1 million premature babies die each year, report finds

[ericlp]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/h...premature-deaths_N.htm

Cliffs... Facts...

So..... Were spending 26 BILLION dollars to keep 13% of all the babies in (America alone) alive. While still losing 1 million of them each year.

Am I the only one that has a problem with with this? Premature Babies are on the Rise. Maybe next few years it will be up to 15%. 20 years from now it could be up to 30-40%.

Where does it stop? Evolution is taking it's toll. Not only that but a good portion of these babies are developing serious medical problems like blindness and Cerebral palsy, etc...etc... These just cause more medical problems and more money and drain on our society.

Now, the more of these we let live I believe the cycle will continue from generation to generation. There was a reason these babies weren't meant to be.

We can't afford it. We are killing 1 million this year. Will it be 2 million next year? 10 million next 10 years? Wear do we draw the line on this??? Let nature take it's course.

The more we money and more efforts we put into this the more the problem just spirals out of control.

I guess my question is how many more kids are we going to kill today?

Personally, I'm tired of the cycle and wasting money, resources that could be put to better use.

Discuss...

 

[Moonbeam]

It will end when it only takes a few minutes to have a kid.

 

[sandorski]

On the flip side of this: Eventually the Technology and Experience will come that Lowers the Cost, increases the survival rate, and lessens the longterm complications. How long that will take and how much $ will be spent until then, I dunno. I think though that it would be prudent to make sure that Parents in that situation are well aware of the Facts and that they not be prevented from choosing to let the Baby die of Natural Causes if they so choose.

 

[TheSkinsFan]

Exactly what is it you are suggesting we do, or not do?

 

[cubeless]

the study doesn't add in the costs for the lawsuits when a baby can't be saved, even if it's severely premature... and the earlier they can save some puts even more pressure on any that are near term to be perfect...

the combination of doctors vanity and patients irrationality will continue to drive costs up...

but then i have 4 kids that were all postmature and the only problems they had is that they were so big i had to ask the doc to throw in a couple extra stitches in pity for me...

 

[Robor]

We have people unwilling to let brain dead comatose family members go. Do you really think any parent would do any different for their child?

 

[StageLeft]

On the flip side of this: Eventually the Technology and Experience will come that Lowers the Cost, increases the survival rate, and lessens the longterm complications. How long that will take and how much $ will be spent until then, I dunno.

Nope, as medical technology improves, the ability to bring people through what would have previously killed them becomes possible. Although it's easier to do something now than it was 50 years ago there are things that are done now (or attempted) that couldn't have been done now. This is why medical costs are soaring, because there is more to do. Medical workers, services, etc. are an ever-growing part of the population because it grows in competence as an industry. Many things now that are minor and treated on an outpatient basis would have killed you in the past. Technology increases the overall cost of medical care despite decreasing certain specifics. It's this way with many industries. How much did computer programmers make 80 years ago? or Pilots make in the 19th century?

BTW a big reason for more premie babies is multiple births, which have skyrocketed at the same time as fertility treatments have. Many people who otherwise wouldn't have had kids or who ought to wait but become impatient jump into drugs and treatments and bang they're crapping out two or three kids and these kids are far more likely to come out early and come out light and underdeveloped, so then more money is pumped into them right off the bat.

 

[Atreus21]

Originally posted by: TheSkinsFan
Exactly what is it you are suggesting we do, or not do?

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

On the flip side of this: Eventually the Technology and Experience will come that Lowers the Cost, increases the survival rate, and lessens the longterm complications. How long that will take and how much $ will be spent until then, I dunno.

Nope, as medical technology improves, the ability to bring people through what would have previously killed them becomes possible. Although it's easier to do something now than it was 50 years ago there are things that are done now (or attempted) that couldn't have been done now. This is why medical costs are soaring, because there is more to do. Medical workers, services, etc. are an ever-growing part of the population because it grows in competence as an industry. Many things now that are minor and treated on an outpatient basis would have killed you in the past. Technology increases the overall cost of medical care despite decreasing certain specifics. It's this way with many industries. How much did computer programmers make 80 years ago? or Pilots make in the 19th century?

BTW a big reason for more premie babies is multiple births, which have skyrocketed at the same time as fertility treatments have. Many people who otherwise wouldn't have had kids or who ought to wait but become impatient jump into drugs and treatments and bang they're crapping out two or three kids and these kids are far more likely to come out early and come out light and underdeveloped, so then more money is pumped into them right off the bat.

Certain Technologies Increase Costs, especially Diagnostics. Others Decrease Costs.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: TheSkinsFan
Exactly what is it you are suggesting we do, or not do?

From the OP:

Let nature take it's course.

Personally, I'm tired of the cycle and wasting money, resources that could be put to better use.

Frankly I agree. And I'll flat out state that given limited resources I prioritize an adult life over a newborn life, so let the "baby killer" shouts commence.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Kill the babies....nice. And you can sleep at night? Amazing.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
Kill the babies....nice. And you can sleep at night? Amazing.

Yeah, it's easy without any crying babies to keep you awake.

 

[polarmystery]

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
Kill the babies....nice. And you can sleep at night? Amazing.

Yeah, it's easy without any crying babies to keep you awake.

We should practice the Spartan way for raising babies.

 

[jpetermann]

I think we spend more money on those who refuse to work, think they are owed everything that other people have (that those people worked for), and keep pumping out babies that we pay for. Should we stop feeding them and giving them handouts and let nature take its course? Not everything is about money... Human life and dignity do not have a price.

 

[TheSkinsFan]

So the OP is suggesting that we shouldn't do everything in our power to try and save every newborn baby due to the costs of trying?!

Wow. That is one of the most disgusting things I've ever heard.

I'd love to see the OP or Gonad approach a new mother and tell her that they are not going to try and save her baby's life because it might cost too much money. Then, as they lay on the ground bleeding to death from the wounds the new mother inflicts on them, someone could stand over them and calmly explain that saving their lives would be too expensive and therefore not worth the effort.

 

[TruePaige]

Our wonderful "for-profit" system that causes those with "unprofitable" problems to suffer.

"Fisk says drug companies are reluctant to create drugs for acute preterm labor because of the high cost of research and relatively low potential for profit, given that women might take them only for a few days."

 

[cubeless]

Originally posted by: TheSkinsFan
So the OP is suggesting that we shouldn't do everything in our power to try and save every newborn baby due to the costs of trying?!

Wow. That is one of the most disgusting things I've ever heard.

I'd love to see the OP or Gonad approach a new mother and tell her that they are not going to try and save her baby's life because it might cost too much money.

how about that you subject the newborn to extended torture and then a large percentage die anyways or live substantially diminished lives?

we need to get over the 'we can fix anything' vanity and get a grip on the fact that death happens...

 

[alchemize]

You can ask the same question about end of life costs. These two issues combined with fatties/smokers and defensive medicine are why costs are so damn high in this country.

I suggest the OP do something about it however. Create a grass roots movement, go to hospital NICU's and suggest to parents they just let nature take it's course. One baby at a time, you'll change the world!

 

[TheSkinsFan]

Originally posted by: cubeless

Originally posted by: TheSkinsFan
So the OP is suggesting that we shouldn't do everything in our power to try and save every newborn baby due to the costs of trying?!

Wow. That is one of the most disgusting things I've ever heard.

I'd love to see the OP or Gonad approach a new mother and tell her that they are not going to try and save her baby's life because it might cost too much money.

how about that you subject the newborn to extended torture and then a large percentage die anyways or live substantially diminished lives?

we need to get over the 'we can fix anything' vanity and get a grip on the fact that death happens...

The OP and Gonad are suggesting that cost is the determining factor, not alleged pain and suffering. One of these two arguments is much less humane than the other... I'll let you figure out which one that is.

And, IMO, unless the baby itself tells them to pull the plug, or his/her parents do so, the Medical professionals, Government, and/or insurance companies have no fucking business making that decision for them. Period.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I like your idea. I mean WTF? We're spending money to keep inferior children alive. Oliver Wendell Holmes was right in sterilizing Carrie Buck. It was completely Constitutional to have her imprisoned. It was her tough luck that she was originally locked up because she was raped and the family wanted her keep it quiet. The principle stands.

You know it's not the first time this sort of thing has come up. The visionary Francis Galton predicted that the inferior would outbreed the superior and that's what happened. Right now we have a far far more expensive situation going on. Welfare moms without the sense to stop breeding have more children than those who work. They in turn have more children. There is no end. The parasites will outnumber the hosts and all will suffer.

We need to be outraged like the OP. Darwin points to the way to fix this problem. The workers need to let the slugs fend for themselves, giving them the opportunity to survive or die. If they die, then it's less of a drain on our society. If they survive then they have proved their worth by adopting to our standards. It's as fair as fair can be.

Next we have the supposed insolvable problem of health care. People pretend that eliminating profit will fix things. Even our wise leaders in government who have nothing but our best interests at heart cannot save us, because as the OP and I have said the dregs of the genetic pool will drag us down.

This wrong can be righted. We must realize that Nature would never allow some people to survive. Those with genetic problems can be sterilized, or if they fall below a government determined standard of productivity painlessly euthanized. Why should people be forced to live with a stigma, knowing that they can never meet the standard for survival unless artificially kept alive? Let them die with dignity.

Then there are the elderly and infirm. How do deal with them? It's not that hard really. What we can do is estimate the productivity of an individual and count that to the "plus" column. They are entitled to resources up to that amount. Once they exceed it, they will have a choice. They can be put to sleep, or as a reward for their labor can be sent to a colony with tools and enough resources for them to build houses, grow crops etc. It's a way to culturally relive the nostalgic pioneer days, and it doesn't cost us very much.

Since the OP touched on preemies, let's be frank. The whole abortion argument is a complete nonsensical artifice. A baby is a baby depending on what side of the vaginal exit it's on? How does that matter in the context of long term human welfare?

Every female pregnancy should be inspected. If there are genetic problems, end it. It would save so much suffering in the long run. Eventually we could eliminate birth defects, diabetes, low intelligence and other scourges. Who knows, maybe we could get to the point where we are able to predict who are most mentally adaptable with our Program. Think of the happiness!

The final solution of course is related to this. Realizing that the good of our species and society are paramount, and having done away with this artificial and outdated concept that babies are somehow automatically a good thing, we test children before they enter puberty. If they don't pass muster physically or intellectually, then cull them. It reduces the risk of bad genes being passed on, and the standards can be adjusted to create a sustainable world population. Too many mouths and not enough resources.

How can we reach these lofty goals? Education. The government is after all the creation of our society which exists to serve us. Our best chance for a happy world is for them to educate all children as soon as they are able to understand the importance of our becoming that Great Society long envisioned. Of course many will oppose our Grand Vision, but they too can be helped. We merely move them to re-education camp and use our latest techniques. We can even try out new therapies on these poor misguided miscreants. Glory!

With Government at the helm, and a clear understanding of the Common Good, we can in a few generations eliminate poverty, religion, hunger, suffering, and promote the Race.





Imagine there's no Heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace

You may say that I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be as one

Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world

You may say that I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will live as one

 

[rudder]

The sweet spot for our healthcare money should be on people 15-40 years old. It is between these ages that society has the most invested. Up until and after that point it is more cost effective to not throw too much money at keeping those age groups alive.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

The fact is all the money and resources being spent on lives at death's door would be better spent on others with a much better chance at survival and decent quality of life. Goes for preemies, goes for the extreme elderly. When you have to choose who lives and who dies it really sucks for some, but that's life. And I love how people are acting like these decisions aren't already being made right now. The cold hard truth is they are and they're being made badly.

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
The fact is all the money and resources being spent on lives at death's door would be better spent on others with a much better chance at survival and decent quality of life. Goes for preemies, goes for the extreme elderly. When you have to choose who lives and who dies it really sucks for some, but that's life. And I love how people are acting like these decisions aren't already being made right now. The cold hard truth is they are and they're being made badly.

The government was never supposed to have that power.

Whereas our founders tried to separate government and power, your centralized planning for it is the death knell of their design.

 

[Sclamoz]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
I like your idea. I mean WTF? We're spending money to keep inferior children alive. Oliver Wendell Holmes was right in sterilizing Carrie Buck. It was completely Constitutional to have her imprisoned. It was her tough luck that she was originally locked up because she was raped and the family wanted her keep it quiet. The principle stands.

