1. Katie Couric and other women who interview you will place their voices in the lower register - the Lauren Bacall sound. You don't have to be that low, but you do need to keep in control and thoughtful in the close-contact interviews, in order to sound more authoritative.
2. Relax your voice and stretch the inner muscles with yawn-like jaw stretches. Strident high-pitched voices kill women candidates. Yours is a pleasant voice. Keep it relaxed and metered. Tension kills the authoritative sound of the voice.
3. Don't rush your answers. When GW does it, he makes laughable mistakes. A measured response, requires a decent thoughtful pace. When you stumble, you sound unsure.
4. Study, study study! Get those 150 questions most likely to be asked by reporters, and prep very hard. Insist on it.
5. You've had executive experience and that includes command position for your state. That would include all enemies foreign and domestic, as you protect your citizens and your state constitution, as the supreme executive officer of Alaska. Biden as been just a senator
6. You sounded tentative and unsure. Get prepared and get ready.
7. Pray for the right answers to come to mind, for what you are to say in the hour thereof.
8. Sometimes, when they don't ask the right question, you give the right answer. Answer the question they should have asked you.
Friday, September 26, 2008
Monday, September 22, 2008
Laura Linney Speaks Lies Like George Bernard Shaw
Hollywood actress Laura Linney's reference at the Emmy Awards to the American Founders being "community organizers" [read: Just like Barak Obama!] reminds me of what the socialist George Bernard Shaw said of the Bolsheviks.
Stephen Schwartz in The New Criterion September 2008 tells us that Shaw was "one of Stalin's most abject sycophants" who spread lies that the Bolsheviks were correct in their contempt for the West. According to Schwartz, Shaw said that the Moscow dictatorship was established "exactly as Washington and Jefferson and Hamilton and Franklin and Tom Paine had established the United States."
Socialists, communists, dictators are always trying to equate themselves with the American Revolution.
The Founders of This American Revolution risked their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor.
Only one candidate in this election comes close to that commitment.
Stephen Schwartz in The New Criterion September 2008 tells us that Shaw was "one of Stalin's most abject sycophants" who spread lies that the Bolsheviks were correct in their contempt for the West. According to Schwartz, Shaw said that the Moscow dictatorship was established "exactly as Washington and Jefferson and Hamilton and Franklin and Tom Paine had established the United States."
Socialists, communists, dictators are always trying to equate themselves with the American Revolution.
The Founders of This American Revolution risked their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor.
Only one candidate in this election comes close to that commitment.
The Leftist Laura Linney Needs A History Lesson
The Emmy Award winning actress who thinks that the Founding Fathers were "community organizers" is steeped in revolutionary rhetoric, not historical fact.
If they organized anything it was a constitutional democracy and not a socialist republic which seems to be the goal of Barak Obama.
That's what socialists do to the "truth." They hide their agenda because the majority of Americans would not accept their "change" if they were honest about what they want to accomplish.
Samuel Adams, John Adams, Jefferson, Hancock, Franklin were actors in a conservative revolution against the progressive policies of King George.
The American Revolution was about people who wanted the Colonies to remain free and unfettered from progressives who would tax them into oblivion.
Samuel Adams organized cell groups to keep things as they were, not push toward a worker's/poor man's rebellion, hell-bent on liberation theology that would divide this country, while our brethren are still in foreign battlefields.
But maybe that's what the actress meant when she said the American Founders were like Obama. Barak Obama's community organizing really means code for revolutionary cell!
Look to Obama's ACORN group to stuff the ballot boxes with provisional ballots in key electoral states, in order to bog down the election with legal challenges, while such ballots in key states are counted and verified.
They will then turn Election Day into an election month.
The Left wants to place the presidential elections into the hands of the elitists in the courts and away from the people. You know. Those people holding onto religion and their guns!
If they organized anything it was a constitutional democracy and not a socialist republic which seems to be the goal of Barak Obama.
That's what socialists do to the "truth." They hide their agenda because the majority of Americans would not accept their "change" if they were honest about what they want to accomplish.
Samuel Adams, John Adams, Jefferson, Hancock, Franklin were actors in a conservative revolution against the progressive policies of King George.
The American Revolution was about people who wanted the Colonies to remain free and unfettered from progressives who would tax them into oblivion.
Samuel Adams organized cell groups to keep things as they were, not push toward a worker's/poor man's rebellion, hell-bent on liberation theology that would divide this country, while our brethren are still in foreign battlefields.
But maybe that's what the actress meant when she said the American Founders were like Obama. Barak Obama's community organizing really means code for revolutionary cell!
Look to Obama's ACORN group to stuff the ballot boxes with provisional ballots in key electoral states, in order to bog down the election with legal challenges, while such ballots in key states are counted and verified.
They will then turn Election Day into an election month.
The Left wants to place the presidential elections into the hands of the elitists in the courts and away from the people. You know. Those people holding onto religion and their guns!
Thursday, September 18, 2008
Obama's Appeal to Masses Similar to Hitler in 1930s
Barak is wrong for America.
Obama is too radical a Leftist for a centrist country.
As solutions he would introduce Peruvian-style socialism, and Venezuelan/Hugo Chavez-type policies.
An African-American, yes! But not Barak. Colin Powell first, before the junior far-left senator.
His inexperience would be dangerous and send this centrist country reeling for decades. Margaret Thatcher in England turned back the liberal policies that were not working, and saved a country that was waning in power and influence. She rolled-back failed economic policies, and restored her country to former glory and strength. Barak would implement many of the Labour Party's failures which they have had to leave behind and compromise on.
He is too closely aligned with radical Islam and leftist policies, his father being a leftist agitator in Kenya. His too close association with former Weather Underground radical William Ayers, who advocated the radical overthrow of the U.S. Government.
Obama's adherence to black-liberation theology in the raging tradition of Stokly Carmichael and Malcolm X - a theology steeped in minority anger and revolution as preached for 20 years in Obama's Church of Christ thundered at Rev. Jeremiah Wright's pulpit.
Obama's tacit support of radical Islamic violence in his father's homeland of Kenya, where burning of churches and Islamist violence brought the radical socialist candidate to power amid persecution of Christians.
Obama's appeal to Hollywood elites, his cult of personality has not seen since the adoring masses of Germans rallied around Adolf Hitler. Obama's appeal to left-wing masses matches Hitler's appeal to national socialists in Germany, leaving us uneasy with America's worship of demagogues.
Obama is a poser - striking thoughtful hand positions around the face - a finger aside an eyebrow, countenance steep in apparent thought. Artificially straightened torso during the debates, near haughty, almost certainly arrogant at the rostrum, chin tipped just high enough to feign superiority.
Obama is a broken boy, yearning for father, watching his own every move to do things just right so as to appear presidential, while McCain has been presidential since the day he stepped out of that prison camp in Hanoi.
Obama would lead the nation into military weakness and an economic decline, more deeply gashed than we are today. All of us are being asked to tighten our belts, live within our means, willingly sacrifice for a season, in order to emerge from this current difficult time stronger and more faithful.
God is at the helm, not some president of the United States - and certainly not some wannabe president who believes that his central planning will create a poor-people's paradise.
God will sustain His people, not a Barak Hussein Obama with revolution dripping from his lips.
True revolution is in the change of heart - in the hope of a redeeming love that sustains all nations in hard times.
This is the change and hope we Americans want.
Obama is too radical a Leftist for a centrist country.
As solutions he would introduce Peruvian-style socialism, and Venezuelan/Hugo Chavez-type policies.
An African-American, yes! But not Barak. Colin Powell first, before the junior far-left senator.
His inexperience would be dangerous and send this centrist country reeling for decades. Margaret Thatcher in England turned back the liberal policies that were not working, and saved a country that was waning in power and influence. She rolled-back failed economic policies, and restored her country to former glory and strength. Barak would implement many of the Labour Party's failures which they have had to leave behind and compromise on.
He is too closely aligned with radical Islam and leftist policies, his father being a leftist agitator in Kenya. His too close association with former Weather Underground radical William Ayers, who advocated the radical overthrow of the U.S. Government.
Obama's adherence to black-liberation theology in the raging tradition of Stokly Carmichael and Malcolm X - a theology steeped in minority anger and revolution as preached for 20 years in Obama's Church of Christ thundered at Rev. Jeremiah Wright's pulpit.
Obama's tacit support of radical Islamic violence in his father's homeland of Kenya, where burning of churches and Islamist violence brought the radical socialist candidate to power amid persecution of Christians.
Obama's appeal to Hollywood elites, his cult of personality has not seen since the adoring masses of Germans rallied around Adolf Hitler. Obama's appeal to left-wing masses matches Hitler's appeal to national socialists in Germany, leaving us uneasy with America's worship of demagogues.
Obama is a poser - striking thoughtful hand positions around the face - a finger aside an eyebrow, countenance steep in apparent thought. Artificially straightened torso during the debates, near haughty, almost certainly arrogant at the rostrum, chin tipped just high enough to feign superiority.
Obama is a broken boy, yearning for father, watching his own every move to do things just right so as to appear presidential, while McCain has been presidential since the day he stepped out of that prison camp in Hanoi.
Obama would lead the nation into military weakness and an economic decline, more deeply gashed than we are today. All of us are being asked to tighten our belts, live within our means, willingly sacrifice for a season, in order to emerge from this current difficult time stronger and more faithful.
God is at the helm, not some president of the United States - and certainly not some wannabe president who believes that his central planning will create a poor-people's paradise.
God will sustain His people, not a Barak Hussein Obama with revolution dripping from his lips.
True revolution is in the change of heart - in the hope of a redeeming love that sustains all nations in hard times.
This is the change and hope we Americans want.
Saturday, September 13, 2008
Wickipedia Cites Serious Ethical Objections, Case Really Closed?
Wickipedia presents these objections to the plastination exhibits.
"Professional ethicists, human rights activists and religious leaders have also objected. "Given the (Chinese) government's track record on the treatment of prisoners, I find this exhibit deeply problematic," said Sharon Hom, the executive director of the advocacy group Human Rights in China.[28]
"Professor Anita Allen, a University of Pennsylvania bioethicist, argued spending money to "gawk" at human remains should raise serious concerns.[29] Thomas Hibbs, Baylor University ethicist, compares cadaver displays to pornography in that they reduce the subject to “the manipulation of body parts stripped of any larger human significance.”[30]
"Even if consent were to be obtained, Rabbi Danny Schiff maintains that we should still question what providing "bodies arranged in showcases for a hungry public" says about a society.[31] Harry Wu, a long-time human rights activist, terms the practice of obtaining exhibit specimens from China "immoral" and describes how the Chinese label of 'unclaimed' on bodies may imply that families were not notified of the death.[28][32]
"Regarding the educational concerns around these exhibits, St. Louis Diocese Archbishop Raymond Burke directs Catholic Schools there to avoid field trips, citing serious questions for Catholics.[33] Prior to the exhibit's opening in Pittsburgh, the Pittsburgh Catholic Diocese endorsed the educational content of the exhibition, while noting that it would not be appropriate for everyone and welcoming continued discourse regarding the place of such exhibits in society.[34] Rev. Daniel Pilarczyk, Archbishop of Cincinnati, issued a statement “I do not believe that this exhibit is an appropriate destination for field trips by our Catholic schools.” .[35]
"In 2006, citing concern over how 'some kids will process these images,' Abbotsford, British Columbia School Superintendent Des McKay barred field trips to exhibits of plasticized human beings.[36] In an editorial, Lutheran Reverend Christoph Reiners questioned the effect on the values of children.[37]
"Elaine Catz, who helped coordinate field trips for the Carnegie Science Center prior to resigning in June 2007, maintains 'it teaches that, once he is deceased, there is nothing wrong with taking a person's body without his consent; it teaches that there is nothing wrong with exploiting the dead in order to make a profit, as long as it is in the name of science or education or art. It teaches that it is incredibly easy to dehumanize others.'"[23] [See Wikipedia for footnotes.]
Despite University Health Care's assurances that this exhibit meets their criteria for ethical science education, you leave less than convinced that this is little more than a prurient secular celebration of hedonist interest made "scientific' - resembling more Frankenstein than Lazarus.
"Professional ethicists, human rights activists and religious leaders have also objected. "Given the (Chinese) government's track record on the treatment of prisoners, I find this exhibit deeply problematic," said Sharon Hom, the executive director of the advocacy group Human Rights in China.[28]
"Professor Anita Allen, a University of Pennsylvania bioethicist, argued spending money to "gawk" at human remains should raise serious concerns.[29] Thomas Hibbs, Baylor University ethicist, compares cadaver displays to pornography in that they reduce the subject to “the manipulation of body parts stripped of any larger human significance.”[30]
"Even if consent were to be obtained, Rabbi Danny Schiff maintains that we should still question what providing "bodies arranged in showcases for a hungry public" says about a society.[31] Harry Wu, a long-time human rights activist, terms the practice of obtaining exhibit specimens from China "immoral" and describes how the Chinese label of 'unclaimed' on bodies may imply that families were not notified of the death.[28][32]
"Regarding the educational concerns around these exhibits, St. Louis Diocese Archbishop Raymond Burke directs Catholic Schools there to avoid field trips, citing serious questions for Catholics.[33] Prior to the exhibit's opening in Pittsburgh, the Pittsburgh Catholic Diocese endorsed the educational content of the exhibition, while noting that it would not be appropriate for everyone and welcoming continued discourse regarding the place of such exhibits in society.[34] Rev. Daniel Pilarczyk, Archbishop of Cincinnati, issued a statement “I do not believe that this exhibit is an appropriate destination for field trips by our Catholic schools.” .[35]
"In 2006, citing concern over how 'some kids will process these images,' Abbotsford, British Columbia School Superintendent Des McKay barred field trips to exhibits of plasticized human beings.[36] In an editorial, Lutheran Reverend Christoph Reiners questioned the effect on the values of children.[37]
"Elaine Catz, who helped coordinate field trips for the Carnegie Science Center prior to resigning in June 2007, maintains 'it teaches that, once he is deceased, there is nothing wrong with taking a person's body without his consent; it teaches that there is nothing wrong with exploiting the dead in order to make a profit, as long as it is in the name of science or education or art. It teaches that it is incredibly easy to dehumanize others.'"[23] [See Wikipedia for footnotes.]
Despite University Health Care's assurances that this exhibit meets their criteria for ethical science education, you leave less than convinced that this is little more than a prurient secular celebration of hedonist interest made "scientific' - resembling more Frankenstein than Lazarus.
Friday, September 12, 2008
Charlie Gibson: Ask Eisenhower Why He Mentioned God on Eve of D-Day
Charlie Gibson's line of questioning was the work of an insipid sychophant following the dictates of his political agenda.
Sarah withstood his insouciant disregard for relevence, as he attempted to trip her up and change the course of the election.
Dwight Eisenhower sent a missive to all his soldiers the night before the D-Day invasion, to help steel their minds for the daunting task ahead. In it he used the G-word. "And let us all beseech the blessing of Almighty God upon this great and noble undertaking."
Gibson's agenda driven grilling of Gov. Palin revealed his left-wing, secularist leanings. Only to uncloak his aching for Obama's reign.
Sarah withstood his insouciant disregard for relevence, as he attempted to trip her up and change the course of the election.
Dwight Eisenhower sent a missive to all his soldiers the night before the D-Day invasion, to help steel their minds for the daunting task ahead. In it he used the G-word. "And let us all beseech the blessing of Almighty God upon this great and noble undertaking."
Gibson's agenda driven grilling of Gov. Palin revealed his left-wing, secularist leanings. Only to uncloak his aching for Obama's reign.
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Does Salt Lake Really Want Body Worlds in Our Backyard?
Gunter Von Hagen's Body Worlds exhibition of real cadavers continues to reveal itself as questionable science. Do we really want this in our backyard?
Don't get me wrong; I'm not queasy about dissections or cadavers. My father (who died when I was nine) and grandfather were Harvard Medical graduates - lots of anatomy books and slides in their libraries. My mother, a nurse, said my father could eat a sandwich while dissecting a cadaver. A strong stomach and a healthy respect for science is in the genes.
Dispassionate medical practice was standard fare at home. No tittering giggles, no prudish restrictions. So some of this exhibit is very familiar to me. But there's another part of Body Works that is just plain odd. And it revolves around Von Hagen himself, and those he hangs around with (and I don't mean the cadavers).
Here's what Mom de Guerre wrote today:
Mom de Guerre said...
"Happy to share, Lend Me Your Ears. Its more than just you and me, thank goodness. No Bodies 4 Profit has close to 500 members. And there is more good news. California was recently the FIRST STATE to pass legislation to regulate these morbid displays. Its currently on Gov. Schwartznegger's desk.
"Also working toward legislation: PA, NY, HI I know of. NJ Congressman Chris Smith has proposed Federal legislation.
"Did you see Gunther von Hagen in David Barboza's NYTimes video tour of VH's laBORatoree (sic) in Dalian China?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqKvYUO7C7w
"The originating article:
http://travel.nytimes.com/2006/08/08/business/worldbusiness/08bodies.html?pagewanted=print
"Herr Dokter's mention of Mercedes was especially offensive to some Jews, because of Mercedes' role in the Holocaust. Dalian is the same place that got Premier (a competing company to Von Hagen's Institute of Plastination) into trouble with the NY Attorney General.
"And his crocodile tears in the Feb 15 ABC expose were really exceptional and so very unconvincing. It gets better (or worse as you may agree) Regarding von Hagen's past
http://en.rian.ru/russia/20071226/94178628.html
http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/news/2001/07/45426
"His father was a Nazi SS agent who turned in a couple dozen of his neighbors and was decorated for it.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article416989.ece
"And what the future holds in VH's creative vision...
http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,532934,00.html (international/zeitgeist/0,1518,532934,00.html)
http://www.smh.com.au/news/tv-reviews/gunthers-er/2008/05/30/1211654292604.html
"Nice guy, huh? Really encourages you to trust him at his word, doesn't it? Would be a lovely neighbor I'm sure. And with those extra plastinated pieces around, I bet his house is the most popular place for parties. To die for, one might say.
September 11, 2008 2:41 PM"
One ethicist from the University of Michigan said recently commentingI have more information about Gunter Von Hagen you will want to read, which follows.
on Body Worlds that we all have highly sensitive Geiger counters that
register ethical violations; if the hair on the back of our necks stands up, or
we get an uneasy feeling about seeing these bodies so exhibited, we should
pay attention to that reaction.
Don't get me wrong; I'm not queasy about dissections or cadavers. My father (who died when I was nine) and grandfather were Harvard Medical graduates - lots of anatomy books and slides in their libraries. My mother, a nurse, said my father could eat a sandwich while dissecting a cadaver. A strong stomach and a healthy respect for science is in the genes.
Dispassionate medical practice was standard fare at home. No tittering giggles, no prudish restrictions. So some of this exhibit is very familiar to me. But there's another part of Body Works that is just plain odd. And it revolves around Von Hagen himself, and those he hangs around with (and I don't mean the cadavers).
Here's what Mom de Guerre wrote today:
Mom de Guerre said...
"Happy to share, Lend Me Your Ears. Its more than just you and me, thank goodness. No Bodies 4 Profit has close to 500 members. And there is more good news. California was recently the FIRST STATE to pass legislation to regulate these morbid displays. Its currently on Gov. Schwartznegger's desk.
"Also working toward legislation: PA, NY, HI I know of. NJ Congressman Chris Smith has proposed Federal legislation.
"Did you see Gunther von Hagen in David Barboza's NYTimes video tour of VH's laBORatoree (sic) in Dalian China?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqKvYUO7C7w
"The originating article:
http://travel.nytimes.com/2006/08/08/business/worldbusiness/08bodies.html?pagewanted=print
"Herr Dokter's mention of Mercedes was especially offensive to some Jews, because of Mercedes' role in the Holocaust. Dalian is the same place that got Premier (a competing company to Von Hagen's Institute of Plastination) into trouble with the NY Attorney General.
"And his crocodile tears in the Feb 15 ABC expose were really exceptional and so very unconvincing. It gets better (or worse as you may agree) Regarding von Hagen's past
http://en.rian.ru/russia/20071226/94178628.html
http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/news/2001/07/45426
"His father was a Nazi SS agent who turned in a couple dozen of his neighbors and was decorated for it.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article416989.ece
"And what the future holds in VH's creative vision...
http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,532934,00.html (international/zeitgeist/0,1518,532934,00.html)
http://www.smh.com.au/news/tv-reviews/gunthers-er/2008/05/30/1211654292604.html
"Nice guy, huh? Really encourages you to trust him at his word, doesn't it? Would be a lovely neighbor I'm sure. And with those extra plastinated pieces around, I bet his house is the most popular place for parties. To die for, one might say.
September 11, 2008 2:41 PM"
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
Continued Controversy About Gunter von Hagen's Body Worlds at the Leonardo
Mom de Guerre posted the following response to the Institute of Plastination's oversensitivity to any criticism.
It does a body good (pun intended) to read that there is at least one parent out there, armed for battle (again, intended) against such questionable practices. Indeed some of the bodies are positioned in some questionable poses. Others have criticized him for his sexuality, as well.
Mom de Guerre said...
"Boy, they ARE worried about the criticism aren't they? Its much more complex than the Institute would like you to understand. For instance, unclaimed bodies most often are NOT used for plastination OR for medical study.
"This is because most states are civilized enough to have a waiting period for unclaimed bodies so that families can be found. In this time they deteriorate and become unusable specimens for study. Especially true with plastination. Bodies need to be really freshly dead for this process. [LMYEars adds: Which is why some people are reluctant to be organ donors - that rush to freshness, and the cold clinical mindset that informs their education and practice. For a great piece on this mindset, read Annihilating Terry Sciavo, Commentary, June 2006.]
"There IS a big difference between legitimate medical study and these grotesque displays, however. Ethical oversight. See also Lucia Tanassi's (Vanderbilt Univ) professional investigation as an ethicist. You hit the nail right on the head, Lend Me Your Ears, and the post by the Institute referenced the problem as well. They admit openly that there are no regulations, so why should they be concerned - ?
"They don't need to comply with the kinds of standards for, say, an anatomy lab. They don't care and they don't have to. They found a VERY lucrative loophole. [That struck me, too. If this is all about education and informing the public, why charge so much? We can go to the U. of Utah's Museum of Art and see some 70 paintings from Van Gogh to Matisse for FREE.]
"And Von Hagens is NOT off the hook from an 'unclaimed' bodies perspective. He used 'unclaimed' Chinese bodies to open this whole market and realize his grotesque vision. He's a vampire and a ghoul." [Today, I thought he was very much like a Doctor Frankenstein, only new and revised, more urbane - we can't give you eternal life, but by placing you on display in this lulling macabre way, you can achieve a reasonable likeness of immortality - all in the name of science! Why am I not surprised that China is so involved in this!]
Thank you, Mom de Guerre!
September 9, 2008 10:08 AM
It does a body good (pun intended) to read that there is at least one parent out there, armed for battle (again, intended) against such questionable practices. Indeed some of the bodies are positioned in some questionable poses. Others have criticized him for his sexuality, as well.
Mom de Guerre said...
"Boy, they ARE worried about the criticism aren't they? Its much more complex than the Institute would like you to understand. For instance, unclaimed bodies most often are NOT used for plastination OR for medical study.
"This is because most states are civilized enough to have a waiting period for unclaimed bodies so that families can be found. In this time they deteriorate and become unusable specimens for study. Especially true with plastination. Bodies need to be really freshly dead for this process. [LMYEars adds: Which is why some people are reluctant to be organ donors - that rush to freshness, and the cold clinical mindset that informs their education and practice. For a great piece on this mindset, read Annihilating Terry Sciavo, Commentary, June 2006.]
"There IS a big difference between legitimate medical study and these grotesque displays, however. Ethical oversight. See also Lucia Tanassi's (Vanderbilt Univ) professional investigation as an ethicist. You hit the nail right on the head, Lend Me Your Ears, and the post by the Institute referenced the problem as well. They admit openly that there are no regulations, so why should they be concerned - ?
"They don't need to comply with the kinds of standards for, say, an anatomy lab. They don't care and they don't have to. They found a VERY lucrative loophole. [That struck me, too. If this is all about education and informing the public, why charge so much? We can go to the U. of Utah's Museum of Art and see some 70 paintings from Van Gogh to Matisse for FREE.]
"And Von Hagens is NOT off the hook from an 'unclaimed' bodies perspective. He used 'unclaimed' Chinese bodies to open this whole market and realize his grotesque vision. He's a vampire and a ghoul." [Today, I thought he was very much like a Doctor Frankenstein, only new and revised, more urbane - we can't give you eternal life, but by placing you on display in this lulling macabre way, you can achieve a reasonable likeness of immortality - all in the name of science! Why am I not surprised that China is so involved in this!]
Thank you, Mom de Guerre!
September 9, 2008 10:08 AM
Monday, September 8, 2008
So This Leonardo Center Body Worlds Ethics Debate Cranks Up - 'Bout Time!
Here's some of the discussion that the public should be having about Dr. Gunter von Hagen's Body Worlds coming soon to The Leonardo Arts and Science Center.
My main point: Amid all this controversial art and science, in 50 to 100 years, we might have cheapened life to such a degree that such a lack of reverence could make wars and destruction of human life less abhorrant and more clinical as in Nazi Germany, but with much greater consequence.
Again, Russia and China already have a long record of abuses in this arena. And they seem heavily intoxicated by this plastics fervor.
So, I'm a little reluctant to subsidized these callous secularist attitudes with my $20 educator's discount. And so should be a large part of Utah!
[Have we calculated a carbon footprint for plastinating all these thousands of bodies?]
Responding to my blog...Body Donation for Plastination said... Budding reporters wishing to learn the anatomy of media bias need look no further than Neda Ulaby’s series on public anatomical exhibitions or “cadaver shows,” as she insists on calling them. In her broadcasts and Reporter’s Notebook (NPR, All Things Considered, Aug 11-12) she plays fast and loose with principles of journalism [So I said: I'm not so sure it's "fast & loose." Advocacy journalism raises quick questions that deserve answers.], such as the discipline of verification and the identification of sources [Something the cadaver papers lack, too, and also need to shore up.].
In “Origins of Exhibited Cadavers Questioned,” where the lone voice questioning the origins of the specimens in Gunther von Hagens’ BODY WORLDS is Ulaby herself [Wait a minute, I'm here wondering about it too. And I know how quickly so-called experts can sign-on when it's something they really want.], she states that though the donor death certificates have been matched with donor forms by renowned ethicist, Dr. Hans Martin Sass, “there’s no clear paper trail from willing donors to exhibited bodies.” On the contrary, there is a very clear paper trail between deceased donors and plastinated specimens that falls within the bounds of medical confidentiality. [Understood, but she's saying those "bounds" have been muddied and made murky.]
The Institute for Plastination has made as much donor information as possible available to museum lawyers and bio-ethicists, without violating the code of medical confidentiality. We will reveal the same information willingly to any legitimate government authority with jurisdiction in Germany that also honors medical confidentiality. “[Dr. von Hagens] says each body he displays can be accounted for, but he is unwilling to make public a complete paper trail,” Ulaby reports. Her objection appears to be that the Institute for Plastination does not release confidential medical information to the media. [A well-founded distrust.]
We have learned from the past about reporters’ lack of discernment about matters of privacy. Before Dr. von Hagens conducted a public autopsy in London, the relatives of the deceased man, whose body was to be autopsied, reassured journalists that their father had agreed to the procedure but asked that his name be withheld. Several of the reporters broke their agreement and revealed the man’s identity. We learned too from the case of Paul Jernigan, the death penalty inmate who was executed in Texas, and his body used for the "Visible Human Project." Many journalists stalked Jernigan’s family to get their stories, without any regard for the family’s grief. We are acutely sensitive to the fact that the donors willed only their post mortal bodies for the education of many—not their personal lives, case histories, or any other aspect of their earthly lives—and will not violate the code of medical confidentiality to satisfy reporters’ curiosity. [You miss her point that they should be verified by an independent agency, not just ethicists who got discounts on their tickets.] Ulaby, as prosecutor [This weakens your argument. She has legitimate concerns where the paper trails break down.], decides that Dr. von Hagens -- an anatomist who invented Plastination in 1977 at the University of Heidelberg to improve medical education for his students -- is guilty of using executed Chinese prisoners in the BODY WORLDS exhibitions until he proves himself innocent.[I think a prima facie burden has been met, throwing doubt on the process - his turn to respond.] “He says that he obtains them all only through trusted sources, but no outsider has verified that they might not be, in a worst case scenario, dissidents killed in a Chinese prison, then sold through a body broker to a medical school, and then displayed to the public,” she reports. The onus apparently is on Dr. von Hagens -- the only anatomist presenting an anatomical exhibition, the only presenter of anatomical exhibitions with a body donation program of more than 8,500 donors, nearly all of them European -- to prove that the specimens in his exhibitions “might not be, in a worst case scenario, dissidents killed in a Chinese prison, then sold through a body broker to a medical school, and then displayed to the public.”[Oh, stop with the self-righteous "such a man as this" argument. He's the only one because for many professionals, there remain serious ethical-religious reservations about such exhibition practices.] Ulaby has no problem, however, with copycat exhibits
[But I do. And here's why: Amid all this controversial art and science, in 50 to 100 years, we might have cheapened life to such a degree that such a lack of reverence could make wars and destruction of human life less abhorrant and more clinical as in Nazi Germany, but with much greater consequence. Again, Russia and China already have a long record of abuses in this arena. So, I'm a little reluctant to subsidized these attitudes with my $20 educator's discount. And so should be a large part of Utah.]
that use only unclaimed and found bodies from China, have no donor programs, and do not have a paper trail, let alone documents. “Critics say that at best those bodies probably belonged to people too poor to have been buried properly.” In other words, Dr. Gunther von Hagens, a 33 year career anatomist with an established donor program of mostly German donors, must prove that he does not use executed Chinese prisoners in his exhibit, while publicly traded exhibition companies that use only unclaimed and found Chinese bodies are exempt from Ulaby’s suspicions. This is not simply journalistic bias, it smacks of bigotry.Currently, there is no national or international law or ethical imperative of informed consent for anatomical specimens. In fact, the majority of anatomical specimens in the world originate from unclaimed bodies. In Maryland, for example, any unclaimed body is by law handed over to the State Anatomical Board, embalmed and distributed for a fee to anatomical institutes around the country. Even in Great Britain under the supervision of Her Majesty’s Inspector of Anatomy (presently Dr. Jeremy Metters), human plastinates are not tracked. Skeletons are sold freely in all countries and are even available via the Internet. Compared to plastinates, these skeletons consist of 100 percent human tissue (plastinates are around 30 percent) and there is no international standard of informed consent. Dr. Gunther von Hagens conceived the world’s first and only body donation program for Plastination to uphold no one else’s standards but his own.For more information:www.bodyworlds.comFor ethics report:http://www.koerperwelten.de/Downloads/ethics_summary.pdf-Institute for Plastination and BODY WORLDS, Office for Body Donation September 8, 2008 9:42 AM
My main point: Amid all this controversial art and science, in 50 to 100 years, we might have cheapened life to such a degree that such a lack of reverence could make wars and destruction of human life less abhorrant and more clinical as in Nazi Germany, but with much greater consequence.
Again, Russia and China already have a long record of abuses in this arena. And they seem heavily intoxicated by this plastics fervor.
So, I'm a little reluctant to subsidized these callous secularist attitudes with my $20 educator's discount. And so should be a large part of Utah!
[Have we calculated a carbon footprint for plastinating all these thousands of bodies?]
Responding to my blog...Body Donation for Plastination said... Budding reporters wishing to learn the anatomy of media bias need look no further than Neda Ulaby’s series on public anatomical exhibitions or “cadaver shows,” as she insists on calling them. In her broadcasts and Reporter’s Notebook (NPR, All Things Considered, Aug 11-12) she plays fast and loose with principles of journalism [So I said: I'm not so sure it's "fast & loose." Advocacy journalism raises quick questions that deserve answers.], such as the discipline of verification and the identification of sources [Something the cadaver papers lack, too, and also need to shore up.].
In “Origins of Exhibited Cadavers Questioned,” where the lone voice questioning the origins of the specimens in Gunther von Hagens’ BODY WORLDS is Ulaby herself [Wait a minute, I'm here wondering about it too. And I know how quickly so-called experts can sign-on when it's something they really want.], she states that though the donor death certificates have been matched with donor forms by renowned ethicist, Dr. Hans Martin Sass, “there’s no clear paper trail from willing donors to exhibited bodies.” On the contrary, there is a very clear paper trail between deceased donors and plastinated specimens that falls within the bounds of medical confidentiality. [Understood, but she's saying those "bounds" have been muddied and made murky.]
