Weird news and such:
- Why are French women so
slim? (Thanks, John) - Solar-powered, pot-smoking, physics-studying hermit squats
near Los Alamos. (Thanks, Gizmodo) - Man replicates scene from Bible, gets
attacked by lions. Wonder of wonders, miracle
of miracles, God took up Daniel once again… - Finally, my flying taxi has
arrived. - Reproductive science is just out of control. Can we apply a little common
sense here? A 57-year-old shouldn’t
be pregnant, nor should anybody have ovaries
in their arms.
As a bonus, here’s a weblog dedicated to Weird
Al Yankovic.
DarrenBarefoot.com 
Curious. What *is* the “cut-off age” for getting pregnant, in your mind?
I always thought it had something to do with “have you hit menopause”, rather than age. 😛
Lions: 1
Jeebus: 0
Donna: It’s apparent to me that evolution and biology never intended 57-year-olds to get pregnant. Consider this quote:
“That all changed three years ago, when she started a grueling, $25,000 journey through fertility treatments, various medical procedures and countless doctor visits.”
In my view, this is excessive and irresponsible treatment. It’s unfortunate that this woman waited to the age of 54 to start attempting to get pregnant, but she waited too long
There is a line to draw with regards to fertility treatment, and I’d draw it well on this side of three years of treatment at the age of 54. It’s also really irresponsible, as the rate of birth defect skyrockets after the age of 35. From this page:
* A twenty-five-year-old woman only has a one in 1250 chance of having a baby with Down’s syndrome.
* And by age forty-five, a woman has a 1-in-30 chance.
Predictably, 45 is where the estimates stop. And, as the article itself notes:
“But having a child at an older age can increase odds of premature delivery, gestational diabetes, hypertension and other problems, fertility experts say.”
That’s not to mention that, statistically speaking, this woman will be dead by the time her children are 20. That’s hardly responsible parenting, is it?
I should state that while I disapprove of this behaviour, I wouldn’t seek to legislate against it. On the other hand, I wouldn’t want my tax dollars going to fund it. I doubt they would, even in Canada, but I’m not sure.
Hey cool! Thanks for the link! 🙂