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

Apparatus for facilitating the birth of a child by centrifugal force (1963)

patents.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 230 posts

Re: Apparatus for facilitating the birth of a child by centrifugal force (1963)

#41

Post by watwut »

fatbaby wrote: post #34
undecisive wrote: post #13

> In the case of a woman who has a fully developed muscular system and has had ample physical exertion all through the pregnancy, as is common with all more primitive peoples, nature provides all the necessary equipment and power to have a normal and quick delivery. This is not the case, however, with more civilized Women who often do not have the opportunity to develop the muscles needed in confinement. Ignoring the…

[flagged]

I do not think it is appropriate to imply non western people are "less civilized" or call them "primitive".

Also, the part about "civilized Women who often do not have the opportunity to develop the muscles needed in confinement" is simply untrue today. We all have tons of opportunities to develop whatever muscles we desire to develop. We just need to take those opportunities.

Note that western people, including women, exercise a lot. Including or especially middle and upper class ones. Conversely, if you need to spend whole day in the market, selling stuff and plus you care about 4 kids and plus you are barely able to feed family, you wont be running 10km daily or what not.

Re: Apparatus for facilitating the birth of a child by centrifugal force (1963)

#42

Post by elzbardico »

jokoon wrote: post #30
cypress66 wrote: post #6

Would this actually work?

I'm more concerned about the mother being okay about being spun like that. Birthing is already painful, I'm not sure it's a good idea to spin a woman like that while she's giving birth.

As the blood flow to the brain is impaired, she would probably pass out, sparing her the pain.

Re: Apparatus for facilitating the birth of a child by centrifugal force (1963)

#43

Post by fatbaby »

watwut wrote: post #41
fatbaby wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I do not think it is appropriate to imply non western people are "less civilized" or call them "primitive". Also, the part about "civilized Women who often do not have the opportunity to develop the muscles needed in confinement" is simply untrue today. We all have tons of opportunities to develop whatever muscles we desire to develop. We just need to take those opportunities. Note that western people, including wome…

[flagged]

Re: Apparatus for facilitating the birth of a child by centrifugal force (1963)

#44

Post by MrYellowP »

_joel wrote: post #23
MrYellowP wrote: post #19

Thanks for pointing out what year it was. I'll try to catch up on my missing sleep.

Is a patent from 1963 classed as modern?

Thanks. It's been too long too hot around here and I'm sleeping maybe 3h per day, in the morning, being awake most of the night. I take the hint and see myself out.

Re: Apparatus for facilitating the birth of a child by centrifugal force (1963)

#45

Post by skrblr »

MrYellowP wrote: post #19

Thanks for pointing out what year it was. I'll try to catch up on my missing sleep.

Maternal mortality rate was 100x higher in the past. Not sure I would call that "doing just fine."

Doesn't change that this patent is very silly, though.

Re: Apparatus for facilitating the birth of a child by centrifugal force (1963)

#46

Post by touisteur »

fjfuvucucuc wrote: post #33
Oarch wrote: post #5

I can see no potential problems here. Please proceed with your baby yeet machine.

Y'all be joking about this but they yanked my baby out with a damn suction cup stuck to his head. Guy looks like he the baby on Coneheads.

Twins here. First one with suction cup, second one they went up there with the hand and forearm to catch the baby's leg and pull. Thank the appropriate deities the epidural was badly performed and my spouse was conked out of her mind (and couldn't push, hence the sucking cup...).

Twin birth is disturbing. They tell you before, but between hearing about it and living it...

Re: Apparatus for facilitating the birth of a child by centrifugal force (1963)

#47

Post by throwaway290 »

fatbaby wrote: post #43
watwut wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do not think it is appropriate to imply non western people are "less civilized" or call them "primitive". Also, the part about "civilized Women who often do not have the opportunity to develop the muscles needed in confinement" is simply untrue today. We all have tons of opportunities to develop whatever muscles we desire to develop. We just need to take those opportunities. Note that western people, including wome…

[flagged]

Say what you mean. If you mean with some weak or atrophied muscles, say that. Don't use "civilized" to hide that fact because it means someone in good shape would be "primitive". Which means not only the choice of words is in fact classist/colonialist, it is also not a very logical statement (sorta fine on HN but sorta bad for a scientific paper). But yeah, times were different (as a statement of fact, no sarcasm).

Re: Apparatus for facilitating the birth of a child by centrifugal force (1963)

#48

Post by touisteur »

mmusson wrote: post #37
Oarch wrote: post #5

I can see no potential problems here. Please proceed with your baby yeet machine.

I remember the doctor explaining that newborns are slippery. All I could imagine was the newborn launching from this contraption with doctor and nurses attempting to catch as the baby slips from person to person while the mother vomits from nausea.

No need to imagine, Tim Burton's Big Fish has a depiction :-)

Re: Apparatus for facilitating the birth of a child by centrifugal force (1963)

#49

Post by lloeki »

watwut wrote: post #41
fatbaby wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I do not think it is appropriate to imply non western people are "less civilized" or call them "primitive". Also, the part about "civilized Women who often do not have the opportunity to develop the muscles needed in confinement" is simply untrue today. We all have tons of opportunities to develop whatever muscles we desire to develop. We just need to take those opportunities. Note that western people, including wome…

Running 10k a day is definitely not the norm, most people don't even walk 10k a day.

Even then, sitting 8h a day in front of a computer is a quite modern plague and the root cause of most "back pain" issues (an insanely prevalent issue, even just counting medically reported cases) because of core atrophy.

Post reply on HN