4 ms·
What age is optimal for pregnancy? (study)
- einpoklum 3y ago[flagged]
- jWhick 3y agonot rly, it is an American study, so it should target Americans, However it is a valid concern/hypothesis that women which give birth younger tend to be of lower health overall due to various socioeconomic conditions.
- einpoklum 3y agoAh, but this does not claim to be a study of what age is the optimal for US women to be pregnant in given the current health care system; it supposedly makes a more general claim (or at least, that's what its title says).
- jWhick 3y agoanyone with 2 brain cells will deduce what you said no matter the clickbait title.
- berkes 3y agoIf it's known, can you not adjust for it?
- SiempreViernes 3y agoTo say it is irrelevant is a bit harsh: despite how dystopic US healthcare stories can be, a lot of people actually live with that system. Those real people can get good use from this study, even if its results can't be easily applied in other parts of the world.
- tourmalinetaco 3y agoJust have your country of choice run their own studies.
- max_ 3y ago> This suggests that prior to the widespread availability of surgical deliveries, men who mated with women in the nubile age group would have reaped the benefit of having a reproductive partner more likely to have a successful first pregnancy. What exactly is a "Nubile age group"?
- berkes 3y ago> A nubile woman is a nulligravida who has recently completed physical growth, puberty, and sexual development (Symons, 1979). This is usually accomplished 3–4 years after menarche in the mid to late teens when female reproductive value is maximal (Bowles & Posel, 2005; Fisher, 1930; Keyfitz & Flieger, 1971).
- roenxi 3y agoI'm scared to google these words. Could you translate them from Medical to English for the rest of us?
- ascar 3y agoNulligravida = not been pregnant Menarche = first menstrual period
- indigo0086 3y agoThis mf scared of words
- readthenotes1 3y agoMore likely scared to trigger pedophilia warnings from people who monitor his web traffic
- znpy 3y agounironically, I've been downloading ISO images of the cds that used to be sold with dictionaries. They're fairly small, they work well with wine and they work offline. I understand that you might be afraid of triggering stuff, and in that case the good old (paper) dictionary might help you.
- AmericanChopper 3y ago[flagged]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- pjc50 3y agoPhysically, or economically?
- iandanforth 3y ago"when social and behavioral risk factors were controlled" So physically and ignoring tons of other factors relevant in the real world.
- Gow8876 3y agoThis study assume we are animalistic like rabbit, dogs and cats with raging hormone to breed madly. Everything else that makes as human are excluded.
- ImaCake 3y agoAnyone else find this an incredibly difficult article to make any sense of? I've read a lot of epidemiological research and I haven't really come across "primiparas" before, why not just call it "first births"? That's what the population genetics papers do. The only technical term in here that I am familiar with is "menarche" (first period/menstrual cycle). The rest just feels like obfuscation to make the authors seem smarter. The massive Odds Ratios presented further down are suspicious as well - if I saw those kind of effect sizes based on observational data I would be running a lot of sanity checks and models designed to test the stability of my model outputs etc. I don't think this will be the study to convince me that Evolutionary Psychology is anything more than snake oil.
- ascar 3y agoBecause primiparas describes the women that give first births and not the first births themselves. The abstract uses regular English and introduces the term. Otherwise they would have to write "women with first births" all the time. It feels like they just tried to be concise and not just throwing them in there to sound smarter.
- fzeroracer 3y agoOne of the major flaws of this study from what I can tell is that it is quite literally prone to survivorship bias. By strictly looking at successful first births it's ignoring the flip side which is how many births were aborted for medically necessary reasons and/or how many miscarriages took place. To me, this seems like they had a given outcome they wanted to prove and then worked backwards from there.
- AmericanChopper 3y ago> By strictly looking at successful first births it's ignoring the flip side which is how many births were aborted for medically necessary reasons and/or how many miscarriages took place. I think you should give it another read. > Moreover, unlike most previous studies, we (a) assess a large set of maternal, fetal, and infant outcomes and complications of labor and delivery, including CPD; (b) consider only medically necessary C-sections; (c) use age groups structured to reflect the average ages of first births in forager populations, comparing the age of 16–20 years with older and younger mothers; (d) include fetal deaths as well as infant deaths;…
- DiscourseFan 3y agoI think the general consensus has always been that teenage girls can't really raise children and aren't in a position to do so, but that they would probably have healthier children than women even 10 years older (though, it appears the difference is only meaningful once a woman hits her late 30s or so, which was also understood). Of course, the "fantasy" of every teenager would actually be the ideal reality: to allow them to have total sexual freedom, sex as an open, public, and common thing, and have the social support to allow any pregnancies that are as a result of that be carried to term, and have the children raised collectively. But instead people want sexual frustration and long periods of loneliness that result in monogamy in their mid to late 20s--and why? So Mark Zuckerberg can buy a new yacht, or whatever it is he spends all his money on.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- anotherhue 3y agoI found this relatively well written, though I am no peer reviewer (I suspect most of you aren't either) Would those who are flagging or down voting it please give a sentence or two for their reasons? Do you not like the methodology, the conclusion, or the article's presence on a 'tech' site?
- bloopernova 3y agoSince you've had no answer yet: I didn't flag or downvote this submission, but I don't think it's relevant to HN. It's also a subject fraught with controversy and easily spirals into a flame war, so I'm suspicious of the motive for posting it.
- FergusArgyll 3y agoHey, I posted it, I thought it was interesting because I always assumed a little older is better. I didn't mean to start a whole fight. Sorry...
- phyphy 3y agoIf we are going to talk about evolution then why not ask ourselves why women keep ovulating till the age of 55?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- ThinkBeat 3y agoThis feels like it was run through some form of a language obscuration process. How to make this more difficult read.
- rokkitmensch 3y agoHate science o'clock on the orange website. This shouldn't be remotely controversial controversial. When my partner expressed that children were in her life plan, even 22 year-old me had the sense to say "well shit girl we better get going! neither of us wants to be tired for childrearing!"