 09:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by qawaearata

if you are not born completely deaf what do they mean by "only Hoh" as in if they are not 95% lost of hearing already? also, is that due to morality or stem cells just not being able to repair it physically?

You can be born completely deaf and be hoh nowadays. When one says "hoh" it is usually a reference to the ability to understand the spoken language (not lip reading) marginally to really goo. It usually go in tandem with the ability to speak and listen.

If you mean 100% stone deaf then that's pretty rare since profoundly deaf can hear something.

Not sure I understand your last question.

kokonut · 05-28-2012, 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oddball

So, you wish you are going to become hearing eventually? For me, I'd rather use stem cell to cure my stupid diabetes.

Stem cell therapy reverses diabetes

Stem-cell therapy helps diabetics heal - Health - DNA

05-27-2012, 05:25 AM	#1 (permalink)
qawaearata Registered User Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Florida Posts: 65	opinions on "AFA opposed stem cells experiment on the Deaf babies" "AFA Denounces FDAs Approval of Newborn Stem Cell Experimentation Audism Free America (AFA), a grassroots Deaf activist network, condemns the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for its approval of a study which will use cord blood stem cells on infants as young as six weeks old in an effort to eradicate the Deaf population of the United States." I'm told this is only HoH but i have no confirmed 100% Rather old topic by now (i'm sure) however, i would like to know YOUR opinion and why. Personally i think if this affects stem cell study in general from being illegal that it is complete bullshit, the act if denied should just be for the Deaf/HoH approval not stem cells in general. That being said, if it puts an infants life in danger, even 0.00000001% i would 100% against it, which im sure it would be. I Feel as if they should be able to choose, though we know that would never be able to happen at under 6 weeks... parents are close minded and should also have no say in my opinion. other than that i really wold like your BLUNT opinions (i'm hearing)

05-27-2012, 08:20 AM	#2 (permalink)
Sares Enjoy the quiet life Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Cheyenne Wyoming Posts: 208	I would guess it all depends on the view, when does life start and at what stage do you call an embryo a baby and is it a baby if it is crated in a test tube or only if created inside a woman? Scientist like to call it a “blastocyst” and that is another word for baby but I am sure the word change helps them to deal with the fact they are working with a potentially new born person. What happens when they find the cure for everything using “blastocyst”? Do we start growing babies for harvest? I do not thing the human animal is smart enough to decide when life is life and it scares me to see the future “baby farms” so that the rest of us might live, and that would be the ones with the money to have the procedure”. I cannot carry a child but have known others that told me they knew the moment life began inside them. My wish is they could get stem cells without destroying a potential baby. For me if I have to “kill a baby” to hear I guess I will never will hear. If I have to kill to live I guess it has been a great 33 years, see you next time unless I am sacrificed for stem cell research. __________________ I always enjoy a quiet evening at home. Work is really getting in the way of being here to play.

05-27-2012, 10:51 AM	#3 (permalink)
Foxrac Need Stormtroopers? Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Zaphias Posts: 32,398	Funny, I thought AFA is called American Family Association. __________________ In Moto We Trust

05-27-2012, 12:46 PM	#4 (permalink)
green427 Registered User Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Cooch's Bridge Battlefield Posts: 1,623	__________________ Warning: Anything I post may not make any sense. All advice is for entertainment value only. Sarcasm might be present. Interpret at your own risk.

05-27-2012, 03:53 PM	#5 (permalink)
Ausrider Premium Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: At a track near you Posts: 331	"eradicate the Deaf population"......i didnt realise we were a disease that needed eliminating Bebonang likes this.

Today
Deafness	Sponsored Links __________________ This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members. Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com

05-27-2012, 07:34 PM	#8 (permalink)
Bebonang Registered User Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Manitoulin Island on Lake Huron in Canada Posts: 7,007	Why it always have to be the baby to be as young as 6 weeks old after birth? It is not necessary to implant with CI or have a stem cell on the baby. This is really ridiculous and absurd. That is why I need the babies to be left alone without those trying to put them in without their will. This is their bodies, not the parents or the authorities. It is always better to wait until they are old enough to understand if they want CI or Stem Cell. Beside, stem cell is probably not going to work. Yes, it can be risky. __________________ I HAVE BEEN DEAF SINCE BIRTH, AND IT IS STILL AWESOME TO BE . (thumb up) (very happy)

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode