Actually Infuriating

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 9 points 6 months ago* (1 child)

the other 2 had a mild infection which is usually the case for children. but ethan had the most severe form which is rare; panechephalitis and dangerous.

all bets are off an adult gets it too.

parent

[–] LillyPip@lemmy.ca 6 points 6 months ago (1 child)

There’s still time for the other 2.

Dawson Disease (SSPE)

It has been estimated that about 2 in 10,000 people who get measles will eventually develop SSPE. However, a 2016 study estimated that the rate for unvaccinated infants under 15 months was as high as 1 in 609. No cure for SSPE exists, and the condition is almost always fatal.

SSPE is characterized by a history of primary measles infection, followed by a normal, unremarkable recovery. Symptoms of SSPE appear later. On average, the first symptoms appear about 10 years after the initial infection

parent

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 2 points 6 months ago

thats the house episode, a child was unvaccinated and then developed the SSPE like years later.

parent

[–] bitjunkie@lemmy.world -1 points 6 months ago (4 children)

People should have to get breeding licenses.

hideshow 8 child comments

parent

[–] Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works 54 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Under the present administration, this family would have been first in line to receive their "breeding license."

Breeding the "Trump Youth" and next generation of MAGAts.

Eugenics is fascist, end of.

parent

[–] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 4 points 6 months ago*

Note: positive eugenics is also fascist.

For clarification - negative eugenics = preventing certain groups from reproducing. Positive eugenics = promoting certain groups to reproduce.

Fascists use both.

parent

[–] bitjunkie@lemmy.world -2 points 6 months ago

Imperfect implementation isn't a reason not to adopt a good idea.

parent

[–] ganryuu@lemmy.ca 17 points 6 months ago (2 children)

No. Just no. That's fucking eugenics. No.

parent

[–] Wataba@sh.itjust.works 8 points 6 months ago (1 child)

Theyre practising their own eugenics right now. In a way that can cause harm to others.

parent

[–] ganryuu@lemmy.ca 15 points 6 months ago

So? Does that make eugenics a good thing? No it doesn't.

parent

[+] yeahiknow3@lemmy.dbzer0.com -13 points 6 months ago* (1 child)

Yes, it’s apparently a human right for evil subhumans to bring children into the world and abuse them. The anti-eugenics crowd speed-running idiocracy.

parent

[–] ganryuu@lemmy.ca 16 points 6 months ago (1 child)

Eugenics is fascist. You are defending a fascist ideology. Take a step back to consider that please.

Also curious to know how you would decide who gets to reproduce.

parent

[–] yeahiknow3@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 6 months ago* (2 children)

We place moral restrictions on decisions that have a potential to hurt others. Bringing children into this world is one such decision.

parent

[–] ganryuu@lemmy.ca 14 points 6 months ago (2 children)

False equivalency. Also waiting on your criteria for a reproduction permit.

Again, eugenics is fascist.

Also, even with the best effort to restrict reproduction in a "good" way, the instant your administration changes, those restrictions will change too. Do you want the Trump admin to choose who can reproduce?

Education is the answer. Always has been, always will be.

parent

[–] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 3 points 6 months ago (2 children)

the instant your administration changes, those restrictions will change too.

This applies to a lot of things. It's a reason why you don't want too much infrastructure in place that can be used for oppression, even if such infrastructure is put into place by a benevolent administration.

parent

[–] ganryuu@lemmy.ca 3 points 6 months ago* (1 child)

Yes, and in the case of restrictions on reproduction, I do not see any way to implement that without having that gigantic oppressive infrastructure.

Also, "benevolent" eugenics is still eugenics, still fascist.

parent

[–] bitjunkie@lemmy.world -2 points 6 months ago (1 child)

Getting to "fascist" seems to be your only endgame here. It's a label. Paved roads and running water are "fascist".

parent

[–] ganryuu@lemmy.ca 1 point 6 months ago

Please explain to me how you would go about selecting who can reproduce and who can't then. I've asked this question multiple times and so far none of you "eugenics are good when it favors me" seem to want to answer it.

Eugenics is about purity of your population. That is a textbook component of fascism, whether you like it or not.

parent

[–] bitjunkie@lemmy.world -1 points 6 months ago (1 child)

All of the "problems" they're pointing out against letting stupid/evil people have a dozen kids are problems that still exist without such a restriction. Inability to isolate variables and saying we shouldn't do anything because "the system is imperfect" defines conservatism.

parent

[–] ganryuu@lemmy.ca 1 point 6 months ago (1 child)

If you bothered to read the whole thread, I do propose a solution. Education.

parent

[–] bitjunkie@lemmy.world 1 point 6 months ago (1 child)

But the current administration would not properly implement education

parent

[–] ganryuu@lemmy.ca 2 points 6 months ago

Unfortunately true, I agree. There would be an enormous amount of work to be done, starting with replacing that admin, and it would take time and effort. Still, I don't see a way, even with all the benevolence in the world, to restrict reproduction in a positive way. Also, I honestly believe that it would end up having a similar effect to banning alcohol for example: people wouldn't stop reproducing, they would hide it, which in turn means no access to healthcare or education for those children, as they would have to be hidden from the government, thus complicating things even further.

parent

[+] yeahiknow3@lemmy.dbzer0.com -3 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

[deleted]

parent

[–] Whirling_Ashandarei@lemmy.world 10 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Once thought like that, but actually think through it and it's not possible without being evil: what are the criteria, who makes the call, who watches those making such calls to ensure it's fair (and who watches them and so on because this kind of thing would immediately attract people seeking power over others and therefore corruption), how does one appeal, etc etc etc.

It just isn't possible without being a fascist (evil).

parent

[–] shawn1122@sh.itjust.works 2 points 6 months ago

Also it's been done before even in "nonfascist" states - see forced sterilization of indigineous peoples and African Americans in the US.

Having a child is something a pair of consenting adults can do with their own bodies. How the state can get involved in that without it being a major incursion on personal liberty should cause one to pause.

I'm convinced that in this part of the world most supporters are either active or latent white supremacists. In other parts it's often based on subjugation of a more specific ethnic group, which isn't any better. It's all fascism at the end of the day.

parent

[+] yeahiknow3@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 6 months ago

[deleted]

parent

[–] Mac@mander.xyz 7 points 6 months ago

Eugenics is okay when it's for my team but not for the others.

Very conservative mindset. lol

parent

[–] shawn1122@sh.itjust.works 1 point 6 months ago

This has been considered at various points in history and, at least in the Western world, it often comes down to white people being given permission (regardless of preparedness) and people of color being forcibly sterilized. Also known as eugenics.

White supremacy is a hell of a scourge and the Western world is still trying to shake it, over the course of centuries.