Slashdot Mirror
Umbilical Cord Blood Banking?
Maestro writes "There must be many parents (and soon-to-be parents) here at Slashdot. What are your thoughts on umbilical cord blood banking? This seems like a major question for our newborn; the question is almost as stressful for us as naming the baby. Given Obama's stance on stem cells, the topic is timely. My understanding is that while the current uses for cord blood are limited, the sky's the limit for the future of stem cell therapies. But with the initial cost over $1000, and ongoing yearly fees, is it worth it?"
!n the day you deliver your baby, you'll probably be overcome with visions of your future with your child - first smiles and steps, birthday parties and sports events, and holidays and life milestones. Your little one ever becoming seriously ill will probably be the last thing on your mind. But some parents do consider the possibility that a serious illness might someday affect their child - and they make a choice on the day their baby is born that might impact the future health of that child or even their other children. They're deciding to bank their newborn's cord blood. And if you don't, you won't be like them, the people who give a flying fuck about their own goddamned children. You'll be just like you. Ignorant, and stupid. I hope you kids die of a rare tropical disease. Then you'll wish you paid us $1000 per year won't you, you cheap bastard.
j'ai découvert une démonstration vraiment admirable (de ce théorème général) que cette si
The mere existance of the private banks wouldn't be a scam (it is just providing a service). If somebody offered to freeze your toes for posterity after you die that wouldn't be a scam either even if they had no useful purpose. However, the marketing might very well be for all the reasons you state. If I were to advertise that it is likely that you could be resurrected from a frozen toe then that would be a scam.
I don't think that you could consider it immoral (except to the degree that the marketing is based on fraud). It sounds like you consider it immoral to set aside cord blood only for your own private use. I don't see how one has a moral obligation to set aside cord blood at all - so how could it be immoral to set it aside for personal use?
This is like suggesting that saving up for personal retirement is immoral because there are senior citizens who could use the money today. Well, sure - and you could give money to them and hope somebody does the same for you. However, that doesn't make it immoral to set aside reasonable savings for one's own retirement. Is it immoral to own a TV when a child anywhere on the planet is starving?
>>>i payed 1230 euros ONE time fee, no mumbo jumbo yearly payments.
You mean you THINK you did not pay yearly charges. More likely, the yearly expense of freezing the cord is subsidized by taxes..... which are sucked out of your paycheck. So you are paying the yearly fee, just hidden.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
>>>Here in Finland (and probably other EU countries) cord blood is stored for free.
You mean you THINK the storage is free. In reality, the expense is subsidized by taxes sucked out of your paycheck. So you are paying the cost of freezing, just well-hidden.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall