Not So Young But Angry Conservatives Unite

Getting sick of the progressively worse slant and obvious bias of the media? Got booted out of other sites for offending too many liberals? Make this your home. If you SPAM here, you're gone. Trolling? Gone. Insult other posters I agree with. Gone. Get the pic. Private sanctum, private rules. No Fairness Doctrine and PC wussiness tolerated here..... ECCLESIASTES 10:2- The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of a fool to the left.

Tuesday, October 18, 2005

NZ Experiments on aborted children, imported from US!

WARNING, this article and discussion WILL GET HEATED and the jpg, is to a graphic pic. This is all done, for good reason. Showing the evils and slippery slope of what some say is allowable.....


LINKS: (article)


In a trash can, a waste basket of all things. Fine disposal and end to our unborn kids. Sickening.....

NZ experiments on aborted US babies
18.10.05By Martin Johnston

Researchers at Auckland University are conducting eye experiments on aborted human fetuses imported from the United States. The university confirmed this yesterday after it was revealed by journalist Ian Wishart in the magazine Investigate. The research has been denounced by an anti-abortion group, which has likened it to the medical experiments conducted under Germany's Nazi regime. But the university rejects the comparison and has defended the research, led by Dr Keely Bumsted O'Brien. Her team in May won an $827,930, three-year grant from the state-funded Health Research Council. The study using fetal tissue aims to improve understanding of vision loss by examining the macula, the central part of the retina. Macular degeneration is common in the elderly. In 2003, Dr Bumsted O'Brien published a study based on experiments using "snap frozen intact human fetal eyes ranging from fetal week nine ... to 18". She did not return the Herald's calls. Nor did the university's deputy vice-chancellor (research), Professor Tom Barnes, who was in a university council meeting, but he issued a statement which said the latest study used donated human fetal tissue segments, including the macula, which were preserved in the US and imported to New Zealand. Professor Barnes said strict protocols and a rigorous approval process governed the research. "Our information shows that approval processes for provision of the tissue by donor families have been followed correctly," he said. Herald inquiries suggest it is unlikely that any fetuses aborted at New Zealand clinics or hospitals are being used in research. The Health Ministry's national database of its ethics committees dating from 1988 contains no record of applications for any such research. The Canterbury District Health Board's clinical director of gynaecology and oncology, Dr Michael Laney, said no fetal tissue from the board's hospital was being used for research. "We made a pact years ago that we were determined not to be seen to be making money out of these women." The Capital and Coast board's head of obstetrics and gynaecology, Dr John Tait, said no New Zealand fetal tissue was used for research - that he knew of - as it would be so controversial. The Voice for Life Auckland branch president, Bernard Moran, described the latest Auckland University experiments as a shocking watershed. "We regard it as Auschwitz," he said. "We knew it was happening in the States and Russia. We certainly didn't think it would happen here."

Fetal law
* Experiments using tissue from aborted fetuses are legal, but they are rare in New Zealand.
* Fetal tissue is excluded from the Human Tissue Act.
* It is expected to be covered in new legislation next year.
* It is proposed that the new law will make it clear that consent will be needed to use tissue from aborted fetuses and stillborn babies.
* The National Ethics Advisory Committee is writing guidelines on research using such tissue.


More by Martin Johnston

Email Martin Johnston

Beyond words. If they run out of aborted kids, where do they get further material? Shall they start reserving and pre-ordering life unworthy and expendable? We get so squeamish about animal experimentation, but don't bat an eye at humans? God Forbid it, now!


  • At 11:03 PM, Blogger Kevin said…

    That was a crappy pic Nick. These better illustrate your point:

    Pic 1
    Pic 2

  • At 5:10 AM, Blogger NDwalters said…

    The pic was not mine, but lemme add the point is that life ought not to be thrown away for the unborn. We toss our lives away, that's our call, we answer for it. However, the kids are another story.

  • At 2:37 AM, Blogger Kevin said…

    I say let the unborn survive on their own. :)

    But seriously, as an alternative, lets just have them removed and implanted into someone else.

    That way the parasite is removed - and someone who actually wants a kid can have it.

    Good idea??

  • At 11:17 AM, Blogger NDwalters said…

    Kevin, let's not call kids parasites, capice?

    And yes, it would be nice to let those who WANT kids to have em. Born or adopted.

    However, there are some who prefer to f-ck, then shuck.

  • At 1:52 PM, Blogger Kevin said…

    Hey - I was just making a point. Here is the complete definition:

    par·a·site Audio pronunciation of "parasite" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (pr-st)

    1. Biology. An organism that grows, feeds, and is sheltered on or in a different organism while contributing nothing to the survival of its host.

    a). One who habitually takes advantage of the generosity of others without making any useful return.
    b). One who lives off and flatters the rich; a sycophant.

    3. A professional dinner guest, especially in ancient Greece.

    You want to tell me an unborn child is not a parasite? fine. But by definition - it is.

    I mean, I've got organisms living in my lungs at this very moment that I'd love to 'remove'.

    Yet, an organism that started from a human sperm and egg is is somehow unique and above the rest of biology?



Post a Comment

<< Home