The Institute for Plastination has made as much donor information as possible available to museum lawyers and bio-ethicists, without violating the code of medical confidentiality. We will reveal the same information willingly to any legitimate government authority with jurisdiction in Germany that also honors medical confidentiality. “[Dr. von Hagens] says each body he displays can be accounted for, but he is unwilling to make public a complete paper trail,” Ulaby reports. Her objection appears to be that the Institute for Plastination does not release confidential medical information to the media. [A well-founded distrust.]
We have learned from the past about reporters’ lack of discernment about matters of privacy. Before Dr. von Hagens conducted a public autopsy in London, the relatives of the deceased man, whose body was to be autopsied, reassured journalists that their father had agreed to the procedure but asked that his name be withheld. Several of the reporters broke their agreement and revealed the man’s identity. We learned too from the case of Paul Jernigan, the death penalty inmate who was executed in Texas, and his body used for the "Visible Human Project." Many journalists stalked Jernigan’s family to get their stories, without any regard for the family’s grief. We are acutely sensitive to the fact that the donors willed only their post mortal bodies for the education of many—not their personal lives, case histories, or any other aspect of their earthly lives—and will not violate the code of medical confidentiality to satisfy reporters’ curiosity. [You miss her point that they should be verified by an independent agency, not just ethicists who got discounts on their tickets.] Ulaby, as prosecutor [This weakens your argument. She has legitimate concerns where the paper trails break down.], decides that Dr. von Hagens -- an anatomist who invented Plastination in 1977 at the University of Heidelberg to improve medical education for his students -- is guilty of using executed Chinese prisoners in the BODY WORLDS exhibitions until he proves himself innocent.[I think a prima facie burden has been met, throwing doubt on the process - his turn to respond.] “He says that he obtains them all only through trusted sources, but no outsider has verified that they might not be, in a worst case scenario, dissidents killed in a Chinese prison, then sold through a body broker to a medical school, and then displayed to the public,” she reports. The onus apparently is on Dr. von Hagens -- the only anatomist presenting an anatomical exhibition, the only presenter of anatomical exhibitions with a body donation program of more than 8,500 donors, nearly all of them European -- to prove that the specimens in his exhibitions “might not be, in a worst case scenario, dissidents killed in a Chinese prison, then sold through a body broker to a medical school, and then displayed to the public.”[Oh, stop with the self-righteous "such a man as this" argument. He's the only one because for many professionals, there remain serious ethical-religious reservations about such exhibition practices.] Ulaby has no problem, however, with copycat exhibits
[But I do. And here's why: Amid all this controversial art and science, in 50 to 100 years, we might have cheapened life to such a degree that such a lack of reverence could make wars and destruction of human life less abhorrant and more clinical as in Nazi Germany, but with much greater consequence. Again, Russia and China already have a long record of abuses in this arena. So, I'm a little reluctant to subsidized these attitudes with my $20 educator's discount. And so should be a large part of Utah.]
that use only unclaimed and found bodies from China, have no donor programs, and do not have a paper trail, let alone documents. “Critics say that at best those bodies probably belonged to people too poor to have been buried properly.” In other words, Dr. Gunther von Hagens, a 33 year career anatomist with an established donor program of mostly German donors, must prove that he does not use executed Chinese prisoners in his exhibit, while publicly traded exhibition companies that use only unclaimed and found Chinese bodies are exempt from Ulaby’s suspicions. This is not simply journalistic bias, it smacks of bigotry.Currently, there is no national or international law or ethical imperative of informed consent for anatomical specimens. In fact, the majority of anatomical specimens in the world originate from unclaimed bodies. In Maryland, for example, any unclaimed body is by law handed over to the State Anatomical Board, embalmed and distributed for a fee to anatomical institutes around the country. Even in Great Britain under the supervision of Her Majesty’s Inspector of Anatomy (presently Dr. Jeremy Metters), human plastinates are not tracked. Skeletons are sold freely in all countries and are even available via the Internet. Compared to plastinates, these skeletons consist of 100 percent human tissue (plastinates are around 30 percent) and there is no international standard of informed consent. Dr. Gunther von Hagens conceived the world’s first and only body donation program for Plastination to uphold no one else’s standards but his own.For more information:www.bodyworlds.comFor ethics report:http://www.koerperwelten.de/Downloads/ethics_summary.pdf-Institute for Plastination and BODY WORLDS, Office for Body Donation September 8, 2008 9:42 AM
Body Worlds Responds Swiftly to Criticisms of Leonardo Center Exhibit
I criticized the Leonardo's exhibit of Body Worlds and stirred a hornet's nest with a post made early this morning.
It must have touched some nerve - some corporate nerve sensitive to public criticism.
However, it is no accident that this type of enterprise thrives in communist countries where the worth of the individual is subordinate to the collective lust for knowledge, and where reverence for human life and sexuality is reduced, not to a chunk of earth or to a quintessence of dust, but, sex, to a mere drink of water (Stalin) and human life to a preserved body in a glass case on Red Square (Lenin) - worshipped, revered, and preserved for future generations of uber-scientists and social engineers.
Again, it's no accident that in the three countries that have sponsored mass executions in the last century - Germany, Russia and China - traffic and commerce of these bodies is the most fierce; and that such coinage of flesh is so indifferent, save for the art of achieving some secularist immortality.
Likewise, it is no accident that such an exhibit should stir up such controversy than here in the United States - one of the most religious countries in the world. I'm a tad concerned this exhibit Body Worlds originates in Europe, where religious faith and practice has waned in the past several scores of years.
In a PBS special on medical school at Harvard, a young med student said that in her gross anatomy class she got a little teary-eyed for the old woman who lay on the table. She said she wept openly for the woman in that first anatomy session, such was the reverence we should all have for human life. However, this exhibition, with its "noisy crowds" precludes the studied awe von Hagen's work could inspire.
But I sense that medical secularists in Utah make shrewd decisions to teach those hocus-pocus Mormons a thing or two about their bodies, and also shed some light on their supposed focus on the heart as the locus of spirit.
They need to spend a night reading Mormon Scientist: The Life and Faith of Henry Eyring, Henry J. Eyring, 2007 ISBN-13:978-1-59038-854-9.
And then spend a weekend gappling with Evolution and Mormonism: A Quest for Understanding, Stephens, Meldrum, Peterson, 2001. ISBN 1-56085-142-2 (pbk.)
[If this is a personal response, thank you to "Body Donation for Plastination".]
Here's the response that my blog this morning generated:
Body Donation for Plastination said...
Budding reporters wishing to learn the anatomy of media bias need look no further than Neda Ulaby’s series on public anatomical exhibitions or “cadaver shows,” as she insists on calling them. In her broadcasts and Reporter’s Notebook (NPR, All Things Considered, Aug 11-12) she plays fast and loose with principles of journalism [So I said: I'm not so sure it's "fast & loose." Advocacy journalism raises quick questions that deserve answers.], such as the discipline of verification and the identification of sources [Something the cadaver papers lack, too, and need shoring up.].
In “Origins of Exhibited Cadavers Questioned,” where the lone voice questioning the origins of the specimens in Gunther von Hagens’ BODY WORLDS is Ulaby herself [Wait a minute, I'm here wondering about it too. And I know how quickly so-called experts can sign-on when it's something they really want.], she states that though the donor death certificates have been matched with donor forms by renowned ethicist, Dr. Hans Martin Sass, “there’s no clear paper trail from willing donors to exhibited bodies.” On the contrary, there is a very clear paper trail between deceased donors and plastinated specimens that falls within the bounds of medical confidentiality. [Understood, but she's saying those "bounds" have been muddied and made murky.]
The Institute for Plastination has made as much donor information as possible available to museum lawyers and bio-ethicists, without violating the code of medical confidentiality. We will reveal the same information willingly to any legitimate government authority with jurisdiction in Germany that also honors medical confidentiality. “[Dr. von Hagens] says each body he displays can be accounted for, but he is unwilling to make public a complete paper trail,” Ulaby reports. Her objection appears to be that the Institute for Plastination does not release confidential medical information to the media. [A well-founded distrust.] We have learned from the past about reporters’ lack of discernment about matters of privacy. Before Dr. von Hagens conducted a public autopsy in London, the relatives of the deceased man, whose body was to be autopsied, reassured journalists that their father had agreed to the procedure but asked that his name be withheld. Several of the reporters broke their agreement and revealed the man’s identity. We learned too from the case of Paul Jernigan, the death penalty inmate who was executed in Texas, and his body used for the "Visible Human Project." Many journalists stalked Jernigan’s family to get their stories, without any regard for the family’s grief. We are acutely sensitive to the fact that the donors willed only their post mortal bodies for the education of many—not their personal lives, case histories, or any other aspect of their earthly lives—and will not violate the code of medical confidentiality to satisfy reporters’ curiosity. [You miss her point that they should be verified by an independent agency, not just ethicists who got discounts on their tickets.] Ulaby, as prosecutor [This weakens your argument. She has legitimate concerns where the paper trails break down.], decides that Dr. von Hagens -- an anatomist who invented Plastination in 1977 at the University of Heidelberg to improve medical education for his students -- is guilty of using executed Chinese prisoners in the BODY WORLDS exhibitions until he proves himself innocent.[I think a prima facie burden has been met, throwing doubt on the process - his turn to respond.] “He says that he obtains them all only through trusted sources, but no outsider has verified that they might not be, in a worst case scenario, dissidents killed in a Chinese prison, then sold through a body broker to a medical school, and then displayed to the public,” she reports. The onus apparently is on Dr. von Hagens -- the only anatomist presenting an anatomical exhibition, the only presenter of anatomical exhibitions with a body donation program of more than 8,500 donors, nearly all of them European -- to prove that the specimens in his exhibitions “might not be, in a worst case scenario, dissidents killed in a Chinese prison, then sold through a body broker to a medical school, and then displayed to the public.”[Oh, stop with the self-righteous "such a man as this" argument. He's the only one because for many professionals, there remain serious ethical-religious reservations about such exhibition practices.] Ulaby has no problem, however, with copycat exhibits
[But I do. And here's why: Amid all this controversial art and science, in 50 to 100 years, we might have cheapened life to such a degree that such a lack of reverence could make wars and destruction of human life less abhorrant and more clinical as in Nazi Germany, but with much greater consequence. Again, Russia and China already have a long record of abuses in this arena. So, I'm a little reluctant to subsidized these attitudes with my $20 educator's discount. And so should be a large part of Utah.]
that use only unclaimed and found bodies from China, have no donor programs, and do not have a paper trail, let alone documents. “Critics say that at best those bodies probably belonged to people too poor to have been buried properly.” In other words, Dr. Gunther von Hagens, a 33 year career anatomist with an established donor program of mostly German donors, must prove that he does not use executed Chinese prisoners in his exhibit, while publicly traded exhibition companies that use only unclaimed and found Chinese bodies are exempt from Ulaby’s suspicions. This is not simply journalistic bias, it smacks of bigotry.Currently, there is no national or international law or ethical imperative of informed consent for anatomical specimens. In fact, the majority of anatomical specimens in the world originate from unclaimed bodies. In Maryland, for example, any unclaimed body is by law handed over to the State Anatomical Board, embalmed and distributed for a fee to anatomical institutes around the country. Even in Great Britain under the supervision of Her Majesty’s Inspector of Anatomy (presently Dr. Jeremy Metters), human plastinates are not tracked. Skeletons are sold freely in all countries and are even available via the Internet. Compared to plastinates, these skeletons consist of 100 percent human tissue (plastinates are around 30 percent) and there is no international standard of informed consent. Dr. Gunther von Hagens conceived the world’s first and only body donation program for Plastination to uphold no one else’s standards but his own.For more information:www.bodyworlds.comFor ethics report:http://www.koerperwelten.de/Downloads/ethics_summary.pdf-Institute for Plastination and BODY WORLDS, Office for Body Donation
September 8, 2008 9:42 AM
It must have touched some nerve - some corporate nerve sensitive to public criticism.
However, it is no accident that this type of enterprise thrives in communist countries where the worth of the individual is subordinate to the collective lust for knowledge, and where reverence for human life and sexuality is reduced, not to a chunk of earth or to a quintessence of dust, but, sex, to a mere drink of water (Stalin) and human life to a preserved body in a glass case on Red Square (Lenin) - worshipped, revered, and preserved for future generations of uber-scientists and social engineers.
Again, it's no accident that in the three countries that have sponsored mass executions in the last century - Germany, Russia and China - traffic and commerce of these bodies is the most fierce; and that such coinage of flesh is so indifferent, save for the art of achieving some secularist immortality.
Likewise, it is no accident that such an exhibit should stir up such controversy than here in the United States - one of the most religious countries in the world. I'm a tad concerned this exhibit Body Worlds originates in Europe, where religious faith and practice has waned in the past several scores of years.
In a PBS special on medical school at Harvard, a young med student said that in her gross anatomy class she got a little teary-eyed for the old woman who lay on the table. She said she wept openly for the woman in that first anatomy session, such was the reverence we should all have for human life. However, this exhibition, with its "noisy crowds" precludes the studied awe von Hagen's work could inspire.
But I sense that medical secularists in Utah make shrewd decisions to teach those hocus-pocus Mormons a thing or two about their bodies, and also shed some light on their supposed focus on the heart as the locus of spirit.
They need to spend a night reading Mormon Scientist: The Life and Faith of Henry Eyring, Henry J. Eyring, 2007 ISBN-13:978-1-59038-854-9.
And then spend a weekend gappling with Evolution and Mormonism: A Quest for Understanding, Stephens, Meldrum, Peterson, 2001. ISBN 1-56085-142-2 (pbk.)
[If this is a personal response, thank you to "Body Donation for Plastination".]
Here's the response that my blog this morning generated:
Body Donation for Plastination said...
Budding reporters wishing to learn the anatomy of media bias need look no further than Neda Ulaby’s series on public anatomical exhibitions or “cadaver shows,” as she insists on calling them. In her broadcasts and Reporter’s Notebook (NPR, All Things Considered, Aug 11-12) she plays fast and loose with principles of journalism [So I said: I'm not so sure it's "fast & loose." Advocacy journalism raises quick questions that deserve answers.], such as the discipline of verification and the identification of sources [Something the cadaver papers lack, too, and need shoring up.].
In “Origins of Exhibited Cadavers Questioned,” where the lone voice questioning the origins of the specimens in Gunther von Hagens’ BODY WORLDS is Ulaby herself [Wait a minute, I'm here wondering about it too. And I know how quickly so-called experts can sign-on when it's something they really want.], she states that though the donor death certificates have been matched with donor forms by renowned ethicist, Dr. Hans Martin Sass, “there’s no clear paper trail from willing donors to exhibited bodies.” On the contrary, there is a very clear paper trail between deceased donors and plastinated specimens that falls within the bounds of medical confidentiality. [Understood, but she's saying those "bounds" have been muddied and made murky.]
The Institute for Plastination has made as much donor information as possible available to museum lawyers and bio-ethicists, without violating the code of medical confidentiality. We will reveal the same information willingly to any legitimate government authority with jurisdiction in Germany that also honors medical confidentiality. “[Dr. von Hagens] says each body he displays can be accounted for, but he is unwilling to make public a complete paper trail,” Ulaby reports. Her objection appears to be that the Institute for Plastination does not release confidential medical information to the media. [A well-founded distrust.] We have learned from the past about reporters’ lack of discernment about matters of privacy. Before Dr. von Hagens conducted a public autopsy in London, the relatives of the deceased man, whose body was to be autopsied, reassured journalists that their father had agreed to the procedure but asked that his name be withheld. Several of the reporters broke their agreement and revealed the man’s identity. We learned too from the case of Paul Jernigan, the death penalty inmate who was executed in Texas, and his body used for the "Visible Human Project." Many journalists stalked Jernigan’s family to get their stories, without any regard for the family’s grief. We are acutely sensitive to the fact that the donors willed only their post mortal bodies for the education of many—not their personal lives, case histories, or any other aspect of their earthly lives—and will not violate the code of medical confidentiality to satisfy reporters’ curiosity. [You miss her point that they should be verified by an independent agency, not just ethicists who got discounts on their tickets.] Ulaby, as prosecutor [This weakens your argument. She has legitimate concerns where the paper trails break down.], decides that Dr. von Hagens -- an anatomist who invented Plastination in 1977 at the University of Heidelberg to improve medical education for his students -- is guilty of using executed Chinese prisoners in the BODY WORLDS exhibitions until he proves himself innocent.[I think a prima facie burden has been met, throwing doubt on the process - his turn to respond.] “He says that he obtains them all only through trusted sources, but no outsider has verified that they might not be, in a worst case scenario, dissidents killed in a Chinese prison, then sold through a body broker to a medical school, and then displayed to the public,” she reports. The onus apparently is on Dr. von Hagens -- the only anatomist presenting an anatomical exhibition, the only presenter of anatomical exhibitions with a body donation program of more than 8,500 donors, nearly all of them European -- to prove that the specimens in his exhibitions “might not be, in a worst case scenario, dissidents killed in a Chinese prison, then sold through a body broker to a medical school, and then displayed to the public.”[Oh, stop with the self-righteous "such a man as this" argument. He's the only one because for many professionals, there remain serious ethical-religious reservations about such exhibition practices.] Ulaby has no problem, however, with copycat exhibits
[But I do. And here's why: Amid all this controversial art and science, in 50 to 100 years, we might have cheapened life to such a degree that such a lack of reverence could make wars and destruction of human life less abhorrant and more clinical as in Nazi Germany, but with much greater consequence. Again, Russia and China already have a long record of abuses in this arena. So, I'm a little reluctant to subsidized these attitudes with my $20 educator's discount. And so should be a large part of Utah.]
that use only unclaimed and found bodies from China, have no donor programs, and do not have a paper trail, let alone documents. “Critics say that at best those bodies probably belonged to people too poor to have been buried properly.” In other words, Dr. Gunther von Hagens, a 33 year career anatomist with an established donor program of mostly German donors, must prove that he does not use executed Chinese prisoners in his exhibit, while publicly traded exhibition companies that use only unclaimed and found Chinese bodies are exempt from Ulaby’s suspicions. This is not simply journalistic bias, it smacks of bigotry.Currently, there is no national or international law or ethical imperative of informed consent for anatomical specimens. In fact, the majority of anatomical specimens in the world originate from unclaimed bodies. In Maryland, for example, any unclaimed body is by law handed over to the State Anatomical Board, embalmed and distributed for a fee to anatomical institutes around the country. Even in Great Britain under the supervision of Her Majesty’s Inspector of Anatomy (presently Dr. Jeremy Metters), human plastinates are not tracked. Skeletons are sold freely in all countries and are even available via the Internet. Compared to plastinates, these skeletons consist of 100 percent human tissue (plastinates are around 30 percent) and there is no international standard of informed consent. Dr. Gunther von Hagens conceived the world’s first and only body donation program for Plastination to uphold no one else’s standards but his own.For more information:www.bodyworlds.comFor ethics report:http://www.koerperwelten.de/Downloads/ethics_summary.pdf-Institute for Plastination and BODY WORLDS, Office for Body Donation
September 8, 2008 9:42 AM
Sunday, September 7, 2008
Serious Ethical Questions Remain on Leonardo Center's Cadaver Exhibit
Despite assurances from Utah ethics boards, endorsements from the Utah Office of Education and other glowing letters, there are serious lingering questions surrounding the Leonardo Center's Body Worlds exhibit.
NPR reporter Neda Ulaby filed this report August 10, 2006 on All Things Considered. Her title: Cadaver Exhibits Are Part Science, Part Sideshow indicates some of the problem with the exhibit.
"...The shows, featuring corpses that have been preserved and solidified through a process called plastination, have been wildly successful. But they also have been dogged by criticism.
"One delicate ethical concern stands out above all the others: whether the bodies were legitimately obtained. Dr. Gunther von Hagens, the inventor of plastination and the impresario behind the Body Worlds exhibitions, says that every whole body exhibited in North America comes from fully informed European and American donors, who gave permission, in writing, for their bodies to be displayed. The science museums that have hosted Body Worlds also make this assurance.
"'What I certainly never use for public exhibitions are unclaimed bodies, prisoners, bodies from mental institutions and executed prisoners,' von Hagens says."
"Von Hagens was not charged with any wrongdoing, and says his cadavers are obtained only through proper legal and ethical channels.
"Dr. von Hagens also plastinates and sells many hundreds of unclaimed bodies obtained from Chinese medical schools for educational purposes. He says that he obtains them all only through trusted sources, but no outsider has verified that they might not be, in a worst-case scenario, dissidents killed in a Chinese prison, then sold through a body broker to a medical school, and then displayed to the public.
"Still, NPR has learned there's no clear paper trail from willing donors to exhibited bodies. People donating their bodies to von Hagens send consent forms to his Institute for Plastination. They pay to have their bodies transported to a plastination facility. There, their donor forms and death certificates are checked.
"That paperwork is then separated from the bodies, which can be used for displays or sold in pieces to medical schools. No one will know for sure, because each plastinated corpse is made anonymous to protect its privacy.
"Hans Martin Sass, a philosophy professor with a speciality in ethics, was hired by the California Science Center to investigate Body Worlds before the show's U.S. debut in 2004. He matched over 200 donation forms to death certificates, but he did not match the paperwork to specific bodies von Hagens has on display.
"Body Worlds should not be confused with its competitor, BODIES... The Exhibition. Gunther von Hagens' Body Worlds is now in St. Paul, Minn., Houston and Boston. BODIES... The Exhibition is in Tampa, Fla., Atlanta, Las Vegas and New York City.
"Roy Glover, spokesman for BODIES... The Exhibition, says its cadavers -- all from China -- did not come from willing donors.
"'They're unclaimed,' Glover says. 'We don't hide from it, we address it right up front.'
For that reason, many venues will not display BODIES... The Exhibition. Groups such as the Laogai Research Foundation, which documents human rights abuse in China, have charged that the category of unclaimed bodies in China includes executed political prisoners.
"When BODIES... The Exhibition opened first in Tampa, Fla., last summer, the state anatomical board requested documentation proving the corpses were ethically obtained. Dr. Lynn Romrell, who chairs the board, says it got only a letter from the show's Chinese plastinator asserting that they were.
"He stated that none of the material came from criminal institutions or homes from the mentally insane. But just his word on that, no documents," Romrell says.
"Romrell wanted to close the exhibition down, but says the state anatomical board lacked the authority.
"The owner of Body Worlds says each body he displays can be accounted for, but he is unwilling to make public a complete paper trail. His competition, BODIES... The Exhibition, relies on documentation from a country with a problematic human rights record. Even at best, its exhibitors say the bodies were not formally donated by people who agreed to be displayed.
Despite questions about the two exhibitions, both continue to draw hundreds of thousands of visitors around the country, and some museums are even thinking about adding plastinates to their permanent collections.
"Signs at the exhibition's entrance stated that the bodies had been voluntarily donated under the auspices of the Institute for Plastination. Well, what was that? Looking into the shows, I learned the IFP was another arm of Dr. von Hagens' buisness empire. In other words, Dr. von Hagens was basically tasked with ensuring that Dr. von Hagens' exhibition was ethical and legitimate.
"NPR learned that the Franklin Institute and similar science centers around North America that have hosted Body Worlds relied on research commissioned by the California Science Center when it first brought the show to the United States in 2004. (This was done by Hans-Martin Sass, who appears in my story.) That research verified that there is a pool of some two hundred death certificates that matched donor forms. But as I looked into the story, I found that no independent observer has matched those documents to the bodies on display. That means there is no clear paper trail from a deceased donor to a finished plastinate.
"Nor has an independent observer ensured that the unclaimed Chinese bodies von Hagens uses in his medical-school-supply business are not turning up on display in the Body Worlds shows. Again, von Hagens categorically declares that he obtains his cadavers ethically; the point here is that the U.S. science centers who have put the bodies on display have conveyed the impression that an independent verification of this has been made.
"Besides the original ethical review, the science centers involved have also reassured patrons that they've turned to "ethics panels" or "advisory boards" of local clerics and academics to ensure that the bodies displayed have spotless ethical pedigrees. But after I interviewed scores of people at various science musuems, it became clear those boards hadn't been asked to seriously engage with the shows' ethical pitfalls. Instead, the board members were more or less charged with marketing the shows to their respective communities."
"For example, he'd been a political prisoner himself in the former East Germany. Or that there's a German horror movie, Anatomie, inspired by his plastinates. Or that von Hagens once danced while costumed as a plastinate in Berlin's famous Love Parade. In Europe some of von Hagens' publicity stunts reveled in sexuality, but his strategy in the United States. has been considerably more subdued. "
NPR reporter Neda Ulaby filed this report August 10, 2006 on All Things Considered. Her title: Cadaver Exhibits Are Part Science, Part Sideshow indicates some of the problem with the exhibit.
