Skip to comments.
‘The tiniest babies’: survival of babies born weighing less than 400g on the increase
LifeSiteNews ^
| 1/14/10
| Thaddeus Baklinski
Posted on 01/15/2011 12:18:21 PM PST by wagglebee
Amillia Sonja Taylor was born at just under 22 weeks gestation, and was one of the smallest babies ever at 284 grams.
IOWA CITY, January 14, 2011 (LifeSiteNEws.com) - A project by Dr. Edward Bell of the University of Iowa, in Iowa City, to create a registry of surviving infants with birth weights of less than 400 grams has found that, while still rare, the chances of survival of these tiny children is rising.
The Tiniest Babies Registry has compiled data on 110 babies born between 1936 and 2010 weighing between 260 and 397 grams at birth and having gestational ages from 21 to 34 weeks.
Dr. Bell told Reuters Health that he was motivated to create the registry in 2000 after a baby girl, now patient #11 in the Tiniest Babies Registry, was born at his university hospital weighing just 359 grams.
When our patient survived, I began to look around to see what other tiny survivors had been reported, Bell said.
Dr. Bell and fellow researcher Diane Zumbach found that the number of micro premies who survive each year has increased since the early 1990s, and noted that gestational age was more important for the babies survival than their size.
By far, the vast majority of infants born alive weighing less than 400 grams are too early in pregnancy to survive, Dr. Bell said in the Reuters report, indicating that the children in the survivors registry were unusually small for their gestational ages but more fully formed than an average 400-gram baby.
A normally-grown 400-gram baby would be approximately 19 weeks along in pregnancy, which is 3 to 4 weeks before reaching a level of development that allows even a chance of survival outside the womb, Bell said.
The researchers also noted that female babies had a much better chance of survival than males, conjecturing that female hormones may play a part in the earlier maturation of internal organs.
Eighty-three (75%) of the patients are female. The 10 smallest infants are female, and the registry contains only 1 boy who was born weighing less than 300 g, Bell wrote in a report published in the journal Pediatrics.
Dr. Bell cautioned, however, that information on long-term health of the children is limited and that many of them have ongoing health and learning problems.
Since the birth of the first survivor below 400 grams in 1936, there have been something like 10 billion babies born in the world who survived to go home with their parents, and we know of only a few more than 100 of these who weighed less than 400 grams, Dr. Bell told Reuters.
Undoubtedly, there are more that have not yet made it to the Registry, he added. In fact, I found another baby shortly after the report was published. Patient #111 is not included in the paper, but he is the smallest boy to survive at 274 grams.
An abstract of the report by Dr. Bell, titled The tiniest babies: a registry of survivors with birth weight less than 400 grams is available here.
The Tiniest Babies Registry, which has a list of the babies in order of date of birth and birth weight, is available here.
TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: moralabsolutes; prolife
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-54 next last
To: DJ MacWoW
I’d have to make the decision whether to exhaust my wealth on saving my children. You would decide (and confiscate) my wealth to spend on someone else’s children.
21
posted on
01/16/2011 8:21:17 AM PST
by
The Good Doctor
(Democracy is the only system where you can vote for a tax that you can avoid the obligation to pay.)
To: The Good Doctor
The same old tired argument. It's THE premier talking point. And it's crap.
This is what you said: And that baby may also have grown up to be a criminal who mugs and murders me some day. Considering my experience with the demographics of ulta-low birthweight babies the latter scenario is more likely than the former.
Now you are pedaling like mad to add addendum's to it. You said what you said, "Only certain demographic children are worth saving".
22
posted on
01/16/2011 8:26:52 AM PST
by
DJ MacWoW
(America! The wolves are at your door! How will you answer the knock?)
To: wagglebee
I'm guessing "The Bell Curve" is one of your favorite books.I suspect you haven't read The Bell Curve. It is actually a very interesting and important book. It was criticized by ignorant folks who not only didn't understand its message but had never read it.
23
posted on
01/16/2011 8:27:52 AM PST
by
ladyjane
To: DJ MacWoW
"Only certain demographic children are worth saving".Quotes mean something. This quote is incorrectly and improperly attributed to me. Your piousness dulls your comprehension.
24
posted on
01/16/2011 8:35:18 AM PST
by
The Good Doctor
(Democracy is the only system where you can vote for a tax that you can avoid the obligation to pay.)
To: The Good Doctor
Don't freepmail me.
Your post 7
Yes. And that baby may also have grown up to be a criminal who mugs and murders me some day. Considering my experience with the demographics of ulta-low birthweight babies the latter scenario is more likely than the former.
25
posted on
01/16/2011 8:49:27 AM PST
by
DJ MacWoW
(America! The wolves are at your door! How will you answer the knock?)
To: DJ MacWoW
You have spiraled into incoherence.
26
posted on
01/16/2011 9:13:34 AM PST
by
The Good Doctor
(Democracy is the only system where you can vote for a tax that you can avoid the obligation to pay.)
To: The Good Doctor
It’s tough when you’re quoted directly, isn’t it.
27
posted on
01/16/2011 9:17:41 AM PST
by
DJ MacWoW
(America! The wolves are at your door! How will you answer the knock?)
To: DJ MacWoW
I make the assumption that the Tooth Fairy doesn't pay for the cost of this care.
Presented with the option of selling your house, emptying your bank account and making your children destitute, in order to provide extraordinary measures to preserve an ultra-low birth-weight crack baby you wouldn't do it. (Although it's easy to type that you would.) And no one should be critical of that decision.
28
posted on
01/16/2011 9:37:31 AM PST
by
The Good Doctor
(Democracy is the only system where you can vote for a tax that you can avoid the obligation to pay.)
To: The Good Doctor; wagglebee
extraordinary measures to preserve an ultra-low birth-weight crack baby There you go again.
29
posted on
01/16/2011 9:41:00 AM PST
by
DJ MacWoW
(America! The wolves are at your door! How will you answer the knock?)
To: DJ MacWoW
30
posted on
01/16/2011 9:49:02 AM PST
by
The Good Doctor
(Democracy is the only system where you can vote for a tax that you can avoid the obligation to pay.)
To: The Good Doctor; wagglebee
We aren’t discussing me. We’re discussing your Margaret Sanger propensities.
31
posted on
01/16/2011 10:14:14 AM PST
by
DJ MacWoW
(America! The wolves are at your door! How will you answer the knock?)
To: DJ MacWoW
You wouldn’t, would ya’? It seems you comprehend that stark reality demands the analysis of cost:benefit ratio before spending money. As harsh as it may sound, any other approach is unsustainable. Of course we could always tax the rich to pay for it...
32
posted on
01/16/2011 10:41:41 AM PST
by
The Good Doctor
(Democracy is the only system where you can vote for a tax that you can avoid the obligation to pay.)
To: The Good Doctor; trisham; DJ MacWoW; little jeremiah; mlizzy; Coleus; narses; Lesforlife; ...
You found something inaccurate about "The Bell Curve"? Or do you just not like evidence that contradicts your view? (Statistically there are a lot more muggers than there are people who have cured cancer, so of course my assertion is correct, but I'm guessing you don't like statistics either.) Is there evidence that highly intelligent people are more likely to have intelligent children? Certainly.
Are children who are raised in underprivileged areas less likely to succeed? This is generally the case.
However, eugenicists like you operate based upon the immoral assumption that those likely to be high achievers have more of a right to live than those who aren't.
My IQ is above 150, my family is very wealthy and I was raised with every imaginable advantage, yet it would be unthinkable to me to believe that I have a right to life that others don't. Rights come from God, not genetics or culture.
