Connect with us

Health and Wellness

The decision to pursue in vitro fertilization in Alabama and its impact on Black reproductive health

Published

on

Getty Images

On February 16, 2024 at Supreme Court of Alabama issued a ruling stating that embryos resulting from in vitro fertilization (IVF) needs to be considered children. The legal dispute arose from a wrongful death lawsuit brought by three couples whose embryos were tragically lost at a fertility clinic in 2020. The incident occurred when the patient entered the realm where the embryos were stored. While trying to reach out and grab some, he burned his hand due to the extremely low temperature and unintentionally dropped the pair embryos. They hit the bottom and were destroyed.

The couples then initiated legal motion against the Center for Reproductive Medicine and the Mobile Infirmary Association under the Alabama Wrongful Death of a Minor Act. While the law traditionally applied to fetuses, it didn’t expressly cover embryos derived from in vitro fertilization (IVF).

Initially, a lower court ruled that the embryos didn’t have the legal capability of an individual or child, which precluded a wrongful death lawsuit. However, in a shocking ruling, the state Supreme Court sided with the couples, affirming that frozen embryos needs to be considered “children” under the state’s wrongful death law and needs to be afforded the identical protections. Embryos destroyed in clinics and hospitals may result in wrongful death lawsuits being filed against these offices and institutions.

The court’s decision, which expanded the law’s application to “all unborn children, regardless of their residence,” has far-reaching implications for the legal status of embryos and the reproductive rights landscape in Alabama.

Less than per week after the Alabama Supreme Court ruled that embryos resulting from in vitro fertilization were recognized as children, three major IVF providers in the state have suspended services for fear of the legal consequences of this decision. In response to mounting pressure to restore in vitro fertilization (IVF) services in the state, Gov. Kay Ivey promptly introduced laws on March 7 to protect doctors from the legal ramifications of the Alabama Supreme Court’s ruling.

In response to public protests and rapid legislative efforts, the bill was quickly passed. As a result, doctors at several primary fertility clinics in Alabama have announced plans to resume in vitro fertilization services. Despite the resumption of services, individuals and families receiving infertility treatment are actually forced to grapple with the lingering effects of the interruption.

Heather Skanes, MD, Founder and Executive Director Oasis of Women’s Health clinic positioned on Birmingham’s west end says the recent ruling has already had a big impact on infertility treatment, causing more delays and financial burdens for patients, particularly Black and Brown patients who’re already marginalized in the medical community. “Many people of color already felt like the odds were stacked against them for infertility treatment,” Skanes says. “People don’t necessarily diagnose them with infertility when it needs to be diagnosed, and too many people are not offered infertility treatment once they are diagnosed. It’s like doctors telling patients, “You’re infertile.” “Good luck,” and people feel like they don’t have the knowledge to make the choices they need to make.”

The latest data on infertility from Center for Disease Control shows that although greater than 13% of American women aged 15 to 49 have impaired fertility, black women are almost twice as likely to experience infertility as white women. They are less likely to seek and undergo infertility treatment. This is not necessarily because black women don’t desire to participate in IVF. Treatment costs could be significant, often starting from $10,000 to $15,000 per cycle, not including additional expenses comparable to medications, consultations, and diagnostic tests.

When we consider the demographics of those without adequate insurance, black Americans are overrepresented. Lack of IVF insurance then places a big financial burden on Black people and families looking for fertility assistance. In addition to systemic barriers to accessing in vitro fertilization treatment, many Black women and those looking for care must grapple with the cultural stigma surrounding infertility treatment that’s deeply rooted in Black communities.

Historically, the prevailing view has been that looking for medical assistance is synonymous with personal failures and shortcomings. As a result, many individuals battling infertility may feel as in the event that they have to hide their struggles and could also be reluctant to pursue treatments comparable to in vitro fertilization for fear of being judged. Black women battling infertility may experience further ostracism due to society’s judgment of how they spend their money.

So, for many who find the courage and funds to seek treatment in hopes of expanding their family, Skanes notes that this ruling is an element of a more significant shift in health care practice where legal considerations are replacing scientific judgment, potentially threatening patient care and outcomes. This trend shouldn’t be specific to Alabama, but reflects broader challenges in driving reproductive health policy across the country.

“Rules that limit access to health care will continue to change the way people practice, not based on evidence, but based on concerns about liability. Healthcare providers play a key role in supporting patients on their fertility journey,” Skanes emphasizes. “It’s about providing compassionate care, offering tailored treatment options, and ensuring patients feel empowered and supported every step of the way in which. In the face of overwhelming laws that’s in no way consistent with best practices or evidence-based medicine, providers proceed to have a responsibility to share and facilitate access to credible information.

For LGBTQ+ individuals and families, the trail to parenthood often presents various unique challenges. In vitro fertilization serves as a source of hope, offering a path to overcome these obstacles and realize the dream of beginning a family. Mia Cooley, reproductive health advocate and founder xHood, provides fertility, family constructing, and nurturing support for the Black Queer community. Cooley says the platform was born out of a private need to create a community where Black LGBTQ+ parents could come together, free from experiences of homophobia, transphobia and racism often found in other spaces. Since its inception on Mother’s Day in 2019, xHood has grown right into a vibrant and supportive community, offering resources, events and a way of belonging to Black LGBTQ+ parents all over the world.

Walking the byzantine path of infertility treatment and reproductive rights as a queer Black parent, Mia Cooley’s journey has been characterised by resilience and perseverance despite systemic obstacles. Reflecting on her experience, Mia shares: “The journey to parenthood is already a deep and sensitive chapter in everyone’s life. However, for queer Black parents like my partner and I, this experience is often marred by discrimination and a reluctance to learn from health care providers.”

She continues, “Navigating the maze of fertility treatments as a Black queer person felt like a constant battle against a system designed to exclude and invalidate us at every turn. The emotional impact of infertility treatment is often overlooked. It’s a roller coaster of hope and despair, compounded by the stigma and discrimination that Black people face when seeking reproductive care. “Every visit, every procedure seemed like another obstacle to overcome in an already difficult journey,” he says.

“But we didn’t give up because our desire to become parents outweighed the obstacles in our way,” Cooley adds. “The financial burden of infertility treatment is enormous. This is a burden that disproportionately affects Black families, who already struggle with systemic inequities and barriers to access to health care. There were times when we wondered whether it was worth it, whether the impact on our mental and emotional well-being was too great. But in the end, the joy of holding our baby in my arms made every sacrifice worth it.”

As the post-Dobbs story unfolds, we witness a unbroken trend of regressive policies restricting access to reproductive health services. The motives of anti-abortion leaders have gotten increasingly apparent. Abortion rights advocates have long warned of the implications of overturning Roe v. Wade, and now that abortion is increasingly isolated and marginalized as an option fairly than as integral health care, we’re starting to see the broader implications of anti-abortion laws for other points of reproductive care. across the country. A recent decision in Alabama to protect IVF providers from legal liability sheds light on this trend.

Ensuring that the provider is protected when accessing medical care is amazingly necessary, as is the patient. Do we also be sure that the law adequately protects people looking for infertility treatment, especially those in communities which might be at increased risk of criminalization for pregnancy outcomes?

Cooley states: “This ruling also reflects the broader issue of reproductive justice – including not only access to care, but in addition the precise to parent in a secure and supportive environment. It is a reminder that reproductive justice shouldn’t be only the precise to have children, but in addition the precise to raise them in communities that affirm and have a good time our identities.”

“As we continue to fight for reproductive justice, let us remember that our struggles are interconnected,” she adds. By standing together, we will create a world where all families are respected, valued and protected.”

This article was originally published on : www.essence.com
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Health and Wellness

Jury awarded $310 million to parents of teenager who died after falling on a ride at Florida amusement park – Essence

Published

on

By

Sun Sentinel/Getty Images

The family of Tire Sampson, the 14-yr-old who tragically died on an amusement park ride in Orlando, Florida, in 2022, has been awarded $310 million in a civil lawsuit.

Tire, who was visiting ICON Park along with his family on March 24, 2022, fell from the FreeFall drop tower. Although he was taken to a nearby hospital, he didn’t survive his injuries.

Now, greater than two years later, a jury has held the vehicle manufacturer, Austria-based Funtime Handels, responsible for the accident and awarded the Tire family $310 million. According to reports from local news stations WFTV AND KSDKthe jury reached its verdict after about an hour of deliberation.

Tyre’s parents will each receive $155 million, according to attorney spokesman Michael Haggard.

Attorneys Ben Crump and Natalie Jackson, who represented Tyre’s family, shared their thoughts on this landmark decision via X (formerly Twitter). “This ruling is a step forward in holding corporations accountable for the safety of their products,” they said in a statement.

Lawyers stressed that Tyre’s death was attributable to “gross negligence and a failure to put safety before profits.” They added that the ride’s manufacturer had “neglected its duty to protect passengers” and that the substantial award ensured it could “face the consequences of its decisions.”

Crump and Jackson said they hope the result will encourage change throughout the theme park industry. “We hope this will spur the entire industry to enforce more stringent safety measures,” they said. “Tire heritage will provide a safer future for drivers around the world.”

An investigation previously found that Tyre’s harness was locked through the descent, but he dislodged from his seat through the 430-foot fall when the magnets engaged. Tire’s death was ruled the result of “multiple injuries and trauma.”

ICON Park said at the time that it could “fully cooperate” with the authorities.

This article was originally published on : www.essence.com
Continue Reading

Health and Wellness

Tireless HIV/AIDS advocate A. Cornelius Baker dies

Published

on

By

HIV/AIDS Advocate, A. Cornelius Baker


A. Cornelius Baker, a tireless advocate of HIV and AIDS testing, research and vaccination, died Nov. 8 at his home in Washington, D.C., of hypertensive, atherosclerotic heart problems, in response to his partner, Gregory Nevins.

As previously reported, Baker was an early supporter for people living with HIV and AIDS within the Nineteen Eighties, when misinformation and fear-mongering in regards to the disease were rampant.

According to Douglas M. Brooks, director of the Office of National AIDS Policy under President Obama, it was Baker’s Christian faith that guided him toward compassion for others.

“He was very kind, very warm and inclusive – his circles, both professional and personal, were the most diverse I have ever seen, and he was guided by his Christian values,” Brooks told the outlet. “His ferocity was on display when people were marginalized, rejected or forgotten.”

In 1995, when he was executive director of the National AIDS Association, Baker pushed for June 27 to be designated National HIV Testing Day.

In 2012, he later wrote on the web site of the Global Health Advisor for which he was a technical advisor that: “These efforts were intended to help reduce the stigma associated with HIV testing and normalize it as part of regular screening.”

https://twitter.com/NBJContheMove/status/1856725113967632663?s=19

Baker also feared that men like himself, black gay men, and other men from marginalized communities were disproportionately affected by HIV and AIDS.

Baker pressured the Clinton administration to incorporate black and Latino people in clinical drug trials, and in 1994 he pointedly told the Clinton administration that he was bored with hearing guarantees but seeing no motion.

According to Lambda Legal CEO Kevin Jennings, yes that daring attitude that defines Baker’s legacy in the world of ​​HIV/AIDS promotion.

“Cornelius was a legendary leader in the fight for equality for LGBTQ+ people and all people living with HIV,” Jennings said in a press release. “In the more than twenty years that I knew him, I was continually impressed not only by how effective he was as a leader, but also by how he managed to strike the balance between being fierce and kind at the same time. His loss is devastating.”

Jennings continued: “Cornelius’ leadership can’t be overstated. For many years, he was one in all the nation’s leading HIV/AIDS warriors, working locally, nationally and internationally. No matter where he went, he proudly supported the HIV/AIDS community from the Nineteen Eighties until his death, serving in various positions including the Department of Health and Human Services, the National Association of Persons with Disabilities AIDS, and the Whitman-Walker Clinic . Jennings explained.

Jennings concluded: “His career also included several honors, including being the first recipient of the American Foundation for AIDS Research Foundation’s organization-building Courage Award. Our communities have lost a pillar in Cornelius, and as we mourn his death, we will be forever grateful for his decades of service to the community.”

Kaye Hayes, deputy assistant secretary for communicable diseases and director of the Office of Infectious Diseases and HIV/AIDS Policy, in her comment about his legacy, she called Baker “the North Star.”.

“It is difficult to overstate the impact his loss had on public health, the HIV/AIDS community or the place he held in my heart personally,” Hayes told Hiv.gov. “He was pushing us, charging us, pulling us, pushing us. With his unwavering commitment to the HIV movement, he represented the north star, constructing coalitions across sectors and dealing with leaders across the political spectrum to deal with health disparities and advocate for access to HIV treatment and look after all. He said, “The work isn’t done, the charge is still there, move on – you know what you have to do.” It’s in my ear and in my heart in the case of this job.

Hayes added: “His death is a significant loss to the public health community and to the many others who benefited from Cornelius’ vigilance. His legacy will continue to inspire and motivate us all.”

Baker is survived by his mother, Shirley Baker; his partner Nevins, who can be senior counsel at Lambda Legal; his sisters Chandrika Baker, Nadine Wallace and Yavodka Bishop; in addition to his two brothers, Kareem and Roosevelt Dowdell; along with the larger HIV/AIDS advocacy community.


This article was originally published on : www.blackenterprise.com
Continue Reading

Health and Wellness

Bovaer is added to cow feed to reduce methane emissions. Does it pass into milk and meat? And is it harmful to humans?

Published

on

By

There are growing concerns in regards to the use of feed supplements, Bowar 10to reduce methane production in cows.

Bovaer 10 consists of silicon dioxide (mainly sand), propylene glycol (food stabilizer approved by Food Safety Australia New Zealand) and lively substance 3-nitrooxypropanol (3-NOP).

There has been an enormous amount of misinformation in regards to the safety of 3-NOP, with some milk from herds fed this additive being labeled “Frankenmilk”. Others feared it could get to humans through beef.

The most significant thing is that 3-NOP is secure. Let’s clear up some major misconceptions.

Why do we want to limit methane production?

In our attempts to limit global warming, we’ve placed the best emphasis on CO₂ because the major man-made greenhouse gas. But methane is also a greenhouse gas, and although we produce less of it, it is: a much stronger greenhouse gas than CO₂.

Agriculture is the largest a man-made source of methane. As cattle herds expand to meet our growing demand for meat and milk, reducing methane production from cows is a vital way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

There are several ways to do that. Stopping bacteria within the stomachs of cows that produce methane one approach is to produce methane.

The methane produced by cows and sheep doesn’t come from the animals themselves, but from the microbes living of their digestive systems. 3-NO stop the enzymes that perform the last step of methane synthesis in these microorganisms.

3-NOP is not the one compound tested as a feed additive. Australian product based on seaweed, Rumin8for instance, it is also in development. Saponins, soap-like chemicals present in plants, and essential oils as well has been examined.

However, 3-NOP is currently one of the popular effective treatments.

Nitrooxypropanol structure: red balls are oxygen, gray carbon, blue nitrogen and white hydrogen.
PubChem

But is not it poison?

There are concerns on social media that Bovaer is “poisoning our food.”

But, as we are saying in toxicology, it’s the dose that makes the poison. For example, arsenic is deadly 2–20 milligrams per kilogram of body weight.

In contrast, 3-NOP was not lethal on the doses utilized in safety studies, up to 600 mg 3-NOP per kg body weight. At a dose of 100 mg per kg body weight in rats, it didn’t cause any adversarial effects.

What about reproductive issues?

The effect of 3-NOP on the reproductive organs has generated numerous commentary.

Studies in rats and cows showed that doses of 300–500 mg per kg body weight caused: contraction of the ovaries and testicles.

In comparison, to achieve the identical exposure in humans, a 70 kg human would want to eat 21–35 grams (about 2 tablespoons) of pure 3-NOP every day for a lot of weeks to see this effect.

No human will likely be exposed to this amount because 3-NOP doesn’t pass into milk – is fully metabolized within the cow’s intestines.

No cow will likely be exposed to these levels either.

The cow licks itself
Cows will not be exposed to levels tested on animals in laboratory studies.
Ground photo/Shutterstock

What about cancer?

3-NOP is not genotoxic or mutagenicwhich implies it cannot damage DNA. Thus, the results of 3-NOP are dose-limited, meaning that small doses will not be harmful, while very high doses are (unlike radiation where there is no secure dose).

Scientists found that at a dose of 300 mg per kilogram of body weight benign tumors of the small intestine of female ratsbut not male rats, after 2 years of every day consumption. At a dose of 100 mg 3-NOP per kg body weight, no tumors were observed.

Cows eat lower than 2 grams of Bovaer 10 per day (of which only 10% or 0.2 grams is 3-NOP). This is about 1,000 times lower than the appropriate every day intake 1 mg 3-NOP per kg body weight per day for a cow weighing 450 kg.

This level of consumption will likely be not the result in cancer or any of them other adversarial effects.

So how much are people exposed to?

Milk and meat consumers will likely be exposed to zero 3-NOP. 3-NOP doesn’t penetrate milk and meat: is completely metabolized within the cow’s intestines.

Farmers could also be exposed to small amounts of the feed additive, and industrial employees producing 3-NOP will potentially be exposed to larger amounts. Farmers and industrial employees already wear personal protective equipment to reduce exposure to other agricultural chemicals – and it is advisable to do that with Bovear 10 as well.

Milk
3-NOP doesn’t penetrate milk and meat.
Shutterstock

How widely has it been tested?

3-NOP has been in development for 15 years and has been subject to multiple reviews by European Food Safety Authority, UK Food Safety Authority AND others.

It has been extensively tested over months of exposure to cattle and has produced no unintended effects. Some studies actually say so improves the standard of milk and meat.

Bovaer was approved for use in dairy cattle by the European Union from 2022 and Japan in 2024. It is also utilized in many other countries, including: in beef products, amongst others Australia.

A really small amount of 3-NOP enters the environment (lower than 0.2% of the dose taken), no accumulates and is easily decomposed subsequently, it doesn’t pose a threat to the environment.

Since humans will not be exposed to 3-NOP through milk and meat, long-term exposure is not an issue.

What does Bill Gates have to do with this?

Bill Gates has invested in a distinct feed processing method for methane, Australian seaweed-based Rumin8. But he has nothing to do with Bovaer 10.

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation awarded research grants to the corporate producing 3-NOP for malaria control researchnot for 3-NOP.

The bottom line is that adding 3-NOP to animal feed doesn’t pose any risk to consumers, animals or the environment.

This article was originally published on : theconversation.com
Continue Reading
Advertisement

OUR NEWSLETTER

Subscribe Us To Receive Our Latest News Directly In Your Inbox!

We don’t spam! Read our privacy policy for more info.

Trending