More U.S. women dying in childbirth
Sat, 2007-08-25 09:44
#1
More U.S. women dying in childbirth
Sat, 2007-08-25 09:44
#2
quote:
ATLANTA - U.S. women are dying from childbirth at the highest rate in decades, new government figures show. Though the risk of death is very small, experts believe increasing maternal obesity and a jump in Caesarean sections are partly to blame.
[url=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20427256/?GT1=10252]http://www.msnbc.msn.com...
Sat, 2007-08-25 10:34
#3
Polly B
[url=http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070807/birth_defec...
And it also seems that all that extra weight in pregnancy may lead to birth defects.
Sat, 2007-08-25 11:18
#4
quote:
Other characteristics of the maternal mortality rate include:Race: Studies have found that the maternal death rate in black women is at least three times greater than is it is for whites. Black women are more susceptible to complications like high blood pressure and are more likely to get inadequate prenatal care.
Quality of care: Three different studies indicate at least 40 percent of maternal deaths could have been prevented.
When I was pregnant with my second, I was so thirsty that I would drink gallons and gallons of water, I knew my baby was breech because I could feel her head by my rib cage. I told my doctor and he ignored me. I told him again and he literally threw a referral at me for a specialist. The specialist found out that the baby was breech and that I had gestational diabetes.
In those days I was not a strong woman, it took everything I had to stand up to this man. I can't imagine what it is like for women of color and young women.
Sat, 2007-08-25 11:22
#5
quote:
Originally posted by Polly Brandybuck:
[b][url=http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070807/birth_defec...And it also seems that all that extra weight in pregnancy may lead to birth defects.[/b]
It's not the extra weight gained in pregnancy that's the problem. No, it's the extra weight gained from eating buckets of fried chicken and BK Double Stackers every day of their lives prior to getting knocked up, added to the normal stresses of pregnancy. You get some 300 pound woman with the prescription pants pregnant, and she's bound to have problems.
I read that in the US, over 75% of the population is either overweight, with 40% of that number obese. The morbidly obese (WTF does that even mean anyway) are the fastest growing (snerk) segment of the population.
I will edit this be gender neutral, and say that American men are as fat or fatter than American women.
[ 25 August 2007: Message edited by: Slider ]
Sat, 2007-08-25 11:26
#6
quote:
Originally posted by Slider:
[b]It's not the extra weight gained in pregnancy that's the problem. No, it's the extra weight gained from eating buckets of fried chicken and BK Double Stackers every day of their lives prior to getting knocked up, added to the normal stresses of pregnancy. You get some 300 pound woman with the prescription pants pregnant, and she's bound to have problems.
I read that in the US, over 75% of the population is either overweight, with 40% of that number obese. The morbidly obese (WTF does that even mean anyway) are the fastest growing (snerk) segment of the population.[/b]
Slider, I think the point could have been made without the crude stereotyping.
Sat, 2007-08-25 11:31
#7
quote:
Originally posted by Amйricain Йgalitaire:
[b]Slider, I think the point could have been made without the crude stereotyping.[/b]
Are you saying that Americans are not, in general, fat? Because they are.
quote:
Increasing numbers of Americans are becoming too fat to fit into X-ray machines, US researchers report.
[url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/5219884.stm]BBC[/url]
[img]http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/41937000/jpg/_41937730_obesescansm...
Sat, 2007-08-25 11:41
#8
No I won't deny that in the slightest but come on - this is a little harsh:
quote:
No, it's the extra weight gained from eating buckets of fried chicken and BK Double Stackers every day of their lives prior to getting knocked up, added to the normal stresses of pregnancy. You get some 300 pound woman with the prescription pants pregnant,
I know people who eat like that and don't gain an ounce - its not always food that does it.
Sat, 2007-08-25 13:39
#9
Polly B
Actually, I didn't say all that weight gained in pregnancy, I just said the weight in pregnancy. Much clearer no? What I meant to say was that the report stated that overweight women were statistically more likely to have babies with birth defects.
I think perhaps Slider has a point, tho I agree AE, he certainly could have worded it nicer. People who are overweight are quite likely to be overweight due to bad food choices. (Or lack or choice!). And perhaps it's the food choices during pregnancy more than something like the size of the Mom that leads to the birth defects?
Sat, 2007-08-25 15:57
#10
The article didn't provide enough information from which to draw conclusions, really. They would have to look at specific causes of death to see what's really going on; otherwise, it's just sweeping generalizations.
