# More Deformities being born



## Creator (Nov 3, 2007)

I noticed that ten years ago less sick or deformed babies are being born but now there seem to be a surge in the numbers. Siamese Twins, mermaids and monkeys?

Are more deformed people being born in recent times?

Discuss this issue.


----------



## Rawled Demha (Nov 3, 2007)

i would say yes.

this could be attributed to many things, from the food and drink we consume, to the clothes and sanitary habits we keep, from our commercial (industrial) practices to the very air we breathe. 

why should new life develop as it has in the past, given our rapidly changing ecosystems?


----------



## Delvo (Nov 3, 2007)

What gives you the impression that the numbers have gone up?


----------



## j d worthington (Nov 3, 2007)

From what I've seen here and there of statements from people in the various fields concerned, there may possibly be a rise in the number, but not the percentage of the population; let's not forget that the world's population has nearly quadrupled in something like a century and a half. There's also the fact of improved communications, records, etc., to be taken into account. Given all that, the assertion that such a thing is on the rise is a dubious one at best....


----------



## Rawled Demha (Nov 3, 2007)

aside from the human situation, there have been any number of deformed animals being born out there, for example there's been a story in the uk lately about a four-legged duck. this is one of many.

and the media is not likely to report the birth of deformed humans as well as they will those for deformed animals, it doesnt make fun reading. there is nobody on this planet that can convince me that the media reports all stories with truth and impartiality. i aint buyin it.

id guess that a lot of the deformed human babies are killed or left to die in many parts of the world. its sad, but true. I'VE SEEN IT DONE.

also, would "deformity" refer to physical handicap, or would mental disabilities be included?


----------



## Creator (Nov 3, 2007)

Hmmm... if you want... but there are some like Autism or asperger's have some benefits that you might want to reconsider calling it disability


----------



## Creator (Nov 3, 2007)

I have a hunch... that China wanted Taiwan was because of the reduced number of breeding population in china. Because dysgenics seemed to be happening in china, they want something to continue their reproduction so you guys get the point.


----------



## purple_kathryn (Nov 3, 2007)

I don't know if it's necessarily more

I think it's more likely to be reported and the children now have a greater chance of living (both through the pregnancy and after birth)


----------



## Creator (Nov 3, 2007)

From a eugenist viewpoint, they would encourage the Spartan way.... 

Note:I didn't start this thread to promote eugenics.... it is because I pity these unfortunate people.


----------



## Rawled Demha (Nov 3, 2007)

i know this is off topic, but i thought china wanted taiwan because, historically, it was theirs in the first place.

i know the usual argument, where you could say that before it was a part of china, it was something else, but human memory goes back only as far as is convenient.


----------



## Nik (Nov 3, 2007)

Um, used to be that a midwife would withold her magical bum-slap from anomalies...

Such sadness, a still-birth...

And neo-natal fatalities were far higher than our expectation-- eg my paternal grandmother had (IIRC) 7/7 live beyond a year. Although one died as a toddler, 4/7 was nearer their norm...

(IIRC, four marched off to Somme, one limped back...)

Also, populations have *soared*, medical provision has improved, more prems are surviving...


----------



## flygin (Nov 3, 2007)

I don't know that the media is less likely to report on deformed humans.  Over here, The "Learning" Channel has numerous stories every week on medical abnormalities in people.  It gives the appearance that these things are more common.

And I would agree with the above statements.  Children who are born with abnormalities are much more likely to survive today than in previous generations.


----------



## Creator (Nov 4, 2007)

So can I say that due to our mercifulness, we have allowed babies with deformities to continue to spread? Something like this.....

It doesn't feel very nice....it must be my inner eugenists..


----------



## purple_kathryn (Nov 4, 2007)

Creator said:


> So can I say that due to our mercifulness, we have allowed babies with deformities to continue to spread? Something like this.....
> 
> It doesn't feel very nice....it must be my inner eugenists..


 
Children with deformities are usually born to perfectly healthy parents.  They are also less likely to procreate themselves (depending on how bad the deformity is) so it's unlikely they'd be passing on their genes


----------



## Rawled Demha (Nov 4, 2007)

id just like to point out that not all of the world resides in the MEDCs. in fact, id say that most of the world's population is in the world's LEDCs, where their infrastructure is not so good. including healthcare and social services.


----------



## j d worthington (Nov 4, 2007)

Yes, children with deformities are much more likely to survive -- there are a few cases of people with two heads who live for quite a while now. (I don't know if any have reached maturity, but it's possible; I remember seeing one case at least where the girls -- one body, two heads, remember, so two people if they're both functioning heads, which these were -- at least lived to be close to their preteens... and that was just the last I heard of them, as far as I know, they're still living. And other than that peculiarity, perfectly normal kids in most ways....)

And most extreme mutations do tend to cancel out; heck, the majority of minor mutations do, for that matter. Yes, we "allow" people with such genetic faults to survive, which may not be a bad thing, either. No few of history's great thinkers and artists (in words or otherwise) have had some genetic defect, after all, so eugenics based on a strictly physical aspect is more than a little short-sighted. If we're going to have an enlightened form of eugnics at all, it's going to be one hell of a complicated set of criteria....

And, as you can see from my above post -- yes, the media is as likely as not to report deformed babies in many cases. They may respect a family's wishes if they desire such not to be published (then again, they may not, depending on the venue); but they tend to approach it as a "human interest" story, showing how people with such deformities can still function quite well -- which, if you've ever dealt with people with birth defects, they quite often can... and many of them would definitely resent pity, for that matter. I've known a few, and have seen interviews (or read articles by) many others, not to mention actually having been to some _genuine_ "freak shows" (not simply novelty acts like the tattooed person or one who pushes sharp objects through parts of their body, etc.) when I was very young. The interesting thing is, when these became largely outlawed, they took away the ability of many of these people to make a living for and thereby support themselves and their families (no few of them were married and had kids -- all of whom were perfectly normal physically... which disposes of _that_ argument; yes, they may be carrying a recessive gene, but _most_ of us do, from hemophilia to schizophrenia to diabetes to....). And, naturally, the performers by and large intensely resented it, as it put them on the dole when they had been self-supporting (and had a better self-image as a result) _and_ they got to travel all over the country (sometimes the world) and meet and talk to people of all stripes....

And I don't think anyone's arguing the media is either objective or impartial; but they don't tend to often shy away from stories that may get reader interest or have a sensational slant, which these invariably do; hence they are _very_ prone to publish them. Again, I'd strongly argue that it's the increasingly interconnected nature of the media that is allowing more of these stories to come to our attention, plus the fact that the percentage of the population (human or otherwise) is probably _roughly_ the same (with some anomalies due to heavy local mutagenic pollutants, etc.), which means the individual numbers go up due to the huge increase in the population (human, in this case); and more of them do live and can come to light than in previous ages. Put all that together, and it would give the appearance, at least, of a notable increase; but again, the majority of people in the health (and census-taking) fields that have commented on this seem to indicate it isn't actually such....


----------



## Harpo (Nov 4, 2007)

Those girls are 17 years old now
Abigail and Brittany Hensel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## j d worthington (Nov 4, 2007)

Indeed, those look like the girls I was talking about. Thanks, Harpo!


----------



## Harpo (Nov 4, 2007)

j. d. worthington said:


> Indeed, those look like the girls I was talking about. Thanks, Harpo!



"all these two-headed teenage girls look the same to me"


----------



## j d worthington (Nov 4, 2007)

Harpo said:


> "all these two-headed teenage girls look the same to me"


 
*SMACK!* Bad, Bad Harpo!


----------



## Ursa major (Nov 4, 2007)

Even in days gone by, the freak show, or its equivalent, wasn't the only source of income.

I think one of the saddest things I've seen on television was a programme about the poor house and similar institutions in Britain. They were looking through some old books, ones that recorded who was staying at a particular workhouse, why they were there, and what their jobs were during "better" times.

The person who we know as the Elephant Man had been a resident. He wasn't there all year round; the researcher explained that at other times, he had a job: he was a door-to-door salesman. It is a job that has never appealed to me: cold calling, face-to-face with people who would rather you weren't there. And yet this was the work that John Merrick, with all his very visible deformities, did. I can't even imagine the courage he must have had to do this type of work.

It makes approaching agents and publishers by mail seem easy, by comparison.


----------



## j d worthington (Nov 5, 2007)

Interesting you should bring up Joseph Merrick (it was Treeves who called him John); he wrote a two-page autobiography which is quite fascinating, from the portions I've come across. He was one who apparently enjoyed at least most of his public appearances, nor did he have a tyrant for a "manager" -- according to his own words, quite the opposite, and he met many very interesting people and found it quite fascinating. I also think that the way he ended his statement is germane here; I hope I'm remembering the lines correctly:



> It's true my form is rather odd,
> But blaming me is blaming God;
> If I could make myself anew
> I would not fail in pleasing you.
> ...


