Science How Evolution Has Made Pregnancy Inherently Dangerous

  • 🇵🇦 Nuestro primer dominio localizado está en español en kiwifarms.pa. Our first localized domain is on Spanish on kiwifarms.pa.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account


It’s not just about extreme cases—pregnancy can have a lifelong impact on well-being.​

Tiffany was 17 weeks pregnant when her water broke while she walked to her car. The fetus wasn’t viable. Her OB-GYN team recommended an abortion—the standard of care, given the high risk of infection and death associated with her condition. While she considered her options, her blood stopped clotting properly—a possibly deadly complication. Doctors intubated her and rushed her to the ICU for a prolonged stay, where she had an emergency abortion. Without access to abortion, Tiffany would have died.
Tiffany, whose name we have changed, is an extreme example. In conversations around abortion rights, such extreme examples often come up as to why abortion is health care. And it’s true: Abortion can be an acutely lifesaving tool.
But carrying a fetus is inherently risky, even in normal pregnancies. The risk that something will go drastically wrong for the mother in pregnancy, or that there will be harmful lifelong health consequences, is unavoidable: Fundamental evolutionary forces have etched these risks into our genes. If you talk to five pregnant people in the USA, statistically one of them will experience a potentially serious complication, like high blood pressure or gestational diabetes.
Many of us are willing to take our chances, with the support of medical care, for the joy of childbirth. But if laws erase the choice to have an abortion, pregnant people will be legally required to put their health, and even lives, at risk. Biology makes sure of that.
The reason is simple: Sometimes what is good for the embryo is not good for the mother. Embryos extract resources from their mothers to improve their own health, which can at times come at the expense of maternal health. From the perspective of the embryo, the benefits of this “selfish” evolutionary strategy outweigh the corresponding costs—the chance of harm or death to the mother. Biologists have a term for this: “parent-offspring conflict.”
Embryos and mothers play a high-stakes game of tug-of-war, according to David Haig, a biologist at Harvard University: If all goes according to plan, the rope is steady. (Or steady enough—many pregnancies involve mild health problems.) But a small slip can send the rope flying. A genetic switch, preexisting condition, environmental stressor, or other complex factors can tip a pregnancy from safe to risky, the embryo increasing the flow of blood, the nutrients it contains, or otherwise enhancing its access to resources at the expense of the mother. This inevitable biological tug-of-war can cause the most common and dangerous pregnancy complications: high blood pressure, diabetes, and severe bleeding.
First, embryos can boost blood flow by remodeling the mother’s blood vessels, causing her blood pressure to spike. One in 13 pregnant women in the USA develop high blood pressure. (Research into these numbers tends to focus on women, but it applies to anyone who gets pregnant). This causes 7 to 8 percent of pregnancy-related deathsin the USA. But even for women who survive, high blood pressure during pregnancy doubles the risk of dying young from heart disease, and triples the risk of dying young from Alzheimer’s.
Second, embryos make the mother’s blood glucose levels skyrocket by releasing a powerful hormone, causing gestational diabetes in 1 of 7 US pregnancies. Half of women with gestational diabetes will develop Type 2 diabetes within 20 years, shortening their lifespan by eight to nine years on average.
Third, embryos directly access the maternal bloodstream by extending tendrils of a highly invasive placenta deep into the mother’s body. At birth, the placenta leaves a freely bleeding wound (which cannot be stanched due to embryonic remodeling of the mother’s blood vessels). As a result, severe bleeding at birth causes 11 percent of maternal deaths in the USA.
For some pregnancy complications, doctors and parents must choose between the mother’s health and the embryo’s health. For example, 1 in 25 pregnant women in the U.S. develop preeclampsia, a potentially life-threatening disease that causes high blood pressure and organ damage. When embryos cause preeclampsia, the only cure is to deliver the baby as soon as the baby is viable—or, if the risk to the mother is deemed great enough, to abort the baby.
Pregnancy is even riskier for women who face racial disparities in treatment, cannot access good health care, or have other health conditions (including COVID). Black and Indigenous mothersare two to four times more likely to die from pregnancy-related causes than white mothers. Women living in the South have a higher risk of death and poor maternal outcomes. Pregnant women diagnosed with COVID are more than three times more likely to die than nonpregnant women, and they have a significantly higher rate of miscarriage, stillbirth, and preterm deliveries. By banning abortions, we would enshrine in law serious discrepancies in risk based on race, region, and health.
We choose to avoid risky activities all the time out of concern for our own health. We eat less sugar, drink less alcohol, decline to go downhill skiing. Or maybe we indulge in those things, because we have weighed the risks and opted to take them. It is up to us, in consultation with our doctors. For someone who does not wish to be a parent, the health risks of pregnancy—which are far greater than those for everyday activities—may not be worth it.
If we ban abortion, we are forcing people to embrace serious physical risks that last beyond the nine months of pregnancy. Pregnancy risks are fundamental, written into our genes and our evolutionary history, and they are not going away anytime soon. While adoption can theoretically erase the burden of unwanted parenthood, we cannot erase the burden of unwanted, lifelong health risks from pregnancy. And unlike pregnancy, abortion has no long-term negative consequences on mental and physical health; in fact, abortion is significantly safer than childbirth. Access to this medical service preserves the right to protect one’s health, both immediately and into the future.
 
If the Supreme Court overrides Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, it will return abortion laws to the states for each to decide on its own. I doubt any state will outlaw medically necessary abortion, which account for something like less than 2% of all abortions currently.
 
Without access to abortion, Tiffany would have died.
And thats why you need to allow for up to post-birth abortion for women who don't wanna be mothers...

I don't care about the rest of the article. Not gonna read a word after that line. The abortion debate in America isn't about medically necessary abortions. Its about those shitty cunts who wanna kill their unborn children for convenience. Get fucked you hack journoscum.
 
The whole basis of the argument here is wrong and retarded. Considering humans will birth at the vast majority of the cases a single child, and that child would have had a good chance of not reaching maturity. "Evolution" has made it so birth is as safe as it gets for women.
And yeah the entire article tries to claim that modern societal ills are somehow considered in the mirror of "Evolution".

Maybe let's ban fat food and alcohol if we're already going the path of banning stuff that are dangerous if you live a bad lifestyle.
 
Funny how when we said the numbers for bad reactions from the covid vaccines were dangerous and we said we shouldn’t be forced to take something that could kill us, I wonder where all these voices were then.

Getting in a car every day is dangerous too but if you really want to not risk pregnancy there are several very effective choices you can make to ensure you don’t need to take this risk that don’t involve killing another human being. This is also disingenuous to start with an extreme case when everyone I know who leans right agrees that if the mother’s life is threatened it is ok to terminate.
 
having enough food to eat is what really made it become deadlier. it was a combination of making babies much larger than they ever were before / also reducing breast feeding by feeding kids cows milk/solid food earlier led to having way more kids in a lifetime than previous eras.

the dangers associated with these things is most pronounced after the victorian era but before modern medicine.

that isn't to say that there aren't' serious risks to some people or that there are risks that people can understandably never want to endure (like much higher rates of incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse later in life), but none of that shit has anything to do with evolution making it inherently dangerous any more than toxic shock syndrome means evolution made periods "inherently dangerous". these are examples of technological intervention causing specific risks which most people accept because it is worth it to them personally.
 
Maybe I skimmed past where it talks about wtf this has to do with evolution lol, but this article is woefully shortsighted.

Yes, these are all things women can potentially face in pregnancy today.
That’s true.
But these are things that have *always* been a risk for pregnant women, and now more than ever we have the medical advances to make sure mom or baby (or both) doesn’t die.
These used to be potential death sentences, but in most competent hospitals with informed and cooperative prenatal care, the risk has gone down immensely.
 
Tiffany was 17 weeks pregnant when her water broke while she walked to her car. The fetus wasn’t viable. Her OB-GYN team recommended an abortion—the standard of care, given the high risk of infection and death associated with her condition. While she considered her options, her blood stopped clotting properly—a possibly deadly complication. Doctors intubated her and rushed her to the ICU for a prolonged stay, where she had an emergency abortion. Without access to abortion, Tiffany would have died.

This bitch needs to get "standard of care" out of her damn mouth because she does not know what she is talking about. Premature rupture of membranes is common and abortion is NOT the standard of care for it. There are decision trees based on a variety of factors but not even at 17 weeks is abortion "standard of care." Read some clinical recommendations here at this accessible yet professionally oriented article for physicians.

1652208151933.png

Rupture at 17 weeks has a grim outlook- for the baby. It is not usually that dangerous for the mother so long as these clinical guidelines are followed. Once signs of sepsis set in, that is indeed one of the rare indications for medically life-salvaging abortion- or just emergency delivery, post viability. DIC (the clotting problem she experienced) is often secondary to sepsis. But most of the time this does not happen. This is one of those rare tragic circumstances.

The fact that this journo just does what comes naturally to her and outright lies about the standard of care for managing these pregnancies is more than the usual level of appalling. Women in these situations need honest answers about the fact that there are treatment options, not just to be smugly assured that murder is the only way out of their nightmare.
 
Women dying during childbirth nowadays is so rare (about .017%) as to be a statistical anomaly. Whereas 1.13% of pregnancies are terminated by abortion.

That means there are nearly 100 abortions per death by childbirth. Which means that a pregnant woman is 100x more dangerous to her fetus than the fetus is to its mother.
 
First, embryos can boost blood flow by remodeling the mother’s blood vessels, causing her blood pressure to spike.
Second, embryos make the mother’s blood glucose levels skyrocket
Black and Indigenous mothers are two to four times more likely to die from pregnancy-related causes than white mothers.
Wow, what a crazy coincidence that all of these things are also directly related to obesity. Isn't that just the biggest coincidence? The universe sure is funny sometimes.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo