April 7, 2011

Alex Schadenberg, Executive Director of The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, recently posted this article alerting us to the new practice guidelines by the Canadian Paediatric Society. These guidelines were modeled after the American Academy of Pediatrics' guidelines and direct withholding nutrition and hydration from infants born with disabilities.

Canadian Paediatric Society approves the dehydration of infants who may not be otherwise dying.

The Canadian Paediatric Society - bioethics committee, released a statement today concerning the Withholding and Withdrawing of artificial nutrition and hydration.

The statement of the Canadian Paediatric Society is similar to the statement from the American Academy of Pediatrics. Both statements approve the withholding or withdrawing of nutrition and hydration (fluids and food) from infants, who may not be dying.
The statement on the Withholding and Withdrawing of artificial nutrition and hydration allows euthanasia by dehydration (slow euthanasia) of infants with cognitive or other disabilities based on a "quality of life" assessment and with the consent.

I refer to this as euthanasia by dehydration because there is a clear difference between withholding or withdrawing fluids and food from a person who is actually dying and nearing death and a person who is not otherwise dying.

When a person is actually dying and nearing death, the death occurs from the medical condition. But when a person has cognitive or other serious disabilities or conditions, but is not otherwise dying, when fluids and food are intentionally withheld or withdrawn, the cause of death is intentional dehydration.          Read more

The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition will be hosting their third Symposium on Euthanasia and Assisted suicide. HLA has attended in the past and will be attending this symposium as well.
The list of scheduled speakers and topics is impressive. This is an excellent opportunity for comprehensive education on end of life issues. Find out more information here.

HLA's publication, Imposed Death, focuses on end of life issues, exposing the atrocities that are happening to old and young alike.Please contact us for your copy.

This is no Joke!

April 1, 2011

We received this press release from our friends at Children of God for Life, one of the resources that Human Life Alliance has relied on for truthful, accurate and updated information on vaccines, fetal and stem cell research, abortion and birth control. 

March 29, 2011- ACTIONALERT

Biotech company using aborted fetal cell lines to test food flavor enhancers

(Largo, FL) Children of God for Life is calling for a public boycott of major food companies partnering with Senomyx, a biotech company that produces artificial flavor enhancers using aborted fetal cell lines to test their products.

In 2010, the pro-life organization wrote to Senomyx CEO Kent Snyder, pointing out that moral options for testing their food additives could and should be used. But when Senomyx ignored their letter, they wrote to the companies Senomyx listed on their website as "collaborators" warning them of public backlash and threatened boycott. Food giants Pepsico, Kraft Foods, Campbell Soup, Solae and Nestlé are the primary targets of the boycott.

Senomyx website states: "The company's key flavor programs focus on the discovery and development of savory, sweet and salt flavor ingredients that are intended to allow for the reduction of MSG, sugar and salt in food and beverage products....Using isolated human taste receptors, we created proprietary taste receptor-based assay systems that provide a biochemical or electronic readout when a flavor ingredient interacts with the receptor." 

Their collaborators provide Senomyx research and development funding plus royalties on sales of products using their flavor ingredients.

"What they don't tell the public is that they are using HEK 293 - human embryonic kidney cells taken from an electively aborted baby to produce those receptors", stated Debi Vinnedge, Executive Director for Children of God for Life, a pro-life watch dog group that has monitored the use of aborted fetal material in medical and consumer products for years.

"They could have easily chosen animal, insect, or other morally obtained human cells expressing the G protein for taste receptors", she added.

In writing to their collaborators, it took three letters before Nestlé finally admitted the truth about their relationship with Senomyx, noting the cell line was "well established in scientific research".

Both Pepsico and Campbell Soup also responded.

Shockingly, Pepsico wrote: "We hope you are reassured to learn that our collaboration with Senomyx is strictly limited to creating lower-calorie, great-tasting beverages for consumers. This will help us achieve our commitment to reduce added sugar per serving by 25% in key brands in key markets over the next decade and ultimately help people live healthier lives." 

Campbell Soup was more sensitive in their response: "Every effort is made to use the finest ingredients and develop the greatest selection of products, all at a great value. With this in mind, it must be said that the trust we have cultivated and developed over the years with our consumers is not worth compromising to cut costs or increase profit margins."

While Campbell didn't state they would change their methods, their response, gave Vinnedge hope.

"If enough people voice their outrage and intent to boycott these consumer products, it may convince Senomyx to change their methods", she noted. "Otherwise, we will be buying Coca-Cola, Lipton soups and Hershey products!"

See www.cogforlife.org/senomyxalert.htm for mailing addresses of Senomyx and the food companies.

