Last weekend I had a blast attending my first BarCamp held at the ThoughtWorks office in Melbourne. The concept is powerfully simple: get a bunch of like minded people together and interesting conversations will ensue. The attendees represented a cross section of disciplines in the IT industry that you don’t usually find in technology specific user groups, producing a variety of interesting presentations.
Many thanks to Ben and the team for organising, I’ll be back next year.
I keep a list of “interesting things to look sometime maybe” which I add to when I come across something that I should learn more about. This list has grown over the last few months because I’ve been busy with client work, the birth of my daughter, landscaping my back yard and <insert more excuses here>. But today is my lucky day! I finished a client assignment last week and I have a few days up my sleeve before the next one starts.
Here are the high priority items on the list as it stands now.
Let’s see how many I can get through before consulting reality spoils the party.
A work colleague of mine and I constantly banter about his refusal to embrace Facebook. He cites the ridiculousness of it as his primary reason. I’m starting to see his point.
My wife and I are expecting a baby in January. As part of the preparation and research we’ve come across far too much information and we’re trying to distil the important stuff from the noise. Something that has come totally out of left field is the choice on want to do with the cord blood during and after the birth. Cord blood is valuable because it is very rich in the best kind of stem cells.
Putting aside the whole stem cell research controversy (which relates more to acquiring stem cells from a destruction of a human embryo and/or therapeutic cloning), we have a real practical choice to make. The options are:
There seems to be a great deal of conflicting information about. Private cord blood banks are in the business of selling storage and, not surprisingly, their brochures prey on our natural fear of the unknown to sell a kind of insurance. From the information they give it’s very hard to tell exactly in what situation the cord blood would be life saving. Everyone knows that stem cell research is hot right now so they rely on unidentified future medical advances to clinch the deal.
The public cord blood bank has a different view:
“It is the opinion of the public cord blood banks that there may not be a role for this method of storage as the cord blood is unlikely to be used for transplantation for leukaemias, cancer and bone marrow failure. The stored cord blood cannot be used to treat genetic disease, as the cord blood would also be affected. The most common reason for transplantation in childhood is for leukaemia. Even if the donor developed leukaemia and required a transplant would their cord blood be used to treat themselves? The answer is ‘no’. The least successful form of transplant is from the patient’s own cord blood or bone marrow. If the leukaemia develops in early childhood, the cord blood may well contain the propensity to develop leukaemia. The most appropriate source of stem cells is from another person whether it is another family member or an anonymous stem cell donor. The chance of finding a match within your family is about 30%, the chance of finding a suitable unrelated cord blood donor is over 80%.”
— From AusCord brochure
Of course, the two parties are putting their spin on their conflicting interests. Who’s right?
Recent Comments