Why I am raging at the World Prematurity Day facebook page..

[Queen of Serpents]

The Human Rights and Scientific Honesty Initiative, University of Virginia The epidemic will continue as long as people continue to be purposefully blind on behalf of their political agendas.

"Previous abortion is a significant risk factor for Low Birth Weight and Preterm Birth, and the risk increases with the increasing number of previous abortions. Practitioners should consider previous abortion as a risk factor for LBW and PB. "

Virginia Commonwealth University study as printed in the British Medical Journal.

"Induced and spontaneous abortion are associated with similarly increased ORs for preterm birth in subsequent pregnancies, and they vary inversely with the baseline preterm birth rate, explaining some of the variability among studies"

Journal of Reproductive Medicine

"Women with a history of induced abortion were at higher risk of very preterm delivery than those with no such history (OR + 1.5, 95% CI 1.1–2.0); the risk was even higher for extremely preterm deliveries (<28 weeks)"

British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology

"This study shows that a history of induced abortion increases the risk of very preterm birth, particularly extremely preterm deliveries. It appears that both infectious and mechanical mechanisms may be involved." This study showed that women who gave birth between 28 and 32 weeks of pregnancy were 40% more likely to have had a previous abortion, and mothers who gave birth to extremeley preterm infants from 22 to 27 weeks were 70% more likely to have had an abortion.

French Study of 2837 preterm births conducted by "pro choice" researcher Caroline Moreau.

"A consent form that simply lists such items as "incompetent cervix" or "infection" as potential complications, but does not inform women of the elevated future risk of a preterm delivery, and that the latter constitutes a risk factor for devastating complications such as

cerebral palsy, may not satisfy courts"

Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons

"Previous induced abortions significantly increased the risk of preterm delivery after idiopathic preterm labour, preterm premature rupture of membranes and ante-partum haemorrhage, but not preterm delivery after maternal hypertension. The strength of the association increased with decreasing gestational age at birth."

European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology

"The latest statistics in the USA (2007) show a preterm (less than 37 weeks) birth rate of 12.6%. Of these, Early Preterm Birth (EPB—under 32 weeks, infants weighing under 1500 grams, or about three pounds.) is at 7.8%, the highest rate in the past 30 years of stats. As noted in the studies above, previous induced abortions’ have an inordinately increased association with “extreme†(<27 wk) and “earlyâ€(<32 wk) premature deliveries (compared to 32 – 37 week premature births.) Thus, it follows that abortion will also have an inordinately increased association with cerebral palsy and other disabilities linked to extreme prematurity."

American Association of Pro Life

Obstetricians and Gynecologists

(This is the comment under the myths and misconceptions about preterm birth link. A link that mentions that there are no real causes of preterm birth, only risk factors.)

My response:

While this information is important, my worry is that it will shame women into carrying a child that cannot be supported. An ob/gyn should inform me of complications and respect me as a patient. (speaking as a prochoice adult who was born extremely preterm with an extremely low birth weight)

I'm just torn right now because I want to send donations to an agency that supports parents and their preterm infants- but you do not screw around with my right to do choose and you do not disrespect me.

/rage over /just annoyed now

[emmiedahl]

It looks like some of the studies lumped spontaneous and elective abortions together in their number crunching. I have no doubt that a women who has a history of miscarriage might be more likely to go into premature labor, because there is significant overlap in the risk factors for both.

[Queen of Serpents]

And I totally see why there would be a connection. The same group is responding to different posts about how Obama helped increase the rates of preterm birth, so now I just think they're trolling with science. Which is a phrase I never thought I would use here.

[PennySycamore]

I share you rage, Queen of Serpents, but as the mother of extremely pre-term, VLBW baby. Way to make a mom of a premie feel great about her baby coming early -NOT!! Mothers who give birth early already end to wonder what they did wrong. These women should not be made to feel guilty. A burden of guilt makes it more difficult to attach to the baby which is not good for either mother nor baby.

[emmiedahl]

Let's just say that in some version of reality, abortion increases the chance of premature birth. Well, so does repeat childbearing last time I checked. If there is a connection, I suspect it is caused by the dilating of the cervix or something that is common to pregnancies regardless of how they end.

It is not a huge deal. If you need an abortion, then get one. If it ends up to be a risk factor for future complications, keep that in mind and know that you should be watched more closely.

I looked up this study and it was done using data from the fifties and sixties. Why not modern data? I am sorry, but abortion was very different then and often performed illegally. Why are we recycling old and irrelevant data? Also, it lumps abortions and miscarriages into the same category when medically they are two completely different things.

http://www.time.com/time/health/article ... 27,00.html

[patsymae]

"It is not a huge deal. If you need an abortion, then get one. If it ends up to be a risk factor for future complications, keep that in mind and know that you should be watched more closely.

I looked up this study and it was done using data from the fifties and sixties. Why not modern data? I am sorry, but abortion was very different then and often performed illegally"

Actually, if it was in the US in the fifties or sixties, it wasn't often performed illegally, it was absolutely performed illegally. Watch "Vera Drake?

[emmiedahl]

"It is not a huge deal. If you need an abortion, then get one. If it ends up to be a risk factor for future complications, keep that in mind and know that you should be watched more closely.

I looked up this study and it was done using data from the fifties and sixties. Why not modern data? I am sorry, but abortion was very different then and often performed illegally"

Actually, if it was in the US in the fifties or sixties, it wasn't often performed illegally, it was absolutely performed illegally. Watch "Vera Drake?

Abortion was legal in certain situations in some states and unconditionally legal in four states prior to Roe v. Wade.

[kitkat]

Abortion and miscarriage are not always managed differently. Both of my miscarriages happened at around nine weeks, fetal development had stopped a few weeks earlier, what is called a 'missed miscarriage', and with both I was given cytotec, to help speed up the miscarriage. This was exactly the same medication that would have been given to me if I'd had a elective abortion. And the procedure that I had with my elective abortion was the same that I would have had if I had miscarried at the same point in gestation, and opted to have surgery to make sure that nothing was retained in my uterus.

I'm not a doctor, but based on my own experience, I'd say that it would make sense, in some cases, to consider spontaneous and elective abortions in the same category. That said, if these studies are using old data, that is very iffy to me, especially since all they found was a slightly elevated risk, not a direct casual relationship.

[emmiedahl]

Abortion and miscarriage are not always managed differently. Both of my miscarriages happened at around nine weeks, fetal development had stopped a few weeks earlier, what is called a 'missed miscarriage', and with both I was given cytotec, to help speed up the miscarriage. This was exactly the same medication that would have been given to me if I'd had a elective abortion. And the procedure that I had with my elective abortion was the same that I would have had if I had miscarried at the same point in gestation, and opted to have surgery to make sure that nothing was retained in my uterus.

I'm not a doctor, but based on my own experience, I'd say that it would make sense, in some cases, to consider spontaneous and elective abortions in the same category. That said, if these studies are using old data, that is very iffy to me, especially since all they found was a slightly elevated risk, not a direct casual relationship.

The difference is that spontaneous abortion happens spontaneously. It means that for whatever reason, your body is rejecting the pregnancy. Perhaps it is a fetal issue, but in many cases it is the mother's body. So some of these women will continue to have issues with successive pregnancies. When lumped in with elective abortion, it will drive up the number of women with preterm labor and miscarriages--which I imagine was the point, because there is no other reason to include them in this study.

[gilora]

"It is not a huge deal. If you need an abortion, then get one. If it ends up to be a risk factor for future complications, keep that in mind and know that you should be watched more closely.

I looked up this study and it was done using data from the fifties and sixties. Why not modern data? I am sorry, but abortion was very different then and often performed illegally"

Actually, if it was in the US in the fifties or sixties, it wasn't often performed illegally, it was absolutely performed illegally. Watch "Vera Drake?

As I recall, "Vera Drake" took place in the U.K. Great movie, BTW. Imelda Staunton should have won an Oscar.

[2xx1xy1JD]

While this information is important, my worry is that it will shame women into carrying a child that cannot be supported. An ob/gyn should inform me of complications and respect me as a patient. (speaking as a prochoice adult who was born extremely preterm with an extremely low birth weight)

I don't really understand your POV on this.

If the data is shitty, then it needs to be called out as such. Bad science helps no one. In that case, the information would not be "important".

OTOH, if there is valid, legitimate research into the risk factors for premature birth that was indeed "important", then why wouldn't you want it mentioned? People should know the true risks and benefits of any medical procedure, and then make their own decisions. I don't feel "shamed" by my D&C procedures or my c-sections even if they potentially increased my risks of future complications - I know that the procedures were warranted and made sense for me at the time, but I'd like to know about potential future risks because it would be part of my future decision-making. For example, after 3 c-sections, 2 D&Cs and a sub-chorionic hemorrhage, I felt that the risks associated with a 7th pregnancy would be too high for my comfort.

[slickcat79]

Let's just say that in some version of reality, abortion increases the chance of premature birth. Well, so does repeat childbearing last time I checked. If there is a connection, I suspect it is caused by the dilating of the cervix or something that is common to pregnancies regardless of how they end.

That was my first thought. The anti-choicers love to act like abortion creates all kinds of risks for various medical conditions, while completely ignoring the fact that even full-term birth of live babies is not exactly a walk in the park.

[PennySycamore]

Let's just say that in some version of reality, abortion increases the chance of premature birth. Well, so does repeat childbearing last time I checked. If there is a connection, I suspect it is caused by the dilating of the cervix or something that is common to pregnancies regardless of how they end.

It is not a huge deal. If you need an abortion, then get one. If it ends up to be a risk factor for future complications, keep that in mind and know that you should be watched more closely.

I looked up this study and it was done using data from the fifties and sixties. Why not modern data? I am sorry, but abortion was very different then and often performed illegally. Why are we recycling old and irrelevant data? Also, it lumps abortions and miscarriages into the same category when medically they are two completely different things.

http://www.time.com/time/health/article ... 27,00.html

A study from the 50s or 60s is really OLD in terms of biomedical research. The usual practice in lactation studies is to cite articles that are no more than 5 years old. It is not that you never cite an older study, but you should be able to find a study on the subject that is recent. I would think the same would be true in all or at least most areas of medicine.