Re: POLITICS: Maternal Age

[Guest guest]

Deanna--As the adoptive mom of three wonderful girls with Down's, I always

find it incredibly disturbing that this is what they're scaring our mommies to

death with--the prospect of raising a child with DS! Believe me, there are MUCH

worse things in life, and many can not be detected before birth! In our DS

support group, it was shown that over 90% of the babies being born were born to

moms in their 20's--the maternal age was a non-issue! This has been shown to

be true across the country, too, I believe. Older moms have a higher

miscarriage rate to begin with (which I can attest to personally), so many of

these

children die before birth. The ones who survive have literally HUNDREDS of

waiting

adoptive homes to go to, should their birth parents choose not to parent

them. I know--I had to go to Russia for my last two girls because the waiting

list

in this country for Down's infants was way too long, and priority was given

to first time parents! When I was pregnant with my last daughter, the doctor

offered us amnio to detect DS. We refused, believing it not to be safe. But we

told him that even if she did have DS, that was right up our alley in our

house, and we laughed! Sadly, our daughter died before birth (cause unknown--I

was

44, BTW), but she did not die unwanted, DS or not. The two before her are

normal, healthy boys, ages 5 and 6, who I gave birth to at 40 and 41. " Maternal

age " is NOT a diagnosis, and Down Syndrome is NOT a tragedy! Climbing off my

soapbox here....Marilyn

[Guest guest]

Carol--I, for one, was not arguing. Just stating how it is from my own

perspective and experiences. I, too, had older parents, and just lost my father

in

June (he was 90). I would have loved it if my parents had been younger when I

came along (I was adopted), just to have them healthy and with me longer! Who

wouldn't? But who's to say that older parents (and at what age) shouldn't have

kids because they might not live to see their kids grow up (and I know you

didn't exactly say this)? Who can guarantee that a 16yo mom and 18yo dad will

live into their old age, either? There are never any guarantees. My oldest is

now

26. Obviously he'll be a lot older than his 5yo half-brother when I die! My

oldest son's father was 26 when we had him, and he's been dead now for 6 years

(heart attack at 46)! My current husband was over 50 when we had both our

boys. Will he live into his 80's or 90's, to see his boys grow up? I hope so,

but

who knows? It's as you said--all very individual, and we all do the best we

can. Marilyn

[Guest guest]

I don't see how you can be even arguing about this. I believe it depends on the

person......at least the mentality part of it does. I can speak as the 'child'

of a woman who was 45 when she had me. It was very evident that my she did not

want me - I was a mistake and the birth hampered her health for years

afterwards. My Father didn't want me either, and I hated having 'old' parents.

Plus my Dad died when I was 12, and even though my Mother lived until I was 35,

I still felt like I was too young to lose her. However, even after all that, I

still believe it depends on the prospective Mother. A lot of Mothers,

especially these days, (when people understand parenthood better than my parents

did), would be far better Mothers in their 40s than they would have been in

their 20s. In fact, I often wish I'd been in my 30s when I had mine instead of

my early 20s. BUT, I think that all depends on how mature a woman is in her

twenties, and her personality and life situation. We are as different as

Mothers, as we are different as people - age has little to do with it, in my

opinion - for some people, younger would be better. For others, older would be

better. Besides all that, what is, is.

Carol

but she did not die unwanted, DS or not. The two before her are

normal, healthy boys, ages 5 and 6, who I gave birth to at 40 and 41. " Maternal

age " is NOT a diagnosis, and Down Syndrome is NOT a tragedy! Climbing off my

soapbox here....Marilyn

[Guest guest]

Carol,

I'd just like to thank you for your present age, experience and

wisdom. You are quite right, situations are what they are. Nothing

in life is perfect.

I just got off the phone with my Father. He was thirty, when I, the

youngest of four was born. It was more " normal " back then, of course.

I told him about this discussion and asked him if he would change

anything about the timing of his children. He said no. We laughed

about having patience to deal with all the antics and realities kids

present when youth is still apparent in us, the parents. Of course,

he is still in his sixties and able to speak to me directly. Not that

age is an indication of mortality. Often it isn't, as is the case for

my husband, who lost his young father to melanoma. But chances are

that when your kids are born in the natural rhythm life presents, you

will enjoy gandchildren as well. My genetics are such that most my

ancestral women live into their nineties, so hopefully, no worries

there

And that is another consideration: Young parents are free to retire,

whereas older parents are bound to college aged kids into their

sixties. So again, like you said, maturity matters. But also, the

time to relax and enjoy grandparents is a consideration in the grand

scheme. We only live to be so old, after all.

God bless you.

Deanna

I can speak as the 'child' of a woman who was 45 when she had me. It

was very evident that my she did not want me - I was a mistake and the

birth hampered her health for years afterwards. My Father didn't want

me either, and I hated having 'old' parents. Plus my Dad died when I

was 12, and even though my Mother lived until I was 35, I still felt

like I was too young to lose her. However, even after all that, I

still believe it depends on the prospective Mother. A lot of Mothers,

especially these days, (when people understand parenthood better than

my parents did), would be far better Mothers in their 40s than they

would have been in their 20s. In fact, I often wish I'd been in my

30s when I had mine instead of my early 20s. BUT, I think that all

depends on how mature a woman is in her twenties, and her personality

and life situation. - Carol

[Guest guest]

Deanna,

I was the youngest of four also! Way younger - my sister was 13 when I was

born, and my brothers were 18 and 19. It's odd, but I never even thought of

asking my Mother how she felt about having a baby at 45. (I probably would

have, if she'd been around as I got older, though.)

Carol

Carol,

I'd just like to thank you for your present age, experience and

wisdom. You are quite right, situations are what they are. Nothing

in life is perfect.

I just got off the phone with my Father. He was thirty, when I, the

youngest of four was born. It was more " normal " back then, of course.

I told him about this discussion and asked him if he would change

anything about the timing of his children. He said no. We laughed

about having patience to deal with all the antics and realities kids

present when youth is still apparent in us, the parents. Of course,

he is still in his sixties and able to speak to me directly. Not that

age is an indication of mortality. Often it isn't, as is the case for

my husband, who lost his young father to melanoma. But chances are

that when your kids are born in the natural rhythm life presents, you

will enjoy gandchildren as well. My genetics are such that most my

ancestral women live into their nineties, so hopefully, no worries

there

And that is another consideration: Young parents are free to retire,

whereas older parents are bound to college aged kids into their

sixties. So again, like you said, maturity matters. But also, the

time to relax and enjoy grandparents is a consideration in the grand

scheme. We only live to be so old, after all.

God bless you.

Deanna

[Guest guest]

On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 00:13:15 -0800

" Carol " <cah@...> wrote:

> Deanna,

> I was the youngest of four also! Way younger - my sister was 13 when I was

born, and my brothers were 18 and 19. It's odd, but I never even thought of

asking my Mother how she felt about having a baby at 45. (I probably would

have, if she'd been around as I got older, though.)

> Carol

>

I was talking to the youngest son of the Priest where I attend services this

past Sunday. I found out something that floored me, Johann was the

youngest of 10!

He was my guide as this was the first time I actually stayed to *eat*

at the meal served after the Divine Liturgy which is how we got to

talking. It wasn't all that bad actually. I had roasted potatoes and

salad.

Anyway turns out Father Seraphim had Johann when he was 50 and his wife

was 46. Johann is now 10 and all the kids are healthy and prosperous

according to Father Seraphim.

" Scholarship is essentially confirming your early paranoia through

a deeper factual analysis. "

Murray Rothbard

" Vegetarians, come away from The Dark Side.

Pork is the other white meat; beef is what’s for dinner;

and a day without pepper-crusted venison tenderloin is

like a day without sunshine. "

Brad Edmonds

[Guest guest]

On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 21:27:00 -0600

Deanna <hl@...> wrote:

> " The evidence indicates that this severe type of facial and brain injury

> is related directly to a lowered reproductive capacity of the mother

> associated with age, since the majority are born to mothers beyond forty

> years of age, and to an inadequate nutrition of the mother, particularly

> in vitamin E since this vitamin plays so important a role in the

> nutrition of the pituitary body.

