Advanced Maternal Age Associated with AIS?

[Ballet Mom]

It is most often used as a term of derision. Very typical.

"As a general rule, people who have questions about the use of technology do not use the term today. Instead, it is used in a deprecating way by advocates of technology, to suggest that the thinking of Neo-Luddites is outdated and outmoded. "

[hdugger]

Drifting off looking at shadows just long enough to confirm that, yes indeed, the counter argument veers off topic and into the pop psychology ditch. Or, for you transactionalists out there, it's the friendly pasttime of "I'm OK. You're insane"

For those not up on the newest lingo, here's the definition of a neo-luddite:

"A Neo-Luddite is someone who believes that the use of technology has serious ethical, moral, and social ramifications. Operating under this belief, Neo-Luddites are cautious to promote early adoption of technology, and while they are not necessarily opposed to technology, they would prefer to see a more serious discussion of the role of technology in society."

It lies in contrast to "technophilia, the belief that technological innovation will remedy all ills."

And that's our foray into dissecting the counter arguers instead of the counter argument for the day. Join us tomorrow when we decide, again, which of the participants is intelligent/rational/informed enough to engage in online conversation.

[Ballet Mom]

There is a hint of what appears to be Neo-Luddism running through threads that mention Scoliscore. It came out of the blue like the treatment-etiology linkage issue came out of the blue. I guess gene screening might be too scary for some even in the context of identifying kids who won't progress past a certain point and even to save kids from bracing.

Apparently you've forgotten that a 35+ degree curve was unacceptable to you and your daughter. How nice that you've decided it should be okay for other people's kids.

In fact I do recall you wanting to reduce the Cobb angle at which surgery was done in order to save kids from their disfigurement at that level. Surgery would be much more cost effective than bracing for sure, lol.

[hdugger]

[slipped by roher and ballet mom, who fail to choose the very flattering definition of neo-luddism, located a mere paragraph below the first. Rule #1, always define terms in the most flattering way ]

BTW, it turns out the Luddites were right, and that the loom would replace their jobs.

[Ballet Mom]

[slipped by roher and ballet mom, who fail to choose the very flattering definition of neo-luddism, located a mere paragraph below the first. Rule #1, always define terms in the most flattering way ]

BTW, it turns out the Luddites were right, and that the loom would replace their jobs.

Smart people those Luddites! :-)

[Ballet Mom]

I really don't have any more to add. When there is a strongly entrenched belief system involved it is pointless to argue or even give the facts (not implying that all belief systems are wrong, so don't even start that argument). I know there are some on here that can weigh through the mud-slinging and come to logical conclusions. However, I hope some of you reading this thread are at least informed as to where some of us are coming from. You can read this same line of reasoning on multiple threads on this forum, unfortunately. For me, personally, the more tools I have available to me in helping to determine treatment for a loved one, the better. Thankfully my daughter didn't progress - at least to my knowledge. I wish I had Scoliscore available to me because I think it would affect her treatment to this day. If we didn't believe, based on hard evidence, that contributing our DNA to the developers of Scoliscore would benefit children and their terrified parents, my parents and I wouldn't have given it. My parents only wished they had Scoliscore available when I was a child - they were terrified just like all the rest of you parents out there. Just remember, YOU are the parents and can still choose what treatments you put your children through, despite what the Scoliscore test says. It's just a tool. (I mentioned that already)

I have no problem if people want to personally pay the $2500 and support privately this scientific research. At some point, they may have enough data to define the 1% that is not benefited by any treatment. Maybe that 1% can accurately be warned that bracing will for sure be a waste of time and should probably be avoided.

Unfortunately, we're operating in a bankrupt country in case people didn't know. And Scoliscore's financial bankers include companies such as Johnson & Johnson. J&J will be looking to develop this market and make it the accepted treatment. I'm fairly sure they're counting on cost savings by reducing or eliminating bracing, and less frequent doctor's visits in order to get insurance companies to pay for their test.

