Street Anatomy highlights the most frequently viewed medical animation ever: an illustration of the difficult path for childbirth. It's too bad it doesn't show the effect on the kid in much detail — our babies all came out with the most astonishingly pointy heads from all the squishing and squeezing, but they still ended up normal. Mostly. I think.
Pharyngula
Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal
Search
Profile
PZ Myers is a biologist and associate professor at the University of Minnesota, Morris.
…and this is a pharyngula stage embryo.
• a longer profile of yours truly
• my calendar
• Nature Network
• RichardDawkins Network
• facebook
• MySpace
• Twitter
• Atheist Nexus
• the Pharyngula chat room
(#pharyngula on irc.synirc.net)
• Quick link to the latest endless thread
I reserve the right to publicly post, with full identifying information about the source, any email sent to me that contains threats of violence.
Random Quote
Irrationally held truths may be more harmful than reasoned errors.
[Thomas Huxley (1825-1895), English biologist and advocate of Darwin's natural selection theory]
Recent Posts
- We're doomed. It's another sign of the apocalypse.
- A wonderful debate
- The world is ending, again
- Rudeness required
- Now I understand everything
- I get email
- Happy Carl Sagan Day!
- A poll in my own backyard
- A True Scotsman™ keeps his Bible in his sporran!
- Who does he think he is, Charles Dickens?
A Taste of Pharyngula
Recent Comments
- Rorschach on A wonderful debate
- MikeM on A wonderful debate
- tonyadamskklddrtotdfdf on New thread for Ken Ham's old whines
- aratina cage on A wonderful debate
- not a gator on A wonderful debate
- Wowbagger, OM on A wonderful debate
- Bruce Gorton on Rudeness required
- Feynmaniac on Ethical Humanist Society of Chicago: You're doing it wrong
- Islander on We're doomed. It's another sign of the apocalypse.
- Ron Sullivan on We're doomed. It's another sign of the apocalypse.
Archives
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
Blogroll
Other Information
« It's too bad this is a joke | Main | If you are what you eat… »
Slitherin' baby
Category: Art
Posted on: October 23, 2007 3:34 PM, by PZ Myers
Share this: Facebook Twitter Stumbleupon Reddit Email + More
TrackBacks
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/53792
Sign in or register with TypePad. Sign up with Movable Type.
Comments
Posted by: The Disgruntled Chemist | October 23, 2007 4:08 PM
Ouch.
Posted by: Sophie | October 23, 2007 4:10 PM
Marsupials rule. Being able to postpone birth to a more favourable date and giving birth to a very tiny being that will be able to grow in a pouch and gain independence progressively seems a very much better idea. Pointy heads... well well well.
Posted by: H. Humbert | October 23, 2007 4:13 PM
Slitherin' Baby is much less annoying than Dancin' Baby.
http://www.burningpixel.com/Baby/Babygif.htm
Posted by: June | October 23, 2007 4:21 PM
Very non-intelligent design.
Posted by: Jsn | October 23, 2007 4:51 PM
Wow, you can almost feel the mother's skin stretching and tearing. Looks like a safe, well-designed process for both mom and baby, doesn't it? The way the head becomes constricted and contorted; the way Ob's, many times, have to make an incision in the perineum to keep the vulva from ripping all the way to the anus. That God fellow is such a good designer...
Posted by: Prillotashekta | October 23, 2007 5:05 PM
My wife was already dead-set against getting pregnant (with my support for that decision). This should completely seal the deal.
A friend of my wife's family recently gave birth. Her husband was present for the event. Afterwards, my father-in-law asked the husband about it.
The husband replied:
"Yeah, I saw it. And let me tell you... Intelligent design, my ass!"
Posted by: shpx.ohfu | October 23, 2007 5:15 PM
The cello music makes it all better.
Posted by: Bride of Shrek | October 23, 2007 5:15 PM
That was almost beautiful, rather quick and I swear the kid was grinning. Funny though I didn't hear the music whilst I was doing it (any of the three times). Mainly consisted of fifteen hours of puffing, screaming and swearing to rip my husband's cods off if he ever got me pregnant again.
Posted by: Moses | October 23, 2007 5:15 PM
Where was the screaming and yelling at the husband part? Because I quite well remember the screaming and yelling at the husband part...
Posted by: Bride of Shrek | October 23, 2007 5:17 PM
But then again that's my lot as a woman because of that bitch Eve tempting Adam with a friggin apple and starting the whole original sin thing. I must admit turning slightly religous during the experience but it was more along the lines of "Jesus, fucking Christ that hurts" kind of worship.
Posted by: Mark P | October 23, 2007 5:50 PM
I'm glad I'm a man, and I'm glad I was too young to remember that experience now.
Posted by: Dianne | October 23, 2007 6:02 PM
Heh. My thought was just the opposite: The animation only took one minute. The actual event takes an average of 17 hours the first time, 6 hours for subsequent attempts. Plus they didn't show the blood. Or the bit where the cord wraps around the baby's neck or the shoulder dystocia. In short, if you think this was scary, stay the heck away from OB wards because you'll faint.
Posted by: Hank Fox | October 23, 2007 6:28 PM
I watched that animation, and good lord! The woman has to push and breathe and scream AND play the cello?? I mean, the music accompanying the birth was beautiful, but ... jeez.
Posted by: Azkyroth | October 23, 2007 6:30 PM
Just out of curiosity, Dianne, how much of that time is divided between just the body's preparation and the baby actually moving through the vagina? I've never been clear on that...
Posted by: Interrobang | October 23, 2007 6:45 PM
I must confess to not having watched it. I can't imagine why anyone would, frankly. Then again, I think it's seriously weird that anyone actually goes through that voluntarily (as opposed to because they had to, or because the culture says it's the done thing, or whatever).
I've got the appropriate equipment, but I'm seriously considering Freecycling it. I'm not using it; it's just taking up space, and I might be able to get something I actually want...
Posted by: KiwiInOz | October 23, 2007 7:11 PM
As my wife said "They told me about the head, but they didn't tell me about the @#$% shoulders!".
Posted by: Amphigorey | October 23, 2007 7:53 PM
Oh my god. I am SO glad I got myself sterilized.
Posted by: Angie | October 23, 2007 8:05 PM
See, it was watching a film of childbirth in 9th grade that scared the daylights out of my 14-year old self to the extent that I had an elective caesarean when I had my child sixteen years later. I still don't know if that was a good thing or not, but I know I've never regretted my decision.
Also, a friend had just given birth vaginally to a baby that came out BUTT FIRST and folded over!! That wasn't pretty.
Posted by: jan andrea | October 23, 2007 8:14 PM
Meh. I've had two homebirths sans medication, and yeah, it hurt like a sonofabitch, but I'm doing it again at the end of December. Neat animation, but too bad they were showing the standard obstetric presentation of mother-on-back, which is among the very, very least efficient ways to labor. I'd have been more impressed if they'd rotated it 90 degrees clockwise, so that the mother's hips could properly flex and open up (as opposed to being far more fixed in place when she's lying on her back). Childbirth is no more designed than any other part of nature, but if you let it progress the way evolution has intended -- instead of insisting on all kinds of interventions like unnecessary inductions, drugs that make it so the woman doesn't feel *anything* and necessitate lying on her back, bad positioning, etc etc etc, it usually goes pretty darned well.
I'm sure I'll get jumped on by the "Well, I *needed* my induction/epidural/c-section" crowd for saying this, but in the vast majority of cases, just letting birth go at its own pace is far safer than trying to intervene. Yes, infant mortality rates have gone down a ton in the last century... but mostly that's because birth practitioners know they're supposed to wash their hands, and the 5% of *necessary% c-sections mean that mothers no longer lose their babies and/or their lives if there genuinely is an issue that precludes a vaginal birth. If you look at infant and maternal mortality rates, the US (where the CS rate is nearly 30% in most areas) is far, far below countries where homebirths and un-intervened-in births are the norm. We kind of suck at the whole birth thing in the US.
Sorry, bit of a soapbox issue there...
Posted by: Chris R. | October 23, 2007 8:20 PM
The ones that don't, I believe, are called "creationists".Posted by: Alison | October 23, 2007 8:22 PM
This is why they invented painkillers. And why the brain tends to block out trauma from our memories. The heck with "natural childbirth" - gimme the drugs. My first took 60 hours, and even after all that AND forceps, she had a perfectly round head. One soft spot on her skull smaller than a dime (she started life off hard-headed, obviously) so each time the pushing stopped, she slid right back up again. After that, a c-section for the second was a piece of cake. Neither one anything like that lovely little film.
Posted by: Rich | October 23, 2007 8:27 PM
I was in the delivery room for the birth of my son. The labor and birth took 11 hours. He had a decidedly pointy skull, but I was so amazed by his beautiful, piercing blue eyes that I didn't notice it until I saw the picture that the hospital took. It kind of freaked me out a bit. I still have a wallet sized copy of that picture. I show it to him when he gets too full of himself. At the age of 22 that will occasionally happen. ;-)
Posted by: Dianne | October 23, 2007 8:53 PM
Azkyroth: "Only" about 1-2 of the hours involved are dedicated to the second stage of labor, aka pushing the baby out. On average. The rest are the cervix dilating to the point that the 11 cm head can fit through the 10 cm cervix. Yep, there's still a mismatch, but it is possible...if the head is tucked just right. In my experience, the early, dilating contractions are somewhat more painful than having a fingernail ripped off*, but there is reason to suspect that my experience was not typical.
*Yes, I do know what that feels like.
Posted by: David Harmon | October 23, 2007 9:06 PM
Interrobang: OK, I'd like to see *that* advertisement! ;-)
Posted by: Brian | October 23, 2007 9:10 PM
I was born with such a squashed-in pointy head that my dad burst into tears and exclaimed, "my son is a retard, what will I do"? He was amazed a couple of hours later when I looked more normal.
Posted by: Dr. Steve | October 23, 2007 9:35 PM
I was impressed with the presentation of this stylized birth - that is the sort of archetype birth that medical students are trained to expect (and which only sometime happens). Note the vertex presentation with the neck flexed so the smallest diameter of the head (the biparietal diameter) can come through, the delivery of the posterior shoulder first, etc.
I will say that once the anterior shoulder comes out, you should fast-forward the animation since the rest of the body shoots out in what can be a challenging game of "catch" for the latex-gloved practitioner.
Posted by: LM | October 23, 2007 10:52 PM
Bring it ON! Only 5.5 weeks!
Did I mention I'm doing the natural childbirth thing? Oh yeah. No epidural for me. Just give me a stick to bite on!
Posted by: Possummomma | October 23, 2007 10:59 PM
That animation lies!! My stomach never had the shrinky-dink qualities that this animated mother had!! ;)
My first baby was a 54 hour labor - no joke. And, she's taken her sweet time ever since.
Second baby was an emergency C-section, which sucked enough to make me have two, VBAC's. Third baby was 8 hours, zero cm to delivery. I got cocky with my last child and was under the impression that the labor would go really fast. Nope. Thirty-six hours of pitocin induced hell and a near death experience later, he decided to grace us with his presense. I'm not all that sure that walking up-right is enough of a bonus for me to accept the effects it had on labor and delivery.
Posted by: PZ Myers | October 23, 2007 10:59 PM
You know that G. Gordon Liddy thing where he held his hand in a flame to prove how tough he was? That was nothing, once you've seen a woman give birth.
(My wife made it through three with only minimal drugs -- I think she had some locals for the really rough bits. I am but a weak, frail worm in comparison.)
Posted by: LM | October 23, 2007 11:00 PM
@ 19: I'm with you. There is no way in hell I'm going to let them tether me to a hospital bed. I want to MOVE.
Really, the pain is the last thing I'm worried about.
Posted by: Rich | October 23, 2007 11:14 PM
My wife (at the time) was expecting drugs of some kind. But when we got there, her doctor was not on call. The doctor that we had available did not believe in drugs during childbirth. In fact, during the labor, she cursed him out so badly that he actually left the delivery room. He told her to do it herself. I'm not kidding. I had to go out and apologise to him and plead with him to come back in.
Conversation with the wife went like this:
Her: RICH WHERE ARE YOU?
Me: I'm right here honey.
Her: THAT'S NOT GOOD ENOUGH!
Her: HOLD ME.
Me: I'm holding your hand dear.
Her: DON'T TOUCH ME YOU BASTARD!
She had to have an episiotomy and I'm guessing that at that point she barely felt it. After my son was born she was given a shot of someting that changed her mood a bit.
She looked at me and said (and I quote):
"Honey, let's make another one. Right now. Right here."
That was about when they yanked out the afterbirth.
I have one son. That was fine for both of us.
Posted by: LM | October 23, 2007 11:18 PM
LOL @ Rich! Shhh, my DH is reading over my shoulder and I think you're scaring him! :D
Posted by: Rich | October 23, 2007 11:25 PM
I'll say one thing more. While I do not believe in a god, the closest that I have ever come to what I think might be a religious feeling is looking at my son mere seconds after he was born.
I would not trade that moment for anything in the world.
It was wonderful. It stays with me to this day.
Posted by: andrea | October 24, 2007 12:07 AM
Pointy head? Shucks, a pointy head is nuffin' -- after 35 hours of back-labor, my second kid had pointy EARS! We always attributed it to watching Star Trek reruns during early labor...
One thing about back-labor; it makes anything else pale in comparison. "Oh yeah, this f-ing hurts, but it's not as bad as back-labor!" Especially 35 hours of such, and then delivering a 9 lb 9 oz kid who chest was even larger than his head! (I am not a big woman, either.)
Intelligent design, my ass.
Posted by: JohnnieCanuck, FCD | October 24, 2007 12:26 AM
Wouldn't that be "Intelligent design, my vagina."?
Posted by: truth machine | October 24, 2007 6:24 AM
I'm glad I'm a man, and I'm glad I was too young to remember that experience now.