AE, I would agree that some people eat like pigs and remain whipcord thin (I'm sort of one of those people, though less so as I get older and since a pregnancy when I gained a massive amount of weight). And in previous threads on obesity, the consensus seems to have been that stereotyping fat people as gluttons is unfair, and simplifies a complex issue. But a 75% obesity rate amongst Americans? That's massive cultural forces at play.
And if we were to make some sweeping generalizations, we would start at the lack of access to health care for tens of millions of Americans.
Sat, 2007-08-25 20:47
#11
Polly B
And the prevalence of fast food everywhere - cheaper and easier than real food.
The study was too broad. What about overweight women who are overweight from eating a lot of healthy food as opposed to overweight women who rely on junk food? What about the medium size women who eat nothing but junk but somehow metabolize it? (Not me, I gained 80 pounds with my first baby). I don't think the numbers on a scale, taken in isolation, can be considered to be the cause of anything.
Sun, 2007-08-26 05:14
#12
Do we not accumulate toxins in our fat? Maybe the reasoning that obese women have greater incidents of children born with birth defects is specious if we attribute it only to obesity.
There's weird things going on at Walpole island, where the residents drinking water is downstream from Sarnia's Chemical valley. The male to female ratio is way out of wack.
Is it because of too many cheezies? Too many Big Macs?
Don't make me get Occam's butter knife out on this.
Sun, 2007-08-26 06:01
#13
quote:
Originally posted by Slider:
[b]It's not the extra weight gained in pregnancy that's the problem. No, it's the extra weight gained from eating buckets of fried chicken and BK Double Stackers every day of their lives prior to getting knocked up, added to the normal stresses of pregnancy. You get some 300 pound woman with the prescription pants pregnant, and she's bound to have problems. [/b]
You're no longer longer welcome in the feminism forum since you can't seem to help acting like a pig when you post here. Do not post in any feminism threads again or your account will be banned from babble.
Sun, 2007-08-26 06:04
#14
quote:
Originally posted by Polly Brandybuck:
[b]And the prevalence of fast food everywhere - cheaper and easier than real food.The study was too broad. What about overweight women who are overweight from eating a lot of healthy food as opposed to overweight women who rely on junk food? What about the medium size women who eat nothing but junk but somehow metabolize it? (Not me, I gained 80 pounds with my first baby). I don't think the numbers on a scale, taken in isolation, can be considered to be the cause of anything.[/b]
Did you look at the actual studies - or just the NBC article?
I wanted to find some of the actual research while reading the article, but which research they were referring to didn't seem clear to me from the article.
[ 26 August 2007: Message edited by: 500_Apples ]
Sun, 2007-08-26 06:08
#15
The greater incidence of birth defects among children of obese women sounds like a nutritional problem, especially when you see double the incidence of neural tube defects (eg spina bifida), a defect associated with folate deficiency specifically, and poor nutrition in general.
Tommy, I've heard that there is an increase in female births everywhere; not sure where to find this stat. One theory is all the hormones in the drinking water from birth control pills, though I've sometimes thought this theory might be perpetuated by so-cons.
(In my family, ie, my first cousins and I, and most recently my brother and his wife, there have been five births in the past 12 years. None were boys.)
Though I have to say, as a girl myself and a mom of girls, it kinda makes me queasy to corroborate any theory suggesting that girlness results from a prenatal toxic contamination of some sort.
Sun, 2007-08-26 06:26
#16
quote:
Originally posted by Sineed:
[b]The greater incidence of birth defects among children of obese women sounds like a nutritional problem, especially when you see double the incidence of neural tube defects (eg spina bifida), a defect associated with folate deficiency specifically, and poor nutrition in general.Tommy, I've heard that there is an increase in female births everywhere; not sure where to find this stat. One theory is all the hormones in the drinking water from birth control pills, though I've sometimes thought this theory might be perpetuated by so-cons.
(In my family, ie, my first cousins and I, and most recently my brother and his wife, there have been five births in the past 12 years. None were boys.)
Though I have to say, as a girl myself and a mom of girls, it kinda makes me queasy to corroborate any theory suggesting that girlness results from a prenatal toxic contamination of some sort.[/b]
There is pretty good evidence that birth control pills are having an effect on [url=http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=birth+control+pill+fish+population&m... populations for example. Unfortunately, socons are coopting the issue so it might end up being harder to find a solution. The general environmental issue at stake is a technological one. Most pharmaceutical pills (BCPs, multivitamins, Alendronate, et cetera) are designed such that a huge proportion ends up flushed down the toilet. That's obviously bad. I'm sure there are problems with other pills as well, and if there are not there probably eventually will be. I can imagine pharmaceutical developers view the toilet as an infinite sink. It's not.
