Pregnancy starts two weeks prior to conception

76 posts in this topic

Life is a mystery, everyone must stand alone , I hear you call my name , and it feels like home ...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Here is some news out of Japan.

Nobody cares actually.

 

That's terrible.

Now, back to the US. I guess what stimulates more people to discuss the US is the drama involved. Probably very few people in Japan care about this subject anyway, or don't make it into a public spectacle. In the US everyone has an opinion and prefers to share it with the whole world rather than keep quiet. Not that there's anything wrong with that but it does mean you're going to get a much livelier discussion and an exchange of opinions on the airwaves and elsewhere. Plus, the US is full of 'interesting' personalities to keep us going.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any country seems dramatic if your main sources of news are agitprop and tabloids.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Perhaps, but pregnancy begins with actual conception (fertilization of an egg), not with the end date of the previous menstruation.

 

Biologically yes. Medically no.

 

The timeline of a pregnancy goes by the number of "weeks pregnant" the mother is. And this is measured from the end date of the previous menstuation.

 

In ante-natal classes it was explained to us that the woman is ironically about two weeks pregnant when she conceives. Cue muted giggles from the assembled parents to be. The 12 and 20 week scans happen not 20 weeks after ovulation, but 12 and 20 weeks since the last period.

 

My son was born at 33 weeks- that is 7 weeks early. This was 33 weeks to the day since my wife's previous period.

 

The law is not bad because it uses the standard medical measure for the length of pregnancy instead of a more precise scientific one, but because the limit it sets is too low. Maybe they've used a different measure to other parts of the US to obscure how low it is, but it is a legitimate medical measurement of length of pregnancy.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The formula "First day of last menstrual cycle plus seven days, count back three months" is used to determine when the baby is due. But a woman is not pregnant until the ovum has been fertilized. As this cannot occur until the woman has ovulated, generally in the middle of the average 28-day cycle, it is ludicrous to say she is pregnant before she has even ovulated.

 

Edit: Sorry, it's a long time since I had personal need of the formula. Since the date of conception isn't always easy to determine, the formula is used for convenience. But I still don't understand how a woman can be a Schroedinger cat for two weeks.

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOYyCHGWJq4

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean obviously a woman is not actually bilogically, physically and in any real sense pregnant before she ovulates, that would be absurd, and I'm very clearly not arguing that. But when a woman is said to be 12 weeks pregnant, two of those weeks are before conception, it's not 12 weeks of actual physical pregnancy: it's about 10 weeks of pregnancy and 2 weeks of not actually being pregnant. That's how it's measured. Week 40 is when the baby is due, but the gestation of a human being is only 38 weeks.

 

When my son was born he was 33 weeks, but it was only 31 weeks since his conception (give or take a day or so).

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/health/tools/pregnancy_calendar/week.shtml?due=%28none%29&week=1

 

 

Pregnancy dates from the first day of your last period, so for the first two weeks of pregnancy you're not actually pregnant! If you're planning to fall pregnant, try to eat well and include food rich in folates, (or leafy green veggies) and take folic acid supplements too - this helps prevent defects such as spina bifida. Oh and if you're trying for a baby, make sure you try really hard by having lots and lots of sex! It'll help get you fit too, as pregnancy can be physically demanding. If you don't already exercise, why not take up a spot of yoga or swimming? It will only help prepare your body for the months ahead - not to mention the birth.

Measuring a pregnancy on a 40 week calendar starting at the last day of the last period is the usual way of doing things.

 

I mean I'm really only echoing what Bloomings said- which was 100% spot on.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Responding to bit added:

 

 

Since the date of conception isn't always easy to determine, the formula is used for convenience. But I still don't understand how a woman can be a Schroedinger cat for two weeks.

 

She isn't. She's shroedinger's cat between trying for a baby and the hormones getting strong enough to show on the pregnancy test. (Until the 12 week scan after a miscarriage :( )

 

You've put the nail on the head. The standard formula is a convenience. The problem is that people who are unaware of the formula and calendar are misinterpreting the measurement used in this bill. "Ho ho ho these idiots are saying a woman is two weeks pregnant before she conceives". No, they're not, that's they way it is normally measured, that's just done for convenience, it is NOT saying she is actually pregnant two weeks before conception.

 

There is a real problem with the bill itself, and that is that they've switched one way of measuring the length of pregnancy for another, but (I think) not changed the number of the limits to take that into account. They've tried to lower the limit by changing how the length of pregnancy is measured and hoping no-one notices.

 

Using the calendar generated by the standard formula isn't a problem, it's a perfectly legitimate way of measuring. Switching to that calendar in order to obscure a reduction of the abortion limit is.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The one who wants to play the lead doesn't get applasue only. Gosssip, malice etc are inevitable. Why do you complain?

 

Now you are just regurgitating the guiding principles of the Neidgesellschaft.

 

If someone is doing better than you, by all means you should go for their throat. :lol:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THE claims of Representative Todd Akin that women don’t get pregnant from “legitimate rape” now live in infamy. But a few things you may not know - read on - It's frightening.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/02/opinion/sunday/kristof-scaring-the-voters-in-the-middle.html?_r=2&smid=fb-share

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Requiring women to carry and give birth to babies who they (and their drs) know will die almost immediately. Incredibly horrifyig.

 

Wonder how many of the supporters of this law and of similar restrictions would actually be prepared to take care of the babies, whether sick or healthy, they claim to want to save. Not in theory, but in practice. If they were left on their doorstep, how would they react?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I asked my tea bagger sister during the election season in '08, if she believed in abortion? No, she said.

I then asked, what about after a rape or incest? No. She didn't believe in it.

 

I then asked what if her daughter who is 28, naturally blond, blue eyed and easily prettier than some of the models in magazines, got raped; Would you force her to have that rapists' baby? She got mad at me for asking such a horrible question and refused to answer it.

 

That's how they are. Until they are put in that situation, they will pass judgment on someone else but won't admit they would be rushing that poor beautiful daughter to planned parenthood so fast, your head would spin. Let me just qualify this; my sister listens to Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity (Fox) every day. We don't discuss politics any more.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This measuring point thing is all very well but how are they going to confirm it to see whether you're allowed to have an abortion or not?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now