PDA

View Full Version : Strange Question?


tony draper
30th Oct 2013, 17:13
Just been watching a documentary about the proto Scots,ie the pre celtic peoples who landed in and inhabited Scotland at the end of the last Ice Age ie 10,000 years ago, probably from Doggerland the land area that existed in the North Sea that was swamped around that time by the rising sea level.
Anyway now the question, they were yacking on about the nomadic hunter gatherer type lifestyle these folks led and the difficulty of tootling about the place with hords of young offspring,so they opined that the ladies of the tribe probably had one sprog and suckled them for a much longer period than would be considered normal now thus preventing repeat pregnancies.
One found this puzzling,one admits one has led a sheltered life but have never heard that a extended period suckling the young employed as a means of birth control.
Be this a fact?
Honest question,not being funny
:confused:

G&T ice n slice
30th Oct 2013, 17:18
I believe this idea has existed for aeons. Indeed a very Catholic acquaintance of mine believed it would prevent pregnancy.

Her second child appeared 12 months and a few days after the first....

wings folded
30th Oct 2013, 17:24
Modern bints either give birth by a gash in the guts and would not dream of offering tit, or go quite the other way and do everything "as it used to be".

While milk is being generated, the hormones that re-activate ovulation are put to one side, but not infallibly.

Within my circle there is an accidental further sprog due to over reliance on this principal. And they are both medically qualified, so should have known better. Ah well.

arcniz
30th Oct 2013, 21:22
Personality still is, and likely always was, the most effective means for birth control.

The "Cold Shoulder", as it were, likely is chilly enough to do the trick... on average, when used with claws to back it up.



:):):)

obgraham
31st Oct 2013, 05:22
Over many years, I found that belief in the value of prolonged breast feeding to stall subsequent pregnancies to be very profitable.

To me, not to them.

obgraham
31st Oct 2013, 05:24
But here, Mr D is what I don't understand: considering that long ago young'uns would meet an often untimely demise, or else get et by lions and eagles and such..... wouldn't survival of the race require a bunch more of them?

racedo
31st Oct 2013, 19:57
Tony

Its a good point but as ladies could be with child from 15-16 then having one every 3 years would still mean 4-5 even allowing for premature demise.

tony draper
31st Oct 2013, 20:30
Well they did not claim they knew this knew this for a fact,how could they,just puzzled me, I had never heard of this before but it must be something know about ie primitive hunter gatherer tribes today may still use this practice.
Just wondered if there was a known biological reality for this method of controlling fertility.
:)

obgraham
31st Oct 2013, 21:29
Yes Tony:
Breast feeding increases the production of Prolactin in the pituitary gland, which in turn suppresses the production of follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) and luteinizing hormone (LH), also from the pituitary.
Those latter two are what generates an ovarian cycle of egg production and release.
No FSH/LH = No cycle.

Well sort of. It's not 100%.

tony draper
31st Oct 2013, 21:34
Thank you Mr obgraham,we learn summat new every day.:)

racedo
31st Oct 2013, 22:20
Well they did not claim they knew this knew this for a fact,how could they,just puzzled me, I had never heard of this before but it must be something know about ie primitive hunter gatherer tribes today may still use this practice.
Just wondered if there was a known biological reality for this method of controlling fertility.
http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/smile.gif

Ever wonder why in primitive societies that Brothers and Sisters didn't get together ? and the tribe knew to prevent that.

er340790
1st Nov 2013, 03:02
Proto-Scots.... Yes, I think I've met a few of them! :}

10Watt
1st Nov 2013, 21:23
l don`t know about birth control....

certainly works as work control.

baggersup
1st Nov 2013, 21:44
Alas, just an old wive's tale. But it's still circulating long after being medically debunked.

My school friend's mother thought that, therefore her sister is 10 months younger than she is.

Lancair70
2nd Nov 2013, 01:21
We, (the Ex wife and I) never even knew of this story/myth/old wives tale of breastfeeding as a birth control method, yet we were accused (by older relo's) of relying on that, when the first born was 5 months old and she fell pregnant again.
She was breastfeeding several times a day, the first sign we had that she might be pregnant again was about 12hrs after the act (typically one of only a few in the previous 5months) the 1st baby rejected the breast milk and never touched it again.
A shock at the time and not really how we planned to have 2 kids but now, a blessing in disguise, as the 2 boys are very close.

arcniz
2nd Nov 2013, 01:51
So.. the plot thickens. Not only iffy BC, but a new category of sibling rivalry -- hormone hijack.

visibility3miles
2nd Nov 2013, 05:21
the first sign we had that she might be pregnant again was about 12hrs after the act (typically one of only a few in the previous 5months) the 1st baby rejected the breast milk and never touched it again.

Sounds like an interesting research grant proposal, if it hasn't been done already. :8

Breast-feeding strike: Why do babies refuse to nurse? - MayoClinic.com (http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/breastfeeding-strike/AN02155)