Pregnancy etc.: Woo-Watch

[Jackalgirl]

Hello, everyone --

For those who don't know, I'm just over 6 months pregnant. Jackalpup should be coming along in August. I'm curious as to whether any of you folks out there have run into various unsupported ideas -- whether it be "old wives' tales" or other kinds of superstitions -- and could give me some advice as to what I might run into.

So far, I've encountered this stuff:

- 1) Pregnant women should not drink green tea.
---- I found this odd, as I'm living in Japan, and I figured that if drinking green tea were a problem, the world would probably know about it (considering that, what, about 75% of the world's population lives in Monsoon Asia and drinks tea). My husband did some research and the only thing he found is that some teas have questionable / unhealthy levels of chemicals in them (like mercury). Roger that -- stay away from tea whose origins I don't know. I asked the nurse-practitioner, by the way, who was baffled -- she hadn't heard of it either.

- 2) Pregnant women should not sleep on their backs. It cuts off oxygen to the fetus.
---- Again, my reaction was "urrrr?" If this were true, wouldn't it be widely known? I mean, I know that I'm not the world's greatest authority on pregnancy, but to me, "cut off oxygen" = "kill or cause significant damage", and I'd think that this would be as well known as SIDS. So I did some research. I found out that if you're pregnant and you sleep on your back, there's no problem for the baby; rather, you're putting all the weight of your uterus (and baby and placenta) on your own spine, which is probably not going to be all that hot for your back. I did find out that sleeping on your right side can reduce blood flow to the baby, but in no cases did I find any indication that this would result in damage-level flow reductions. I have not remembered to ask the NP about this one yet, although it was definitely not part of the fairly involved "pregnancy brief" I received after I first got my pregnancy confirmed.

- 3) Ah, the classic: acupuncture helps pregnant women.
---- Anecdotal story from one of the officers in my command: about a week before the baby was due, the baby still hadn't positioned itself head down. The doctors had attemped to push the baby around and that hadn't helped. They were talking c-section, and whatnot, and had casually recommended trying out acupuncture. So the officer and his wife tried it and, voila! the baby shifted to a head-down presentation and was delivered normally. "Did the doctor take any notes about this?" I asked. "No," said the officer. "But it worked for my wife," he said. I said, "it's a pity that your doctor didn't write this down. Because there's no way to tell whether the baby would have just shifted on its own anyway. You'd have to compare lots of situations -- do a study -- to find a correlation." Of course, the officer wasn't happy that I wasn't just taking him at his word, but I stand by my assessment.

I've looked over Quackwatch and there doesn't seem to be anything in particular, except of course the excellent information about acupuncture, bad advice from health food stores, and the time that Gary Young murdered a newborn by keeping it underwater for more than an hour, in what was apparently a form of water birth taken to an extreme.

So, do you experienced parents out there have any stories about various questionable ideas? Of what should I be wary?

Many thanks in advance!

[Slimething]

I'm a guy but my wife had two sons and I was very involved with the medical people during her pregnancies. I've never heard these before so they're probably bunk. I would trust the professionals for advice on these topics. For the sleep thing, I would encourage you to get sleep any way you can as the mechanics of sleeping while "big" get increasingly more difficult as you progress.

BTW, congratulations!

[Boo]

JG,


The bit about not sleeping on your back, there is medically sound reason for this.


From this site:http://www.gynob.com/leftside.htm


Q Why is it better to sleep on your left side when pregnant?

A The answer to this question lies in the anatomy of the abdomen, which has to harbor the ever-increasing uterus as the baby grows. The Vena Cava is the main vein that drains the entire lower half of the body. Anatomically, it lies just to the right of the midline--just on the right side of your spine. As the baby gets bigger, certainly the heavier uterus, lying flat on the Vena Cava will (like stepping on a garden hose) obstruct flow up towards the heart. The drainage of the lower half of the body becomes sluggish, which not only increases the swelling of your ankles, feet, and legs, but will also impact on hemorrhoids as well. And decreased return of blood flow to the heart will cause hypotension (lowered blood pressure) down the line and resulting diminished arterial blood flow to the uterus, placenta, and baby.
Sometimes this hypotension is evident when a woman has an ultrasound, during which she lies flat. One of the symptoms of hypotension is nausea that will accompany the light-headedness. In answer to your question, lying on the back is the worst ossible position in the third trimester. Lying on the right side is better than lying on your back, but lying on your left side is the best of all, because this is the position which will have the least amount of weight upon the Vena Cava.

© Copyright 1999 Gerard M. DiLeo, M.D., F.A.C.O.G.



Boo

[Kahalachan]

I know a woo-watch for breastfeeding. Breastfeeding and intelligence is correlated. Higher intelligence isn't proven to be caused by breastfeeding. I think it's more likely that while the act of breastfeeding releases oxytocin, the mother is more likely to bond with a child and providing the child with a lot of stimuli from a human is the factor in question.

[casebro]

Originally Posted by Boo

JG,


The bit about not sleeping on your back, there is medically sound reason for this.


From this site:http://www.gynob.com/leftside.htm


Q Why is it better to sleep on your left side when pregnant?

A The answer to this question lies in the anatomy of the abdomen, which has to harbor the ever-increasing uterus as the baby grows. The Vena Cava is the main vein that drains the entire lower half of the body. Anatomically, it lies just to the right of the midline--just on the right side of your spine. As the baby gets bigger, certainly the heavier uterus, lying flat on the Vena Cava will (like stepping on a garden hose) obstruct flow up towards the heart. The drainage of the lower half of the body becomes sluggish, which not only increases the swelling of your ankles, feet, and legs, but will also impact on hemorrhoids as well. And decreased return of blood flow to the heart will cause hypotension (lowered blood pressure) down the line and resulting diminished arterial blood flow to the uterus, placenta, and baby.
Sometimes this hypotension is evident when a woman has an ultrasound, during which she lies flat. One of the symptoms of hypotension is nausea that will accompany the light-headedness. In answer to your question, lying on the back is the worst ossible position in the third trimester. Lying on the right side is better than lying on your back, but lying on your left side is the best of all, because this is the position which will have the least amount of weight upon the Vena Cava.

© Copyright 1999 Gerard M. DiLeo, M.D., F.A.C.O.G.



Boo

Yes but: That seems to be on man's opiinion. Here's mine:

Babies are in a water filled sac. Babies are fatty. Fat floats. So, lying on your back will allow the baby to float up, away from the vena cava. I'm familiar with a similar concept, since I sleep on a waterbed. No matter where I sleep on the bed, the load on the floor is the same. Then too, a baby's elbow can poke on things in any position.

Plus, pinch off the vena cava much, and you legs will swell instantly. Other parts of you circulatory system have shunts that allow alternative flow paths, but not the vena cave.

Fall asleep with a pinched vein, and you will wake up and roll over, it happens every night. It's called "My leg went to sleep".

[Lisa Simpson]

Originally Posted by casebro

Yes but: That seems to be on man's opiinion. Here's mine:

Babies are in a water filled sac. Babies are fatty. Fat floats. So, lying on your back will allow the baby to float up, away from the vena cava.

I hope you aren't serious about this.

[Stupendous Man]

I don't know what your water source is like, but I know that here in Ottawa we have safe clean drinking water that is treated by the municipality. Therefore, the act of boiling and sterilizing everything for bottle feeds is completely unnecessary.
Also, our kids have always taken the bottles without having them warmed up first. They like the formula and milk cold (or at least room temp).

Maybe that's not what you meant, but it may help you anyway.

[Boo]

Originally Posted by casebro

Yes but: That seems to be on man's opiinion. Here's mine:

snip...

Actually it's the medical opinion of a physician trained in the practice of Obstetrics and Gynecology. Unless you have equivalent training I'll stick with his opinion.


If your post was intended to be an attempt at sarcasm or wit please use smilies, I can be humor impaired at times.



Boo

[Puppycow]

Originally Posted by Kahalachan

I know a woo-watch for breastfeeding. Breastfeeding and intelligence is correlated. Higher intelligence isn't proven to be caused by breastfeeding. I think it's more likely that while the act of breastfeeding releases oxytocin, the mother is more likely to bond with a child and providing the child with a lot of stimuli from a human is the factor in question.

I wouldn't call that "woo." The evidence may not be conclusive, but neither is it homeopathy we're talking about here.

One meta-study

Quote:

We identified 40 pertinent publications from 1929 to February 2001. Twenty-seven (68%) concluded that breastfeeding promotes intelligence. Many studies, however, had methodological flaws. Only 2 papers studied full-term infants and met all 4 standards of high-quality feeding data, controlled for 2 critical confounders, reported blinding, used an appropriate test, and allowed the reader to interpret the clinical significance of the findings with an effect size. Of these 2, 1 study concluded that the effect of breastfeeding on intellect was significant, and the other did not.

Conclusion. Although the majority of studies concluded that breastfeeding promotes intelligence, the evidence from higher quality studies is less persuasive.

Besides, intelligence is just one of many possible benefits.

[Professor Yaffle]

Originally Posted by Kahalachan

I know a woo-watch for breastfeeding. Breastfeeding and intelligence is correlated. Higher intelligence isn't proven to be caused by breastfeeding. I think it's more likely that while the act of breastfeeding releases oxytocin, the mother is more likely to bond with a child and providing the child with a lot of stimuli from a human is the factor in question.

I am sure that there was some research recently that suggested that the correlation between breastfeeding and intelligence was almost completely explained by more intelligent mothers being more likely to choose breastfeeding. When they controlled for the intelligence of the mother, there was no relation between breastfeeding and intelligence.

Edit to add link: http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstr...583.55v1?rss=1 - but read the rabid responses for criticisms of the study revolving around their (lack of) definition of breastfeeding.

[Professor Yaffle]

Both of my babies were in a posterior position in late pregnancy and I was told by midwives to spend time leaning forward with my hips higher than my knees to encourage the baby to turn. I did it first time round, but second time around I did some research on it and found only a couple of studies on this, neither of which gave any support, so i didn't bother. The baby didn't turn first time around, but did the second time.

[Professor Yaffle]

And the advice about sleeping on your back in late pregnancy, regardless of whether it has a sound basis, is really pointless. If you have ever tried to sleep on your back in late pregnancy, you will know it is extremely %$£%^#*ing uncomfortable and you wouldn't get a wink of sleep like that!

[casebro]

Originally Posted by Boo

Actually it's the medical opinion of a physician trained in the practice of Obstetrics and Gynecology. Unless you have equivalent training I'll stick with his opinion.


If your post was intended to be an attempt at sarcasm or wit please use smilies, I can be humor impaired at times.



Boo

He is different qualifications than I. But judging from the copyright notice, he is giving his own opinion, albeit a professional one. No studies were cited. No reccomendations from any associations. I don't know who he is, but there are quacks who are doctors.

So far as my science, babies do float in fresh water. They would float even better in salty water.

[Lisa Simpson]

So if I filled a trash bag with 8 pounds of solid vegetable shortening and two pounds of water and set it on my stomach, how much weight is resting on me? Two pounds or ten pounds?

[Gilmar]

But even if babies floats upward in the uterus, the combined weight of the baby and uterus can weigh on the vena cava. It's not like the baby is a helium balloon lifting the uterus up from the vein.

[dissonance]

Quote:

Yes but: That seems to be on man's opiinion. Here's mine:

Babies are in a water filled sac. Babies are fatty. Fat floats. So, lying on your back will allow the baby to float up, away from the vena cava.

This could only have been written by someone who was never pregnant. Rather hard to float when the darn baby has pretty much filled up that whole sack. Also, the total weight thing PPs mentioned. Oh, and IIRC, babies only gain much in the way of fat towards the end of the pregnancy, so I'm not sure how well they'd float prior to the third trimester anyway.

The 'don't sleep on your back' thing was something that in the third trimester suddenly made a lot of sense to me - if I spent more than about 10 minutes lying on my back, I would get really, really light headed and start to feel sick. This would be almost immediately relieved by rolling onto my left side. So I didn't lie on my back. Also, lying on my back gave me just deadly heartburn.

What I really don't understand is how most OBs, from what I've heard, will tell you not to sleep on your back - but the moment you arrive at the hospital in labour everyone seems dead set on getting you into a bed for monitoring, an epidural, etc...where you will lie on your back.

As far as woo in pregnancy, I think the most prevalent I heard was the various gender predictions. Morning sickness = girl! Carrying high = boy! etc, etc. You would not believe how many people posting on Babycenter are peeing into toilets full of drano because they read on the internet that the resulting colour will predict the gender. Also, the whole full moon brings on labour myth (? I assume it's probably a myth, although admittedly I haven't actually done much research on it) is really, really prevalent among labour and delivery nurses.

Oh, for some reason people kept offering me homeopathic cures for my 'morning' sickness. I stuck with Diclectin, thank you, which actually works.

[Boo]

Originally Posted by casebro

He is different qualifications than I. But judging from the copyright notice, he is giving his own opinion, albeit a professional one. No studies were cited. No reccomendations from any associations. I don't know who he is, but there are quacks who are doctors.

So far as my science, babies do float in fresh water. They would float even better in salty water.

Studies:

http://bja.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/78/3/317.pdf

http://pt.wkhealth.com/pt/re/anesb/a...856144!8091!-1




Postural position and neurocardiogenic syncope in late pregnancy
The American Journal of Cardiology, Volume 92, Issue 10, 15 November 2003, Pages 1252-1253
Ming-He Huang MD, PhD, William R. Roeske MD, Hong Hu RDCS, Julia H. Indik MD, PhD, and Frank I. Marcus MD.

Abstract: A 23-year-old woman at 34 weeks' gestation developed recurrent syncope due to profound sinus arrest captured on electrocardiography. Syncopal events occurred in the same sitting position. An echocardiogram revealed severe collapse of the inferior vena cava each time the patient changed her posture from a supine to a sitting position, which was related to the syncope.


http://www.anesthesia-analgesia.org/...t/97/1/256.pdf



Your turn.



Boo

[Puppycow]

My wife is Japanese and she drank green tea during both her pregnancies. Both our kids turned out fine. That's just anecdotal but I also know that the Japanese almost all drink green tea and I don't think they have any problems.

[Jackalgirl]

Originally Posted by dissonance

This could only have been written by someone who was never pregnant. Rather hard to float when the darn baby has pretty much filled up that whole sack. Also, the total weight thing PPs mentioned. Oh, and IIRC, babies only gain much in the way of fat towards the end of the pregnancy, so I'm not sure how well they'd float prior to the third trimester anyway.

The 'don't sleep on your back' thing was something that in the third trimester suddenly made a lot of sense to me - if I spent more than about 10 minutes lying on my back, I would get really, really light headed and start to feel sick. This would be almost immediately relieved by rolling onto my left side. So I didn't lie on my back. Also, lying on my back gave me just deadly heartburn.

That's the thing that gets me. It seems to me that if being in x position cuts off blood flow, or hurts, or whatever, you will naturally not want to sit that way. Maybe it has something to do with today's climate of hysteria (i.e., the perception that if you don't present something as an incipent crisis, people won't pay attention), but all of this "Don't do this!" stuff is a no-brainer. At least for the physical posture side of things, in which your body will darn well give you feedback as to what is good and what isn't. Or will it?

Originally Posted by dissonance

What I really don't understand is how most OBs, from what I've heard, will tell you not to sleep on your back - but the moment you arrive at the hospital in labour everyone seems dead set on getting you into a bed for monitoring, an epidural, etc...where you will lie on your back.

Fortunately, even though this is a military hospital in Outer Nowhere (Misawa and, thank you, I like it that way. ; ) ), the staff there seems to be pretty supportive of natural childbirth. There's even a doula on base, whom I will probably be hiring. I've spoken with the OB/GYN folks and they say that even though the hospital isn't quite set up yet the way they want it (they're working on birthing rooms with actual beds, as opposed to the bed-cum-examination-table things they've got now, and homey decorations), they're definitely supportive of women in labor walking around, squatting, using birthing balls, etc., until the very last few minutes of labor, at which point they need them up on the table so they can "catch". Unfortunately, they don't have any bathtubs -- although I agree that having a woman in a tub during the latter portion of labor is a Bad Idea, I think that being able to spend the early stages in some nice warm water could be beneficial. Alas, the hospital doesn't have facilities for that. But, at any rate, the staff have assured me that they're not of the "get in bed the minute you arrive" variety. Good!

Originally Posted by dissonance

As far as woo in pregnancy, I think the most prevalent I heard was the various gender predictions. Morning sickness = girl! Carrying high = boy! etc, etc. You would not believe how many people posting on Babycenter are peeing into toilets full of drano because they read on the internet that the resulting colour will predict the gender. Also, the whole full moon brings on labour myth (? I assume it's probably a myth, although admittedly I haven't actually done much research on it) is really, really prevalent among labour and delivery nurses.

I had not heard of a full moon bringing on labor. That's kind of weird. I suppose they'll cite the tides, or something, but that seems dumb to me. As for the gender prediction stuff, that's already hogwash in my mind -- this is anecdotal, mind you, but I didn't really have much by way of morning sickness (I think I threw up three times, and that was mostly in reaction to encountering some really bad smells). And I'm having a girl. : )

Originally Posted by dissonance

Oh, for some reason people kept offering me homeopathic cures for my 'morning' sickness. I stuck with Diclectin, thank you, which actually works.

Good for you!

Thanks to everyone else who's responded so far; the links to studies are particularly interesting, and give the important lesson that even though a study exists, it's important to find out whether the study was conducted properly, and whether all possible causes were accounted for and controlled for. Boo, thanks for your study links -- if I'm understanding the terminology correctly, it's saying that lying on your back is a problem, yes? And it doesn't talk about lying on your right side at all; all of its references to a "lateral position" involve lying on the left side...

[JoeTheJuggler]

Originally Posted by Boo

Studies:


Postural position and neurocardiogenic syncope in late pregnancy
The American Journal of Cardiology, Volume 92, Issue 10, 15 November 2003, Pages 1252-1253
Ming-He Huang MD, PhD, William R. Roeske MD, Hong Hu RDCS, Julia H. Indik MD, PhD, and Frank I. Marcus MD.

Abstract: A 23-year-old woman at 34 weeks' gestation developed recurrent syncope due to profound sinus arrest captured on electrocardiography. Syncopal events occurred in the same sitting position. An echocardiogram revealed severe collapse of the inferior vena cava each time the patient changed her posture from a supine to a sitting position, which was related to the syncope.


http://www.anesthesia-analgesia.org/...t/97/1/256.pdf



Your turn.

My addition: I was a helper (or "labor coach") for a friend. Her water broke, and the baby was in posterior position (nose facing the ceiling rather than the floor--is that the right term?). Anyway, she was stuck in bed and had unproductive but excruciating labor all night long. They put a monitor on the baby (a gizmo like a sharp spring that they threaded lightly into the skin of its scalp), and anytime mom lay flat on her back, the baby's pulse ox (or whatever it was they were monitoring) dropped, and nurses came running into the room to scold her and make her shift a bit.

Obviously, I'm weak on details, but I know there was something they were monitoring in the baby that showed whenever she was flat on her back.

[JoeTheJuggler]

About green tea: caffeine is the only concern I can think of. Green tea has less than coffee, but it's still some. I would think if you didn't drink LOTS of it, it wouldn't be a big deal.

[Professor Yaffle]

Late in labour with my first baby, he was in distress, and every time his heartrate dipped they got me to roll over to my left side until it came back up again.

[dissonance]

Quote:

Fortunately, even though this is a military hospital in Outer Nowhere (Misawa and, thank you, I like it that way. ; ) ), the staff there seems to be pretty supportive of natural childbirth. There's even a doula on base, whom I will probably be hiring. I've spoken with the OB/GYN folks and they say that even though the hospital isn't quite set up yet the way they want it (they're working on birthing rooms with actual beds, as opposed to the bed-cum-examination-table things they've got now, and homey decorations), they're definitely supportive of women in labor walking around, squatting, using birthing balls, etc., until the very last few minutes of labor, at which point they need them up on the table so they can "catch". Unfortunately, they don't have any bathtubs -- although I agree that having a woman in a tub during the latter portion of labor is a Bad Idea, I think that being able to spend the early stages in some nice warm water could be beneficial. Alas, the hospital doesn't have facilities for that. But, at any rate, the staff have assured me that they're not of the "get in bed the minute you arrive" variety. Good!

Excellent! My local hospital was pretty good - they have every mother file a fill-in-the-blanks hospital birth plan when you come in to do the tour, and they make every effort to assign the natural childbirthing types nurses who have some NCB experience. So I while I did have to lie down for 20 minutes of monitoring when I arrived at the hospital, after that I wasn't in bed again until I got an overwhelming and undeniable urge to lie on the bed. In fact, my nurse was the one who suggested a few different positions to help relieve the back labour.

Of course, it helps that I was only in labour for about 5 hours total! And oh, that remind me of another source of woo - ways to bring on labour. There's a million of them, most of which have dubious support at best (special salads from particular restaurants! spicy food! various homeopathic tinctures!). And the best thing is, eventually something will seem to work, so you'll have a woman who is utterly convinced that her labour was started by the fact she wore her clothes backwards and smelled motor oil fumes or whatever.

[Gbob]

So, just from a non-science standpoint.....

Here's the thing any parent of more than one child will attest to. During your first pregnancy you will be extremely cautious. You will make sure that you have every conceivable item you see in a store that's baby related. When the child is born you will make sure that it's diet, schedule, and upbringing will be "by the book". Your nights will be fulled with worry and anxiety that you're not going to be doing enough as a parent.

By the second child you realize that it's not that big a deal, and that instinct and biology have enabled parents to raise kids for over a hundred thousand years.

Your child will face a million different potentially life ending dangers over the course of it's existence. The danger of a bad diet or sleeping position during pregnancy is mild compared to the danger your child will face when they discover bike riding, power tools and chemistry. How well your child does in school, and how their personality is shaped does not come from the womb, but instead the old standbys of love and discipline.

Not saying you should go get a bottle of whiskey and a pack of smokes, just that doing so would be far less harmful then letting the kid watch too much television or not reading to the kid after they're born.

Then again, worrying too much is part of the fun of your first child. Someday you'll have a good chuckle over the pregnancy. I still get a kick when I go up in attic and see some of the crap we bought. I even have headphones for the womb to play Mozart (hey, that study wasn't debunked until after I bought 'em!)

[sophia8]

Originally Posted by dissonance

Of course, it helps that I was only in labour for about 5 hours total! And oh, that remind me of another source of woo - ways to bring on labour. There's a million of them, most of which have dubious support at best (special salads from particular restaurants! spicy food! various homeopathic tinctures!). And the best thing is, eventually something will seem to work, so you'll have a woman who is utterly convinced that her labour was started by the fact she wore her clothes backwards and smelled motor oil fumes or whatever.

Orgasm is supposed to either bring on labour, or speed labour up once it starts. I never really thought of trying it out before any of my labours started; once I was on labour, getting poked around "down there" was the last thing I wanted!

[Professor Yaffle]

When number 2 baby was almost two weeks late, I had a sweeping of the membranes, then a curry, then sex. I went into labour a couple of hours after the sex, but obviously have no idea if any of them worked, or if I was just going to go then anyway.

[Jackalgirl]

Thanks for the input, everyone, especially the links to studies about being one one's side. Gbob, someone passed around almost exactly what you said to me, but in joke format, which was good, because I was worried about how not worried I was about this whole thing. ; )

So here's another question: my mother just sent me "Childbirth Without Fear" (Michel Odent and Grantly Dick-Read), which I have read. Very interesting (in places), even though it was written in the 50s. The main point is that childbirth need not necessarily be painful; that the pain comes because a) women are told it is painful b) women expect it to be painful and c) because of this and their general fear, their bodies tighten up and they end up, essentially, fighting the mechanisms of childbirth.

I keep hearing people tell me, with relish, how much pain they were in, and "never again without an epidural", and so forth. Interestingly enough, the book mentions this (the propensity of people to take particular delight in telling ghoulish tales of anguish and pain). My mother, on the other hand, said, "it wasn't painful; it was powerful." She actually tore her perineum (sp?) when she gave birth to me -- because the doctor didn't believe I was just about out of her and she tried to hold me in.

These are all anecdotes, of course -- and the book is full of anecdotes of women who gave birth without any particular pain: again, the idea is that childbirth is certainly hard work, but it need not be painful (this is, of course, discounting abnormal births).

From a skeptical point of view, I have to ask that question: why does it have to be painful? Are animals -- primates, especially -- in a particularly huge amount of pain when they give birth (or do they appear to be)? I've never actually paid attention to those few occassions when I've seen animals giving birth (mostly on nature documentaries), but they don't seem to be particularly upset -- no thrashing, no screaming, etc. Aren't we built for this sort of thing? Yeah, it's unusual -- you don't give birth every day -- but I can't see what evolutionary benefit there would be to pain in childbirth, when pain for all other intents and purposes seems to exist to tell us that something is wrong.

I did a quick survey of a couple of online sites about the stages of labor and they uniformly refer to childbirth as painful. So I still don't get it. Is natural, painless childbirth a bunch of woo? Or is the pain brought on by the expectation that there has to be pain? If the latter, is this soley a Judeo-Christian sort of thing ("The Curse of Eve", which as I understand it was a mistranslation anyway), or do other cultures expect childbirth to be painful?

I gotta break out my anthro book references and see what I can find...but what do you think / what do you know?

[Silly Green Monkey]

Humans are fairly unique in that we walk upright, with the narrower pelvis required. We also have very large heads. Narrower pelvises and larger heads make for more difficult deliveries.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by Professor Yaffle

Late in labour with my first baby, he was in distress, and every time his heartrate dipped they got me to roll over to my left side until it came back up again.

Exactly. Yes, it's natural to not sleep on one's back in advanced pregnancy. But during labor, you find yourself in all sorts of positions that would otherwise be uncomfortable, whether it be because someone is attaching a monitor or starting an IV or you are just trying to find a comfortable position and there isn't one. But when the baby's heart rate slows down, the first thing you do is turn the patient on her side.

It is not a myth and it is important. In addition to the research cited above there is also extensive clinical experience with this anatomical issue in any and every OBGYN practice. At some point, if systematically collected and in a sufficient volume, anecdotal evidence actually becomes valid evidence.

[Professor Yaffle]

I think the fact that some people don't have much pain doesn't really tell us much ab out whether childbirth "has to be" painful. The process seems to be different in every case. The difference between my first and second labours was huge. Someone I know had 2 non painful contractions then promptly gave birth, but that doesn't mean that this is what would happen to everyone if only they were more relaxed.

I have no doubt that psychological factors make a big difference to your experience of pain, but telling people that if they are in the right state of mind and bodily relaxation then it won't hurt will just lead to a lot of very disappointed women who will be convinced that they must have done it wrong because it hurt like hell!

I did a lot more of the relaxation/visualisation stuff with baby number one, and I thought I was going to die from the pain - I had a back labour and became exhausted from a very long labour that kept stalling. The second time was much quicker and while the contractions still hurt like hell, I didn't have much time to worry about it because we were in such a rush to get to the hospital before baby popped out. Relaxation techniques went out the window as i was just trying not to fall off the back seat of the car as we hurtled round corners! I suppose the distraction from the pain helped!

Interestingly, although I remember "that" it hurt like hell and I remember thinking I was going to die, and I couldn't possibly get through another contraction - I don't actually remember the pain itself and what it felt like at the time. I think that is natures way of tricking you into doing it again!

[Skeptic Ginger]

Er..about that pain thing, anyone who thinks it's all about expectations has obviously never given birth to a baby.

But epidurals get you through a lot of it, and when it's over, you soon forget all about it. You can't do anything about it now, so no sense worrying about it.

I expected to walk around in labor for an hour or so, go in and pop that baby out. 56 (or was it 58?) hours after my labor started, no sleep, painful pitocin drip and forceps later, my little bundle arrived. No bonding, off to the ICU, he didn't tolerate that extended labor either. But in a day he was fine and a couple weeks ago he turned 18. Yes, it was that fast...that's the other thing...

[Professor Yaffle]

Originally Posted by skeptigirl

Er..about that pain thing, anyone who thinks it's all about expectations has obviously never given birth to a baby.

But epidurals get you through a lot of it, and when it's over, you soon forget all about it. You can't do anything about it now, so no sense worrying about it.

I expected to walk around in labor for an hour or so, go in and pop that baby out. 56 (or was it 58?) hours after my labor started, no sleep, painful pitocin drip and forceps later, my little bundle arrived. No bonding, off to the ICU, he didn't tolerate that extended labor either. But in a day he was fine and a couple weeks ago he turned 18. Yes, it was that fast...that's the other thing...

Sounds very similar to my first one - although I got off lightly with only about 40 hours... Little one didnt have to go to ICU, but I had to stay in hospital for a week because the epidural gave me a dural tap and i got the associated (excruciating) headache that comes from your spinal fluid leaking out through the hole!

Honestly, although I think they mean well, I think the natural, no pain people can do a lot of harm. I know someone who really got into it when she was pregnant, but who had a really painful labour and ended up with an epidural. It took her a long time to get over the feeling that she had "failed".

[Jackalgirl]

Well, I'm certainly willing to take pain medication if I have to -- I'm no luddite. But I'd rather avoid it. I don't want to be doped up. I don't want the baby to be doped up. I am not at all keen about the idea of an open hole into my spine. I /really/ don't want to have anything to do with pitocin. What I really /really/ don't want, though, is people in the hospital telling me what I want, or telling me I have to have some kind of intervention for their own convenience, or telling me that I /have/ to have medication because /they/ feel bad. How do I sort out BS advice from good advice?

[fls]

Originally Posted by Jackalgirl

So here's another question: my mother just sent me "Childbirth Without Fear" (Michel Odent and Grantly Dick-Read), which I have read. Very interesting (in places), even though it was written in the 50s. The main point is that childbirth need not necessarily be painful; that the pain comes because a) women are told it is painful b) women expect it to be painful and c) because of this and their general fear, their bodies tighten up and they end up, essentially, fighting the mechanisms of childbirth.

