Rumor or Truth about Duchess of Cambridge?????

[PDilemma]

Ok you know what? I'm so tired of the whole weight thing and she can't get pregnant because she's so thin stuff. My best friend weighed a whole 90 pounds when she got pregnant with her first baby. I weighed 220. Neither one of us should have been able to get pregnant on the first try. But we did! Science doesn't know everything. If it's meant to be, it will be.

My mom has weighed about 95 lbs dripping wet her whole life and had two babies. And my nephew's mother had two and was over 300 lbs both times she got pregnant.

As far as I can tell, informing women of all the reasons they can't get pregnant is a sport in our society. No idea why. All of this crap had a woman I know so paranoid she intentionally got pregnant last year in the middle of an unstable relationship while underemployed because she was almost 26 and convinced she'd be infertile if she waited any longer. Now she's on benefits for herself and the baby...

[MacMadame]

Science doesn't know everything.

It isn't science that is wrong in this case. Science just says these things can decrease fertility. It's people who don't understand science who interpret "can decrease fertility" to mean "you'll never get pregnant."

I agree with PDilemma. Telling women why they'll never get pregnant is a sport in this country. And, when they get pregnant anyway, the sport changes to telling them every horror story about any pregnancy that ever happened since the beginning of time.

[Bunny Hop]

Science doesn't know everything.

Science knows it doesn't know everything - otherwise it would stop.

[danceronice]

My mom has weighed about 95 lbs dripping wet her whole life and had two babies. And my nephew's mother had two and was over 300 lbs both times she got pregnant.

As far as I can tell, informing women of all the reasons they can't get pregnant is a sport in our society. No idea why. All of this crap had a woman I know so paranoid she intentionally got pregnant last year in the middle of an unstable relationship while underemployed because she was almost 26 and convinced she'd be infertile if she waited any longer. Now she's on benefits for herself and the baby...

It's body-fat percentage, not actual body size. As long as your body thinks it proportionally has enough 'reserves' to support a baby, it doesn't matter if you're 90 pounds or 190 pounds. (Up to a certain point, obviously--you can be too thin, and you can also be too fat.)

And it's true if you wait too long, it gets harder. That's just nature. Women over 35 start to lose fertility and if you wait too long, it does become impossible without drastic intervention. But it's not like you hit 30 and one of those little turkey pop-up timers goes off.

In Kate's case it more likely they just don't think they WANT kids immediately. I mean, how did that work out for HIS parents again?

Oh yeah, one thing that CAN cause problems--stressing about it. So the more the media speculates and asks and pressures, the less likely they are to get what they want. Which is kind of perversely satisfying. (Seriously, TLC, Baby Watch? Get a life.)

[barbk]

There is good evidence to indicate that women who are very underweight are more prone to infertility. Here's what the University of Maryland says, "Weight loss or low weight may affect the hormonal signals that the brain sends to a woman's ovaries or a man's testes. In mild cases, a woman's ovaries may still make and release eggs, but the lining of the uterus may not be ready to have a fertilized egg implant because of inadequate hormone levels. In more serious cases, the woman's ovaries may not produce eggs at all. These women may have irregular or no menstrual cycles."

I don't think that there is much doubt that the Duchess is at a very, very low weight for someone of her height. There's also some evidence that those who have lost weight and who are now substantially underweight are at higher risk of infertility than are those who were naturally very tiny. Hard to argue that Kate hasn't lost a fair amount of weight since the pictures even five years ago, and she was always slim.

I'm not suggesting that she has an eating disorder, or that she can't possibly get and stay pregnant. I do think that her current apparent weight makes that a whole less likely.

(And I'm also of the belief that waiting for a while after marriage before getting pregnant is a very good idea for lots of reasons.)

[PDilemma]

I think the problem is that every time there is some study or some new information about fertility, the media presents a very generalized and sometimes sensationalized picture of it. My friend actually saw headlines about fertility declining after 25 and planned her life accordingly and the science was misrepresented in the headlines she saw. There was a story at the time that was online and not at a reputable source and not based on science speculating that these studies maybe indicated we should encourage young women to have babies before college and get their education later so they don't risk losing their fertility. And my friend nearing her 25th b-day ate all of that up, believed it and made some really bad life choices. Another woman I know saw headlines about body weight (which some of you have correctly interpreted here) and panicked that since she was 20 lbs or so overweight she might not be able to have children. And the stories she read were easily interpreted that way.

The media has not served women well by sensationalizing these things. There is validity in making people aware of the issues, but the way it has been reported falls more on the side of scaring women rather than accurately informing them.

[IceAlisa]

I think the problem is that every time there is some study or some new information about fertility, the media presents a very generalized and sometimes sensationalized picture of it. My friend actually saw headlines about fertility declining after 25 and planned her life accordingly and the science was misrepresented in the headlines she saw.

Headlines and actual studies published in peer-reviewed medical journals are not the same thing. And I think if I searched the database, I would find many examples of the latter demonstrating that a low enough percentage of body fat may lead to infertility.

[Dragonlady]

The media has not served women well by sensationalizing these things. There is validity in making people aware of the issues, but the way it has been reported falls more on the side of scaring women rather than accurately informing them.

I can't help but think that a lot of this scaremongering is deliberate. Women have been delaying marriage and having children since the birth control pill gave women the option of making choices about when to have a family and every such advance has been met with scary tactics. This stuff isn't new. When my son was born, I was 25 and that was considered "old" by the nurses at the hospital. One even referred to me as a "geriatric pregnancy" I was so old.

