🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <65mm43$pc3@fridge.shore.net>, Dan Kennedy <dkennedy@shore.net>
wrote:

> : In article <347DC8DB.2EB8@ix.netcom.com>, snowbird@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> 
> : Is the story about race, or is it about the first-ness of 
> : seven babies surviving birth vs. the not-so-specialness-anymore
> : of a mere six babies surviving?
> 
> And there has been something of a happy side-effect from all of this.
> Groups in Washington have reacted to all the attention in Iowa by finally
> stepping forward and helping the family of the five surviving babies.
> After all, that's quite a burden too. (Frankly, I can't imagine how people
> even cope with twins!)
> 

Yeah, but the whole thing is really shitty journalism.  Aside from the
fact that 7 (or 6, or any number more than 2) children in one family means
a major tax burden to the rest of us, a puff piece like this overlooks the
medical reality that most multiple birth outcomes are nowhere near this
good.  Lots of triplets, let alone megabirths, have various physical
and/or mental problems.  However,
just try to explain that to people who only want to see the rare success
story and don't give a damn about reality.
 
Anything that encourages people to go wacko over artificial fertilization
is bad bad bad.

-- 
Carl Witthoft(changeDOT)  cgw@worldDOTstd.com carl@aoaincDOTcom
Pinball maniac, windsurfer, volleyball setter, happy Dad
http://world.std.com/~cgw