I'm sorry. I can't give you a proper answer to this because I'm too busy Laughing My F***ing A** Off.

However, it is good to look to your (biological) mother when trying to guess what your experience will be like. I like her use of the word "powerful".

Linda

[Professor Yaffle]

I think the best attitude to have going into labour is that you want/don't want certain things, but you reserve the right to change your mind at any moment! I went in with a similar attitude to you, that I didn't want certain pain meds or an epidural. When it came to the point where they have me the syntocynon (??) drip and told me it would probably hurt even more intensely from now on, nobody could have dissuaded me from getting an epidural at that point, and it helps that you don't feel you have to beat yourself up about it or justify it to yourself.

Second time, they didn't even have time to get the gas and air out!

[FarSideOfTheMoon]

Originally Posted by sophia8

Orgasm is supposed to either bring on labour, or speed labour up once it starts. I never really thought of trying it out before any of my labours started; once I was on labour, getting poked around "down there" was the last thing I wanted!

I heard recently that there is a hormone in sperm which softens the cervix, so there might be some truth in the 'having sex brings on delivery' one.

My wife is 8 months pregnant, and woo is a big thing amongst pregnant woman. It is subtly reinforced however by medical staff and midwives - i think their attitude is that anything that helps as a distraction is good in their eyes.

The latest one I heard was to drink raspberry team after 36 weeks, because that will bring on labour.

The other biggie, is the TENS machines. The positively encourage these at our local hospital. However when I said I didn't think there was any benefit, they started talking about how they work well as a distraction. I think they are all very familiar with the literature, however as I say they will encourage anything which isn't harmful. Every woman I know who has used a TENS machine in labour has ripped it off once the real pain starts, seemingly.

[Jackalgirl]

Originally Posted by fls

I'm sorry. I can't give you a proper answer to this because I'm too busy Laughing My F***ing A** Off.

However, it is good to look to your (biological) mother when trying to guess what your experience will be like. I like her use of the word "powerful".

Linda

Why are you laughing?

[fls]

Originally Posted by Jackalgirl

Well, I'm certainly willing to take pain medication if I have to -- I'm no luddite. But I'd rather avoid it. I don't want to be doped up. I don't want the baby to be doped up. I am not at all keen about the idea of an open hole into my spine. I /really/ don't want to have anything to do with pitocin. What I really /really/ don't want, though, is people in the hospital telling me what I want, or telling me I have to have some kind of intervention for their own convenience, or telling me that I /have/ to have medication because /they/ feel bad. How do I sort out BS advice from good advice?

This is my advice, based on experience on both sides (I'm not an Ob/Gyn, but I've delivered about a hundred babies). I'm reluctant to add to any fear and anxiety by saying this, especially since after it's over the actual pain becomes (relatively) unimportant. However, ultimately, I think knowledge is the best way to counteract negative expectations.

I've had four babies. I had an epidural for the first (partially effective) and nothing for the other three. I had an attitude very similar to yours. I didn't want nothing for the last three, but I held out as long as possible and ended up asking for something at a point where things progressed very quickly anyway (no point to taking anything and no time regardless).

Despite trying to stay calm and in control, and being willing to work through pain, you can reach a point where it's too much. You begin to lose control; panic and fear can set in. You probably won't reach that point (especially taking into consideration your mother), but it's best to prepare beforehand for the possibility. Discuss the options and decide what you are comfortable using. Not all hospitals are set up to provide an epidural quickly - find out how long it will take so you know how long you can wait before asking. I think that just knowing that relief is possible often prevents one from becoming overwhelmed.

You will get through it. And there is far more to the experience than pain. I think we relish talking about that aspect (after it's over, of course ) because it becomes part of the sense of accomplishment and pride.

Linda

[Jackalgirl]

Originally Posted by Professor Yaffle

...When it came to the point where they have me the syntocynon (??) drip and told me it would probably hurt even more intensely from now on...

What drip is this? It's the first I've heard of it. You're not talking about pitocin, are you? From what I've read, pitocin really increases the pain of contractions. If it's not prying too much, why were you given this drip?

[fls]

Originally Posted by Jackalgirl

Why are you laughing?

Because you realize that it's an incredibly silly claim if you've ever had the experience.

Linda