>

> " Important new data have been provided in an analysis of births in the

> United States in connection with the development of the Mongolian

> group. Bleyer has reported a study of 2,822 cases. He reports that the

> total births in the United States in 1934, of 1,095,939, there were

> 1,822 reported as Mongoloids, The average age of the mothers of these

> individuals was forty-one years. He reports data indicating that in the

> age group of mothers forty-one to forty-four the chances of the

> development of a Mongoloid would be seventy-five times as high as normal

> expectancy, and in the age forty-five to forty-nine the chances are 125

> times normal expectancy. In a group of 1,942 Mongoloids, 1,100 or 57

> percent were last children. These data are in keeping with those

> several other investigators, and emphasize the problem of depleted

> reproductive capacity. "

> ~ Nutrition and Physical Degeneration, Weston A. Price, DDS, pgs. 371-72.

My question is the lowered reproductive capacity because of age or

because of lowered nutrition? And he seems to present evidence on the US,

not the groups he was observing and studying.

Unfortunately I don't have access to NAPD at the moment, otherwise I

would look it up myself, but does he mention anything about lowered

reproductive capacity and maternal age among the groups that he studied?

> They are cut short by those who vow, " First,

> do no harm. "

It is my understanding that doctors no longer take that vow, i.e the

Hippocratic Oath, because of its statement against abortion.

" Scholarship is essentially confirming your early paranoia through

a deeper factual analysis. "

Murray Rothbard

" Vegetarians, come away from The Dark Side.

Pork is the other white meat; beef is what’s for dinner;

and a day without pepper-crusted venison tenderloin is

like a day without sunshine. "

Brad Edmonds

[Guest guest]

wrote:

> My question is the lowered reproductive capacity because of age or

> because of lowered nutrition? And he seems to present evidence on the US,

> not the groups he was observing and studying.

>

> Unfortunately I don't have access to NAPD at the moment, otherwise I

> would look it up myself, but does he mention anything about lowered

> reproductive capacity and maternal age among the groups that he studied?

Well, I found a few things about birth control and family planning in

primitives in chapter 21. On page 396 of Nutrition and Physical

Degeneration, Dr. Price states:

" Those who still believe in the old fatalistic doctrines may answer the

questions why the last child is affected seriously much more often than

would be expected by chance; or why the most severe defectives are born

after mothers have exceeded forty years of age; and still further why

our defectives are found chiefly among the later members of large

families. These facts are not explainable by Mendel' laws of heredity. "

The 19th chapter on physical and mental deterioration speaks extensively

on maternal and paternal age, with age forty being the bar not to exceed

in age in both parents. Reproductive exhaustion is actually the term he

uses for nutritionally deficient parents, I do believe, and he uses it

consistently as well. But since maternal age has proven a sensitive

topic, I will not touch upon it here. Get a copy of it and read for

yourself.

But I could not find anything in his studies on traditional peoples and

maternal age per se. It seems a topic he must have touched on somewhere

as he gets into reproductive issues extensively. Perhaps someone else

has knowledge that I am lacking. It definitely sparks my curiosity!

However, using common sense, since our bodies do indeed begin a gradual

decline around the average age of 30, it would make follow that we have

an optimal age window with which to reproduce. And we want to optimize

nutrition, of course, as well. Having said that, we all age

individually, and often chronological and biological ages don't match

up. Some age sooner than others given a constant age. Skeletal mass,

as I discussed recently and is an example of chronological/biological

decline that may be limited with good diet and exercise, but will still

happen eventually all the same. Aging happens.

Deanna

[Guest guest]

On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 15:04:55 -0600

Deanna <hl@...> wrote:

> Well, I found a few things about birth control and family planning in

> primitives in chapter 21. On page 396 of Nutrition and Physical

> Degeneration, Dr. Price states:

>

> " Those who still believe in the old fatalistic doctrines may answer the

> questions why the last child is affected seriously much more often than

> would be expected by chance; or why the most severe defectives are born

> after mothers have exceeded forty years of age; and still further why

> our defectives are found chiefly among the later members of large

> families. These facts are not explainable by Mendel' laws of heredity. "

>

> The 19th chapter on physical and mental deterioration speaks extensively

> on maternal and paternal age, with age forty being the bar not to exceed

> in age in both parents. Reproductive exhaustion is actually the term he

> uses for nutritionally deficient parents, I do believe, and he uses it

> consistently as well. But since maternal age has proven a sensitive

> topic, I will not touch upon it here. Get a copy of it and read for

> yourself.

Thanks for retrieving the quotes. I have two copies of NAPD actually, a

hardback and a paperback copy. One is in storage and I seem to have

misplaced the other one on my recent road trip.

> But I could not find anything in his studies on traditional peoples and

> maternal age per se. It seems a topic he must have touched on somewhere

> as he gets into reproductive issues extensively. Perhaps someone else

> has knowledge that I am lacking. It definitely sparks my curiosity!

Yes and this is what I really want to know. It would seem to me that if

this were an issue among the groups he studied, he would have made

mention of it, rather than write about reproduction outside the context

of his groups.

He is very high on the collected wisdom of these folks, so it seems to

me that if they thought late births were a problem, and took measures to

prevent it, he would have mentioned it as a way to buttress the

arguments you present above.

> However, using common sense, since our bodies do indeed begin a gradual

> decline around the average age of 30, it would make follow that we have

> an optimal age window with which to reproduce. And we want to optimize

> nutrition, of course, as well. Having said that, we all age

> individually, and often chronological and biological ages don't match

> up. Some age sooner than others given a constant age. Skeletal mass,

> as I discussed recently and is an example of chronological/biological

> decline that may be limited with good diet and exercise, but will still

> happen eventually all the same. Aging happens.

>

Yes I realize this. My question is this, we know what happens to SADers,

how do we know this is true of WAPers? Of course we age, but do we age

as fast? I think the consensus here, at least in theory, would be no. So

perhaps the problems with reproductivity problems and the age they occur

are true of SADers, not WAPers. Perhaps fertility lasts as long as it

does for a reason, and whatever problems may occur are largely a result

of SAD, not WAP.

Anyway, just something I need to research for myself.

" Scholarship is essentially confirming your early paranoia through

a deeper factual analysis. "

Murray Rothbard

" Vegetarians, come away from The Dark Side.

Pork is the other white meat; beef is what’s for dinner;

and a day without pepper-crusted venison tenderloin is

like a day without sunshine. "

Brad Edmonds

[Guest guest]

[] Yes I realize this. My question is this, we know what happens

to SADers,

how do we know this is true of WAPers? Of course we age, but do we age

as fast? I think the consensus here, at least in theory, would be no. So

perhaps the problems with reproductivity problems and the age they occur

are true of SADers, not WAPers. Perhaps fertility lasts as long as it

does for a reason, and whatever problems may occur are largely a result

of SAD, not WAP.

Anyway, just something I need to research for myself.

SAD eaters definitely reach puberty at younger ages, and may

accordingly, fizzle out reproductively sooner too. I think this might

be a result of hormones and endocrine disruptors in our food supply. I

don't know, but it *seems* a pretty recent phenomenon. Anecdotes of

earlier than reasonable menopause ages in SADers (<40 years)have been

cranked through the rumor mill as well.

Oh, I did come across an interesting study of paternal age and longevity

of daughters that might interest you; read a snippet below.

And this is where I will bid you adieu, until I tackle the science

without religion argument.

Deanna

http://longevity-science.org/Gavrilov-PAA-1998.pdf

Contour plot for daughters (Figure 1) demonstrates that the highest

levels of life span are observed for those daughters who were

born to fathers at ages 35-45 years. After that age there is a decrease

in daughters' life span consistent with the previous results

described earlier. However, it is interesting to note that the life span

of daughters born to young fathers (25-30 years) is also low if

maternal age at reproduction was below 35 years. Increased maternal age

at reproduction is not associated with decrease of daughters'

life span which is consistent with previous results obtained by the

method of multiple linear regression.

Contour plot for sons (Figure 2) demonstrates a mysterious diagonal

orientation of isolines suggesting the importance of parental

age gap (difference between paternal and maternal ages). When father is

10 years older than mother the life span of sons is particularly

low. Any change of this parental age gap in any direction results in

increase of sons' life span. This mysterious phenomenon does not

have satisfactory explanation yet. However it is interesting to note

that the parental age gap might be important factor determining the

probability of consanguineous marriages (this prediction follows from

the models of population genetics).

Another type of data analysis is presented at Figures 3-4 where the

levels of offspring longevity are plotted as a function of paternal

life span (X-axis) and paternal age at childbirth (Y-axis). Contour plot

for daughters (Figure 3) again demonstrates that there is an

" ideal " paternal age at reproduction - about 40 years related to the

highest daughters' life span. Daughters born to older fathers have

shorter life span both in the case of short-lived fathers (60-65 years)

and long-lived fathers (80-90 years). However, for younger fathers

(below 30 years) daughters' life span is also shorter. One possible

explanation of this observation is that short-lived daughters were

born to young fathers with high mutation load and short reproductive

life span.

The data for sons (Figure 4) again demonstrate the mysterious pattern -

they look like the negative image of daughters' pattern (see

Figure 3) reflected by mirror. Sons born to fathers at ages 30-40 years

have the lowest life span for any level of paternal longevity.

Reproduction at younger or older ages results in higher levels of sons'

life span (see Figure 4).

The results presented in this section demonstrate that parental age

effects are very strong and are not yet understood. So, they

should be taken into account in any other studies including studies of

heritability of human longevity. Parental age effects also deserve

their special investigation in humans and animal models, since such

studies could shed the light on the mechanisms determining aging

and longevity.

>

[Guest guest]

I'm curious if there are any folks out there who breed animals and

what they have to say about fit older females giving birth to healthy

young. Not older females who have been bred many times before either.

Anyone? Suze--dog lists?

B.

On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 18:08:04 -0800, <slethnobotanist@...> wrote:

>

>

> On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 15:04:55 -0600

>

>

> Deanna <hl@...> wrote:

>

> > Well, I found a few things about birth control and family planning in

> > primitives in chapter 21. On page 396 of Nutrition and Physical

> > Degeneration, Dr. Price states:

> >

> > " Those who still believe in the old fatalistic doctrines may answer the

> > questions why the last child is affected seriously much more often than

> > would be expected by chance; or why the most severe defectives are born

> > after mothers have exceeded forty years of age; and still further why

> > our defectives are found chiefly among the later members of large

> > families. These facts are not explainable by Mendel' laws of heredity. "

> >

> > The 19th chapter on physical and mental deterioration speaks extensively

> > on maternal and paternal age, with age forty being the bar not to exceed

> > in age in both parents. Reproductive exhaustion is actually the term he

> > uses for nutritionally deficient parents, I do believe, and he uses it

> > consistently as well. But since maternal age has proven a sensitive

> > topic, I will not touch upon it here. Get a copy of it and read for

> > yourself.

>

> Thanks for retrieving the quotes. I have two copies of NAPD actually, a

> hardback and a paperback copy. One is in storage and I seem to have

> misplaced the other one on my recent road trip.

>

> > But I could not find anything in his studies on traditional peoples and

> > maternal age per se. It seems a topic he must have touched on somewhere

> > as he gets into reproductive issues extensively. Perhaps someone else

> > has knowledge that I am lacking. It definitely sparks my curiosity!

>

> Yes and this is what I really want to know. It would seem to me that if

> this were an issue among the groups he studied, he would have made

> mention of it, rather than write about reproduction outside the context

> of his groups.

>

> He is very high on the collected wisdom of these folks, so it seems to

> me that if they thought late births were a problem, and took measures to

> prevent it, he would have mentioned it as a way to buttress the

> arguments you present above.

>

>

>

> > However, using common sense, since our bodies do indeed begin a gradual

> > decline around the average age of 30, it would make follow that we have

> > an optimal age window with which to reproduce. And we want to optimize

> > nutrition, of course, as well. Having said that, we all age

> > individually, and often chronological and biological ages don't match

> > up. Some age sooner than others given a constant age. Skeletal mass,

> > as I discussed recently and is an example of chronological/biological

> > decline that may be limited with good diet and exercise, but will still

> > happen eventually all the same. Aging happens.

> >

>

> Yes I realize this. My question is this, we know what happens to SADers,

> how do we know this is true of WAPers? Of course we age, but do we age

> as fast? I think the consensus here, at least in theory, would be no. So

> perhaps the problems with reproductivity problems and the age they occur

> are true of SADers, not WAPers. Perhaps fertility lasts as long as it

> does for a reason, and whatever problems may occur are largely a result

> of SAD, not WAP.

>

> Anyway, just something I need to research for myself.

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

--- In , Blazey <teresa.blazey@g...>

wrote:

> I'm curious if there are any folks out there who breed animals and

> what they have to say about fit older females giving birth to healthy

> young. Not older females who have been bred many times before either.

> Anyone? Suze--dog lists?

> B.

Price's observations don't seem to draw a distinction between

older women who've had lots of children, and those who have

had maybe one or no previous children. But I can't go look at the

book because I lent it to a young pregnant couple!

But I wonder if this reproductive exhaustion occurs more as a

result of having children or more as a result of aging per se.

I would think it's a combination, but I wonder which factor

has more weight. And of course, I wonder how good

nutrition might affect the rate of exhaustion.

It seems to me that *paternal* age and nutrition are almost

completely ignored by everyone except WAP.

Aven

[Guest guest]

>It seems to me that *paternal* age and nutrition are almost

>completely ignored by everyone except WAP.

>

>Aven

Not completely ignored. I read something about the point

that the amount of alcohol the FATHER drank has an effect

on the kid ... children of alcoholic fathers tend to have more

birth defects. I can think of a couple of dozen things offhand

that would contribute to this (like, beating your wife? lack of

good food?) but they believed they had weeded out those issues,

and that the sperm were damaged somehow by the lack of

nutrition/health of the father.

Heidi [HJ] [HTG]

[Guest guest]

> Re: POLITICS: Maternal Age

>

>

>

>I'm curious if there are any folks out there who breed animals and

>what they have to say about fit older females giving birth to healthy

>young. Not older females who have been bred many times before either.

>Anyone? Suze--dog lists?

> B.

Wow...interesting question! I have NO idea, but I will pose that question to

one of my dog lists and let you know what they say.

Suze Fisher

Lapdog Design, Inc.

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg

Weston A. Price Foundation Chapter Leader, Mid Coast Maine

http://www.westonaprice.org

----------------------------

" The diet-heart idea (the idea that saturated fats and cholesterol cause

heart disease) is the greatest scientific deception of our times. " --

Mann, MD, former Professor of Medicine and Biochemistry at Vanderbilt

University, Tennessee; heart disease researcher.

The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics

<http://www.thincs.org>

----------------------------

>

[Guest guest]

>I'm curious if there are any folks out there who breed animals and

>what they have to say about fit older females giving birth to healthy

>young. Not older females who have been bred many times before either.

>Anyone? Suze--dog lists?

> B.

Most farmers retire older animals, esp. if they've had a lot of

babies. But it rarely comes up with farmers ... if someone has females for

breeding, they breed the animal as soon as she's old enough.

Feeding an animal that isn't producing anything is a waste of

feed.

Heidi [HJ] [HTG]

[Guest guest]

wrote:

> I'm curious if there are any folks out there who breed animals and

> what they have to say about fit older females giving birth to healthy

> young. Not older females who have been bred many times before either.

> Anyone? Suze--dog lists?

My daughter breeds guinea pigs. If the females do not have their first

litter before ten months of age, the pelvis bones fuse, preventing the babies

from passing easily. This may result in the death of both mother and babies.

~~ Jocelyne

[Guest guest]

> My daughter breeds guinea pigs. If the females do not have their first

> litter before ten months of age, the pelvis bones fuse, preventing the babies

> from passing easily. This may result in the death of both mother and babies.

>

> ~~ Jocelyne

I'm so glad you posted this! I have a guinea pig, and I thought

I might breed her someday. I guess I won't.

Aven

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 12/7/04 2:13:15 AM Eastern Standard Time,

heidis@... writes:

> I can think of a couple of dozen things offhand

> that would contribute to this (like, beating your wife? lack of

> good food?) but they believed they had weeded out those issues,

> and that the sperm were damaged somehow by the lack of

> nutrition/health of the father.

