Posted on 08/24/2022 9:36:04 PM PDT by ConservativeMind
A study has found Australian children who were born via cesarean section (C-section) have a greater risk of cardiovascular disease and obesity, and it's sparked a call to limit the increasingly popular practice.
Dr. Yaqoot Fatima and Dr. Tahmina Begum were part of a team that used data from the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children to analyze the health outcomes of children delivered by C-section.
"C-section births have risen across the world with a disproportionately higher rate in developed countries. In Australia, the C-section birth rate has increased from 18.5% in 1990 to 36% in 2019 and nearly half of Australian babies are projected to be cesarean born by 2045," said Dr. Begum.
She said the study found a relationship between C-section births and cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors in children.
"Four out of six individual CVD risk components and the composite index of the five CVD risk components showed a positive association with C-section birth. Our study also provided a direct relationship between C-section and increased overweight and obesity among children at 10–12 years of age," said Dr. Fatima.
She said there was a biologically plausible reason for linking C-sections to CVD risk factors and obesity.
"There's an altered microbial load from C-section birth as compared to vaginal birth. This altered microbial ecosystem hampers the 'gut-brain axis' and releases some pathogenic toxins that cause metabolic damage," said Dr. Begum.
She said it was also possible the fetal stress from physiological or pharmacological induction of labor during a C-section could also have an effect.
"Growing rates of C-sections conducted for non-clinical reasons is a major public health concern that calls for a reduction in the rate of unnecessary C-sections and their associated human and economic costs," said Dr. Begum.
(Excerpt) Read more at medicalxpress.com ...
Hospitals push c-sections to free up delivery rooms and reduce the risk/liability of difficult/prolonged natural deliveries.
The doctors are the ones insisting on c-sections. I never had one myself, but I knew many women whose doctors insisted they have c-sections, instead of natural childbirth.
Perhaps because you’ve never given birth
Doctors push c sections so they can schedule their time
It has lost favor in the states
I had a scheduled c-section at 36 weeks due to high risk, scar tissue.
I fought tooth & nail to deliver naturally or at least extend the 36 weeks to full term but they were worried I would have complications to both me, baby if live birth.
After the c-section, they told me minimal scar tissue & I probably could’ve delivered naturally/full term! Problem is, there was no way to know what my uterine scar tissue looked like because obviously pregnant. To make things worse, my son spent 1 week in NICU because lungs weren’t fully developed. It was horrible.
Well, many of them are alive to study. There’s that.
It’s not strange that many women can’t deliver naturally. Women used to die in childbirth pretty regularly before C- Sections.
And often, it’s not even that, but fetal distress. Sometimes it’s about saving the baby’s life and not the mother’s ability to deliver.
The idea that women choose c-sections over labor because it’s easier or more convenient, or whatever, is ludicrous. It’s major surgery and the recovery is no picnic.
I had both of my sons by C-section and I’m not sorry.
With the first, labor just was not progressing. When he was born, he had the umbilical cord around his neck. It didn’t cause any problems because it never tightened, which it would have during a natural delivery.
With the second, my doctor offered me the opportunity to try a natural birth again. I declined as there is a risk of uterine rupture. That son had the cord wrapped around his neck- twice! Again it didn’t tighten and cause problems.
I think the sections might well have saved both their lives. My second section may have saved another baby as well. My doctor had come in to do my section and they were getting me ready when people started running around like mad. My doctor had another patient in labor when her baby’s heart rate suddenly dropped and they were unable to get it back up. Since the doctor was already there for me, they were able to rush her into the OR. I found out later that she had something called an abruption, where the placenta detaches before the baby is born. If an immediate section isn’t done you will lose the baby and maybe the mother as well.
Some women apparently feel that the section deprives them of of the real birth experience. I think having them come out healthy is most important.
Amen.
My labor wasn’t progressing either. After 24 hours it was going nowhere even though the contractions were giving it their best shot. Turns out I have a straight tailbone and that keeps the baby from being guided into the birth canal.
She just bounced off it for the full 24 hours. By the time they told me the situation and the options, I was so exhausted, I could not have pushed even if I wanted to. I told them to just get her out and wake me up when it was over.
It turns out it is rare for a woman with a straight tailbone to deliver naturally. Usually it would be die in childbirth time. The next two pregnancies were scheduled sections. No choice.
I can’t believe they’re actually talking about reducing cesarean births. Forty years ago, people for natural births were saying c-sections were too high, 25-33% of births. It took 40 years for medical deep state to pay attention.
others need a c section because the baby would be born dead or brain damaged because of prolonged labor.
C Sections often are done because of prolonged labor. Partly defensive medicine; if the fetal heart beat shows signs of fetal distress, you do a C section, even though often the kid would deliver okay, because if the kid ends up with brain damage you get sued.
But even when we worked in Africa, about ten percent of women needed a C section so the baby would be born alive...
as for women not needing a c section: I had one farmer who just knew his wife who was in good shape, could deliver normally. After 12 hours of labor the cervix was dilated but the head remained high so we did a C section. Without that surgery she would have died in childbirth: a common way to die in the good old days by the way.
Older women are giving birth.
That’ll up the likelihood of a caesarean.
So will gestational diabetes.
FWIW, while caesarians for convenience are a rotten idea in my opinion, I think this study is crap.
Same here. My son was delivered c-section after hours of no progress. I just couldn’t deliver a 9.5 lb baby - and he was two weeks early! They didn’t do ultrasound and had no idea he was that large. I have zero regrets that they did the c-section.
38 yrs ago next week, my wife’s water broke. Called the doctor and off to the hospital we go. The baby never dropped, so after hours of waiting for her to dilate and have contractions, they decided to do a c-section. Our daughter was delivered fine and dandy.
2 1/2 years later, our second daughter was also delivered by c-section, this time it was planned. Both are grown and doing well, one is married.
They never did say why our first daughter wouldn’t drop, but it was a necessity.
That’s basically what happened to me. Thankful for mine and yours both being born healthy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.