The one thing I'll never agree with is forced immunization, where parents would have zero choice at the birth of their child or during "pandemics" like H1N1, where vaccines did cause issues and weren't as thoroughly tested or had unexpected side-effects (1). With that said, I have no problem with schools requiring an up-to-date immunization schedule or hospitals requiring doctors and nurses to be immunized, etc.

Vaccines are important and effective but there can be risks.

I'd like to see a study performed across a broad spectrum of children, following them from infancy to pre-teen years, to assess any potential non-obvious or long-term effects that vaccinations may have. Do more aggressive schedules and combinations of vaccinations have any impact on development over the long-term (e.g. impacts on the immune system, brain development, etc?) The current evidence suggests that it is unlikely, but I'm not sure there has ever been a comprehensive study performed specifically looking for potential issues over the long-term. With each new vaccine added to the schedule, I think this becomes even more important. For example, during the H1N1 outbreak, scientists discovered that people who were vaccinated with the seasonal flu shot were more likely to become infected by H1N1, with worse symptoms; follow up studies confirmed this. There is also evidence to suggest getting the yearly flu shot can make you more susceptible to getting the flu in following years. (2)

So while vaccines are very important and effective, it's still important to ask questions and be informed (through valid research); anyone that thinks otherwise is likely an idiot.

--------------------

(1) http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/Concerns/h1n1_narcolepsy_pandemrix.html

(2) http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2013/03/study-getting-flu-shot-2-years-row-may-lower-protection

Why is China Having Measles Outbreaks When 99% Are Vaccinated?

How Vaccines Harm Child Development

Measles vaccines kill more people than measles, CDC data proves

You can do better.

There was some very interesting research released just last month about autism, it found that the problem begins in the womb with tiny patches of badly developed cortex. The important thing is that these patches can be nearly anywhere, so the effects it can have can be really varied. Here is a summary if anyone's interested.
http://www.wlns.com/story/25082941/patches-of-cortical-layers-disrupted-during-early-brain-development-in-autism

I took a class in Behavioral Neroendocrinology and that's precisely what happens. All brain development follows a female path, unless acted on by hormones. If gonadal development occurs, it triggers the brain to become "masculine". But if this doesn't happen, then you have what happens to this girl.

This isn't a choice, or a phase, or a decision that was made by the parents to let it happen or not happen; this already took place in utero. I just hope she remains as happy and spunky as she is now and with luck, can find someone who can accept her for her.

a good example of how brain development is intrinsically tied to early behavior

@bcglorf

Well, you're entitled to your opinion. But I don't think it's a semantic game. When police discover a "human femur" buried in the ground have they discovered a "human being?" No. They've discovered a bone that belongs to a human. Likewise, your hair is "human hair," but it is not a "human being."

We use the term "human being" to describe a living creature that possess certain qualities--among them consciousness and an ability to feel. A human fetus, while alive, does not have those qualities. As such, I don't feel we can really consider it a human being.

Of course, you can choose to disagree. But if you do, I'd like to know what qualities a fetus has that you think entitles it to be considered a human being.

I happen to think science does have a very clear idea of brain development--see the article I linked to--and consciousness to say that fetuses in the 1st trimester don't possess it yet. And the law, both federal and that of several states makes it clear that yes, a 2nd trimester baby has the legal rights of a human. Someone who kills a pregnant woman can be tried for double-homicide.

Admittedly, the laws are a mess right now. For some states, the double-homicide can be charged even if the woman was only in the 1st trimester. This is something that should be resolved in the future.

None of this means you have to change your opinion. Look at the evidence and make the decision you think is most rational.

^Human vs. Human being is just playing on semantics.

My point is the entire debate revolves around what point you consider a fetus to be human in the sense as having the same rights and freedoms as the rest of us. For ease I'll try and refer to that as human being here.

From what you've said it seems before the 2nd trimester, you don't consider the fetus a human being. Is it one from the 2nd trimester on? If so, does it have the same rights and freedoms as other human beings starting then? This would ultimately mean terminating it is covered by laws on murder.

As for basing it on brain development, I dislike that as a reason for it being too fuzzy. There is NO clear line to say right there is the point where the ability for consciousness and feeling pain has developed. We just really don't have a good clear definition of consciousness, let alone the brain development required to achieve it. I still stand that implantation in the womb is the only really clear and firm line to be drawn.

@bcglorf

See what @gwiz665 said. A fetus is human, but it is not a human being (yet). It's a hugely important distinction. The fetus before the 2nd trimester hasn't developed a nervous system well enough to feel pain, nor is the brain developed enough for consciousness. That's the distinction. A 2-month old can both feel pain and is conscious and therefore is a human being. A fetus is not, in my opinion.

The problem of course is that a fetus will become a human being (most likely--miscarriage is still possible) without intervention. So terminating a fetus is, in my opinion, immoral. But far less immoral than killing a conscious human being capable of feeling pain. And far less immoral than forcing a woman to bear the economic, medical, social, and psychological costs of bearing an unwanted child.

I dunno about the brain development caused from doing 2 plus 2 all day. Expanding your mind isn't XP grinding. I do think that they both miss a good point on the road less travled that Karl was talking about. But living a life style of always fretting the little things is backwards, not progressive.

It reminds me of a talk I had with my roomie on what makes a good coder. A good coder is lazy. Meaning he doesn't want to waste his time doing trivial interactions with his machine to accomplish his goal. Trivial interactions do not expand the mind. But taking an alternate path not recommended to you by some program isn't so trivial as to be mocked.

I know this is dipping into conspiracy theory here, but the thing that stuck out in my mind after reading that article was "...Risks of ingesting fluoride include Chronic Kidney Disease, Thyroid Disease, reduced brain development in children, reduced IQs, dental fluorosis, skeletal fluorosis, and increases in hip and other bone fractures. ..."

Paired with the fact that 'They' want us to drink more and more water per day under the guise of 'General Health and Wellbeing' just adds more fuel.

>> ^Sagemind:

"ANOTHER LOOK AT FLUORIDE IN THE WATER SUPPLY"
http://www.ecomall.com/greenshopping/fluoride.htm


--


The water-table-effect is scary as well, guaranteeing that humankind as a whole is affected, rather than just civilized/urban areas. Why stupify 50% of the population when you can get 100%?

</tinfoil_hat>

Seriously though, potentially scary stuff... Pharmaceuticals in the water table are cause for a lot of *fear as well. I can't wait until literally everyone with a penis is walking around with a permanent hardon due to the massive amounts of Cialis, Viagra, and Levitra being dumped into the world-water-supply. Funny shit.

And no one will be depressed, but they may all be potentially suicidal.

I wonder about birth control as well. Surely 100% of the medication isn't being metabolized, so it would gather in waste water also. Population decrease, lower IQ, and perma-stiffy's the world 'round.

I believe that we are all born with this condition. Sound will affect vision and other senses are all interlinked but many of the neural connections die out as our brains develop because they are not necessary.

Sniper. Dude. You don't think that decades of neurological research qualify scientists to predict brain development? And when I say predict, I mean that they are pretty gosh darn sure about this. They aren't just guessing based on probablility that Dani will never be "normal". They KNOW that the brain develops language and social skills in certain parts by a certain time. People who miss the window of opportunity can't get it back. Excluding divine intervention, it's not a matter for debate. Her brain just isn't capable of traveling backward in time and developing all over again.

It's nothing personal.