A note: Campbell Soup and Solae have both severed relationships with Senomyx. Please contact the remaining companies on the list. The calls and letters are working! 

Bravo Chile!

March 31, 2011

On Saturday, March 26, in a special ceremony, the President of Chile, Sebastián Piñera, received the International Protect Life Award on behalf of the people of Chile. The event was covered by most of the major media in Chile.

Chile was recognized for being the most pro-life Latin American country and also having the lowest maternal mortality rate in Latin America. The award was based on Chile's initiatives that help protect the health and lives of all Chileans at all stages of life.
Abortion is illegal in Chile, without exception. Every life is seen as valuable. A commonly held belief with Sixty-seven percent of Chileans identifying themselves as Pro-Life.

Chile is a model for maternal health care. Low maternal mortality rates are achieved through education and by providing access for all pregnant women to good prenatal care throughout pregnancy. They also offer women facing unexpected  pregnancies help so they won't feel they can't have the baby.

Respect for Life is fostered through education. The government of Chile launched a campaign which ran pro-life  television ads during prime time. The focus is on the dignity and humanity of the preborn child.

Human Life Alliance was one of the signatories of the congratulatory letter to President Piñera and the Chilean people

You can read the letter here.   

RH Reality Check is at it again…

March 18, 2011

And we would appreciate your help.

They are reacting to HLA’s college publication, running as an insert in the Daily Iowan, school paper for the University of Iowa. This is their claim about You Can Stop Injustice:

Contrary to what you’d expect, the contents of this packet were filled with extremist anti-abortion propaganda. This pamphlet, which was funded by the Human Life Alliance, made the absurd assertions, among others, that victims of rape and incest would be better off without the option of abortion and that Planned Parenthood is a eugenics organization.

There is a difference between a newspaper providing the space for an organization to logically express its point of view and a newspaper giving legitimacy to offensive and fanatical claims. The ad was blatantly trying to mislead readers. It took advantage of the faces and suffering of victims of rape, domestic violence, and racism, and used them for its own benefit.

RH Reality Check is picked and shared on dozens of other websites. Their misinformation is perpetuated ad infinitum.

We would love to have HLA supporters go to RH Reality Check and post your comments. This is a great opportunity for you as a pro-life person to express your thoughts and be read by thousands of pro-abortion readers around the world.

Please email us a copy of your post

Selective Killing Fields  

March 10, 2011

We want to share an article written by Julie Grimstad, contributing Writer and Editor of Imposed Death, that helps explain what is wrong with Physician's Order for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) laws. Julie is addressing a specific state's proposed legislation, Wisconsin, but many states are now proposing basically the same legislation. We hope you find this article informative.

SELECTIVE KILLING FIELDS: POLST in Action

Julie Grimstad

1-19-2011

“In my practice, while I steadfastly refuse to write a prescription with lethal intent or otherwise help the patient commit suicide, I can share with the patient information that he or she already has the ability to exert control over the time [of] death. Virtually any patient with far-advanced illness can be assured of dying – comfortably, without any additional physical distress – within one or two weeks simply by refusing to eat or drink.” – Ira Byock, M.D., American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Care, March/April 1995

Hospitals and nursing homes are becoming (or have already become) selective killing fields. POLST (Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment) is another in a long line of efforts to persuade people to refuse medical treatment. Living Wills and Powers of Attorney for Health Care (advance directives) have not been as successful in this area as their creators in the right-to-die movement had hoped they would be. Put quite simply, POLST protocols and laws are the “death with dignity” squad’s latest attempt to select those whose lives are viewed as “futile” in order to ensure their speedy demise. POLST forms are designed to limit the use of life-saving technology, life-sustaining treatment and even ordinary care, such as the provision of food and water. “Compassion” and “patient autonomy” are the alleged motives for promulgating POLST forms. However, a look at their origin tells a different story.

Analysis of the POLST movement “reveals that it is a national effort to manage and control death under the guise of compassion.” (Ethics and Medics, 6/2010, “The Danger of POLST Orders”.) The usual cast of characters is involved in this latest effort to advance the “right to die.” POLST was developed in the 1990’s by the Ethics group at Oregon Health & Sciences University, the group that also developed the Guidebook to the Oregon Death With Dignity Act (Oregon’s physician-assisted suicide law). POLST was developed with grants from George Soros’s Project on Death in America, as well as the Greenwall Foundation and the Cummings Foundation, all frequent sponsors of right-to-die organizations. Compassion & Choices (formerly the Hemlock Society) promotes POLST. (For more detailed information/a timeline, go to www.lifetree.org.) POLST was one of the outcomes of the Project on Death in America. On 11/9/2003, the Boston Globe (Carey Goldberg, Globe Staff) reported: “... the Project on Death in America, financed by billionaire George Soros and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, poured more than $200 million over the last decade into end-of-life programs and research.”