"...The shows, featuring corpses that have been preserved and solidified through a process called plastination, have been wildly successful. But they also have been dogged by criticism.
"One delicate ethical concern stands out above all the others: whether the bodies were legitimately obtained. Dr. Gunther von Hagens, the inventor of plastination and the impresario behind the Body Worlds exhibitions, says that every whole body exhibited in North America comes from fully informed European and American donors, who gave permission, in writing, for their bodies to be displayed. The science museums that have hosted Body Worlds also make this assurance.
"'What I certainly never use for public exhibitions are unclaimed bodies, prisoners, bodies from mental institutions and executed prisoners,' von Hagens says."
According to reporter Ulaby, "Chinese medical schools supply von Hagens with unclaimed bodies, which he plastinates and sells to universities. Von Hagens used to take cadavers from the former Soviet Union, but he stopped after body-trafficking scandals in Russia and the Kyrgyz Republic."
Given the recent Olympic Chinese gymnast scandal, China cannot be trusted with their paper trails. AP reporter Nancy Armour stated that previous lists on the website of the General Administration of Sport of China in 2004, 2005 and 2006 poated both athletes in question - He and Yang - with birth dates that made them ineligible. According to those lists, He was born January 1, 1994. Yang was born August 26, 1993. In 2007, Yang's birthdate changed to August 26, 1992. But back to this cadaver controversy and NPR reporter Ulaby.
"Five years ago, customs officers intercepted 56 bodies and hundreds of brain samples sent from the Novosibirsk Medical Academy to von Hagens' lab in Heidelberg, Germany. The cadavers were traced to a Russian medical examiner who was convicted last year of illegally selling the bodies of homeless people, prisoners and indigent hospital patients."Von Hagens was not charged with any wrongdoing, and says his cadavers are obtained only through proper legal and ethical channels.
"Dr. von Hagens also plastinates and sells many hundreds of unclaimed bodies obtained from Chinese medical schools for educational purposes. He says that he obtains them all only through trusted sources, but no outsider has verified that they might not be, in a worst-case scenario, dissidents killed in a Chinese prison, then sold through a body broker to a medical school, and then displayed to the public.
"Still, NPR has learned there's no clear paper trail from willing donors to exhibited bodies. People donating their bodies to von Hagens send consent forms to his Institute for Plastination. They pay to have their bodies transported to a plastination facility. There, their donor forms and death certificates are checked.
"That paperwork is then separated from the bodies, which can be used for displays or sold in pieces to medical schools. No one will know for sure, because each plastinated corpse is made anonymous to protect its privacy.
"Hans Martin Sass, a philosophy professor with a speciality in ethics, was hired by the California Science Center to investigate Body Worlds before the show's U.S. debut in 2004. He matched over 200 donation forms to death certificates, but he did not match the paperwork to specific bodies von Hagens has on display.
"Body Worlds should not be confused with its competitor, BODIES... The Exhibition. Gunther von Hagens' Body Worlds is now in St. Paul, Minn., Houston and Boston. BODIES... The Exhibition is in Tampa, Fla., Atlanta, Las Vegas and New York City.
"Roy Glover, spokesman for BODIES... The Exhibition, says its cadavers -- all from China -- did not come from willing donors.
"'They're unclaimed,' Glover says. 'We don't hide from it, we address it right up front.'
For that reason, many venues will not display BODIES... The Exhibition. Groups such as the Laogai Research Foundation, which documents human rights abuse in China, have charged that the category of unclaimed bodies in China includes executed political prisoners.
"When BODIES... The Exhibition opened first in Tampa, Fla., last summer, the state anatomical board requested documentation proving the corpses were ethically obtained. Dr. Lynn Romrell, who chairs the board, says it got only a letter from the show's Chinese plastinator asserting that they were.
"He stated that none of the material came from criminal institutions or homes from the mentally insane. But just his word on that, no documents," Romrell says.
"Romrell wanted to close the exhibition down, but says the state anatomical board lacked the authority.
"The owner of Body Worlds says each body he displays can be accounted for, but he is unwilling to make public a complete paper trail. His competition, BODIES... The Exhibition, relies on documentation from a country with a problematic human rights record. Even at best, its exhibitors say the bodies were not formally donated by people who agreed to be displayed.
Despite questions about the two exhibitions, both continue to draw hundreds of thousands of visitors around the country, and some museums are even thinking about adding plastinates to their permanent collections.
"Signs at the exhibition's entrance stated that the bodies had been voluntarily donated under the auspices of the Institute for Plastination. Well, what was that? Looking into the shows, I learned the IFP was another arm of Dr. von Hagens' buisness empire. In other words, Dr. von Hagens was basically tasked with ensuring that Dr. von Hagens' exhibition was ethical and legitimate.
"NPR learned that the Franklin Institute and similar science centers around North America that have hosted Body Worlds relied on research commissioned by the California Science Center when it first brought the show to the United States in 2004. (This was done by Hans-Martin Sass, who appears in my story.) That research verified that there is a pool of some two hundred death certificates that matched donor forms. But as I looked into the story, I found that no independent observer has matched those documents to the bodies on display. That means there is no clear paper trail from a deceased donor to a finished plastinate.
"Nor has an independent observer ensured that the unclaimed Chinese bodies von Hagens uses in his medical-school-supply business are not turning up on display in the Body Worlds shows. Again, von Hagens categorically declares that he obtains his cadavers ethically; the point here is that the U.S. science centers who have put the bodies on display have conveyed the impression that an independent verification of this has been made.
"Besides the original ethical review, the science centers involved have also reassured patrons that they've turned to "ethics panels" or "advisory boards" of local clerics and academics to ensure that the bodies displayed have spotless ethical pedigrees. But after I interviewed scores of people at various science musuems, it became clear those boards hadn't been asked to seriously engage with the shows' ethical pitfalls. Instead, the board members were more or less charged with marketing the shows to their respective communities."
"For example, he'd been a political prisoner himself in the former East Germany. Or that there's a German horror movie, Anatomie, inspired by his plastinates. Or that von Hagens once danced while costumed as a plastinate in Berlin's famous Love Parade. In Europe some of von Hagens' publicity stunts reveled in sexuality, but his strategy in the United States. has been considerably more subdued. "
Saturday, September 6, 2008
Sarah Palin versus Political Punditry
Alaska Govenor Sarah Palin's entry into this election reminds all that it is not the elites who rule this country, but regular folk with problems.
Her speech this week was brilliant, making it clear that it's now time to slap on the McCain/Palin bumper stickers. We can be proud of a monumental decison, however, this election goes.
Despite all the partisan media bulldog attacks from CNN and all their pundits who wear "reporter" pins, truth will out. Solid citizenry proves the day.
Keith Oberman was a disgrace; and the rape-comm, bulldog brunette, attacking the McCain chairman, needed her slanted diatribes muzzled like a mouthy Indiana Jones heroine.
Yes! When they "take down the styrofoam Greek columns and take them back to some studio prop lot" we are left with empty rhetoric.
Barak Obama has "promoted change to further his career," while John McCain has used his "career to promote change."
In the difficult years ahead, I for one want a man that has been tried and tested to lead this country, not a confirmed but cloaked socialist cell organizer, who deliberately keeps his radical left-wing agenda hidden.
Her speech this week was brilliant, making it clear that it's now time to slap on the McCain/Palin bumper stickers. We can be proud of a monumental decison, however, this election goes.
Despite all the partisan media bulldog attacks from CNN and all their pundits who wear "reporter" pins, truth will out. Solid citizenry proves the day.
Keith Oberman was a disgrace; and the rape-comm, bulldog brunette, attacking the McCain chairman, needed her slanted diatribes muzzled like a mouthy Indiana Jones heroine.
Yes! When they "take down the styrofoam Greek columns and take them back to some studio prop lot" we are left with empty rhetoric.
Barak Obama has "promoted change to further his career," while John McCain has used his "career to promote change."
In the difficult years ahead, I for one want a man that has been tried and tested to lead this country, not a confirmed but cloaked socialist cell organizer, who deliberately keeps his radical left-wing agenda hidden.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