----------



## Rawled Demha (Nov 5, 2007)

brilliant. j.d i like that one a lot. especially the first verse

"blaming me is blaming god" - beautiful


----------



## Ursa major (Nov 5, 2007)

Mr. Merrick's attitude puts us all to shame; well me, anyway.


----------



## Soggyfox (Nov 5, 2007)

who are we to judge evolution in action, many of these so called abnormalities maybe the future of our race, what will they be thinking in a 1000 years from now looking back at changes to the species.

the duck with 4 legs would be much better suited to life in fast flowing rivers, maybe rivers that have higher occurances of flooding, from say higher occurences of super heavy rain storms, hmmmmmm.


----------



## Rawled Demha (Nov 5, 2007)

but they're not sure if he can reproduce yet


----------



## mosaix (Nov 6, 2007)

I've been following this thread with some interest.

Has anybody thought that the trend (if there genuinely is one) may be due to couples having children later in life?


----------



## Creator (Nov 7, 2007)

mosaix's got a point if you are referring to an aunt of mine. She married at 40 and my niece is a little retarded.... Sad..


----------



## Rawled Demha (Nov 7, 2007)

when you add in the fact that 40 was once (upon a long, long time ago) the average life expectancy of human beings, this is certainly food for thought.


----------



## Harpo (Nov 7, 2007)

A friend of mine just had a baby just after her 42nd birthday - the baby's fine and fab


----------



## Rawled Demha (Nov 7, 2007)

congrats to ur friend!


----------



## Creator (Nov 7, 2007)

I don't want to burst anyone's bubble but the tragedy is that only at a certain age like maybe 3 or 5 yr old then you can see whether the child is really healthy.... 

No offence that's my niece.


----------



## Rawled Demha (Nov 7, 2007)

when they should be able to communicate with us, you mean?


----------



## Creator (Nov 8, 2007)

Well they say that if disabilities like mental disability are discovered early plus the fact that both sides are supportive, they are overcome their disability depending of the severity.

Hey but criminality...can that be considered a disability or something more....


----------



## Anomander (Nov 12, 2007)

I just read about the elephant man on Wiki. Truly touching.


----------



## Phil Janes (Nov 16, 2007)

You never know! One of those "deformities" just might be the upgrade our bodies will need to survive another century. That's why evolution is better than so-called "intelligent design".


----------



## Creator (Dec 4, 2007)

But isn't that cruel kindness, in a point of view.


----------



## Prof. Ligate (Mar 27, 2008)

j. d. worthington said:


> Interesting you should bring up Joseph Merrick (it was Treeves who called him John); he wrote a two-page autobiography which is quite fascinating, from the portions I've come across. He was one who apparently enjoyed at least most of his public appearances, nor did he have a tyrant for a "manager" -- according to his own words, quite the opposite, and he met many very interesting people and found it quite fascinating. I also think that the way he ended his statement is germane here; I hope I'm remembering the lines correctly:


. 
I remember Merrick's lines a little differently (below), but while his views are relevant he was not *born* deformed.  His work as a travelling salesman started when his appearance was normal, before a combination of two diseases caused his grotesque disfigurement.

It's true my form is rather odd,
But blaming me is blaming God;
Could I create myself anew
I would not fail in pleasing you.

If I could reach from Pole to Pole,
And grasp the oceans in a span,
This would not make a greater soul -
The mind's the measure of the man.


----------



## j d worthington (Mar 27, 2008)

Prof. Ligate said:


> .
> I remember Merrick's lines a little differently (below), but while his views are relevant he was not *born* deformed. His work as a travelling salesman started when his appearance was normal, before a combination of two diseases caused his grotesque disfigurement.
> 
> It's true my form is rather odd,
> ...


 
Ah, thank you... that is probably closer to the mark, as I was going on a memory of something I came across a little over ten years ago. And that's a good point about his not being born deformed. Incidentally, I've not kept up with the latest on what they think caused his deformities; the last I'd heard was some time back, and leaning toward Proteus syndrome. Is this still one of the things they think contributed to it, or has some new information (and a consequent change in diagnosis) come to light?


----------



## Karn Maeshalanadae (Mar 27, 2008)

mosaix said:


> I've been following this thread with some interest.
> 
> Has anybody thought that the trend (if there genuinely is one) may be due to couples having children later in life?


 

Actually, statistics HAVE shown that children of women who got pregnant after the age of 35 have a greater risk of Down's Syndrome......


----------

