Advisers to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration are convening Tuesday and Wednesday for closed-door meetings to discuss the prospect of approving artificial wombs for use in human trials. The FDA's Pediatric Advisory Committee will chiefly address what kind of data scientists will have to produce in the trials and what sort of regulations may be needed.
The unnatural process by which a creature is grown inside a fluid-filled pod, as opposed to inside a symbiotic mother, has been pitched by companies like Vitara Biomedical as a means of increasing survival and improving outcomes for premature babies.
While some scientists are excited by the prospect of potentially helping struggling babies, critics have noted the technology will inevitably result in legal and ethical quandaries.
Nevertheless, Nature reported that researchers at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia — a hospital that apparently offers medical sex-change interventions to children as young as 8 — are ready to move on from performing artificial womb experiments involving lambs. The lamb CHOP researchers are specifically seeking approval for the first human clinical trials of their extra-uterine environment for newborn development, or EXTEND.
This early technology would not yet entirely eliminate the mother from the equation. Rather than growing a human being from conception to birth, as was horrifyingly depicted in the science fiction film "The Matrix," the CHOP researchers "hope that simulating some elements of a natural womb will increase survival and improve outcomes for extremely premature babies. In humans, that's anything earlier than 28 weeks of gestation — less than 70% of the way to full term, which is typically between 37 and 40 weeks," according to Nature.
Bloomberg reported that premature lambs kept inside the fake womb for up to four weeks were able to develop normally.
Scientists at the University of Toronto executed similar experiments but instead on fetal pigs, having concluded that "there are several questions that remain with regards to the feasibility of translating [fetal sheep] results to human subjects."
Alan Flake, a fetal surgeon at CHOP who has taken the lead on the effort to dehumanize pregnancy, predicted in a 2017 video, "If it’s as successful as we think it can be, ultimately, the majority of pregnancies that are predicted at-risk for extreme prematurity would be delivered early onto our system rather than being delivered premature onto a ventilator."
Recreating the Womb: New Hope for Premature Babiesyoutu.be
A number of CHOP researchers have since joined Vitara Biomedical, a startup that has raised $100 million to develop EXTEND, thanks in large part to First Spark Ventures, a venture capital firm co-founded by former Google CEO Eric Schmidt.
To transition a baby from its mother to the pod, doctors would perform a C-section, albeit of a more complicated variety.
To ensure the baby remains in a "fetus-like state," such that the digestive system does not activate and fluid doesn't drain from its lungs, the surgeons must jab tubes into the baby's umbilical blood vessels then immediately dunk it into a so-called "biobag" filled with a sterile fluid that mimics that found in a real amniotic sack.
The tubes that had been inserted into the baby's umbilical blood vessels would provide it with nutrition, while a so-called membrane oxygenator would provide the baby with oxygen.
George Mychaliska, a pediatric fetal surgeon and researcher at the University of Michigan, told Bloomberg, "It makes sense that if you recreate the fetal environment, babies’ survival rate will increase and, hopefully, their long-term morbidities or health consequences will be diminished."
Nature indicated that there may be implications for abortion and its legality, particularly since fake wombs might make it such that fetal viability extends far earlier than currently recognized.
Earlier this year, pro-abortion radicals noted in Wired that while so-called ectogenesis would "enable people with wombs to reproduce as easily as cisgender men do: without risks to their physical health, their economic safety, or their bodily autonomy," the technology "could significantly weaken abortion policies worldwide."
The article's authors, Rosalind Moran and Jolie Zhou, bemoaned the possibility that without recourse to the "my body, my choice," argument, it may no longer be socially acceptable or legal for women to slaughter their unborn babies.
"Successful ectogenesis would render the fetus viable at a very early stage, possibly even from conception. If ectogenesis—even partial ectogenesis—becomes available, it would then be possible for an unwanted fetus to be transferred into an artificial womb to continue developing without harming a woman’s bodily autonomy, depending on how the fetus is removed," the two pro-abortion radicals wrote. "In this way, women would be able to end their pregnancy without resorting to traditional abortion. Given this option, if a woman chooses traditional abortion regardless, the abortion will appear more like an intentional killing."
Just as the new technology might prove lifesaving, to Zhou and Moran's dismay, it could alternatively expose the unborn grown in scientists' glorified Ziploc bags to various abuses on account of inevitable legal loopholes.
Chloe Romanis, a biolawyer at Durham Law School in the United Kingdom, told Nature that the babies grown in the fake wombs will not be fetuses in the conventional sense.
"The name we give to these new unprecedented patients has implications for rights that the law and society affords," said Romanis.
The FDA advisory meeting takes place at a time in American medicine when it appears many are keen to separate babies from their mothers or, at the very least, pregnancy from women.
In June, the American Medical Association published a peer-reviewed paper in its Journal of Ethics floating the suggestion that there's no moral reason why taxpayers should not subsidize the provision of wombs from dead or living women to transvestites so that they can carry babies.
Could artificial wombs help save premature babies?youtu.be
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
National Security Council spokesman John Kirby suggested during a White House press briefing Monday that new laws protecting the unborn around the nation along with possible changes to the Department of Defense's abortion policy, such as those sought by Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), might hurt recruitment and morale for the U.S. military.
Kirby also insinuated that the Pentagon's facilitation of abortion procurement amounts to a "sacred obligation."
While Republicans in Congress seek to disentangle the U.S. military from pro-abortion initiatives by way of amendments to the National Defense Authorization Act, such as Rep. Ronny Jackson's (R-Texas) NDAA amendment passed last Thursday, Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) has endeavored to do so by way of senatorial privileges.
NPR reported that since February, Tuberville has blocked every personnel move in the U.S. military requiring a confirmation, which amounts to at least 270.
Tuberville noted in a July 14 op-ed that "over the last two years the Left has been relentless in turning the military from the world’s greatest killing machine to just another outfit for liberal social engineering."
"Since March the Pentagon has been spending our tax dollars for travel and extra paid time off for service members and their kids to get abortions – something Congress neither authorized nor appropriated," continued Tuberville. "With so much at stake, and with so much ground already lost, conservatives in Congress have no choice but to stand and fight against a politicized Pentagon before we look back with nostalgia on the days when the American people trusted its military."
The senator from Alabama told Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin earlier this year that the taxpayer should not be "on the hook" for abortion-related expenses, emphasizing that it violates the Hyde Amendment.
For his principled stance, Tuberville has drawn the ire, not just of Democrats, but also of seven former U.S. secretaries of Defense, who sent a letter on May 4 urging the "Senate to act expeditiously on the nearly 200 nominees for general and flag officer who are being blocked from Senate confirmation."
The former defense secretaries wrote, "We appreciate that Senators can have sincere and legitimate concerns about a Pentagon policy, including as it may relate to broader domestic or social issues. These lawmakers also deserve timely and thorough responses to their questions. However, we believe placing a hold on all uniformed nominees risks turning military officers into political pawns, holding them responsible for a policy decision made by their civilian leaders."
During a press briefing Monday, a reporter raised the matter of Tuberville's holds on military promotions, saying, "The administration has been critical of Senator Tuberville with his holds on military promotions because of social policy and saying that he is harming military readiness. On the flip-side of that impasse — and this is something that Republican lawmakers have raised — why is the new DOD policy on abortion critical to military readiness?"
Kirby responded by highlighting that "one in five members of the U.S. military are women. Twenty percent. ... When you sign up and you make that contract, you have every right to expect that the organization — in this case, the military — is going to take care of you and they’re going to take care of your families."
Kirby then suggested that the facilitation of abortion procurement, which he euphemistically referred to as "reproductive care," is a "foundational, sacred obligation of military leaders."
Beyond suggesting that the Pentagon's abortion policy is somehow holy, Kirby claimed that pro-life laws "in this country that are now being passed are absolutely having an effect on [service members' and their spouses'] willingness to continue serving in uniform or to encourage — or discourage, in this case — their spouses from continuing service."
As a consequence of pro-life laws, Kirby further suggested there will be retention and morale issues.
"Recruiting is tough enough as it is with a very strong economy out there. We want to keep the people that we get," said Kirby. "Not to mention, it's just the right darn thing to do."
Kirby's suggestion Monday that abortion might have an impact on the Pentagon's recruitment crisis echoes remarks made last summer by Gil Cisneros, the Pentagon’s chief of personnel and readiness.
Cisneros said, "We have concerns that some service members may choose to leave the military altogether because they may be stationed in states with restrictive reproductive health laws."
— (@)
Although Kirby indicated that prospective U.S. military members' difficulties offing their unborn children might adversely affect recruitment and retention, there appear to be various far more consequential factors precluding Americans from joining the military that preceded the Supreme Court's Dobbs ruling and Republicans' recent pro-life laws.
The Army missed its recruitment goal by 25% last year, its worst recruiting year since the end of the draft in 1973.
U.S. Army Secretary Christine Wormuth told CNBC, "Only about 23% of kids between 16 and 21 are able to meet our standards, and some of that, frankly, is reflective of the problem that we have in our country with obesity."
TheBlaze previously reported that the Air Force recently eased its body fat requirements in hopes of meeting its yearly active-duty recruiting goal. It's presently unclear what weight this change might have on intake.
Beside problems of fitness, there are also problems of desire, suggested Wormuth.
"Right now, only 9% of young Americans say that they’re interested in joining the military."
Even military families, whose children make up the majority of new recruits, "don't see it as a good choice," Adm. Mike Mullen, the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, recently told the Wall Street Journal.
The Journal explained how one proud military family had soured on the prospect of encouraging their boys to join up, not because it might be difficult for some mothers to off their young but owing to the Biden administration's botched conclusion to the Afghanistan War in 2021, which had proven too dispiriting.
The military must also contend with the fact that it can no longer lure prospects who are fit, capable, and possibly interested with financial incentives when civilian institutions are offering the same or better.
Sgt. Maj. Marco Irenze, of the Nevada Army National Guard, told the Journal, "To be honest with you it’s Wendy’s, it’s Carl’s Jr., it’s every single job that a young person can go up against because now they are offering the same incentives that we are offering, so that’s our competition right now."
The Military Times reported that extra to "an under-educated public, a roaring civilian jobs market and bad perceptions of service fueled by negative headlines," Genesis, the electronic health record for the Military Health System, may have had a hand in disqualifying prospects who have been on medicines in the past or have met with psychiatrists.
Genesis has also been accused of making medical screenings longer, according to Maj. Gen. Edward Thomas, head of Air Force Recruiting Service.
To make matters worst, those unwilling to get the COVID-19 vaccine have likely shied away from recruitment centers. While the military has claimed there is no "hard data" to show that the vaccine mandate hurt recruiting, it has ousted thousands of service members who refused the vaccine.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
New York Attorney General Letitia James’ attempt to move her lawsuit against a pro-life organization from upstate New York to Manhattan was rejected by a court last Tuesday. Her lawsuit comes after she faced suit from Heartbeat International over her politically-motivated witch hunt and threats against pro-life organizaions.
So-called 'abortion shield laws' will prevent pro-life states and their citizens from holding abortionists accountable.
I simply wanted to ask some questions about my reproductive health. Instead, I was thrown onto a fertility conveyor belt.
My life has long been affected by an abortion I had at 17. Abortion kills innocent unborn babies under the guise of women’s rights.
Despite benefitting from the GOP's pro-life grassroots efforts, Rep. Nancy Mace is happy to run to CNN to attack the pro-life movement.
Pro-abortion fanatics are attacking the crisis pregnancy centers that have worked to help many mothers break away from homelessness and despair.
Americans should demand answers as to why Joe Biden and the FDA are making the abortion pill riskier for women.
www.theblaze.com
freebeacon.com