[ / / / / / / / / ] [ b / news+ / boards ] [ operate / meta ] [ ]

/medfag/ - Medicine Fags

Catalog

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
Password (For file and post deletion.)

Allowed file types: jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 8 MB.
Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000.
You may upload 5 per post.


Primum non nocere

000000 No.25

Nowadays more women (due their careers or profession) choose to have children at older age, using fertility treatments in order to achieve maternity.

It seems to me that this is pushing too hard on nature, as having children at older ages (35 and more) increases risks of genetic mutations and fetus development would be subpar; as well as increased risk for the mother. It would be preferably to make more compatible laboral opportunities and motherhood.

What's your instance on this topic?

Has science gone too far? :^)

9a5bc0 No.35

Statistical fact, I remember reading a study on it written in the 60s, not sure of any modern data. It plotted rates of congenital issues such as asthma and heart murmurs, and there was a significant increase of them in births between mothers 20 years of age and 30 years of age.

>What's your instance on this topic?

What?



Delete Post [ ]
[]
[Return][Go to top][Catalog]
[ / / / / / / / / ] [ b / news+ / boards ] [ operate / meta ] [ ]