Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Infants' sense of pain is recognized, finally (1987)

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 387 posts

Re: Infants' sense of pain is recognized, finally (1987)

#231

Post by lelanthran »

rootusrootus wrote: post #9
hirundo wrote: post #3

> Newborns do feel pain. Presumably it doesn't switch on from nothing at birth, and pre-borns feel pain too. I'm pro-choice on abortion, but perhaps we should at least anaesthetise the fetus before late term abortions. Is that done? Or is their pain denied? Or is compassion toward that pain too difficult in the circumstances?

IIRC the consensus is that a fetus likely starts to experience pain in the second trimester. Over 90% of all abortions happen in the first trimester.

> IIRC the consensus is that a fetus likely starts to experience pain in the second trimester. Over 90% of all abortions happen in the first trimester.

Isn't that just a different way of saying that 10% of abortions are painful to the fetus?

To me, that seems like a significant number. Why not just legislate that those 10% fetuses get some pain relief? Is there any opposition to this?

Re: Infants' sense of pain is recognized, finally (1987)

#232

Post by wruza »

_gabe_ wrote: post #130
lisper wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Babies feeling pain is something that should be self-evident, shouldn't it? We need to be careful here. Just because a system responds to painful stimulus does not necessarily mean that it "feels pain". Consider this: https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/06/google-places-engine... Or this: https://spectrum.ieee.org/why-people-demanded-privacy-to-con... Or this: https://junkerhq.net/MGS2/MarkIII.html People tend to…

You do know what the definition of anthropomorphize is right? > attribute human characteristics or behavior to (a god, animal, or object). As far as I'm aware, baby humans don't start off as non-humans and magically transform into a human at some age where they understand more. So it seems fitting to attribute human characteristics to humans . That is not anthropomorphizing.

If you ask someone to describe something generally anthropomorphic, the description would only tangentially fit a human newborn. “The weather is angry”, “trees strive to the light”, “this car is pretty demanding” are all examples of it. Not only newborns can’t express clearly what they strive to or angry of, they (likely or arguably, whichever) have no concepts of that in their minds, but we tend to attribute these to them either way.

Idk if it’s commenters here are nitpicky or not, but I recognized the sense of gp’s terminology without a doubt.

Re: Infants' sense of pain is recognized, finally (1987)

#233

Post by jk7tarYZAQNpTQa »

kif wrote: post #78
anonu wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True. Lobotomies used to be common practice as well. Even a surgery performed recently, UPPP, for treating sleep apnea is "no longer recommended"... It was only five or ten years ago where they would perform this incredibly invasive surgery, but enough research shows they're not that effective.

What is considered to be the best treatment for apnea these days? Is it ESP, or something else? Besides CPAP of course.

Losing weight.

Re: Infants' sense of pain is recognized, finally (1987)

#234

Post by Broken_Hippo »

bergenty wrote: post #216
jnovek wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Babies feeling pain is something that should be self-evident, shouldn't it?” I have yet to understand the historical underpinnings of this phenomenon, but as someone who deals with chronic pain, doctors don’t seem to be aware that people feel pain _in general_. I’m being sort of facetious, but any chronic pain community is full to the brim with stories of various medical professionals being skeptical of patients’ pa…

It’s because people lie for many reasons. To get out of work, get disability, make a claim, to get opioids because they’re addicted to them etc. As a doctor, you’re probably going to become cynical after a while. This is very different from a baby because they have little motivation to lie and you can see them reacting to simple painful situations like bumping their head.

It’s because people lie for many reasons.

So? The first response should always be to take folks seriously. Always. Even if they are really searching for opioids. No doctor should assume folks are lying upfront.

Even if that means that a couple people are getting off work when they don't need it. And I'd much rather have a disability system that occasionally gives the wrong people benefits than to withhold benefits from someone and make their life torturous. Much like theft an loss are costs of retail, this should be the cost of a disability system: A few folks take advantage.

Re: Infants' sense of pain is recognized, finally (1987)

#235

Post by thatjoeoverthr »

tsol wrote: post #174
natroniks wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a circumcised male who has decided to have all 3 male children circumcised. As a Jew, if I may weigh on this, you have my background for an conflicts or biases. Also, maybe content warning is in order for genital mutiliation. 1) It is absolutely not common practice to allow a mohel to orally suck the blood out of an infant's penis. If it's practiced at all, it is only in extremely fringe groups of Jews, not just…

It's sad you have to explain all of this. For some reason casual bigotry is now considered acceptable if it's for the sake of what they believe is a good cause. That's a shift I've noticed recently, as a member of a religion that gets a lot of hate. It portends sad things for our society

It’s bigoted to support cutting some babies but not other babies.

Tell me I can cut off the tip of my daughter’s ear. Tell me anyone who opposes me is a bigot. Tell me I don’t need her permission, and I don’t need to wait to discuss it with her.

Or, more probable: find some little gotcha in my analogy so that you don’t have to confront it.

Re: Infants' sense of pain is recognized, finally (1987)

#236

Post by Broken_Hippo »

jk7tarYZAQNpTQa wrote: post #233
kif wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is considered to be the best treatment for apnea these days? Is it ESP, or something else? Besides CPAP of course.

Losing weight.

That's only if your weight is the cause.

Re: Infants' sense of pain is recognized, finally (1987)

#237

Post by dotancohen »

tomcam wrote: post #190
jnovek wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Babies feeling pain is something that should be self-evident, shouldn't it?” I have yet to understand the historical underpinnings of this phenomenon, but as someone who deals with chronic pain, doctors don’t seem to be aware that people feel pain _in general_. I’m being sort of facetious, but any chronic pain community is full to the brim with stories of various medical professionals being skeptical of patients’ pa…

My stock joke is that if the doctor or nurse says it won’t hurt, it will hurt at least a little. If they say it will hurt a little, it will hurt a lot. If they say it will probably hurt, time for serious anesthesia. Also, there’s pretty much no such thing as minor surgery except maybe skin tag removal.

The book Enders Game opens with this premise.

Re: Infants' sense of pain is recognized, finally (1987)

#238

Post by thisNeeds2BeSad »

tomcam wrote: post #190
jnovek wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Babies feeling pain is something that should be self-evident, shouldn't it?” I have yet to understand the historical underpinnings of this phenomenon, but as someone who deals with chronic pain, doctors don’t seem to be aware that people feel pain _in general_. I’m being sort of facetious, but any chronic pain community is full to the brim with stories of various medical professionals being skeptical of patients’ pa…

My stock joke is that if the doctor or nurse says it won’t hurt, it will hurt at least a little. If they say it will hurt a little, it will hurt a lot. If they say it will probably hurt, time for serious anesthesia. Also, there’s pretty much no such thing as minor surgery except maybe skin tag removal.

Lucky you, if you dont have genetics were anesthesia do not work properly. Then find a doctor, who accepts that problem and gets it over with painful but fast.

The hardest part is if you have a dentists that insist on anesthesia must work, but it wont, so you must act your ass off to prentend to not be in pain, so he wont push syringe after syringe, doing nothing and waiting for 15 minutes in between while your tooth is already open with the root canal drills in.

Re: Infants' sense of pain is recognized, finally (1987)

#240

Post by jk7tarYZAQNpTQa »

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #236
jk7tarYZAQNpTQa wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Losing weight.

That's only if your weight is the cause.

"Some 60–90% of adults with OSA are overweight"

https://diabetesjournals.org/care/article/31/Supplement_2/S3...

Post reply on HN