SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Iceland is close to eliminating Down syndrome births due to widespread prenatal screening tests and nearly 100% of women choosing an abortion in the case of a positive test for Down syndrome:
With the rise of prenatal screening tests across Europe and the United States, the number of babies born with Down syndrome has significantly decreased, but few countries have come as close to eradicating Down syndrome births as Iceland.
Since prenatal screening tests were introduced in Iceland in the early 2000s, the vast majority of women -- close to 100 percent -- who received a positive test for Down syndrome terminated their pregnancy.
While the tests are optional, the government states that all expectant mothers must be informed about availability of screening tests, which reveal the likelihood of a child being born with Down syndrome. Around 80 to 85 percent of pregnant women choose to take the prenatal screening test, according to Landspitali University Hospital in Reykjavik.
[...] Other countries aren't lagging too far behind in Down syndrome termination rates. According to the most recent data available, the United States has an estimated termination rate for Down syndrome [open, DOI: 10.1002/pd.2910] [DX] of 67 percent (1995-2011); in France it's 77 percent (2015); and Denmark, 98 percent (2015). The law in Iceland permits abortion after 16 weeks if the fetus has a deformity -- and Down syndrome is included in this category.
The Prenatal Diagnosis link in the summary was replaced with a working version.
National Review has a counterpoint opinion piece about the CBSN article. Snopes has a page debunking inaccurate headlines about the article.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday August 17 2017, @06:15PM (5 children)
Yes, and? The Democrats and Republicans more or less switched sides on the social spectrum during the Civil Rights era. I'd have been a proud Republican in the 1860s, for the same reason I'd have been a proud Democrat in the 1970s and am now a pissed off Independent here in the 2010s.
You really do live up to your username; everywhere you go, you leave disordered, useless heat behind you.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Entropy on Thursday August 17 2017, @07:35PM (4 children)
If history is so unimportant, why is everyone whining to tear down statues?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday August 17 2017, @09:32PM (3 children)
Because, you complete fucking JAQoff, removing monuments glorifying a dark time period in history is not the same thing, not even CLOSE, to "destroying history." ...okay, maybe to assholes like you who don't/can't read, but to anyone with a fourth-grade education or above, there are available these things called books...you should try them sometime.
Here's an analogy: the knowledge necessary to build a car is not going to disappear if a statue of a Ford Model-T is destroyed. There is a tremendous difference between a monument and a fact.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Sulla on Saturday August 19 2017, @05:00PM
I can understand statues of Jefferson Davis as well as big time slave holders, but what the hell is the problem with General Lee? Lee was a slave holder for a matter of minutes when he inheirated his fathers slaves and immedietly freed them and he had sympathy for the cause of emancipation. Lee's rememberance is about a man who was offered leadership of the union army and would have taken the job had virginia not succeeded.
People should probably want to remove statues of the union general Sherman as well, he burned bridges behind him so the freed slaves would drown as they tried to follow his march across rivers.
Slavery was a huge factor in the civil war, but it was not the only thing at play. As more and more left states want to flex their muscle and not be forced to fall in line with the fed (pot, gay marraige, etc) they should realize that the civil war completely broke the power of the 10th amendment.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 2) by Sulla on Saturday August 19 2017, @08:21PM (1 child)
More in line with what you responded than my previous reply. How long until we get to airbrushing "enemies of the people" from photos so future people don't know they were there? Maybe we should airbrush all the slave owners from the paintings from the founding of the nation. Take their names off of the declaration of independence.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday August 20 2017, @03:58AM
One more time: removing monuments != erasing history. There are books available to all who wish to (or can...) read explaining in plenty of gory goddamn detail who these people were and what they did. And unlike the statues, the books don't glorify them.
Because, be real here with me for a hot fuckin' minute, you DON'T build statues to people unless the intent is to lionize them.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...