New prenatal test for Down"s syndrome "will not lead to more terminations"

A safer prenatal test for Down’s syndrome due to be introduced on the NHS is not predicted to lead to more pregnancies being terminated, according to one of Britain’s most eminent statisticians.

Sir David Spiegelhalter, professor for the public understanding of risk at the University of Cambridge, said that the best evidence available suggests that the blood test, which will be made available in 2018, would lead to an increase of around 20 in the number of positive diagnoses made each year through screening.

He added the test would result in far fewer women opting for invasive testing, reducing miscarriage numbers.

Spiegelhalter cautioned that this evidence sometimes appeared to have fallen out of view in debates in which some campaigners have warned that a generation with Down’s syndrome could be “screened out”.

“People feel very strongly about it, of course they do. It’s all the more reason to stand back and look at the figures,” he said. “There’s a mismatch at the moment between the official basis on which this is being rolled out and the discussion around it.”

According to the Department of Health’s own projections, Spiegelhalter said, more than 40 miscarriages would be avoided every year because far fewer women would be given amniocentesis, an invasive test in which a tiny amount of fluid is removed from the womb. He added, however, that it was impossible to predict exactly how families would respond to the new screening regime.

“There’s been a lot of concerns expressed about the increased number of terminations,” said Spiegelhalter. “In the assumptions under the current model that’s not the case. The estimate is that there wouldn’t be a change.”

The new test, which works by detecting tiny quantities of foetal DNA circulating in the mother’s blood, will be offered to about 10,000 women a year who are considered to have a higher chance of giving birth to a baby with Down’s syndrome, or two rarer genetic conditions: Edwards’ and Patau’s syndromes.

The test is offered after the standard screening that all pregnant women receive at 12 weeks, which involves an ultrasound and a blood test.

According to recent Department of Health figures, 7,900 women agreed to an invasive test and 46 miscarried. More than 3,000 chose not to have the test for fear of losing their baby or because they would wish to continue with their pregnancy regardless of the result. The figures showed 1,031 Down’s cases detected in a year.

The blood test, which predicts Down’s syndrome with more than 90% accuracy, means most high-risk women will be able to avoid amniocentesis. The government predicts that around 10,000 women would opt to have the non-invasive prenatal test (NIPT). Of these, the Department of Health predicts that most would be screened out and fewer than 1,500 would proceed to the invasive test, where 1,055 Down’s cases would be positively identified.

The motivation for introducing the new blood test is safety, but controversy has been building based on concerns that far more parents would be inclined to find out if their baby was affected by a genetic disorder, potentially leading to more pregnancies being terminated.

In a BBC documentary last month, A World Without Down’s Syndrome?, actor Sally Phillips, whose son Olly has Down’s syndrome, raised concerns about the new test and highlighted the joy that her son had brought to her family.

Spiegelhalter said he “in no way seeks to criticise the campaign groups”, but wants to give people access to the best evidence available. His analysis is due to be published on the website of the Winton Centre for Risk and Evidence Communication at the University of Cambridge, which launched last week and will aim to provide unbiased statistics on public health and policy issues.

Philip Dunne, the health minister, said: “We want women to be able to access the safest screening tests available, so based on the clinical evidence, we have approved the use of a new non-invasive prenatal test for Down’s, Edwards’ and Patau’s syndromes. By offering non-invasive prenatal testing, fewer pregnant women will go on to be offered diagnostic testing which carries a risk of miscarriage.”

Lynn Murray, spokesperson for the campaign group Don’t Screen Us Out, said that the concerns of those opposed to the policy went beyond the projected screening statistics. “We are very disappointed that the Department of Health have approved the NIPT roll-out without consultation with the very group that this is going to have the biggest impact on, people with Down’s syndrome and their families,” she said. “The government has admitted itself that it has made no assessment of the impact this will have on the community of people with Down’s syndrome.”

New prenatal test for Down"s syndrome "will not lead to more terminations"

Prenatal selection destroys women’s health

It is not a secret that prenatal selection leads to the eradication of over 90% of unborn babies with Down syndrome. However, it is a secret that killing these babies can lead to serious health complications in women not unlike PTSD-symptoms soldiers face when returning from war.

When Canadian, pro-choice, filmmaker Punam set out on a journey to make an honest movie (Hush) about women’s reproductive health, she never expected to find this: Abortion leads to very serious health problems. Problems include breast cancer, infertility, pre-term birth in future pregnancies, anxiety, depression and even suicide.

Induced abortion more than doubles the risk for breast-cancer

Induced abortion causes a sudden overexposure of estrogen. Studies published in the Lancet and British Journal of Cancer show that these hormonal changes more than double a woman’s risk for developing breast-cancer.

