Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Did Elizabeth Edwards Use Donor Eggs? (If so, where are the unused embryos?)
Slate ^ | October 29, 2004 | Suz Redfearn

Posted on 10/31/2004 7:46:57 PM PST by The Loan Arranger

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-51 last
Comment #41 Removed by Moderator

To: Paul_B
Or is this just more political calculation from the Party of cynicism, knowing this issue would be explosive among Evangelicals and serious RCs?

This is one Evangelical who's only explosive reaction to the subject is horror that this ever made it into print. If anyone wants to talk about donated eggs, then fine let's talk about donated eggs. These are not donated eggs, they are two beautiful little children!

God bless Emma and Jack Edwards.

42 posted on 10/31/2004 9:15:43 PM PST by Between the Lines ("Christianity is not a religion; it is a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: MercCPC
Not really.

Fecundity starts to drop off long before that, he says. At 35, one in four women trying to have a baby will run into difficulties. At 40, about half will fail to conceive naturally. Above 45, there are so few births using one's own eggs that no one keeps records of it, said Adamson. When it happens, you're in miracle territory.

At 35 the eggs tend get "sticky" and that is why the chances of deformity increase. Me, I gave birth at 36 and 38 and they are blessedly healthy.

Liz Edwards should have just kept her mouth shut and then it would have been extremely impolite for people to speculate on print. You cannot try to peek into Pandora's box without suffering the consequences.

I find the "miracle territory" comment ironic, given John Edwards claim about a sKerry presidency curing a multitude of ills.

43 posted on 10/31/2004 9:50:32 PM PST by Ruth A.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

Comment #44 Removed by Moderator

To: mcg1969; freespirited; Between the Lines

No one wants to attack the children. The immediate issue here is the hypocrisy that allows John Kerry and John Edwards to attack Cheney's daughter, , and Liz Edwards to even suggest that the Cheneys are ashamed of her, and then to withhold their own situation from public scrutiny.

You may perceive this as an attack article, whether it was meant that way I can't say. But the hypocrisy issue is indeed valid if they want to lead this nation. And many people would indeed be concerned about the possible root issue of tossing fertilized human eggs away. That too is a worthy subject for the nation to consider. The only way to do that without mounting an attack would be to have an open and honest discussion, which isn't happening.

I also say God bless the children, no matter how they were conceived. But the more I learn about the Edwards the less I see to convince me they should be at the seat of power.


45 posted on 11/01/2004 3:36:08 AM PST by Paul_B
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Ruth A.

I question Adamson's statistics. My wife conceived at ages 27, 29, 31, 33, 36, and 42, with no miscarriages or significant complications. We're hoping for no more children, because of other health problems we are both having.

Adamson is almost surely failing to take into account the prior distribution of live births, lack of complications, etc., in trying to calculate the probability of live births, lack of complications, etc. I.E., women who have conceived and/or nursed almost continuously since their twenties are far likelier to have children with few complications well into their forties. It is also well known among OB/GYN types that girls who start egg production early are much more likely to continue into their fifties than those who begin later.

Many medical researchers commit this error, although more of them are becoming Bayesians, especially cancer researchers.


46 posted on 11/01/2004 5:37:10 AM PST by mywholebodyisaweapon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Paul_B; freespirited; Between the Lines
No one wants to attack the children. The immediate issue here is the hypocrisy that allows John Kerry and John Edwards to attack Cheney's daughter, , and Liz Edwards to even suggest that the Cheneys are ashamed of her, and then to withhold their own situation from public scrutiny.

Nobody is disagreeing (on this forum) that it was O.K. for the Dems to bring up Mary Cheney. But this is ALSO wrong, and two wrongs simply don't make a right. We're going to have to score our political points elsewhere.

The only way to do that without mounting an attack would be to have an open and honest discussion, which isn't happening.

And despite their disrespect for the Cheneys it remains the Edwards' decision whether or not to have that discussion.

47 posted on 11/01/2004 8:07:45 AM PST by mcg1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: mywholebodyisaweapon

"We're hoping for no more children,"

They know what causes that now.


48 posted on 11/01/2004 8:09:34 AM PST by Rebelbase (Indiscriminate reprisals strengthen the terrorists. Targeted ones weaken them. Aim is everything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: mabelkitty

**Those hormone and fertilization treatments may have had something to do with her appearance.
That, and the fact that her body may be going through menopause on top of it should have given her pause. I wouldn't risk it for anything**

With the news today of her being diagnosed with breast cancer one wonders if there is any link as I have heard sometimes with fertality drugs etc this can increase risk of cancer.


49 posted on 11/04/2004 10:55:56 AM PST by snugs (An English Cheney Chick - BIG TIME)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: snugs

OH!
I just realized I made a mistake. I didn't mean her physical appearance, I meant her public appearance in her strident and not very nice personality.

But now that you mention it, yes, she may be going through menopause.

Jeez, now everyone thinks I'm one of those people that needlessly attacks physical appearance. Damn.


50 posted on 11/04/2004 11:20:21 AM PST by mabelkitty (Blackwell for Governor in 2006!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: The Loan Arranger

Apparently, the Edwards were lying back in 2004 as well.


51 posted on 08/18/2008 3:03:41 PM PDT by Arec Barrwin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-51 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson