Naked Science Forum

Life Sciences => Physiology & Medicine => Topic started by: Petrochemicals on 14/05/2020 00:18:26

Title: Should all women be given cesareans (c sections)
Post by: Petrochemicals on 14/05/2020 00:18:26
Given the terrible complications some women face, the life long injuries some incur, should they ? My personal view is yes purely on a cost ground to begin with.
Title: Re: Should all women be given cesareans (c sections)
Post by: alancalverd on 14/05/2020 00:39:46
It's a good option if vaginal delivery goes wrong and you have sharp knives, sterile operating facilities, safe anesthesia, and clean recovery wards. Definitely a first-world answer to a universal problem, so (like formula milk or tonsillectomy) not to be encouraged where the underlying assumptions are invalid or there is no emergency.

Are you prepared to tolerate an ever-increasing dependence on these things as more women with inadequate delivery systems and babies with large heads survive? Every medical intervention benefits the current generation at the long term cost of the species, and none more spectacularly than this. 
Title: Re: Should all women be given cesareans (c sections)
Post by: AlphBravo on 16/05/2020 11:15:02
Well the science says vaginal delivery is the best because the C section model misses out on gut bacteria which gives the c section delivery some problems with a weakened immune system.

https://www.abc.net.au/radio/programs/babytalk/babytalk-why-you-shouldnt-choose-a-cesarean-birth/9028690
Title: Re: Should all women be given cesareans (c sections)
Post by: alancalverd on 16/05/2020 13:45:15
When it works, yes. But humans have evolved to a peculiar anti-Darwinian state where very few are capable of giving birth unaided and some cannot manage a vaginal birth at all. Midwifery probably goes back to our earliest recognisable ancestors and has permitted the evolution of a species with an abnormally large head along with the survival of females with android hips.

Given the choice of saving the species or saving two lives, we tend to go for the latter, hence the caesarean process, reserved for only the most valuable farm or zoo animals but offered to pretty well every human regardless of the longterm consequences.   
Title: Re: Should all women be given cesareans (c sections)
Post by: Petrochemicals on 17/05/2020 16:27:16
Well the science says vaginal delivery is the best because the C section model misses out on gut bacteria which gives the c section delivery some problems with a weakened immune system.

https://www.abc.net.au/radio/programs/babytalk/babytalk-why-you-shouldnt-choose-a-cesarean-birth/9028690
Seems like an argument to me, perhaps this would make a good thread on a science forum ?
https://www.sheknows.com/parenting/articles/1139006/outrageous-c-section-myths-busted/
Title: Re: Should all women be given cesareans (c sections)
Post by: Petrochemicals on 17/05/2020 16:31:03
It's a good option if vaginal delivery goes wrong and you have sharp knives, sterile operating facilities, safe anesthesia, and clean recovery wards. Definitely a first-world answer to a universal problem, so (like formula milk or tonsillectomy) not to be encouraged where the underlying assumptions are invalid or there is no emergency.

Are you prepared to tolerate an ever-increasing dependence on these things as more women with inadequate delivery systems and babies with large heads survive? Every medical intervention benefits the current generation at the long term cost of the species, and none more spectacularly than this. 
When it works, yes. But humans have evolved to a peculiar anti-Darwinian state where very few are capable of giving birth unaided and some cannot manage a vaginal birth at all. Midwifery probably goes back to our earliest recognisable ancestors and has permitted the evolution of a species with an abnormally large head along with the survival of females with android hips.

Given the choice of saving the species or saving two lives, we tend to go for the latter, hence the caesarean process, reserved for only the most valuable farm or zoo animals but offered to pretty well every human regardless of the longterm consequences.   
Sounds like we are already down an evolutuonary rabbit hole (as opposed a culdesac), but this would be a debate on eugenics (a discussional horets nest), so leave it as 90 percent women can give birth naturally.