posted on December 11, 2005 08:54:51 AMDoesn't matter if she put her children at risk, you put a child at "risk" as soon as it leaves the womb.
Ron, are you just being sarcastic? Because I think there are many choices parents make for their children that dont always turn out for the best.....
I find extremely ironic that everybody's condemning her responsibility for motherhood...endangering her child...and meanwhile..parents all over the country are taking their kids to McDonald's everyday, maken them fatties and diabetics! Why is everyone not rallying out against these careless mothers?
posted on December 11, 2005 09:09:45 AMrisk having children knowing the increased odds of them being infected.
Why would any woman having ANY disease have children? It's not selfish to want your own childen and a family, maggie.
Your all hashing RISK! risk rISK! Without risk, there is no future for anything. Pretty soon, they will have genetics so mapped out, some one will hesitate to have a child because they "MIGHT" inherit some predisposition that you have!
.
[ edited by dblfugger9 on Dec 11, 2005 09:18 AM ]
posted on December 11, 2005 09:14:22 AM she refused to give the doctors her history of the disease which would have benefited in the treatment of her baby.
MIGHT have benefitted ...
But I admit this is the one sore point with me. I think she should have told the doctors at that critical point. She had her reasons. But she f/u'd up right there, imo, and now is paying for it with the loss of the life of her daughter.
posted on December 11, 2005 09:29:48 AM
:idnt you mention on these very boards that antibiotics and other medications did some severe damage to your teeth?::
No - strange that you remember every irrelevent thing i say and yet got that one so wrong. I've had problems with my sinuses since I was a kid which led to stomoach issues which led to excessive vomiting which led to the problems I have with my teeth. I have nothing against antibiotics. You might be referring to a medication I was given to help get the stomach issues under control (Propulsid) which I took once, thought I was having a heart attack and never took again. Shortly afterwards it was taken off the market because it was indeed causing heart attacks.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
An intelligent deaf-mute is better than an ignorant person who can speak.
My brother's T-Cells are also within the normal range (yes, that's the second brother with HIV; the first died in 1996 as you all know). He still is HIV+. HIV can hide and lay dormant for a long time. You may test negative today, but test positive a week from now. That's one of the reasons this disease is so hard to cure.
The mother's refusal to take AZT was wise. However, there are other drugs to treat HIV. No HIV patient that I know currently takes AZT. The drug itself it useful in treating HIV, but the side-effects are so bad that most patients stop taking the drug. Today, the daily dose of AZT is decreased. My brother, David, was instructed to take it every four hours around the clock back in the late 1980's. He stopped taking it altogether and when the newer drugs came out, he started taking them. He also stopped taking those when crack pots told him he'd live longer without the drugs. He died soon after.
Whatever the findings
What is meant by that is I'm reading conflicting things. I don't know what the real results are. Is the mother lying to protect herself? Are the medical personnel and examiner lying to hang the mother? I just don't know so I won't assume that I do.
Cheryl
"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter." - Martin Luther King, Jr.
[ edited by cblev65252 on Dec 11, 2005 10:27 AM ]
posted on December 11, 2005 10:35:36 AM
The mind is like a steel trap there, fenix.
I've told you before I pretty much remember everything I read. As much as you'd like to think it is; it's not specific to you. Ive always tested out very high on that with reading comprehension scores. What was relevant to me is one disease causing the deterioration of another part of the body, your bones in your mouth. That is common with teeth from medication for the initial disease.
Cheryl, I dont think they were trying to hang her, but rather made a conclusion that did not - was not based on the data available that jives with what is to be expected in such cases of the tissue samples. The more I read on her, she actually denies the existance of HIV/AIDS connection whatsoever. One person's crackpot is the next century's nobel prize winner. It's very hard to draw a conclusion one way or another. I think that is where I am at with it. There's alot of questions with only a 25% chance of that child having had AIDS or dying of an aids related illiness. I think people sterotype things without having the evidence to back it up.
.
posted on December 11, 2005 11:00:40 AM
Miss Mags. Thank you but I am fine. I've had this since I ws about 12 so I am used to it. It sounds wierd but at this point, vomitting for me is as normal as coughing. It's like anything that you deal with for a long time, you just adjust and move forward. Bugs the hell out of roomates though which I why I live alone... well, that and the fact I am an antisocial pain in the ass.
Dbl - no meds caused this one - just stomach acids erroding the enamel.
Cheryl - Personally Iam going with the cornoers results, for two reasons.
1) There is versted interest on the part of an independent examiner to find one cause of death as opposed to another. the findings were pretty straight forward and I think i's a stretch to say that amoxicilian would cause so many negatives in the body in just a few days, especially the atrophy of organs.
2) The only person that states that the death was not as a result of complications resultin from her HIV status is a doctor whose life work would be thrown out the window if he did say anythin else. Asking a doctor who has built a reputation on the theory that HIV does not lead to AIDS or AIDS related illnesses to be completely unbiased and open in his evaluation is like asking Sean Hannity to give a unbiased evaluation of the Bush administration.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
An intelligent deaf-mute is better than an ignorant person who can speak.
posted on December 11, 2005 11:03:25 AM
But Dbl - There is an independent lab that did the AIDS test. It was not the coroner. Why do you believe that there is only a 25% chance that she was positive when test results state that she was?
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
An intelligent deaf-mute is better than an ignorant person who can speak.
