There’s an episode of The Simpsons in which Homer wins a Grammy Award, and the following dialog occurs:
Homer: Oh, why won’t anyone give me an award?
Lisa: You won a Grammy!
Homer: I mean an award that’s worth winning.
Then a crawl line scrolls across the bottom of the screen, stating: “LEGAL DISCLAIMER: Mr. Simpson’s opinions does not reflect those of the producers, who don’t consider the Grammy an award at all.”
That’s how I’m coming to feel about the once-noble Nobel Prize.
One of the most egregious awards they made was last year’s honoring of our president with a Nobel Peace Prize before he’d done anything. (It was awarded on his 11th day after inauguration.)
Even he said he did not feel worthy of the award—not that that stopped him from accepting it, mind you.
And the Nobel folks have a long history of lame decisions.
Now they have added to that legacy with the latest award, in which the culture of evil celebrates itself.
According to the Nobel web site,
The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2010 was awarded to Robert G. Edwards “for the development of in vitro fertilization”.
Edwards was one of two doctors who pioneered IVF, though his partner has since died.
Take it away, Christian Science Monitor! . . .
The Nobel medicine prize committee acknowledged the role of British biologist Robert Edwards in developing in vitro fertilization, handing him on Monday the prestigious award for bringing “joy to infertile people all over the world.”
Of course, the Nobel committee didn’t mention that it also brought death to millions of children conceived in a dish and then intentionally not used, some of them spending their entire existence in a freezer, only to be treated later as medical waste.
Between 2 and 3 percent of newborns in many developed countries are now IVF babies. And about 4 million individuals have born so far been through IVF, according to the Nobel committee. The birth of the first “test-tube baby,” Louise Brown, was in 1978.
“What Louise Brown meant was, you held her up, all her parts were there, and she smiled, and that ended the ethics criticism,” says Arthur Caplan, director of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia.
Well, among culture-of-death, establishment bioethicists, maybe. Their job is to not to actually say no to anything but to rationalize whatever whatever comes down the pike and help society accept it by declaring it ethical.
So where do we go from here?
“The Nobel Prize is for the work Edwards did helping the infertile, but [he could also have] unleashed the most controversial technology I can think of, which is, should we use it to design our offspring?”
At the same time, the prospect of scientists helping to create human life in a lab has raised vexing ethical issues. The foremost question – very real for many IVF parents – is about what happens to fertilized, but unused, embryos.
One unintended consequence of IVF includes an explosion in multiple births – as a result of parents choosing to implant multiple embryos to raise the likelihood of success for an expensive procedure.
FILE UNDER: Dr. Frankenstein’s Medicine Show
What are your thoughts?
Comments
Post a Comment
I wonder what Alfred Nobel would think. It used to be a prestigious award. Now, whatever. What’s next, an award for the inventor of RU-486? The Nobel Foundation is turning the award into a pile of crap.
The Nobel is a joke and has been for awhile now.
As NPR was celebrating this they mentioned how silly people used to worry about the embryos would be defective but now there are four million healthy people from test tubes out there. Wouldn’t it be fun , I wondered , to write a book about how the government had planted designer genes in all these babies and was only waiting until there were enough reset tube people to take over the world. It would destroy the industry overnight. Hmmm. It would need a sub plot about how birth control pills had a mind control effect making women want to have test tube babies.
Martin, that sounds hauntingly similar to a Chick Tract. Of course, the Satanic/Pagan Catholic Church would be behind it all; our opposition to such things being merely a front.
Martin, your plot is eerily similar to a major subplot of Dean Koontz’s Frankenstein books (which I recommend, along with his others, if you like excellent socio-political-cultural commentary with your suspense. And he’s Catholic!).
Back on topic. IVF beat out the miraculous advances in adult stem cell technology? The Nobel has become liberals giving money to liberals, for the acceptable sort of causes. How else give an 11-day President a prize for some nebulous hope of what he might do? No surprise that they would, but sad. The Nobel used to mean something.
I had read sometime ago that IVF children have medical problems. Does anyone have information on that?
It’s my understanding that the “crisis” in natural fertilization of babies is caused by women who begin taking the birth control pill to “turn off” their system for 20 years or so and then having difficulties in turning it back on again when they decide to have a child.
This year is the 50th anniversary of the invention of the birth control pill.
I know this girl who went through this whole thing with in vitro fertilization. It never worked. I think she had two miscarriages. She was miserable and sad. I understand it is a painful process. And, oh yes, it is expensive. She ultimately gave up because the false hope, heartbreak and stress were just entirely too much. Not to mention the sheer physical pain and discomfort.
They adopted a child.
She got pregnant twice afterward, the out-dated way, and now has three children.
Why was she able to get pregnant? Don’t ask her IVF doctor, because they obviously don’t know. The folks that took thousands of dollars from her and failed to deliver don’t have a clue. Or at least I hope they don’t, in a way. Because if they do know, then they simply took advantage of her. But then, they took advantage of her anyway. Because they failed.
IVF holds out this hope to discouraged and desperate couples. “We can get you pregnant.” People that want to have a baby become so desperate they are willing to try anything, and to believe any encouragement. They are given information regarding the chances for success and the potential complications. But, this is all offered within the context of “This is your only hope.” Which is flatly and unambiguously a lie.
Natural Family Planning, however, looks at root causes for infertility, and works toward the proper and natural functioning of the couple seeking to have babies. This is a little known fact regarding what many just look at as Catholic Sanctioned Birth Control. It is not that; it is a way to cooperate with God and your god given bodies to have children in a manner which is in conformity with God’s plan. But, because it understands fertility, NFP is also a resource for dealing with infertility.
If IVF did not get her pregnant, and then she got pregnant twice since then, what changed? Why was she able to have not one but two babies when they had been trying and failing for years? As I mentioned earlier, don’t ask the IVF folks. The very uncharitable part of me says they don’t know or care because, simply, there is not nearly the money to be made helping couple have babies the old-fashioned way. There is serious money to be made marketing “hope.” Or is that “hype?”
This Nobel award nauseates me.
FB
Interesting you mention the lack of success. That’s odd to hear. There are easily obtainable numbers and facts supporting the idea that most IVF businesses prescreen most of the actually “infertile” people out of their prospects. This way, they can post incredibly high numbers indicating success. The truth is, they are only able to help a very small percentage of total infertility problems. And the time and money could have been spent on a more affordable, ethical, and overall successful method of treating infertility. Thanks Nobel for handing out an award to someone who took the path of least resistance, fudged the numbers, and wasted a lot of time and money that could have been actually helping a lot more people.
Hi Ann, you asked about health problems of IVF babies. There is an increased risk of ‘imprinting disorders’ (a bit complicated to explain here, but it affects the DNA, and they are usually low birth weight which leads to obesity, to diabetes, and to hypertension. Long term health affects in IVF children needs to be studied because the oldest (Louise Brown is only 32). Back in 2003, the Journal of Medical Genetics published a paper on just such imprinting disorders in children conceived through IVF. There is also an increased risk of cerebral problems, birth defects, premature birth, increased risk of certain types of cancer, and the list goes on. Zenit news service conducted a very good interview with Dr. Carlo Bellieni, professor of neonatal therapy at the School of Pediatrics of the University of Siena which lists these issues (http://www.ewtn.com/library/PROLIFE/ZINVITRO.HTM).
There is also a risk that the parents are passing on their genetic infertility to their IVF born children, making the longer term problems worse. You also need to look in to something called ‘vanishing twin’ syndrome which can lead to cerebral palsy and organ damage in the surviving twin.
Perhaps what is worse is the recognition of ‘survivor syndrome’ amongst IVF children - ‘why did my parents pick me?’. This too is described in the ZENIT article.
God Bless, Ian (www.catholiclab.net)
Last person I heard of receiving it that deserved it was Mother Theresa. I’m not sure but I do think it went downhill after that.
Another sad example of rewarding evil. And another example of an award lasting too long.
We had our child through IVF with ICIS and without that we wouldnt have our beautiful child. Going through the process made our marriage stronger and appreciate our daughter everyday. We know she is a gift from God and am thankful for British biologist Robert Edwards in developing in vitro fertilization. My husband had cancer and without this treatment we wouldnt have our child. No embroyes were lost or destroyed in our IVF treatment. I am Catholic and if I could have afforded it I would have had another child this way. It was a miracle that I had my child and am not ashamed or feel its a sin to have her this way. IVF is not intrinsically evil as the church would have it made out. NOt all cases are the same and alot of us go to great lenghts to make sure it safe and no lives are lost.
fe
i was looking for the garmmie committe my name is stephanie from the bahamas i love to see the gammie show but i what to know if you can get juatina bynum to sing one night with the king she is grate listen to it it on you tube you love it stephanie
Congrats Rose, Hug your child so many worked so hard to bring into this beautiful world. Your’s being the hardest work.
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.