5 ms·

Wild speculation: perhaps those that chose c-section are on average less able to tolerate pain, and therefore lacking in self control (to a degree) and therefor

Wild speculation: perhaps those that chose c-section are on average less able to tolerate pain, and therefore lacking in self control (to a degree) and therefore their progeny have a higher likelihood of overeating.

tonfa 10y ago
If you read the article, the study was done in context of other studies showing that most of the gut bacteria comes from vaginal birth, e.g http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0817/3/3/769/htm http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0817/3/3/769/htm Correlation between healthy gut bacteria and lower obesity rate are not that surprising.
- gohrt 10y ago
  That's a tautology -- what does "healthy" mean?
basseq 10y ago
Disclaimer: There's a really bad stigma about c-sections and mothers who have them being "less" or "worse" because of it. I'm careful to point this out before we dive into a discussion on making accusations of "poor self-control". That said... If you remove those c-sections that are medically necessary or recommended ("known indicators for cesarean delivery" is the language used in the abstract), then you're left with that population that truly "chose" to have a c-section. The association is stronger in this population. I'd want to tie this back to those demographics. What kind of people truly choose a c-section? Is there something about that demographic that correlates to obesity for other reasons? Are obese women more likely to be counseled towards c-sections? Again, why? It's unclear if they normalized for this. Incidentally, I think your speculation is probably wrong. You assume that c-sections are (or are regarded as) the lower-pain option. You can have a painless "natural" birth with an epidural, and post-birth recovery is going to be "painful"--in different ways--with either path. In other words, don't think people choose c-section for pain management in the first place, which invalidates the rest of your logic chain.
- seizethecheese 10y ago
  Interesting, and I think you may be right. I do think women choose c-sections because the are scared of natural birth for whatever reason. It's probably true that there is some demographic component to this correlation, though I would assume the would control for that.
  - Mz 10y ago
    I do think women choose c-sections because the are scared of natural birth for whatever reason. I think that is pretty rare. From what I have seen, women are much more likely to genuinely choose a C-section because they have a career and need to have the baby on a set schedule so they can get back to work. Having a baby the natural way is a fairly messy organic process that does not readily fit into the highly scheduled lives of modern two-career couples. IIRC, only about 5 percent of babies show up on their actual due date. Most are either early or late. I have read plenty of articles where career women scheduled a C-section so they could schedule the birth and also schedule time off from work. Waiting for a baby to show up when they feel like it is rather inconvenient not only for you, but for your employer if you are anyone of any importance. It can amount to being willing to leave the entire department in a lurch when you suddenly drop everything. Babies can be anywhere from several weeks early to two weeks late, from what I gather. That leaves a window of potentially two to three months in which baby might decide "now's the time." In fact, my understanding is that a baby three weeks early isn't even classified as a preemie. So there is potentially a five week window for a "normal" birth.
    - justinlink 10y ago
      Actually, having a c-section would be worse for "career" focused mothers. Sure, you get to schedule your due date, but you are having a surgery. It takes longer to recover from a c-section then a natural birth. There is driving and lifting restrictions for weeks. FMLA leave is usually extended for those with c-sections by a few weeks. And as for scheduling, you can define a maximum date, but the baby can still come early. Just because I'm schedule to have a c-section on September 1st, doesn't mean I can't go into labor in August 15th.
fragola 10y ago
I am speechless. Just in case anyone reads this and thinks having a C-section is painless: it's not. It's really not for the faint of heart, and it almost always happens after hours in labor anyway. Before leaping to insulting conclusions about why women get C-sections, consider the most obvious explanation: this whole thing is just due to gestational diabetes -> higher risk of c-section AND gestational diabetes -> higher risk of obesity later in life for infant.[0] [0] http://www.webmd.com/baby/gestational-diabetes-you#1 http://www.webmd.com/baby/gestational-diabetes-you#1
- seizethecheese 10y ago
  My only knowledge here is personal experience having talked to women swearing they will only ever have C-sections.

tonfa 10y ago

If you read the article, the study was done in context of other studies showing that most of the gut bacteria comes from vaginal birth, e.g http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0817/3/3/769/htm http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0817/3/3/769/htm Correlation between healthy gut bacteria and lower obesity rate are not that surprising.

gohrt 10y ago
That's a tautology -- what does "healthy" mean?

basseq 10y ago

Disclaimer: There's a really bad stigma about c-sections and mothers who have them being "less" or "worse" because of it. I'm careful to point this out before we dive into a discussion on making accusations of "poor self-control". That said... If you remove those c-sections that are medically necessary or recommended ("known indicators for cesarean delivery" is the language used in the abstract), then you're left with that population that truly "chose" to have a c-section. The association is stronger in this population. I'd want to tie this back to those demographics. What kind of people truly choose a c-section? Is there something about that demographic that correlates to obesity for other reasons? Are obese women more likely to be counseled towards c-sections? Again, why? It's unclear if they normalized for this. Incidentally, I think your speculation is probably wrong. You assume that c-sections are (or are regarded as) the lower-pain option. You can have a painless "natural" birth with an epidural, and post-birth recovery is going to be "painful"--in different ways--with either path. In other words, don't think people choose c-section for pain management in the first place, which invalidates the rest of your logic chain.

seizethecheese 10y ago
Interesting, and I think you may be right. I do think women choose c-sections because the are scared of natural birth for whatever reason. It's probably true that there is some demographic component to this correlation, though I would assume the would control for that.
- Mz 10y ago
  I do think women choose c-sections because the are scared of natural birth for whatever reason. I think that is pretty rare. From what I have seen, women are much more likely to genuinely choose a C-section because they have a career and need to have the baby on a set schedule so they can get back to work. Having a baby the natural way is a fairly messy organic process that does not readily fit into the highly scheduled lives of modern two-career couples. IIRC, only about 5 percent of babies show up on their actual due date. Most are either early or late. I have read plenty of articles where career women scheduled a C-section so they could schedule the birth and also schedule time off from work. Waiting for a baby to show up when they feel like it is rather inconvenient not only for you, but for your employer if you are anyone of any importance. It can amount to being willing to leave the entire department in a lurch when you suddenly drop everything. Babies can be anywhere from several weeks early to two weeks late, from what I gather. That leaves a window of potentially two to three months in which baby might decide "now's the time." In fact, my understanding is that a baby three weeks early isn't even classified as a preemie. So there is potentially a five week window for a "normal" birth.
  - justinlink 10y ago
    Actually, having a c-section would be worse for "career" focused mothers. Sure, you get to schedule your due date, but you are having a surgery. It takes longer to recover from a c-section then a natural birth. There is driving and lifting restrictions for weeks. FMLA leave is usually extended for those with c-sections by a few weeks. And as for scheduling, you can define a maximum date, but the baby can still come early. Just because I'm schedule to have a c-section on September 1st, doesn't mean I can't go into labor in August 15th.

fragola 10y ago

I am speechless. Just in case anyone reads this and thinks having a C-section is painless: it's not. It's really not for the faint of heart, and it almost always happens after hours in labor anyway. Before leaping to insulting conclusions about why women get C-sections, consider the most obvious explanation: this whole thing is just due to gestational diabetes -> higher risk of c-section AND gestational diabetes -> higher risk of obesity later in life for infant.[0] [0] http://www.webmd.com/baby/gestational-diabetes-you#1 http://www.webmd.com/baby/gestational-diabetes-you#1

seizethecheese 10y ago
My only knowledge here is personal experience having talked to women swearing they will only ever have C-sections.