The POLST form differs from a Living Will or a Power of Attorney for Health Care (advance directives) because, once signed by a physician, it is the physician’s orders and may therefore be carried out immediately. Furthermore, the law governing advance directives, which requires two physicians to certify that the patient is capable of making medical decisions, will not apply to a POLST form. POLST leaves the patient wide-open for abuse.

The proposed Wisconsin POLST law is extremely flawed from a moral point of view.

1. The analysis introducing the POLST bill states that the withholding or withdrawal of treatment under this bill “does not constitute suicide.” If a person chooses to have withheld or withdrawn treatment or care that is life-sustaining, is this not a death wish and suicide/assisted suicide if carried out?

2. The bill itself states (7)(g) “Nothing in this section condones, authorizes, or permits any affirmative or deliberate act to end life other than to permit the natural dying process.” What does this mean? Is death by dehydration a “natural dying process” for a person in a persistent vegetative state, or a person with a life-limiting illness, or anyone else, for that matter? Does denial of medical treatment or care that could prevent death merely permit a “natural dying process”?

3. The POLST philosophy is that patient autonomy is paramount. That is completely contrary to Catholic moral teaching. “A person has the moral obligation to use ordinary or proportionate means of preserving his or her life.” (USCCB, Ethical & Religious Directives)

4. The POLST form—a physician’s preprinted order sheet—has check boxes to refuse even very ordinary things, including food and fluids. This is contrary to authentic Catholic moral teaching regarding medical decision-making. Whether or not to provide/receive nutrition and hydration is not a choice. They are either medically contraindicated (because they are actually causing harm to the patient or because the patient’s body can no longer assimilate food and fluids) or they must be provided.
a. In March of 2004, Pope John Paul II addressed the International Congress on Life-Sustaining Treatments and Vegetative State. He unequivocally stated that withholding hydration and nutrition from patients when these will sustain their lives is wrong and that death by starvation and dehydration “ends up becoming, if done knowingly and willingly, true and proper euthanasia by omission.”
b. In 2007, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith strongly reinforced this papal instruction, writing to the bishops of the United States: “The administration of food and water even by artificial means is, in principle, an ordinary and proportionate means of preserving life. It is therefore obligatory to the extent to which, and for as long as, it is shown to accomplish its proper finality, which is the hydration and nourishment of the patient. In this way suffering and death by starvation and dehydration are prevented.”

5. POLST forms are typically filled out as the patient’s condition changes/worsens, frequently when the patient and his/her agent are under stress. POLST forms supersede previously signed advance directives. Would the same wishes (as are expressed when the physician checks boxes in the POLST form) have been expressed by the patient/agent in a less stressful situation? Since the POLST form overrides the patient’s Power of Attorney for Health Care and the physician’s orders in the POLST form are generally carried out immediately, POLST is extremely dangerous.

6. Confronting patients with such difficult and fateful decisions during a time of crisis seems particularly heartless, especially when they have already signed a Power of Attorney for Health Care expressing their values and carefully stated wishes. Assisted Suicide proponent Ann Jackson testified before a Senate subcommittee in 2006. During the course of her testimony in favor of assisted suicide, she said that one of Oregon’s successes was POLST. She claimed that “respect for end-of-life wishes is virtually 100% when POLST…is in place.” (Testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Property Rights, “The Consequences of Legalized Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia,” 5/25/2006.) But does a POLST form accurately convey a person’s wishes and values? Filling out the POLST form includes a coaching process designed to elicit the patient responses desired by the physician or other medical professional who is checking the boxes. It is actually not difficult to “clarify” away a distressed patient’s previously expressed wishes by presenting what a medical professional considers “realistic options.”(Medical professionals receive special POLST training in this regard.)

7. POLST sets the stage for neglect, substandard medical treatment, and cost- saving at the expense of patients’ lives. Although POLST promoters steer clear of mentioning the money motive, it is undoubtedly a factor in efforts to limit treatment.

G.K. Chesterton, in What’s Wrong With the World?, answered that question: “What is wrong is that we do not ask what is right.” We ask what is quick and convenient, what is useful, what is cost-effective…not does this course of action/inaction respect this person and his or her life? The most “right” thing we can do is love and respect one another and ourselves. Even if we do not love perfectly, at least we must try to do what is right, not merely what is easy. The sick person should not be offered the option to hasten his or her death, particularly when weak, in pain, feeling overwhelmed or just plain tired of fighting.