Yeah, good thing you weren't older when you were born.
Posted by: Dianne | October 24, 2007 8:42 AM
Rich: Your OB must be insane! Has anyone murdered him for being a complete jerk yet or is that still something for him to look forward to? Or did he manage to kill someone by providing inadequate care and get his license pulled before anyone got it together to put him out of who knows how many women's misery?
Posted by: Bob | October 24, 2007 10:18 AM
Hear, hear.
If anyone important like that walked out on us at a time like that, I'd strangle the fucker and stick him in a supply closet.
Oh, I'm sorry. Was that out loud?
Posted by: Arnosium Upinarum | October 24, 2007 12:06 PM
Considering this, it is utterly bewildering that there is anything like an overpopulation of humans. To think that there are over 6 billions alive now who squeezed their way out of their mothers into the world on over 6 billion separate occassions...oh dear, I feel really faint
Posted by: Josh | October 24, 2007 2:49 PM
Oh my god. Despite the clean and cartoony nature of that video, my jaw dropped and I could only say one thing: c-section. Screw natural birth, why squeeze them out like that now if you can avoid it.
Posted by: RP | October 24, 2007 2:52 PM
Jumpin' jeebus, and people wonder why I'm childfree. Thank you, science, for effective contraception!
Posted by: LM | October 24, 2007 4:01 PM
Tsk. Such wimpiness!
Posted by: Anton Mates | October 24, 2007 6:34 PM
Good lord, have you seen a c-section? With the cutting and the blood and the shoving internal organs out of the way so you can reach through and cut some more and...ick. Ick. It significantly raises (like, triples) your chances of having severe medical problems during subsequent births, as well.
Much better to adopt. Then you can screen out the ugly kids!
Posted by: Kseniya | October 24, 2007 6:49 PM
Arno, I think the population problem a testament to the overpowering need to get laid. Repeatedly. There's a horse-cart aspect to the claim that if the population continues to grow unchecked, the human race is fucked.
OMG... That's a pretty damned funny story, Rich.
At this point in my life, I'm a dedicated nullipara, though I expect that to change sometime during the next ten or so years.
Best wishes, LM, let us know how it goes. Make sure that stick is hard rubber, or rawhide.
Posted by: Dianne | October 24, 2007 9:54 PM
Good lord, have you seen a c-section?
Yeah. Abdominal surgery: not pretty. I've always rather regretted that I didn't see mine, though. It would have been fun to see where the critter had been developing all that time...
Best wishes, LM, let us know how it goes. Make sure that stick is hard rubber, or rawhide.
Seconded. Some women come through labor thinking "no sweat." But they are the minority.
Posted by: Arnosium Upinarum | October 24, 2007 10:08 PM
Kseniya: Oh, sure. Repeatedly. Demonstrates beyond a shadow of a doubt just how powerful that drive is, that so effectively disables any perception of consequent risk.
The "claim" that "if the population continues to grow unchecked, the human race is fucked" doesn't require any "horse-cart aspect" consideration to be true or not. The reasons for overpopulation are relatively irrelevant. The potential CONSEQUENCES of an ever-increasing population of consumers on a decidedly finite world with finite resources and living space that other species require to keep it all tolerably livable obviously ARE. And they're not very pretty. - arno
Posted by: Arnosium Upinarum | October 24, 2007 10:31 PM
Oh, btw, PZ? That "G. Gordon Liddy thing"? Just for the record. Actually, it was snuffing flaming matches out with his fingers, saying, "The trick is in NOT MINDING that it hurts".
I've seen that political myth repeatedly reported as original to him. It fits his er, style, of course. But it's not original to him. See Peter O'Toole do it early in film "Lawrence of Arabia".
Considering that the reports of Liddy's use of the "trick" use almost the same exact wording for the er...justification, in answer to the question, "What's the trick?", Liddy almost certainly stole it from the movie OR the myth propagated from an initial false report by someone who applied it to Liddy that subsequently grew into a myth in the retelling. I don't know if it was original to the movie, but the film predates the reported occurrences attributed to Liddy in his later er...career.
Posted by: Owlmirror | October 25, 2007 1:08 AM
Talk.origins post of the month, some years ago:
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/postmonth/may02.html
Posted by: Kseniya | October 25, 2007 1:34 AM
Arno, I'm with you all the way. The cart-horse remark was just a wisecrack.
Posted by: Arnosium Upinarum | October 25, 2007 6:16 PM
Kseniya: Ah, okay. Cool.
But this gives me an opportunity to provide a relevant link:
http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn12834-unsustainable-development-puts-humanity-at-risk.html
That's the future we face from our prodigious baby-squirtings. (Argh, feeling faint again...)