You know it's not the first time this sort of thing has come up. The visionary Francis Galton predicted that the inferior would outbreed the superior and that's what happened. Right now we have a far far more expensive situation going on. Welfare moms without the sense to stop breeding have more children than those who work. They in turn have more children. There is no end. The parasites will outnumber the hosts and all will suffer.

We need to be outraged like the OP. Darwin points to the way to fix this problem. The workers need to let the slugs fend for themselves, giving them the opportunity to survive or die. If they die, then it's less of a drain on our society. If they survive then they have proved their worth by adopting to our standards. It's as fair as fair can be.

Next we have the supposed insolvable problem of health care. People pretend that eliminating profit will fix things. Even our wise leaders in government who have nothing but our best interests at heart cannot save us, because as the OP and I have said the dregs of the genetic pool will drag us down.

This wrong can be righted. We must realize that Nature would never allow some people to survive. Those with genetic problems can be sterilized, or if they fall below a government determined standard of productivity painlessly euthanized. Why should people be forced to live with a stigma, knowing that they can never meet the standard for survival unless artificially kept alive? Let them die with dignity.

Then there are the elderly and infirm. How do deal with them? It's not that hard really. What we can do is estimate the productivity of an individual and count that to the "plus" column. They are entitled to resources up to that amount. Once they exceed it, they will have a choice. They can be put to sleep, or as a reward for their labor can be sent to a colony with tools and enough resources for them to build houses, grow crops etc. It's a way to culturally relive the nostalgic pioneer days, and it doesn't cost us very much.

Since the OP touched on preemies, let's be frank. The whole abortion argument is a complete nonsensical artifice. A baby is a baby depending on what side of the vaginal exit it's on? How does that matter in the context of long term human welfare?

Every female pregnancy should be inspected. If there are genetic problems, end it. It would save so much suffering in the long run. Eventually we could eliminate birth defects, diabetes, low intelligence and other scourges. Who knows, maybe we could get to the point where we are able to predict who are most mentally adaptable with our Program. Think of the happiness!

The final solution of course is related to this. Realizing that the good of our species and society are paramount, and having done away with this artificial and outdated concept that babies are somehow automatically a good thing, we test children before they enter puberty. If they don't pass muster physically or intellectually, then cull them. It reduces the risk of bad genes being passed on, and the standards can be adjusted to create a sustainable world population. Too many mouths and not enough resources.

How can we reach these lofty goals? Education. The government is after all the creation of our society which exists to serve us. Our best chance for a happy world is for them to educate all children as soon as they are able to understand the importance of our becoming that Great Society long envisioned. Of course many will oppose our Grand Vision, but they too can be helped. We merely move them to re-education camp and use our latest techniques. We can even try out new therapies on these poor misguided miscreants. Glory!

With Government at the helm, and a clear understanding of the Common Good, we can in a few generations eliminate poverty, religion, hunger, suffering, and promote the Race.

Aren't people largely trying to make it so the government can provide health care for everyone, no matter if they can afford it or not, whereas people against reform don't want their taxes paying for deadbeats and illegals? Seems like your comparision would put you w/ the social darwinists.

It's amazing that the fundies freak about of the government taking control at the idea of health care.

Invading foreign countries? Not a problem
Wiretapping w/o warrants? Not a problem
Kidnapping people and holding them indefinitely (not to mention torturing 100 to death)? Not a problem.
Government reforming our broken health care system? @#$% that!

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
The fact is all the money and resources being spent on lives at death's door would be better spent on others with a much better chance at survival and decent quality of life. Goes for preemies, goes for the extreme elderly. When you have to choose who lives and who dies it really sucks for some, but that's life. And I love how people are acting like these decisions aren't already being made right now. The cold hard truth is they are and they're being made badly.

The government was never supposed to have that power.

Whereas our founders tried to separate government and power, your centralized planning for it is the death knell of their design.

And people were never supposed to live past certain afflictions we can now treat. These decisions have to be made, and are being made, and I'd rather them be made with efficient spending in mind as opposed to being profit driven. Be it by government, some medical regulatory board, or whatever.