>> ^Sniper007:
I find it amazing that anyone at all (including neurological experts) can assume that they have such a complete understanding of the human mind that they'd feel confident enough to predict in advance the limit to which an individual can perform. Didn't the experts say she'd never walk? Didn't they say she'd never be able to interact or focus like a normal person? Haven't the experts ALREADY been proven WRONG, even when examining this specific case alone? Why would anyone ever believe that she can't be normal?
I think the error is somewhere between 'Ability' and 'Probability'. She has the physical capacity to do everything any other woman can do. No doubt. Ability is not the issue. The issue is Probability. She Probably WON'T attain those levels of competence based on the choices of those around her (first), and her own choices (second). The preceding statement is only reasonable based on our experiences with similar past cases. Even in those cases however, it must be acknowledged that some individuals may have had an ability to advance that was not fulfilled due to a lack of desire to advance.
Never underestimate the power of the human mind and will.

>> ^quantumushroom:
The human heart is infinitely deceptive; anyone who thinks they can make up their moral code as they go along is already a victim of that deception.
Man remains a vicious animal, a reptilian brain with only a thin veneer of reason and rationality. There is nothing in the atheist's bag o' tricks to quell the beast (ego).
Apparently there's enough good in religion--any religion--that promotes human survival over destruction. I don't believe you can be an authentic atheist without acknowledging this.


Maybe you have only a thin veneer of reason, qm. I have several more layers of brain development on top of the reptilian portions that make me into a creature that is tribal by nature, part of a pack. As a member of this tribe, I strive to be recognized as a valuable member, contributing as much if not more than I receive. In that way, my peers will hold me in high esteem, and I will have access to plentiful resources which make my life much more pleasant. If I were to commit crimes against the tribe, such as theft, deception, assault, or murder, I would lose some if not all of the esteem of my peers. Aside from the retribution my peers might seek, I may also face ostracism or death. Knowing this, I don't even consider such actions within the realm of thought, excepting perhaps in only the most extreme of circumstances, where I would be facing death due to lack of such actions.

But most days I don't have to consider such dire choices. I am polite and considerate, yet assertive. In this way my peers may safely assume I will work with the team to hold up my end of the work we must do together, but I will not allow myself to be taken advantage of. And knowing that, they can plan their lives making me a part therein, and I can do the same.

And all without religion.

EDIT: The idea that you must have religion in order to be a good person is one of the Great Lies that religion teaches people. Individuals are selfish by design, but all it takes is a little thought to realize that being a part of a healthy community is essential to our well-being.

Chilaxe,
It's fascinating stuff. Neurophysiology and pharmacology have advanced significantly, but perhaps not as far as some might think. PET scans and metabolic MRIs give us clues as to increased activity in certain brain structures during different types of cognitive and motor activities. That's very generalized information. Excess and deficiencies of neurotransmitters result in well described pathology. While we know cognition and abstract thought is performed in the cerebral cortex, we have very little information on the specific biochemistry and neuronal synaptic pathways that allow it to happen.

Some of the most interesting clinical cases I get to be involved with are awake craniotomies to resect brain tumors. Carrying on a conversation with a patient and witnessing real-time neuro/cognitive dysfunction with manipulation of the brain is something I can't begin to describe.

I'm also fascinated by brain development that is time limited and dependent. For instance, the areas devoted to language. If not stimulated during those crucial first few years of life, development is stunted and the full capacity for language skills is lost forever. I'm getting off topic, but it's fascinating stuff.

It's obvious that all consciousness, thought, and awareness is produced thru biochemical means. Thus, all concepts, precepts, abstracts, etc. are of anatomic and physiologic origin.

However, I'm still waiting to hear a good explanation of how a collection of inanimate atoms coalesce, begin replication, and eventually gain the capacity to look on themselves and determine their own essence.

Age is a bit more than a number. It's brain development, judgment, and the ability to protect yourself better from pressure. Excerpt from a NIMH report...

Edited to remove way too long quote, people can read it for themselves.

http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/publications/teenage-brain-a-work-in-progress.shtml

In other words kids playing with kids might be fine but an adult screwing with them needs their ass kicked. Let them grow up first, they are easy victims of predators if we don't have and stick to that rule. In this case the societal pressure turns out to have valid scientific reason behind it, not just moral judgment.