I had Tink when I was nearly 40 and I was very worried about having an developmently disabled baby because of increased risk for women my age.
There wasn't the level of scary stuff out there about women having problems getting pregnant that you see now and even though I was nearly 40 when I got pregnant, getting pregnant was not difficult at all. But there was a lot of stuff about the risks of Downs Syndrome and other risks to the fetus of having babies at this late stage in my life.

I was so relieved when we got the results of the amnio which said I was carrying a healthy baby girl.

[PDilemma]

Headlines and actual studies published in peer-reviewed medical journals are not the same thing. And I think if I searched the database, I would find many examples of the latter demonstrating that a low enough percentage of body fat may lead to infertility.

I did not dispute that. Not in any of the posts I have made. In fact, my point was that headlines and medical journals are not the same. Studies are misrepresented by journalists who do not understand the studies they are reporting. And this isn't just true regarding fertility matters. People are misinformed and unduly scared regarding all kinds of health issues because of the media's bad reporting.

And there are exceptions to every rule in fertility matters as well as other health issues. My father-in-law was born when his mother was 48 years old, long before assisted reproduction existed. Given that he was the youngest of her eleven children, clearly she was very fertile, but he is younger than his nearest sibling by seven years and was a big surprise. You don't know what is going to happen in individual cases.

[nerdycool]

My friend actually saw headlines about fertility declining after 25 and planned her life accordingly and the science was misrepresented in the headlines she saw.

More and more fertility doctors are telling patients that based on recent research, fertility for women does start to go in decline at about age 27, though it's not drastic. It's a sharper decline in the mid-30's, which is when people start to worry. So there is some truth to it, although it's still possible for women with no problems to get pregnant with little difficulty. For example, on average for a normal healthy couple, there is a 20% chance each month of getting pregnant. After 27 or so, the chances drop slightly, to maybe 19%. At age 35, it drops closer to 13%. By age 40, 10%.

Do I have articles proving this? No. But I do know what my own RE (Reproductive Endocrinologist) told me, and I know that other RE's around the country are starting to tell their patients the same thing, per my online fertility support group. And I like to think that my doctor knows what she's talking about.

[kwanfan1818]

UH, use Harry's sperm?

I guess that's why there's a "spare".

I know that Dragonlady's comment wasn't in response to Latte's, but it works.

[Ania]

Haven't heard anything about it, but considering that the entire trip was widely documented on an almost hour-by-hour basis, I'd be surprised if something like this happened. They didn't miss any engagements, and the few times they had time to themselves, their whereabouts was still well known.

I have no idea what did or did not happen to Catherine. But I wanted to address this comment. It is possible to have a miscarriage without missing any engagements or anyone knowing (besides the woman of course!) - that's how mine was last year. A miscarriage does not always equal hospital trips and physical pain (emotional pain is another issue entirely, and I think my emotional state was helped by being very busy at the end of the semester, grading, etc.)
Again, this is not an opinion on anything relating to Catherine; I just addressed what I think is a misperception about miscarriages in general (which come in many shapes, including physically painless).

[IceAlisa]

And there are exceptions to every rule in fertility matters as well as other health issues.

Yes, there are exceptions to most every accepted standard in medicine. However, any OB/GYN worth their mettle would suggest to their patient to gain weight if their % of body fat is too low to ovulate if the patient is trying to conceive. A physician does not generally look at exceptions but to the standard of care and statistics as well as their clinical experience. These are by no means perfect but it's the best we've got. Exceptions do not invalidate the rule.

You don't know what is going to happen in individual cases.

No, you do not. But you play the odds. It's like saying that you don't know what would happen if someone decided to walk across a busy highway. May be they will get lucky. But their odds aren't great.

[Civic]

That poor woman. Everything she does, says or wears comes under scrutiny.

[walei]

As I was wizzing through the grocery store, there was a big front page headline of The Duchess having a miscarriage on the Canadian/US tour. I haven't seen anything else about it; does anyone know if it's hype or true?

Once I saw one the front page of a tabloid with a woman saying they won't let her compete in the Olympics because she has three legs. The cover had a photograph of this woman with three legs on the ice complete with figure skates on all three.

I'm just sayin'

[Dragonlady]

Catherine sure looked happy on her Canadian tour. I seriously doubt that she would have been all that blissful if she had undergone a miscarriage. She was also physically very active which again, I doubt would have been the case had she miscarried.

I had two miscarriages and I certainly wasn't smiling and carrying on with my usual schedule when they happened. It wasn't the physical difficulty, it was the emotional.

[bek]

I had two miscarriages and I certainly wasn't smiling and carrying on with my usual schedule when they happened. It wasn't the physical difficulty, it was the emotional.

Well its kind of the job of a royal to smile and look happy, even when your going through private turmoil. Not saying that Kate had a miscarriage. And if she did its really none of our business. I really do think its a bit much though for people to be talking about Kate being infertile now. Seriously the girl probably just started trying to have kids...

[milanessa]

Seriously the girl probably just started trying to have kids...

And that's assuming they have.

[FigureSpins]

Once I saw one the front page of a tabloid with a woman saying they won't let her compete in the Olympics because she has three legs. The cover had a photograph of this woman with three legs on the ice complete with figure skates on all three.

I'm just sayin'

I saw someone do a routine like that at Adult Easterns a few years ago. She brought a dummy "third leg," complete with skate, as a prop for an Artistic program.

[IceAlisa]

And that's assuming they have.

IIRC, she said she was not in a hurry.