I never realized that these statistics might corroborate a theory that girliness results from toxicity. I think that's clearly not it but I guess you're right some people might believe that. You know, if the only harmful hormone going around was that from bovine growth hormone cow and milk, there might be greater "masculinity" in both boys and girls, and I don't think people would then say boyishness comes from toxins. Lastly, I remember reading that the proportion of sperm in a man which is Y or X varies with factor such as age, unfortunately I can't remember the detail. But it's conceivable it could vary with diet as well, for whatever reason. And then random other things. In a recent issue of Psychology Today, they mentioned beautiful couples have more girls (12% higher chance).
[ 26 August 2007: Message edited by: 500_Apples ]
Sun, 2007-08-26 06:48
#17
quote:
In a recent issue of Psychology Today, they mentioned beautiful couples have more girls (12% higher chance).
And I have two girls...but it totally makes sense. My husband and I, we're often mistaken for Brad and Angelina [img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img]
And yeah, pharmaceuticals in the water supply are a real environmental problem, but the socons will make hay out of the birth control pills to grind their own specific ax at the expense of all the other problems.
Sun, 2007-08-26 06:57
#18
Hmm. I have a boy. So that totally dispels that theory. [img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img] (Kidding, kidding.)
Sun, 2007-08-26 07:35
#19
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:
[b]Hmm. I have a boy. So that totally dispels that theory. [img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img] (Kidding, kidding.)[/b]
I've seen your picture in the
[url=http://www.rabble.ca/about_us/bioindex.shtml]Rabble bio section[/url]. That pig's gonna need a lot of lipstick!
Sun, 2007-08-26 07:42
#20
Piss off loser.
Sun, 2007-08-26 07:45
#21
remind
Okay, it is time for slider to be gone, he was asked and then told not to participate in the feminist forum. And then he pulls this crap.
Sun, 2007-08-26 07:51
#22
Slider is gone. And by that I mean banned. That was a clear case of banning if I ever saw one.
[ 26 August 2007: Message edited by: M.Gregus ]
Mon, 2007-08-27 15:33
#23
quote:
Tommy, I've heard that there is an increase in female births everywhere; not sure where to find this stat. One theory is all the hormones in the drinking water from birth control pills, though I've sometimes thought this theory might be perpetuated by so-cons.
I've heard that too. But I do believe the Walpole Island example is more extreme.
It used to be that on the left we blamed corporations for everything. That all the answers related back to eliminating or regulating big business.
Now, in almost every field of endeavor, we now blame ourselves and corporations have free reign when it comes to labour issues, environmental issues, health issues.....
You know, I think they won.
Mon, 2007-08-27 16:22
#24
Polly B
quote:
Originally posted by 500_Apples:
[b]Did you look at the actual studies - or just the NBC article?
[ 26 August 2007: Message edited by: 500_Apples ][/b]
No, I read the article and then I looked around a bit but didn't really find anything that seemed to address this that well. I would like to see a study done that examines the root causes of obesity and how that relates to the incidence of birth defects. I don't think the simple fat=defects would stand up.
But I am just guessing, based on life experience and having a whole bunch of not so tiny friends and relatiives with perfect babies.
Mon, 2007-08-27 16:39
#25
Frustrated Mess
quote:
Endocrine disruption should be right at the top of the list of most critical technological disasters facing the world today, up with climate change. With little notice, vast volumes and combinations of synthetic chemicals have settled in every environment in the world, including the womb environment. Synthetic chemicals at very low concentrations in the womb change how genes are programmed, cells develop, tissues form, and organs function, and thus undermine the potential and survival of developing animals, including humans. The chemicals threatening the integrity of future generations are derived from the processing of crude oil and natural gas, the same processes that are driving climate change. This is an integral part of the climate change story.These chemicals, called endocrine disruptors, are in products that have become an integral part of our global lifestyle and economy. And in order for the products to be sold, the public must believe they are safe. Adding fuel to corporate denial is the unwillingness by anyone to accept the fact that every woman -- yes, every woman -- is walking around during her reproductive years with a mixture of chemicals in her body that cannot only change her physiology and how she functions, but also can start a chain of events that can change how her unborn child will be constructed, function, and mature throughout its lifetime. It is a transgenerational concept too preposterous for most people to accept. They would rather forget it. Besides, what can they do about it?
[url=http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/8/15/104934/059]Forgot the link .. [/url]
[ 27 August 2007: Message edited by: Frustrated Mess ]