It’s not pretty. The NY Times has published images of babies born with Zika-induced microcephaly, and whoa, but that virus really does a number on the developing cortex. Scientists are beginning to figure out how it’s disrupting development, and now there’s concern that even superficially unaffected children might have late-occurring deficits.
Dr. Levine said the images suggest that Zika is like a formidable enemy able to do damage in three ways: keeping parts of the brain from forming normally, obstructing areas of the brain, and destroying parts of the brain after they form.
With such a vicious and unpredictable virus, “it’s key to realize that Zika is more than microcephaly, that there’s a number of other abnormalities as they’ve shown in this paper, and its effects are going to be even more broad,” said Dr. Spong, whose agency has begun a study of what will ultimately be 10,000 babies born in Zika epidemic areas including Brazil and Puerto Rico.
Meanwhile, here in the US, our useless congress is frozen in stupidity, unable to act. Why? Because this problem requires management and screening by family planning groups, and all the Republicans can see is that funding rational responses to Zika will require the assistance of organizations like Planned Parenthood, and that one of the necessary options for affected women should be termination of the pregnancy. The research in Brazil is, in part, trying to find unambiguous criteria for diagnosing affected fetuses in utero, to eliminate false positives and to allow families to respond appropriately to the afflictions.
But we’ve got nitwits like Marco Rubio here.
Obviously, microcephaly is a terrible prenatal condition that kids are born with. And when they are, it’s a lifetime of difficulties. So I get it.
I’m not pretending to you that that’s an easy question you asked me. But I’m pro-life. And I’m strongly pro-life. I believe all human life should be protected by our law, irrespective of the circumstances or condition of that life.
No, it is an easy question. When you’ve got a fetus with a brain that’s been destroyed by a virus, you give the woman you plan to burden with the responsibility of caring it for the rest of its broken, diminished “life” the choice of what to do.
Some women will find that choice difficult, and I can respect that; others will find it easy. What’s wrong is that Rubio has to struggle with the question of whether women should have autonomy.
But what’s even more wrong, is that ideologues like Rubio are in the position to politicize other people’s personal decision and prevent our society from responding in a rational manner.
Ah, but the beauty of it is, it’s all well thought out planning.
After all, with a wrecked brain, they get pre-made republicans for the future!
wzrd1, #2
LOL! Take that, people with developmental disabilities!
*high five*
/s af
PZ, got ant decent mainstream articles or review papers you could recommend for reading up on what Zika does to neural development?
Marco Rubio on how all human life is valuable regardless of quality or condition.
Marco Rubio on how we aren’t killing people quickly enough for his liking.
Family planning is a small part of responding to Zika.
We’ve been there and just recently with Ebola. It’s getting to be routine.
1. Mosquito control.
2. Look for some antivirals.
3. A vaccine. Zika confers immunity so it is straightforward.
4. Family planning. Counsel at risk populations to consider postponing pregnancy for a while, leaving Zika areas, or avoiding getting bit by mosquitos.
5. Following at risk pregnancies to see what is happening.
Ironically, the GOP is just preventing a response to be jerks and morons. It’s part of making sure the US government is Zombied, still around but not doing anything.
And ironically, the most affected are…their voters. Zika is spread by a tropical and subtropical mosquito that is in the fundie xian heartland of the SE USA.
Oh well, they are used to voting against their own interests.
Rubio is an empty suit and not very bright.
1. What he thinks about abortion and Zika is simply irrelevant. He’s just one senator from one state. I wouldn’t ask him what brand of laundry detergent to buy much less what to do about a Zika infected fetus.
2. Neither would most people.
He is just trying to out-Cruz Ted Cruz. He didn’t do well in the GOP presidential nomination and has an election coming up. No one is going to out-oogedy boogedy Marco Rubio.
As a physician in a large academic pediatric hospital in the south, I am TERRIFIED of zika. And even more, I have a 9 month old at home and we have no idea what the virus does to the developing brain of children who acquire it as infants… My wife has also expressed interest in having a second child, and I told her we should wait to see what happens with this crisis. If she were willing to terminate a pregnancy affected by microcephaly, it would still be a difficult choice, but she’s not so we won’t even try at the moment.
The Rubio problem is applying restrictions for the government on the individuals. Is used to be a common call for government to eliminate those less able than the common citizen (ring any bells?). To then reverse that onto individuals, forcing to give birth and raise one no matter how severely disabled is … uh … yukk
Ruboto just repeats the same phrases endlessly.
Do we know how long Zika stays in the system? Is it like e.g. varicella, where (if I understand correctly) the end of primary infection only means that the virus is dormant? Or is it more like influenza, where (again IIUC) the end of primary illness means the virus has been decisively killed off by the immune system?
re 10:
good question. thx for asking.
The thing is, in Rubio’s opinion, the fetus and subsequent child is god’s punishment for the woman screwing. And the worse the burden, the better. His loving god expresses his wrath in interesting ways.
So not only Zika cripple fetal brains, but on top of that it’s capable of time traveling, destroying the brain cells of elected officials’ fetuses decades before it even arrived in the US.
If my recollection is correct, besides the “poison pills” the thugs added to the Zika funding bill (defunding Planned Parenthood, as one example), they proposed using the not-yet-spend Ebola research funding, thus (effectively) terminating Ebola research, both upcoming and ongoing. In addition, when the dummies showed some spine and refused to go alone with this mad scheme, the thugs then accused the dummies of being totally responsible for the stalemate.
(No thugs (republicans) for any office! These mindless arseholes must be totally removed from all levels of politics!!)
Those pictures in the OP article were incredibly heartbreaking to look at. I have a 6-month-old at home, and this those images were just… terrifying, to be honest. Those poor babies. My wife and I moved well up the east coast from Atlanta, GA, about a year ago. The more we learn about Zika, that happier I am that we were able to make that move happen. Just one more reason I’m glad to see snow during the winter again.
I’m not going to wish violence on Marco Rubio, as much as I may want to. All I wish for him is the same thing that I have wished for Trump and most of their fellow Republican ilk: that before their ends come, they realize to the fullest extent what awful, retched excuses for human beings they are, to understand all of the pain and sorrow their miserable lives have wrought, and that these thoughts are the last things in their minds before it all fades to black.
“Abort it and try again. It would be immoral to bring it into the world if you have the choice”
Everyone knows who made this statement in the context of Down Syndrome. And I have no doubt his thoughts on Zika induced fetal neurologic damage are similar and even more fervent. And yes, I too was taken aback at Dawkins’ flippant tweet over a woman’s personal reproductive decision making.
I read this recent article in New Scientist regarding the devastating future for Zika babies:
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2075925-what-will-life-be-like-for-brazils-generation-of-zika-babies/
Stripping away the callous delivery of Dawkins’ tweet, is there some moral clarity in what he said? I really hope that mosquito control, vaccination and other environmental interventions will control and contain this virus. But there is the real possibility of an epidemic similar to Brazil. My personal take is that bringing a human into this world with severe developmental delay, epilepsy, shortened lifespan, etc. would be immoral and a callous disregard for that individual’s lifelong suffering. I know the responses I will get-“who are you to judge?”, “how do you know that child will suffer?”, “who f$&@ing gave you the right to decide?”, “Hawking is disabled so should he have been aborted?”, “it’s not a moral decision for you to make. Her body. Her choice. Period.” All are valid moral retorts but don’t sway my moral compass regarding the potential thousands who could be born with severe neurologic damage.
raven @#7
On the one hand, I couldn’t agree more. However, he is one among a significant number of Senators (e.g. Cruz) and members of Congress with similar ideologies who possess the power to enact legislation (or not) that affects lives. That means, unfortunately, that what they think is relevant even though their thinking is severely mistaken.
ragdish @ 16
And, should you ever be in a position where you’re pregnant with a fetus who may have been affected by Zika, that will be your choice to make. But reducing the spread of Zika, ensuring people at risk of having children affected have access to contraception and abortion and counseling, and providing care and support to children born with Zika-related health problems all seems a lot more do-able and less morally abhorrent than advocating a mass abortion policy.
I guess it might depend on how many damaged children you would be willing to support for their whole life, what kind of policies you might advocate.
uncle frogy