this post was submitted on 15 Jun 2025
136 points (99.3% liked)

World News

47511 readers
2329 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] pulsewidth@lemmy.world -2 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

50% seems like an overstatement, but who cares if the hospital uses c-sections regularly? Much like people's lower jaws are evolving to be smaller over time and we're experiencing many health issues related to teeth overcrowding (due to people having processed food and needing to chew hard foods less often) - we're experiencing changes in childbirth too. Women are having children much later in life in western nations, which causes narrower pelvises, and they're having heavier babies.. Both of which lead to much higher likelihood of natural birth complications, especially when you factor in the obesity epidemic. So yes, c-sections are becoming more common - to ensure the child and mother are safe through the birth.

[–] RBWells@lemmy.world 8 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

I care, because C-section is much more dangerous for both mother and child, much harder to recover from major abdominal surgery than vaginal birth, reduces chance of successful breastfeeding, and because, since it wasn't so high in other places, does imply they were routinely doing something to cause labor to stall. Which they were. And no, no way is 50% reasonable.

My youngest is 18, oldest 30. So this was not recent. They are down to 37% now, which is still out of line with hospital standards.

[–] pulsewidth@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago

Caesarian is absolutely not 'much more dangerous' for mother and child, cite some evidence. 32% of all births in the US are caesarian, about the same in the UK, and over 50% of those are emergency c-sections after natural childbirth has proven impossible and the doctors have had to step in to save the mother and baby from death or lifelong injury or disability.

"Delivering a baby via cesarean section is generally considered safe, and in some instances is medically necessary and safer than a vaginal birth"

https://www.healthline.com/health/pregnancy/how-many-c-sections-can-you-have

"The data shocked the study’s head author, Darine El-Chaâr, a perinatal researcher at the Ottawa hospital. In the planned vaginal birth group, there was a higher percentage of negative outcomes compared with the MRC [maternal-request, non-emergency c-section] group, driven by serious vaginal tears and babies admitted to intensive care. “I myself am challenged by the data,” she says, underlining that she believes vaginal birth is natural. “I wanted it to be the other way around.”"

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2022/feb/13/caesareans-or-vaginal-births-should-mothers-or-medics-have-the-final-say