Furthermore, the surgical or vacuum removal of a baby weakens a woman’s cervix and may form scar tissue. This significantly increases the risk of infertility, miscarriage or (extreme) premature birth (before 32 weeks) in future pregnancies. Extreme pre-mature birth in itself is a known cause for breast-cancer.

Selective abortion does not fix problems but creates new ones

The majority of women going through an abortion believe they are responsible for terminating a human life. Feelings of guilt, stress and depression are well-known long-term effects in soldiers who have killed or witnessed murder. It is no surprise that many women also suffer severe and lasting emotional damage after an abortion.

One woman calls the abortion of her unborn son diagnosed with Down syndrome the blackest decision she made in her life. She writes: “I’m going thru hell. But I believe I am not entitled to mourning. I have played a role in the death of my child. To live with that, is the hardest part in this journey.”

In recent years the marketing of prenatal genetic screening tests has intensified. Today’s pregnancy is cast in the illusion of ‘perfection’. Detecting disability in unborn children results in higher numbers of selective abortions. It is a sad irony that in the quest for perfection developmental and health problems may occur more frequent in future pregnancies. This is due to the fact that abortion increases the risk for premature birth.

Women don’t hear about the risks when prenatal screening and selection is offered. Instead they hear outdated, negative predictions about life with Down syndrome. The promise of “peace of mind” lures women into screening. They are made to believe that attacking their own babies for reason of being ‘different’ is a ‘right’ and a ‘freedom’. Some eugenicists even claim women have the ‘moral obligation to abort and try again’.

The truth is that abortion cannot make women un-pregnant. It makes them mothers of dead babies. Mothers who are then left to deal with the mental and physical consequences.

Women should take back their pregnancy

People with Down syndrome have always existed as a natural part of our human species. Down syndrome is not the result of increased pollution of our environment. Most importantly: most people with Down syndrome lead healthy, rewarding lives. 99% indicate they are happy with their lives. That number is much higher than the average population.

It is time women take back their pregnancies and stop fearing genetic differences. Instead we should fear the marketing of a fictitious perfect world where money, food, health and humans are controlled by a select tight-knit group of people.

The prenatal testing and selection industry is not about women’s rights. It is about women’s suppression as much as it is about eugenics and economics: creating ‘perfect’ humans while maximizing profits for pharma and reducing projected health-care costs for states.

The majority of care-takers are female. Women need extra support when their baby is diagnosed with Down syndrome or another disability. Better information, access to therapeutic programs and improved chances and equality in society helps women and their children. Genetic testing with the intent of selective abortion is not support. It is discriminatory and destroys women’s health.

Sources:

hushfilm.com

abortionbreastcancer.com

abortionfacts.com

trouw.nl

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/

theguardian.com

Prenatal selection destroys women’s health

Intellectual disability may possibly be caused by prenatal gene mutation

The mutation of a gene vital for foetal brain development could be responsible for impaired mental function in children born with intellectual disabilities, Australian researchers have discovered.

The gene, TUBB5, is critical for building connections between nerve cells of the brain involved in speech, sight, co-ordination and higher level cognition, researchers found.

It acts as a type of scaffolding inside neurons, enabling them to shape their connections to other neurons, said lead researcher Dr Julian Heng from the Australian Regenerative Medicine Institute at Melbourne’s Monash University. When a mutation occurs these connections cannot be properly made.

“What we have been able to do is clarify the role of TUBB5 in how neurons connect and its importance to a healthy, functioning brain,” Heng said.

“This is only the beginning of our journey into understanding the importance of scaffolding proteins and their role in helping neurons make brain circuits.”

The discovery may have implications for prenatal testing and for genetic counsellors who may be able to test patients for TUBB5 mutations, he said. But he said parents could not pass the faulty gene on to their children and the mutation occurred during pregnancy. The cause is unknown.

Heng’s research will now focus on how TUBB5 mutations might be targeted and potentially repaired.

The discovery, published on Wednesday in the journal Human Molecular Genetics, builds on previous research from Heng’s team, which looked at three unrelated patients with microcephaly, a rare brain disease in children.

“They all had intellectual disabilities and they all had one other thing in common – they all encoded a genetic mutation to TUBB5,” Heng said.

His latest research clarifies the role of this mutation in brain circuits and may have implications for other developmental conditions such as autism or schizophrenia.

Figures from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare estimate that more than half a million Australians have an intellectual disability.

The president of the Australasian Society for Intellectual Disability, Dr Angus Buchanan, said most of those were born with it, though it often was not detected until children failed to meet developmental milestones such as in speech and walking.

“I think this new research has the potential to provide more information to some people with intellectual disabilities and their families,” he said.

“But intellectual disabilities include a whole range of conditions with a range of potential causes.

“Some people may find it helpful to know of a potential cause, but others prefer not to focus on that because regardless, they will still be living with an intellectual disability.”

Intellectual disability may possibly be caused by prenatal gene mutation