You also have a decreased risk of ovarian cancer if you completely remove your fallopian tubes, and it doesn’t require an 18.75 year financial, emotional, medical, and time investment to gain.
Its longer than that these days. I was out for a bit in my 20s but in my 30s I had to move back because there is no realistic way to live in my own house and all I have to show for my work history is back pain, meniscal tear, poor vision, constant migraines, deteriorated mental capabilities and social skills, probably other crap, debt.
The voice of reason is too often ignored.
Counterpoint: There’s a correlation between being forced to have a child you’re not ready for and having your fucking life ruined.
Causation isn’t correlation.
Yes it is.
Causation requires correlation, but not vice versa
It is it? Or it requires it?
The famous sentence is that correlation isn’t causation, the inverse is always true. Correlation means that two things tend to increase and decrease together or inverted, that they both have a relation with whatever else. Causation means that one thing is the cause of another thing, meaning that one or several things increasing or decreasing are the sole cause of another thing hapenning.
By definition, causation implies correlation, but the inverse isn’t true.
Small example: months where more icecream is eaten have an increased average of tanned people, on average. Does this mean that eating icecream gets you tanned? Nope, it means that on summer people eat more icecream (partial causation) and on summer people go more to the beach and get tanned, again, being summer isn’t the causation of getting tanned, it’s just a correlation because it’s sunnier. As we know, being in the sun is the causation of getting tanned.
In any case, either you mixed the two terms or you got confused, I hpe this clarified it :]
Or that was the joke?
By definition you can’t have causation without a correlation, but the two aren’t the same. It does feel like your original intent was ‘correlation doesn’t equal causation’ though.
You have that backwards.
You are also significantly less likely to die from a gunshot if you’ve never owned a gun.
But hey, statistics only matter if they support your already held views, right?
Those parasites from Futurama are better…
I mean, totally. Please gimme.
And if you keep the thing around for another 18 years it’ll be able to buy you a beer, but only if it hasn’t already eaten you out of house and home, or shot up its middle school, or outlived you by 18 years after you died of postpartum hemorrhage. The whole topic is ridiculous.
You actually have to keep it around 21 years until they can buy a beer in the US.
True, although a preschooler can fetch you one from the fridge.
Compared to healthy microbes in human guts, that’s nothing. But when we take antibiotics, we kill those microbes. I guess it is immoral to take antibiotics then.
Gut microbes are people too! They deserve full citizenship! Many are multicellular and have a circulatory system like a ❤️ beat. That means they deserve full citizenship status.
“Carried to term”? 😂 Yeah, I’m sure that’s required
It kinda is, because the reduced risk they’re referring to is due to fewer menstrual cycles (while carrying the pregnancy). But you can get the same benefit from hormonal birth control
I was mainly thinking about the second half of the post about babies’ stem cells. The research was done on the blood of pregnant women.
deleted by creator
I was referring specifically to the reduced risk of ovarian and breast cancers.
Yeah, I wasn’t. Giving birth is not a requirement for any of these things.
I’ve heard something about women that felt like they’d became dumb after having a baby and their overall mental capabilities became permanently worse. I can’t imagine going through all the suffering just to suffer more and bring a new life into a present and future of also suffering.
Meanwhile these dodos are against stem cell research. 🤦♂️