33
posted on
01/16/2011 10:48:54 AM PST
by
wagglebee
("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
To: The Good Doctor; wagglebee; trisham; metmom
Look, “Good” Doctor, you take the Margaret Sanger approach to the lives of babies. I do not. I find you and your demographic crap disgusting. FR is a pro-life site. You are out of step. You judge the value of a life on where the child is from and money. How many have you killed because they couldn’t line your pocket? If the libs get their way, you’ll beg for your life as you age which is more than these babies get to do.
34
posted on
01/16/2011 10:52:09 AM PST
by
DJ MacWoW
(America! The wolves are at your door! How will you answer the knock?)
To: ladyjane; trisham; DJ MacWoW; little jeremiah; mlizzy; Coleus; narses; Lesforlife; ...
I suspect you haven't read The Bell Curve. It is actually a very interesting and important book. The Communist Manifesto and Mein Kampf are also interesting and important, sources of evil often are and The Bell Curve falls into this category as well.
It was criticized by ignorant folks who not only didn't understand its message but had never read it.
I understood it perfectly, it's simply another attempt by the evil Darwinists to legitimize eugenics.
35
posted on
01/16/2011 10:53:33 AM PST
by
wagglebee
("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
To: All
36
posted on
01/16/2011 11:11:36 AM PST
by
wagglebee
("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
To: The Good Doctor; wagglebee; DJ MacWoW; little jeremiah; trisham
There is a cost-benefit ratio for everything. I'll probably be considered a genocidal maniac, but if it's costing enormous sums of money to save someone else's baby the benefit isn't worth the cost to me. Sorry, it isn't.If the shoe fits......
It's reprehensible to put a dollar amount on a person's life, reducing it to a mere commodity.
I don't know if you're a real MD or not, but the *good* part is no mystery. Screennames mean nothing, but if you are, could you have the courtesy of putting your real state flag on your home page so I can have a clue about whether to know if I have to worry about being on the receiving end of YOUR "services"? I'd really rather not, if it's all the same to you. I want a doctor who will first, Do No Harm, and will have the ethics to look out for my best interest.
Almost every advance in the medical field starts out borne of necessity and is not cheap. As it proves it's worth, it's refined and cost comes down.
For all your cold hearted, calculating, disgusting cost effectiveness philosophy, trying to save these babies will lead us to learn more.
If you can't find it in you to have enough of a soul to save babies for ethical reasons, perhaps you could reduce that to cost effectiveness and see the value in what we can learn from trying.
You know, the space program back in the 60's was criticized for much the same thing. We were poring money into it and not seeing much of a *return*, but we did. The space program accelerated the development of technology which wasn't considered needed but has benefited us tremendously.
Seems to me that sterile clean rooms, that allow people with no immune systems to survive, were one of those developments.
I noted, too, that your objection was to saving "someone else's baby". And if it were YOUR OWN baby, that would make a difference?
God help you.
37
posted on
01/16/2011 11:23:29 AM PST
by
metmom
(Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
To: The Good Doctor; Dr. Brian Kopp; trisham; DJ MacWoW; little jeremiah; mlizzy; Coleus; narses
If obama care continues to be in our future, I can see a place for you on one of his deathpanels.
38
posted on
01/16/2011 11:26:20 AM PST
by
metmom
(Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
To: MamaB
I read that book.
It’s people like them that make the difference. People who will not take what the medical community pushes on them and stand up to speak for those who cannot speak for themselves.
Great book.
39
posted on
01/16/2011 11:27:49 AM PST
by
metmom
(Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
To: DJ MacWoW
We’re not debating abortion, and I’m not espousing killing anyone. If God wants a 400 gram baby to live he’ll let them live regardless of what you, me or anyone else wants. The opposite is also true. You want to play God, not me. I’m for leaving it in His hands.
40
posted on
01/16/2011 11:32:38 AM PST
by
The Good Doctor
(Democracy is the only system where you can vote for a tax that you can avoid the obligation to pay.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-54 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson