Live data from Hacker News

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

patents.google.com

71–80 of 230 posts

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

#71
> If, for example, the height of the openings 125 in standards 120' is selected so that the angle of repose of the stretcher corresponds to the angle of inclination the stretcher would assume when subjected to a centrifugal acceleration of two gs, no elevation of the foot end of the stretcher will occur before the speed of rotation is high enough to cause a horizontal component of two gs.

Two freekin' gs.

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

#72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doctors' discomfort is also why they are so eager to slice women open like a fish, because baby needs to come on their schedule or they'll be late for tee time.

[[citation needed]] To my knowledge Caesarean Section is a last resort.

It is not. My mother was forced out of a hospital once for not giving a Caesarean section. (The baby was fine throughout.)

And I had a college roommate (male, no children) who espoused the idea that making women give birth without the benefit of a Caesarean section was barbaric.

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

#74
It is called Blonsky device, and the story behind it is interesting: https://allthatsinteresting.com/blonsky-device

From the article: "On that fateful day, George witnessed a pregnant elephant nearing labor. The large mammal spun in wide, slow circles. As he watched, George hypothesized that the spinning helped the elephant deliver its 250-pound baby."

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

#75
post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for sharing this. It's so crucial to know that we have actually lost this information and we're getting worse. > Do you know what is the most uncomfortable position for labour is? Yeah, layin on your back. My wife and I were shocked when we had our first. We were recommended a "natural birth" course that taught us this, and everyone gave us crap about being "woo-woo" and "denying science". Everyone. We also ha…

> home birth Isn't the rate of complications higher at home than in a hospital? Statistics is your friend here. Not sure I would want my wife to experience pre-hospital rates of complications. Maybe tough to study tho, as I'm sure women who have had smoother pregnancies (or a good first like your wife) are the ones more likely to home birth.

If you don't count "complications caused by intervention" and things like that, then no it isn't.

We've decided that it will be safer and more comfortable for us to do it at home with professional help. Thankfully the public hospital here had a home birthing unit, which was only started about 3 years ago.

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

#76

> 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…

There exist gyms and personal training education for pregnant and postpartum women. I considered sharing one here, but I realized that the comportment of many on HN would be disruptive to them.

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

#77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doctors' discomfort is also why they are so eager to slice women open like a fish, because baby needs to come on their schedule or they'll be late for tee time.

[[citation needed]] To my knowledge Caesarean Section is a last resort.

Not who you are replying to.

Anecdata, but my sister-in-law had 3 children, her first was at the same hospital I was born (in the Texas Medical Center), and he was a standard birth, the last 3 were at our small region hospital. With her second child after only an hour of labor they told her they HAD to do a C-Section, and to top it off, they only gave her 2 nights to recover from what is major surgery (first night being the night she gave birth). The reason for the remaining C-Section was that she "needed" a C-Section before.

I'm not saying that its so the doctor can go play golf or something personally repugnant like that, but that they are short staffed doctors, and a C-Section typically has no complications and they know how long it takes to get a baby out when they cut you open versus you taking up a bed that could be turned over to the next C-Section. There is an incentive to flip beds as often as possible.

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

#78
post #39

Everybody is joking half sarcastically here but childbirth as a process in hospitals do have serious problems and modern day labour leaves deep mental scars in most women while being one of the most important thing in their life. This is definitely a step in the wrong direction however laughable the idea is. Do you know what is the most uncomfortable position for labour is? Yeah, layin on your back. It's just the mos…

Thanks for sharing this. It's so crucial to know that we have actually lost this information and we're getting worse. > Do you know what is the most uncomfortable position for labour is? Yeah, layin on your back. My wife and I were shocked when we had our first. We were recommended a "natural birth" course that taught us this, and everyone gave us crap about being "woo-woo" and "denying science". Everyone. We also ha…

> They made such a big deal about being two days past the due date, that they pulled her aside and asked if I was abusive.

There's no relationship between those two things. The "do you feel safe at home" questions are required by law; I get them whenever I visit a hospital, including when I go by myself with a question about toenail fungus.

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

#79
post #74

It is called Blonsky device, and the story behind it is interesting: https://allthatsinteresting.com/blonsky-device From the article: "On that fateful day, George witnessed a pregnant elephant nearing labor. The large mammal spun in wide, slow circles. As he watched, George hypothesized that the spinning helped the elephant deliver its 250-pound baby."

I bet the elephant was just shy and didn't want anyone seeing her give birth

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

#80
post #39

Everybody is joking half sarcastically here but childbirth as a process in hospitals do have serious problems and modern day labour leaves deep mental scars in most women while being one of the most important thing in their life. This is definitely a step in the wrong direction however laughable the idea is. Do you know what is the most uncomfortable position for labour is? Yeah, layin on your back. It's just the mos…

Thanks for sharing this. It's so crucial to know that we have actually lost this information and we're getting worse. > Do you know what is the most uncomfortable position for labour is? Yeah, layin on your back. My wife and I were shocked when we had our first. We were recommended a "natural birth" course that taught us this, and everyone gave us crap about being "woo-woo" and "denying science". Everyone. We also ha…

By the looks of it you are denying science...

Hopefully you live close enough to a hospital. Pregnancy complications can happen suddenly and require immediate medical assistance.

Post reply on HN