About Me

Name: vikingmother
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Blog Roll

 

Indiana Apologizes for 100 year old EUGENICS style forced sterilizations!

 It started in 1907.

Indiana became the nation's leader in forced sterilizations of those it considered "inferior" morally or physically. 

And Indiana's state health commissioner apologized recently---as Indiana marked the 100th year anniversary of this "first in the nation" sterilization law.

"In 1907, then-Gov. J. Frank Hanly signed a state law widely regarded as the first in the world to permit sterilization in a misguided effort to improve the quality of the human race.The practice was not ended until 1974."
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=3036919

A creepy footnote - A woman sterilized (as a teen---and without her knowledge) joined in a ceremony where the State of Indiana dedicated a marker to remind people of this bad law
...only overturned in the 1970's. (Her mom had told the state she was slightly retarded. She thinks Mom was scared she'd get pregnant.)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Eugenics in China post Y2k

 Here's a link to a 2001 Congressional report on China's forced abortion policy.  It also lists other coercive measures they use to conform their population to the government's population agenda

http://hdl.handle.net/1805/726


Eugenics lives on.  Only here, a non-scientific societal value "boys are more wanted than girls" means more parents abandoned or aborted girls.

THE LAW OF UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES  -  Thus, China has emerging young adult populations (at least in outlying areas) that are said to be LACKING YOUNG women.

Where will the young men go to find women...wives?  We will see!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Eugenics - Galton - Nazis - Just crazy ideas???

Enter any one of the three terms in my title
EUGENICS,
 GALTON  (actually Sir Francis Galton, cousin of Charles Darwin), or NAZIS 
            to get lots of sites and lots of blogs & debates.

Briefly, here's how those three terms connect up:

In the mid 19th Century, Victorian "supergenius" Sir Francis Galton read his cousin Charles Darwin's then-new writings on evolution. He then developed his own offshoot from Darwin's ideas.  Essentially, he wanted to hypercharge the human race's "natural selection" process to bring about the survival of the fittest humans---faster. 

Galton wanted the "superior" people to have more kids---the "inferior" to be discouraged from having kids...This is an oversimplification, but not by much. (Search under his name to find online libraries with his writings on marriage, eugenics available to read).

He, formerly with Quaker influenced Christian beliefs, transferred his faith to his semi science - semi philosophy of eugenics. He spent much of the rest of his life  preaching & teaching eugenics.  Eugenics was his word for the philosophy of being "well born".

Maybe some of you found an old award for a "Fitter Family" in some great grandparent's artifacts. Some of our ancestors might have gone to the local 1920's county fair, and gotten an award not only for their prize cow, but for their prize "litter" of strong, healthy kids. 

Early 20th century Eugenics was a popular pseudoscience (more a semi religion). In its early mild version, even some popular persons such as Teddy Roosevelt, the young pre World War II Winston Churchill, and Chief Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes subscribed to its main ideas.

Sound familiar? 

Eugenics - marrying the "right" person who can breed smart, healthy kids,  was a "moral imperative" taught in some US & English textbooks Some societies and high born persons worked to propagate a "better bred human race".

And this "moral imperative" to breed a better human race was picked up by an Austrian in the 1920's - Adolf Hitler, who quickly pushed Eugenics to its logical conclusion.

Thus, the Nazis thought it a "moral imperative" to do their Nuremburg laws, their forced sterilization of German disabled, their mass murders of "undesirables" like Jews, gypsies, etc. etc. and their breedcow "Lebensborn" programs where young "racially pure" girls, women were bred to have kids out of wedlock in both Germany & other countries. They also siezed Nordic looking kids from Poland, elsewhere for German adoption. (See an AOL story on one such child today May 7.)

So...some Nazis felt no remorse after their mass murders & other actions most of us call crimes.  They thought they were fulfilling their eugenic "moral" obligation to help  their race evolve quickly to a higher level. (I was little when Nazi murderer Adolf Eichmann was caught.  He seemed quite pleased with his part in murdering millions.)

Some of us watch the genetics and embryonic stem cell versus adult style stem cell debates closely...We don't want any versions of the "eugenics" ideology to return.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (4) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Can "Snot" "save" us?

My initial title is not a joke without substance.

It is slightly incorrect, as I actually refer to the "olfactory mucosa" inside the nose---
 
the cells which might produce mucus  (i.e. "snot" to the lay person or to the teacher or mom who has to clean it off a child) ---That is, if I, a non-scientist, understand this study correctly.

Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine  Vol 29 Number 3 - 2006 
Olfactory Mucosa Autografts in Human Spinal Cord Injuries - A Clinical Pilot Study You can find them online.

This small study basically was done with seven adult patients - all who had some kind of major spinal injury.  They found some moderate gains in movement (and for some, even some return of bladder function). The patient's own inner nose cells were grafted into the spinal injury....the seven patients were carefully monitored over a length of time, and the study details the range of motion, etc. that returned to each patient.

They are optimistic that this procedure could be further refined to bring possibly significant improvement to other spinal injury patients. However, I quote the last paragraph of the article below with an added comment.
...I insert the implied comment in brackets because the article elsewhere specifically warns against using embryonic stem cells for this kind of treatment.

"...Although using one's own stem cells may be safer, easier, and more effective [than other techniques such as using embryonic stem cells or any stem cells not from the patient] support for such a clinical trial is difficult due to the lack of commercial product or patentable procedures that would engender biotech company support."

Is money part of what's driving the rush to use embryonic stem cells??? How sad! 

How many promising small studies like this will NOT be pursued...because there isn't something to patent???

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »