100 smokin' babes.
-
-D.
ICQ: 202-96-31 -
"Most"... sure.
Since we're now dwelling on the issue, maybe a point worth clearing up with you, as well, is the egg isn't a "part" of the woman's body... the egg is "produced by" the woman's body.
But yes... "most" varieties of parasites don't grow from eggs produced by the host's own body. You are correct.Last edited by D; 03-13-2008, 11:24 AM.-D.
ICQ: 202-96-31Comment
-
I think the baby needs to get a new momComment
-
The thing is, most of those "authors" are doctors. What are your credentials again?
And, one paper or test result may not be "gospel" as you say, but when there are thousands of studies done that corroborate those findiings I'm sorry but how can that not far outweigh the ridiculous arguments of a few smokers?
I'm the one that should be saying that to you, gunni and the like. That google search I posted leads to thousands of links on hundreds of sites, many of them accredited official medical sources, yet *you* in all your wisdom say it's not enough, it's all to be doubted and questioned. Why? So you can justify smoking during pregnancy? If that's not the reason then why pray tell are you arguing with me?
Hallelujah.
It's parts of your posts like this that tell me you simply aren't reading what's being said. If you had you'd know that drinking has already been mentioned and covered in this thread by several including myself.
Not really. It's not "a glass or two" that is the problem, it's women who get drunk while pregnant, and it happens a lot. Stop minimizing the problem. What's being said in this thread by virtually 90% or more of those who posted is actually damn good advice. I have no idea why you'd want to sit there and be resisting it, aside from the fact that you're a smoker and want to defend it.
Most of those sites, the studies, the tests, etc have nothing whatsoever to do with "the media".
Those conclusions you say you're drawing so objectively seem to me to be for the most part completely and utterly self-serving (because you're a smoker) and incorrect. Why would someone not want their kid to have as many advantages as possible to start off their life with? I really don't get people like you, it makes no sense.
Why not put down the cancer sticks for a while and do some actual reading on the subject?Promote Wildmatch, ImLive, Sexier.com, and more!!
ALWAYS THE HIGHEST PAYOUTS: Big Bux/ImLive SIGNUP ON NOW!!!
Put some PUSSYCA$H in your pocket. ICQ me at: 31024634Comment
-
Dictionary has the same definition that I posted.
"an organism that lives on or in an organism of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment. " - http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/parasite
Fetus is a symbiont. Calling a fetus a parasite is a stretch.Comment
-
Here is something on the car fumes and pregnacy smoking is bad but so is going into a congested city or driving a car
Carbon monoxide (CO) is a colorless, odorless and tasteless gas that suffocates the body by taking oxygen?s place in the bloodstream. CO poisoning symptoms?headache, dizziness, confusion, nausea, shortness of breath?mimic those of the common flu, confusing diagnosis. For example, a quarter of patients complaining of flu-like symptoms at the University of Louisville Medical Center actually had CO poisoning, one study found.
Pregnant women, developing fetuses, and newborns absorb CO into their bloodstream at even higher rates than others, according to a report by the University of Arizona School of Public Health.
Effects on fetuses and neonates: CO crosses the placenta by simple diffusion and
fetus? COHb depends on maternal COHb concentrations. However, fetal HB has a
higher affinity for CO than adult HB, and fetal intoxication can not be assessed by
maternal COHb (1,7,8). Maternal COHB levels in non-smokers range between 0.7%
and 1.0% whereas fetal blood COHb levels range between 0.7% and 2.5%. Maternal
smoking during pregnancy exposes the fetus to grater than normal concentration of
CO and COHb of 2.0-8.3% and COHb of 2.4-7.6% can be found in maternal and fetal
blood respectively. To date, few studies have investigated the effects on ambient CO
levels and low birth weigh (LBW). The majority of the studies have been focused on
the relationship between LBW and smoking during pregnancy (1,7,10). Recently, Ritz
and Yu (28) evaluated the effects of CO exposures during the last trimester of
pregnancy on the frequency of LBW among neonates born 1989-1999 to women
living in the Los Angeles, California, area. They found exposure to more than 5.5
ppm CO during the last trimester of pregnancy, and it was associated with a 22%
increase in LBW.
some more info on car fumes
http://healthychild.org/resources/ar...s_in_your_car/
and everyday household hazards
http://www.babyminestore.com/newshou...pregnancy.htmlComment
-
www.smokingwhilepregnant.org ---
"Even drinking one glass of wine or beer during pregnancy can cause complications. It is better to refrain completely from drinking alcohol until further studies have been performed on light drinking during pregnancy."
There goes that argument. I see no mixed message there.
From medicinenet.com: http://www.medicinenet.com/script/ma...ticlekey=83346 ---
Smoking while pregnant causes birth defencts.
From sciencedaily.com -- http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0106122922.htm
More about potential defects.
From netdoctor.co.uk: http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/health_ad...antsmoking.htm
"Why is it harmful to smoke during pregnancy?
A baby in the womb gets everything from its mother. Nutrients and oxygen come via the placenta and umbilical cord. Smoking not only exposes the foetus to toxins in tobacco smoke, but it also damages placental function.
When a person smokes, some of the oxygen in their blood is replaced by carbon monoxide. If a pregnant woman smokes, her blood and therefore her child's blood will contain less oxygen than normal. This can cause the foetal heart rate to rise as baby struggles to get enough oxygen."
drspock.com: http://www.drspock.com/faq/0,1511,2415,00.html ---
"Smokers have more miscarriages than non-smokers. It is tragic to see women who are grieving over their lost pregnancy and at the same time blaming themselves for its occurrence. You never want to be in a position to say "if only I had taken better care of this pregnancy, this bad outcome wouldn't have occurred." It is better to quit up front than wait until you have to deal with this kind of situation."
Hello? How much proof do you need? Only a smoker could sit there and remain unconvinced.
Shall I go on?Promote Wildmatch, ImLive, Sexier.com, and more!!
ALWAYS THE HIGHEST PAYOUTS: Big Bux/ImLive SIGNUP ON NOW!!!
Put some PUSSYCA$H in your pocket. ICQ me at: 31024634Comment
-
You are totally missing my point.
I do not in any way shape or form deny these statistics. Smoking while pregnant is dangerous for the unborn child. Smoking is dangerous to the smoker and those around them.
My point was the risks you gave can equally be applied to many things. The pregnant woman in the 21st century puts the foetus at so many risks every day, if we are to blindly believe all these studies, that it's a wonder human society will ever succeed in surviving.
But it does.
1 or 2 glasses while drinking - sure they can put the foetus at risk, but so can excercise, yet lots of women in the first trimester excercise regularly and at the same pace as when not pregnant.
1 or 2 cigarettes - sure they can put the fetus at risk, but so can walking around NYC or London or Beijing on a sunny day when ground-level ozone is at maximum.
In life, pregnant or not, there are risks. Lots of people take vitamin supplements during life and pregnancy. Why? Just eat a balanced diet.
You are misreading my posts...
For coding work - hit me up on andy // borkedcoder // com
(consider figuring out the email as test #1)
All models are wrong, but some are useful. George E.P. Box. p202Comment
-
hmmm I see a niche here maybe... Joking.Comment
-
[disclaimer for cdsmith]not that I'm saying anti-smoking sites use biased study citations, nor are the studies demonstrating smoking and disease (whether or not pregnant) are FUD, but...[/disclaimer]
If I wanted to cite studies to spread FUD, it's really easy - here are valid, peer reviewed studies by real doctors...
A maternal 'junk food' diet in pregnancy and lactation promotes an exacerbated taste for 'junk food' and a greater propensity for obesity in rat offspring.
SOURCE
Effects of pelvic floor muscle training during pregnancy.
SOURCE
Leisure time physical exercise during pregnancy and the risk of miscarriage: a study within the Danish National Birth Cohort.
SOURCE
and I didn't have to try hard searching pubmed for those -
here's a great one:
Obstetricians pay much attention to the diet and environment of the pregnant woman in prenatal care, but perhaps the woman's work also may affect pregnancy outcome. All women work in the home in addition to any work performed outside the home. The former component needs careful assessment; to get from home to work may be itself a stressful experience. In the workplace, women may encounter specific hazards of radiation or chemicals. More widespread are the problems of fatigue and boredom, which need careful assessment in relation to the outcome of pregnancy. These factors should be measured more precisely, thus allowing the physician to advise pregnant women better about the safe duration of work. Currently, advice tends to be overly cautious, as physicians are uncertain of the data on which such standards are based.
For coding work - hit me up on andy // borkedcoder // com
(consider figuring out the email as test #1)
All models are wrong, but some are useful. George E.P. Box. p202Comment
-
No, I don't think I am. I think you are attempting to minimize the problem, and I think you're doing so because you are a smoker and want to defend it and rationalize it by citing other dangers, as if there is some sort of hypocrisy going on. There isn't.
Of course women (and their menfolk) should do what they can to eliminate other obvious dangers like trying to avoide breathing in exhaust, paint fumes, excessive dust and pollution, etc etc etc.
No one is saying there aren't other risks, but smoking is an avoidable one that is proven to raise all sorts of health risks by a frightening margin. It is not something that as you say "can be applied equally in risk" to most of the other day to day risks. Even the lightest of reading on the subject shows that in many areas it is the #1 cause of certain problems.
If you agree with my point, then why not just agree?
Realize, don't minimize. :DPromote Wildmatch, ImLive, Sexier.com, and more!!
ALWAYS THE HIGHEST PAYOUTS: Big Bux/ImLive SIGNUP ON NOW!!!
Put some PUSSYCA$H in your pocket. ICQ me at: 31024634Comment
-
For coding work - hit me up on andy // borkedcoder // com
(consider figuring out the email as test #1)
All models are wrong, but some are useful. George E.P. Box. p202Comment
-
Like I've already posted, no one is saying there aren't other health risks and bad behaviors.
But your entire argument smacks of you saying "why just single out smoking when there are all this other stuff".... as if people are being hypocritical or something. That's not the case here at all. But the fact is, as far as doing damage to one's unborn child goes, smoking is about the most selfish, inconsiderate, and potentially destructive of them all. Some of the other things mentioned are also avoidable, yes, and plenty of pregnant women do avoid them. Some are just there in society and are more difficult (but not impossible) to avoid.
Smoking is one of the worst, as is obvious by the links posted, and it's completely avoidable.
It's about putting your baby's welfare before your own selfish needs. Some have the sense to do it, many don't.Promote Wildmatch, ImLive, Sexier.com, and more!!
ALWAYS THE HIGHEST PAYOUTS: Big Bux/ImLive SIGNUP ON NOW!!!
Put some PUSSYCA$H in your pocket. ICQ me at: 31024634Comment
-
WOW - degree in reading between the lines per chance?
Simply because of the outrageous aggression displayed against pregnant smokers on page 1. The vast majority of them being men, I might add.
I was simply playing devil's advocat, because it required it, simply because of the stupid half-baked aggressive replies. Sarah doesn't know the life of that mother-to-be who was smoking. Perhaps she was there for a checkup after a car accident the week before in which she lost her husband and just needed a smoke.
When pregnant niche pics come up on this forum, people go "i'd hit it" etc, and surprisingly very very little if any resistance to the outright absurdity and selfishness displayed by that mother-to-be.
That is what I meant when I said "think out of the box", which seemed to get your feathers ruffled.
BTW, are you one of those guys that if, in a parallel universe, came to my house and I lit up a cigar, would tut and/or make some remark about passive smoking and/or go outside?
For coding work - hit me up on andy // borkedcoder // com
(consider figuring out the email as test #1)
All models are wrong, but some are useful. George E.P. Box. p202Comment
-
For coding work - hit me up on andy // borkedcoder // com
(consider figuring out the email as test #1)
All models are wrong, but some are useful. George E.P. Box. p202Comment
-
No, just perceptive by nature. :D
Enough excuses. There IS no excuse for it. Period. Again, stop justifying. You've already admitted that it is a bad idea to smoke while pregnant and that you personally wouldn't do it.
Posing for pics poses no health risks to the fetus I'm aware of. If I saw any of them smoking I'm sure more than a few people would comment about it.
It was a stupid comment. You presumed too think that I'm not considering the larger scope of the issue, which isn't the case. The way I see it, you and those arguing with me are the ones who have the narrow agenda and can't think outside the box. (aka: the cig carton)
Not at all. Although I've always been for the most part a non-smoker, over the years (especially through the 80's and 90's) I have partied and drank or otherwise been in the same room with probably thousands of smokers.
What I take issue with are preggers who smoke, obviously, and people on welfare or who are otherwise poor who will think nothing of spending their last $100 bucks on smokes yet let their kids go hungry because they have no grocery money.
You bet shit like that bothers me.Promote Wildmatch, ImLive, Sexier.com, and more!!
ALWAYS THE HIGHEST PAYOUTS: Big Bux/ImLive SIGNUP ON NOW!!!
Put some PUSSYCA$H in your pocket. ICQ me at: 31024634Comment
-
Promote Wildmatch, ImLive, Sexier.com, and more!!
ALWAYS THE HIGHEST PAYOUTS: Big Bux/ImLive SIGNUP ON NOW!!!
Put some PUSSYCA$H in your pocket. ICQ me at: 31024634Comment
-
I think: not my business
Poor child but you cannot choose your parents unfortunately, and the child will have a better life than being born in a 3rd world country for example. So who am I to judge? That's part of the universe, you will have very smart parents who's children only get healthy food etc. and the opposite with uneducated parents ...Comment
-
Promote Wildmatch, ImLive, Sexier.com, and more!!
ALWAYS THE HIGHEST PAYOUTS: Big Bux/ImLive SIGNUP ON NOW!!!
Put some PUSSYCA$H in your pocket. ICQ me at: 31024634Comment
-
This is the absolute bottom line
This is why it doesn't bother me. When I see parents in McDonalds feeding their fat kids, do I want to go over and give them a piece of my mind? No, cos it's none of my business. Full stop.
If someone wants to come and have a go at me about how I treat my kids or whatever, fine. I'll say the same thing time and time again - piss off cos it's none of your business.
For coding work - hit me up on andy // borkedcoder // com
(consider figuring out the email as test #1)
All models are wrong, but some are useful. George E.P. Box. p202Comment
-
Strange that they'd insert "of another species" in there.
But since this is now a discussion of semantics, scroll down one block on the same entry you quoted.
An actual dictionary (American Heritage Dictionary) - not just a website definition _based_ on a dictionary... quotes the following as the biological definition.
"par·a·site (pār'ə-sīt') Pronunciation Key
n.
1. Biology An organism that grows, feeds, and is sheltered on or in a different organism while contributing nothing to the survival of its host."
It is noted as the biological definition - on the same page, and by a more valid source... and biology's the subject we're discussing here... or at least all that I'm discussing. No mention of the symbiont needing to be from another species there.
On that point, you acknowledged that it is a symbiont - which I never denied. Of course it's a symbiont. A parasite is a _type_ of symbiont. On the subject of symbionts, I'll quote a text from my library:
"Symbiotic relationships are categorized as either mutualism, commensalism, or parasitism" (Campbell 545).
Out of those 3 choices, how would you define the symbiotic relationship? It's not mutualistic... just ask any pregnant woman how her morning sickness feels or how much energy she's lacking. It's not commensalistic... the baby certainly benefits from the exchange. Since there's only 3, that leaves one left: parasitic.
Still, with the contrasting popular definitions, I guess you're free to interpret it as you will.
The point only has to do with my other posts on this thread peripherally, but still remains no less valid, and I apologize it it offends any of your sensibilities... but calling the observation that a fetus is a parasite a "stretch?" I think many biologists might disagree with you. I know I do.
--
Work Cited
Campbell, Neil A., Jane B, Reece. Biology. 7th ed. San Francisco: Pearson, Benjamin Cummings. 2005.Last edited by D; 03-13-2008, 02:45 PM.-D.
ICQ: 202-96-31Comment
-
She's not capable of being a mother... why the hell did she put herself in that situation if she can't bear with it!
[Web Design | Development | Programming | Content Writing ]
ICQ: 238-890-469Comment
-
only on GFY discussions like this can go on and on
Comment
-
I'll concede the biological definition, although I think the biological definition leaves a lot to be desired. And it's true, it's just a matter of semantics because surely biologists could create a new term/category for a fetus because it differs from the most common parasites in that it's created and nurtured (usually voluntarily) by the host, and contributes to the survival of the species (for without fetuses developing into humans, the human species would die out).
I think that both the social and legal definitions contrast with the biological definition, so I think they're germane to the discussion.Comment
-
I am sure most of us get that to a degree. Hence why there was a hush in the waiting room rather than people storming outside to yell at her.This is the absolute bottom line
This is why it doesn't bother me. When I see parents in McDonalds feeding their fat kids, do I want to go over and give them a piece of my mind? No, cos it's none of my business. Full stop.
If someone wants to come and have a go at me about how I treat my kids or whatever, fine. I'll say the same thing time and time again - piss off cos it's none of your business.
Though I can only take the 'not my business' so far. For example, seeing kids get smacked around in public always gets me.Comment
-
Over-feeding kids is a good point. It poses tremendous health risks to kids but the outrage isn't the same. I guess you can't really stop bad parents from being bad parents.Comment
-
yes i agree i think it should be against the lawComment
-
"ah.. population control at work"ICQ: 16544251 - Skype: gator37 @ eastlink.ca - email: yngwie @ isys.caComment
-
she's prolly putting her son/daughter at risk.
.
So Far, So Good
ICQ: 236-396-443
Search Engine Optimizer
Comment
-
Comment
-
Wow at the replies in here.
Its not a good idea, but its her body.IW
Skype : blance8888
Icq : 15567120Comment
-
Me too. I don't even like kids but I get overtaken by this blind rage when I see someone hitting a kid. Once, as I was walking into a grocery store with a friend, I happened to glance behind me just in time to see a mom pull her kid around the other side of another entry area where she thought no one could see and hit him on the side of the face about three times, HARD. The kid immediately started screaming of course (he was maybe 4 or 5) and then she hit him again for that. For a minute I felt like I was in slow motion and then I just launched at her, screaming I don't even know what and making threats. I think she just about shit her pants, she didn't see me coming. My friend ended up pulling me away and then the kid and mom got into a car and left. It all happened so fast and afterwards, I wished I had handled it differently but there you are.gone. long gone.
aylasquareturtle .."a"t".. gmail dawt comComment
-
I think: Their kid is going to hate them if they have birth defects from smoking.
Mom likes smoking more than a little extra reassurance her baby will be ok and will not quit.
Something in the head is not working right, and Mom doesn't think straight. Poor baby.
and glad its not my life... that's what I think.Comment
-
It is partially because if that is the level she will dish out in public you have to wonder what is happening in private.
It isn't just physical violence either...I can't tell you how many times in this area I hear parents really verbally laying into their young kids with the most fowl language in public. I hear some "mom" yelling for no really serious reason stuff like 'get fucking here you fucking brat, you have no fucking respect, blah blah' and the kids are always barely out of diapers or still in them. I can't help but think (and often have muttered loudly) that no wonder they have no respect because you treat them like crap.Comment
Comment