Have we grown cold? Have we lost the fervor of our conviction that every human being has dignity and is worthy of life? Those of us who are pro-life must vigorously oppose the POLST movement. We must protect the lives of everyone – including ourselves. We must never succumb to the false compassion of those who see planned death as the final solution to human suffering and the burden of caring for one another.

POLST advocates will not accept “no.” They will keep reintroducing POLST bills. Be vigilant.

Baby Number Seven Billion Not an Overpopulation Concern

By Steven Mosher | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 2/23/11 7:25 PM

Sometime late this year a baby will emerge from the womb of its mother, draw its first breath, and announce its arrival into the world with a tiny cry. Thus will Baby Seven Billion be born.

Everyone agrees that Baby Seven Billion's birthday-the day that our planet becomes home to seven billion human beings-marks an important milestone. But is it a milestone on humanity's upward path that we should celebrate, or a warning sign of impending catastrophe?

The prophets of doom and gloom, of population bombs and the baby booms, would have preferred that Baby Seven Billion had never been born.

We at PRI have a different take on the matter. We believe that the birth of Baby Seven Billion is cause for celebration. He or she has been born into a world that is more prosperous than our forebears could have imagined.

As our numbers have climbed so has our well-being. In 1800, when there were only 1 billion people, per capita income was a mere $100. By 1900, as the population was closing in on 2 billion, it reached $500. Currently, with 7 billion people, per capita income has soared to over $5,000. In 2100, when the population is projected to be between 7 and 8 billion (and falling), it will be $30,000 in current dollars.

Driving the so-called "population explosion" has been a real explosion in health and longevity. As late as the 19th century, four out of every 10 children died before reaching age five. Today under-five mortality is under 7 percent. Two hundred years ago, human life expectancy was under 30 years. Today it is closer to 70 years.

As people live longer, naturally there are more of us around at any given time. This is cause to celebrate, not to despair.

By nearly every measure of well-being, from infant mortality and life expectancy to educational level and caloric intake, life in Africa, Asia, and Latin America has been getting dramatically better. According to the World Bank, the average income in the developing world has more than doubled since 1960.

Enough grain is produced for every person on earth to consume 3,500 calories daily. There is no need for anyone to starve in the midst of this plenty.

Population has doubled since 1960, but world food and resource production has never been higher. Economies continue to expand, productivity is up, and pollution is declining. Life spans are lengthening, poverty is down, and political freedom is growing. Even the intractable Middle East, thought to be forever the playground of dictators and ayatollahs, is astir. The human race has never been so well off.

In fact, underpopulation, not overpopulation, is the biggest threat facing the world today. Over eighty countries representing well over half the world's population will have below replacement fertility-defined as 2.1 children per woman.

The populations of the developed nations today are static or declining. The UN predicts that, by 2050, Russia's population will have declined by 25 million people, Japan's by 21 million, Italy's by 16 million, and Germany's and Spain's by 9 million each. Europe and Japan will lose half their population by 2100.

Countries with below replacement rate fertility will eventually die out. It's just a matter of time.

Even in the developing world family size has shrunk, from around 5 children per woman in 1900 to well under 3 today. And the decline continues.

According to the UN's "low variant projection"-historically the most accurate-the population of the world will peak at 8 billion in 2040 or so, and then begin to decline.

High fertility rates are becoming rare. The UN numbers for 2008 show only a handful of countries with population increase rates at or above 3.0 percent.

By 2050, persons aged 65 and above will be almost twice as numerous as children 15 years and younger. The economic consequences of population aging will be closing schools, declining stock markets, and moribund economies.

Ignoring these facts, the population controllers continue to spread their myth of overpopulation.

The UNFPA and other population control organizations are loath to report the truth about falling fertility rates worldwide, since they raise funds by frightening people with the specter of overpopulation. They tell us that too many babies are being born to poor people in developing countries. This is tantamount to saying that only the wealthy should be allowed to have children, and is a new form of global racism.

We should stop funding population control programs, and instead turn our attention to real problems like malaria, typhus, and HIV/AIDS.

Let us also join together in celebrating the birth of Baby Seven Billion. He or she is a sign of our future, our hope and our prosperity.

People are our greatest resource. Extraordinarily gifted people have helped to enrich civilization and lengthen life spans. But the fact is, everyone, rich or poor, is a unique creation with something priceless to offer to the rest of us.

Baby Seven Billion, boy or girl, red or yellow, black or white, is not a liability, but an asset. Not a curse, but a blessing. for all of us.

Steven W. Mosher is the president of the Population Research Institute and the author of Population Control: Real Costs and Illusory Benefits. He is considered one of the foremost experts on the coercive population control program in China