Forgive me if I'm not excited by the thought of a bunch of kids left with big curves and large disfigurement and less treatment of them.

[Dingo]

hdugger

I know sickle cell is a slightly different case, since it's related to the ability to fight malaria, but it's fairly common for a genetic disease - around 1 in 500 in the affected population. And that's for a lethal disease.

In the Malaria belt in Africa Sickle Cell hits up to several percent of children. However because the genetic defense offered by the Sickle Cell gene is so expensive it can only be common in areas where it's worth the cost.

There is some Sickle Cell in places like the USA because black people were brought here as slaves. However we don't need the protection that gene offers so in the long run it's doomed in this part of the world.

If Scoliosis hit certain groups very hard and others infrequently a genetic explanation would make more sense. Maybe the disease gene offered protection against something dangerous that was common in a specific environment.

I believe I read that Cystic Fibrosis is most common in Europe because having one copy of the disease gene offers some protection from the Beubonic Plague.

[hdugger]

Scoliscore

Over the years, I've been won over by Ballet Mom's argument against the myopic focus on whether kids will need surgery by the time they hit 18. Because Scoliscore seems to institutionalizes that dividing line, it exacerbates the problem.

If Scoliscore, instead, told me something more meaningful - like "Will my son ever need surgery," or "Will he avoid surgery but be in pain all of his life," or "Will he avoid surgery and pain but feel disfigured"- I'd have no problem with it. Instead, it compounds all of the errors of pediatric orthopedic care by lumping together the under-25 degree kids, who will likely have no significant problems with scoliosis, with the up-to-40 degree kids, who will likely just avoid surgery as children but go on to need treatment as adults.

It's the equivalent of developing a test which tells you whether your child's stage 0 cancer will progress to stage 3 by the time they're 18. It simply casts too broad a net to effectively prescribe treatment, and it reinforces the puzzling idea that any disease which doesn't require massive intervention by the time you're 18 can be safely ignored.

To help speed up the rebuttal process, I've put this through the Google "Neo-Luddite/Technopilia filter" and come up with the following rough translation of my positon:

Oooohhh genes scary! Me need go to cave until bad civilization gone

[Ballet Mom]

To help speed up the rebuttal process, I've put this through the Google "Neo-Luddite/Technopilia filter" and come up with the following rough translation of my positon:

Oooohhh genes scary! Me need go to cave until bad civilization gone

LOL!

(Has it really been years? eek )

[Pooka1]

Apparently you've forgotten that a 35+ degree curve was unacceptable to you and your daughter. How nice that you've decided it should be okay for other people's kids.

You say that like it matters what I do and don't think matters in terms of what the curve does. There is no evidence it matters what you think or I think or your daughter thinks or my daughters think in terms of affecting any curve.

[hdugger]

LOL!

(Has it really been years? eek )

I joined 8/09, so I'm using the 1/2 year to push it into the plural

[rohrer01]

hdugger,

I apologize if I offended you by Wikipedia's definition of neo-luddism. I honestly didn't know what it meant and wasn't trying to be sarcastic in any way. I felt that the first paragraph adequately described what Pooka1 was trying to say and didn't feel it necessary to post the "whole" Wiki page. It was an honest mistake.

[hdugger]

Sorry, my error in writing. I always forget the problems of voice in online.

I *meant* the second post (about my having selected the more favorable version of neo-luddism) as a joke on myself - that I'd passed right by the unfavorable one and just selected the definition I wanted. When Ballet Mom also selected the first one, I thought I'd let her know my trick in selective posting.

You really do not have to repost entire wiki pages just to please me. I'm pretty easy

[hdugger]

BTW, my husband points out that "neo-luddism" goes against everything that luddism stands for. If I'm going to be a luddite, I'll be damned if I'm going to do it in some new-fangled way.

[Dingo]

This is all I ask....

Ten years from now when scientists discover that Scoliosis is triggered by a pathogen the first thing you say to yourself is... "Wow, Dingo was right!"

And I will be. 8-)