____

~~~~> Maybe due to his half-assed verility the sperm had a much farther ways

to swim, and thus, upon finally reaching the egg, were very, very tired?

Chris

[Guest guest]

Re: POLITICS: Maternal Age

>

>

>

>I'm curious if there are any folks out there who breed animals and

>what they have to say about fit older females giving birth to healthy

>young. Not older females who have been bred many times before either.

>Anyone? Suze--dog lists?

> B.

I posed this question to one of my dog lists, and Christie , a member

of this list, and longtime natural rearing breeder, said that a bitch that

comes into heat once or twice a year but doesn't breed tends to develop

problems like an inflammed uterus even if she is otherwise healthy, due to

the pro-inflammatory effect of repeated progesterone exposure. She mentioned

that dogs " ovulate into a progesterone environment instead of an estrogen

environment " unlike other mammals.

So I guess the situation with dogs is not comparable to humans.

Suze Fisher

Lapdog Design, Inc.

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg

Weston A. Price Foundation Chapter Leader, Mid Coast Maine

http://www.westonaprice.org

----------------------------

" The diet-heart idea (the idea that saturated fats and cholesterol cause

heart disease) is the greatest scientific deception of our times. " --

Mann, MD, former Professor of Medicine and Biochemistry at Vanderbilt

University, Tennessee; heart disease researcher.

The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics

<http://www.thincs.org>

----------------------------

>

[Guest guest]

Not exactly in line with the conversation, but might be some tidbits of

interest to some of you.

Older modern human mothers tend to be more androgenized - they have

higher testosterone and androgen levels that will affect the offspring.

As women get older they are more prone to be insulin resistant and that

means they are missing and enzyme for converting OH progesterone to

cortisol so it becomes testosterone and androgens and the estrogen goes

up too.

Older mothers are more prone to develop autoimmune disease post partum

or other endocrine disorders. Wiley also said that the womb tens to be

seasoned by the child before. So if I look at a family I know the first

was a girl, the next a boy and he is slightly ambiguous in orientation,

the next children where a series of boys and they got progressively

tougher and shorter, then a girl who is lesbian and masculinized and

then a very female girl. Another family with a two boys followed by an

androgenized female who is very smart (androgenized women tend to be

very smart as they have high E for the brain) then a taller male who is

not tough followed by a very tough short male. I know my last child a

son born to me at the age of 41 is very rough and tough.

Laurel

> >

> >

> >I'm curious if there are any folks out there who breed animals and

> >what they have to say about fit older females giving birth to healthy

> >young. Not older females who have been bred many times before

either.

> >Anyone? Suze--dog lists?

> > B.

>

[Guest guest]

Laurel,

That's exactly in-line with the conversation I was seeking. How

fascinating, though anecdotal.

B.

On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:29:51 -0800, Laurel <laurelmc@...> wrote:

>

> Not exactly in line with the conversation, but might be some tidbits of

> interest to some of you.

>

> Older modern human mothers tend to be more androgenized - they have

> higher testosterone and androgen levels that will affect the offspring.

> As women get older they are more prone to be insulin resistant and that

> means they are missing and enzyme for converting OH progesterone to

> cortisol so it becomes testosterone and androgens and the estrogen goes

> up too.

>

> Older mothers are more prone to develop autoimmune disease post partum

> or other endocrine disorders. Wiley also said that the womb tens to be

> seasoned by the child before. So if I look at a family I know the first

> was a girl, the next a boy and he is slightly ambiguous in orientation,

> the next children where a series of boys and they got progressively

> tougher and shorter, then a girl who is lesbian and masculinized and

> then a very female girl. Another family with a two boys followed by an

> androgenized female who is very smart (androgenized women tend to be

> very smart as they have high E for the brain) then a taller male who is

> not tough followed by a very tough short male. I know my last child a

> son born to me at the age of 41 is very rough and tough.

>

> Laurel

>

>

> > >

> > >

> > >I'm curious if there are any folks out there who breed animals and

> > >what they have to say about fit older females giving birth to healthy

> > >young. Not older females who have been bred many times before

> either.

> > >Anyone? Suze--dog lists?

> > > B.

> >

>

>

> <HTML>

> <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC " -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN "

" http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd " >

> <BODY>

> <FONT FACE= " monospace " SIZE= " 3 " >

> Important <B>Native Nutrition</B> Addresses

> <UL>

> <LI>Native Nutrition on the <A

HREF= " / " >WEB</A>

> <LI>Search the message <A HREF= " http://onibasu.dyndns.org/ " >ARCHIVE</A>

& mdash; <B>NEW FEATURE!</B></LI>

> <LI>Change your group <A

HREF= " /join " >SETTINGS</A></\

LI>

> <LI><A HREF= " mailto: " >POST</A> a

message</LI>

> <LI><A

HREF= " mailto: -subscribe " >SUBSCRIBE</A> to the

list</LI>

> <LI><A

HREF= " mailto: -unsubscribe " >UNSUBSCRIBE</A> from

the list</LI>

> <LI>Send an <A

HREF= " mailto: -owner " >EMAIL</A> to the List Owner

& Moderators</LI>

> </UL></FONT>

> <PRE><FONT FACE= " monospace " SIZE= " 3 " >List Owner: Idol

> Moderators: Heidi Schuppenhauer

> Wanita Sears

> </FONT></PRE>

> </BODY>

> </HTML>

>

[Guest guest]

On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:29:51 -0800, Laurel <laurelmc@...> wrote:

> Older modern human mothers tend to be more androgenized - they have

> higher testosterone and androgen levels that will affect the offspring.

> As women get older they are more prone to be insulin resistant and that

> means they are missing and enzyme for converting OH progesterone to

> cortisol so it becomes testosterone and androgens and the estrogen goes

> up too.

Laurel,

And what if the prospectivemother is not at all insulin-resistant?

Good to go, you think?

B.

>

> <HTML>

> <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC " -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN "

" http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd " >

> <BODY>

> <FONT FACE= " monospace " SIZE= " 3 " >

> Important <B>Native Nutrition</B> Addresses

> <UL>

> <LI>Native Nutrition on the <A

HREF= " / " >WEB</A>

> <LI>Search the message <A HREF= " http://onibasu.dyndns.org/ " >ARCHIVE</A>

& mdash; <B>NEW FEATURE!</B></LI>

> <LI>Change your group <A

HREF= " /join " >SETTINGS</A></\

LI>

> <LI><A HREF= " mailto: " >POST</A> a

message</LI>

> <LI><A

HREF= " mailto: -subscribe " >SUBSCRIBE</A> to the

list</LI>

> <LI><A

HREF= " mailto: -unsubscribe " >UNSUBSCRIBE</A> from

the list</LI>

> <LI>Send an <A

HREF= " mailto: -owner " >EMAIL</A> to the List Owner

& Moderators</LI>

> </UL></FONT>

> <PRE><FONT FACE= " monospace " SIZE= " 3 " >List Owner: Idol

> Moderators: Heidi Schuppenhauer

> Wanita Sears

> </FONT></PRE>

> </BODY>

> </HTML>

>

[Guest guest]

>. Another family with a two boys followed by an

>androgenized female who is very smart (androgenized women tend to be

>very smart as they have high E for the brain) then a taller male who is

>not tough followed by a very tough short male. I know my last child a

>son born to me at the age of 41 is very rough and tough.

>

>Laurel

Wow! Lots of detail. I didn't know all that ... but ... there has been a study

done recently that shows the biggest predictor for homosexuality in

males is the number of boys born previously to that mother. If a woman

has 7 sons, the 7th is likely to be gay.

Heidi [HJ] [HTG]

[Guest guest]

> Wow! Lots of detail. I didn't know all that ... but ... there has been a study

> done recently that shows the biggest predictor for homosexuality in

> males is the number of boys born previously to that mother. If a woman

> has 7 sons, the 7th is likely to be gay.

>

> Heidi [HJ] [HTG]

Heidi, where did you read this? I've always wondered why so many of

the gay men I know come from large, religious families (Catholic and

Mormon mainly) despite incredible pressure NOT to be gay. This could

*partially* explain it, but I think the formation of sexual preference

is on the complicated side of things...

[Guest guest]

Intriguing. I wonder what the puzzle is there?

Women do best to birth and nurse for at least 3 years. Extended nursing

triggers markers which restore women's systems so they are less likely

to be open to illness. I wonder if the women in the 7 boys study were

mom's who did extended nursing? I sort of doubt it so I imagine the

seventh babe in this study was from a mom who had a pretty battered

endocrine system by boy seven. I'm thinking stressed mom. I went back

to Wiley. Here's a quote from pg 61 of Sex, Lies, and Menopause.

" Because the food supply (insulin) is the control on reproduction

(testosterone), it is insulin that controls the choice between the

production of cortisol or testosterone. The mechanism of testosterone

can enhance masculinity in females in utero or, if it's too intense, can

cause male hormone resistance and actually feminize men. She got that

from " Human behavioral sex differences: a role for gonadal hormones

during early development " " Physiological Bull " 1995 by Collaer

Laurel

> Wow! Lots of detail. I didn't know all that ... but ... there has been

a

> study

> done recently that shows the biggest predictor for homosexuality in

> males is the number of boys born previously to that mother. If a woman

> has 7 sons, the 7th is likely to be gay.

>

>

> Heidi [HJ] [HTG]

>