Cases of measles spread at Disneyland has become a national political issue. Should parents be required to have their children vaccinated? Also, Britain is a step closer to becoming the first country in the world to allow a form of in-vitro fertilization. Then, Jill Leovy's critically acclaimed new book examines the cultures of South Los Angeles and the LAPD.
Vaccine politics pricks GOP presidential hopefuls
New Jersey Governor Chris Christie and Senator Rand Paul (R - KY) yesterday said parents ought to have a measure of choice when it comes to vaccinating their children.
Later in the day, both Republican presidential hopefuls amended their positions. Christie's office released a statement saying "with a disease like measles there is no question kids should be vaccinated." Paul's office released a statement saying he "believes that vaccines have saved lives, and should be administered to children."
Adding to the political fray, Hillary Rodham Clinton tweeted: "The science is clear: The earth is round, the sky is blue and #vaccines work..." The statements come as pockets of measles infections flare up around the country, with Southern California as the epicenter.
How do the comments from Christie and Paul align with the law? Will vaccines become a political issue in the coming presidential campaign?
Have you chosen not to vaccinate your children on religious grounds? Or has anyone you know made that choice? If so, let us know by going to KPCC.org/network
Guest:
Jonathan Cohn, senior national correspondent, The Huffington Post; "Rand Paul's Vaccine Comments Are Latest Chapter in 136-Year-Old Debate"
UK becomes first country to approve three-parent in vitro fertilization
Members of the British House of Commons passed a measure that makes the U.K. the first country in the world to allow three-parent in vitro fertilization (IVF) to families who don’t want to worry about passing on incurable genetic diseases to their offspring. The British House of Lords, the other house in British Parliament, will still have to vote on the measure.
The specific technique that is being debated is called mitochondrial donation. It is still in the research stage in the U.S. and U.K. and involves removing faulty mitochondrial DNA during the fertilization process that could cause things like brain disorders, heart problems, and muscular dystrophy. It’s often referred to as “three-parent IVF” because the child would have DNA from a mother, a father, and a female donor.
Supporters of the technique say it will allow parents, especially those who are aware of genetic diseases they could pass on to their offspring, the chance to have a child that will live without pain or suffering. Opponents are concerned that there hasn’t been enough research and testing done, and that it would allow “designer babies” because the technique involves planting genetically-enhanced embryos into women.
Do you think this technique should be approved? What are the advantages and disadvantages of this procedure being approved? Should people be allowed to have a “designer baby” if they want one and can afford it?
Guests:
Dieter Egli, Ph.D., senior research fellow at the New York Stem Cell Foundation, a non-profit organization working to accelerate cures for the major diseases of our time through stem cell research.
Marcy Darnovsky, Ph.D., executive director of the Center for Genetics and Society, a nonprofit organization working to encourage responsible uses and effective societal governance of human genetic, reproductive, and biomedical technologies.
How should charities’ effectiveness be evaluated?
Conventional wisdom suggests that the effectiveness of a charity or nonprofit group would be judged by their charitable donations, or in other words, on how donors’ money is actually spent to further the organization’s charitable cause.
But there are some who take a different approach to evaluating charities. These individuals believe that charities and non-profits should be evaluated more like a business, and that they should spend more of their money on overhead. The argument here is that charities that spend more money on their overhead give themselves more and better resources through which to carry out their charitable work.
Should charities be evaluated by the amount they spend on their own resources or on their charitable work?
Guests:
Daniel Borochoff, founder and President of CharityWatch, a nonprofit organization based in Chicago that rates and evaluates charities for donors.
Dan Pallotta, founder and President of the Charity Defense Council, a nonprofit based in Cambridge, MA that believes charities should be judged by their impact, not their overhead.
Quiz: What is 'orthorexia' and are you struggling with it?
If food trends like juice fasts and gluten-free foods are any indication, we as a nation are trying to eat our way to a healthier, longer life.
But this urge to eat healthy is giving rise to an eating disorder known as “orthorexia.” People suffering from orthorexia don’t so much obsess with how much or little they eat, rather, they focus on how “pure” or “clean” their food is. In extreme cases, Orthorexia can lead to malnutrition and chronic health issues.
The disorder is relatively new, and a group of researchers in Colorado have come up with a set of diagnostic guidelines for doctors. Do you know someone who might be suffering from orthorexia? What are the warning signs? What are treatment options?
Guest:
Thomas Dunn, associate professor of psychology at the University of Northern Colorado and co-author of a recent paper in Psychosomatics that outlines diagnostic criteria for the disorder
Invisible killings: The homicide epidemic in South LA
In the United States, the leading causes of death are cancer and heart disease. But for young black men, add homicide to the list. Making up 6 percent of the population, black men in America account for 40 percent of homicide victims.
Many of these murders are committed by other black men. And despite a criminal justice system that disproportionately puts people of color through its machinery, many killers go free, leaving their victims’ families bereft.
L.A. Times reporter Jill Leovy explores these killings through the lens of South Los Angeles, where one white detective is far exceeding the averages. Treating each case like a celebrity murder, John Skaggs is dogged in his search to provide families with answers. Leovy paints a portrait of one such case, a 2007 murder and subsequent prosecution investigated by Skaggs. Moreover, she details the legacy of racism and the monotony of frequent violence that has historically given cops and reporters alike little interest in pursuing the stories of black men killed in their own neighborhoods.
After a year of protest in the wake of police killings of black men in Missouri and New York, Cleveland and Los Angeles, "Ghettoside" shines a light on a neighborhood accustomed to fearing cops, accustomed to murder, and accustomed to all of it going unreported. How far can good police work go? And how far has the department come in assisting residents of South L.A.?
Jill Leovy will talk about her new book, "Ghettoside," this Thursday, Feb 5, at 7:15pm at the Mark Taper Auditorium at the Central Library in Downtown.
Guests:
Jill Leovy, author of “Ghettoside: A True Story of Murder in America” (Spiegel & Grau, 2015). She is a reporter at the Los Angeles Times and founded the paper’s Homicide Report section 8 years ago.