‘Free birthing’ and planned home births might sound similar but the risks are very different
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
The death of premature twins in Byron Bay in an apparent “wild birth”, or free birth, last week has prompted fresh concerns about giving birth without a midwife or medical assistance.
This follows another case from Victoria this year, where a baby was born in a critical condition following a reported free birth.
It’s unclear how common free birthing is, as data is not collected, but there is some evidence free births increased during the COVID pandemic.
Planned home births also became more popular during the pandemic, as women preferred to stay away from hospitals and wanted their support people with them.
But while free births and home births might sound similar, they are a very different practice, with free births much riskier. So what’s the difference, and why might people opt for a free birth?
What are home births?
Planned home births involve care from midwives, who are registered experts in childbirth, in a woman’s home.
These registered midwives work privately, or are part of around 20 publicly funded home birth programs nationally that are attached to hospitals.
They provide care during the pregnancy, labour and birth, and in the first six weeks following the birth.
The research shows that for women with low risk pregnancies, planned home births attended by competent midwives (with links to a responsive mainstream maternity system) are safe.
Home births result in less intervention than hospital births and women perceive their experience more positively.
What are free births?
A free birth is when a woman chooses to have a baby, usually at home, without a registered health professional such as a midwife or doctor in attendance.
Different terms such as unassisted birth or wild pregnancy or birth are also used to refer to free birth.
The parents may hire an unregulated birth worker or doula to be a support at the birth but they do not have the training or medical equipment needed to manage emergencies.
Women may have limited or no health care antenatally, meaning risk factors such as twins and breech presentations (the baby coming bottom first) are not detected beforehand and given the right kind of specialist care.
Why do some people choose to free birth?
We have been studying the reasons women and their partners choose to free birth for more than a decade. We found a previous traumatic birth and/or feeling coerced into choices that are not what the woman wants were the main drivers for avoiding mainstream maternity care.
Australia’s childbirth intervention rates – for induction or augmentation of labour, episiotomy (cutting the tissue between the vaginal opening and the anus) and caesarean section – are comparatively high.
One in ten women report disrespectful or abusive care in childbirth and some decide to make different choices for future births.
Lack of options for a natural birth and birth choices such as home birth or birth centre birth also played a major role in women’s decision to free birth.
Publicly funded home birth programs have very strict criteria around who can be accepted into the program, excluding many women.
In other countries such as the United Kingdom, Netherlands and New Zealand, publicly funded home births are easier to access.
Only around 200 midwives provide private midwifery services for home births nationally. Private midwives are yet to obtain insurance for home births, which means they are risking their livelihoods if something goes wrong and they are sued.
The cost of a home birth with a private midwife is not covered by Medicare and only some health funds rebate some of the cost. This means women can be out of pocket A$6-8,000.
Access to home birth is an even greater issue in rural and remote Australia.
How to make mainstream care more inclusive
Many women feel constrained by their birth choices in Australia. After years of research and listening to thousands of women, it’s clear more can be done to reduce the desire to free birth.
As my co-authors and I outline in our book, Birthing Outside the System: The Canary in the Coal Mine, this can be achieved by:
- making respectful care a reality so women aren’t traumatised and alienated by maternity care and want to engage with it
- supporting midwifery care. Women are seeking more physiological and social ways of birthing, minimising birth interventions, and midwives are the experts in this space
- supporting women’s access to their chosen place of birth and model of care and not limiting choice with high out-of-pocket expenses
- providing more flexible, acceptable options for women experiencing risk factors during pregnancy and/or birth, such as having a previous caesarean birth, having twins or having a baby in breech position. Women experiencing these complications experience pressure to have a caesarean section
- getting the framework right with policies, guidelines, education, research, regulation and professional leadership.
Ensuring women’s rights and choices are informed and respected means they’re less likely to feel they’re left with no other option.
Hannah Dahlen, Professor of Midwifery, Associate Dean Research and HDR, Midwifery Discipline Leader, Western Sydney University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Recommended
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
Eat to Beat Depression and Anxiety – by Dr. Drew Ramsey
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
Most of us could use a little mood boost sometimes, and some of us could definitely stand to have our baseline neurochemistry elevated a bit. We’ve probably Googled “foods to increase dopamine”, and similar phrases. So, why is this a book, and not just an article saying to eat cashews and dark chocolate?
Dr. Drew Ramsey takes a holistic approach to health. By this we mean that to have good health, the whole body and mind must be kept healthy. Let a part slip, and the others will soon follow. Improve a part, and the others will soon follow, too.
Of course, there is only so much that diet can do. Jut as no diet will replace a Type 1 Diabetic’s pancreas with a working one, no diet will treat the causes of some kinds of depression and anxiety.
For this reason, Dr. Ramsey, himself a psychiatrist (and a farmer!) recommends a combination of talking therapy and diet, with medications as a “third leg” to be included when necessary. The goal, for him, is to reduce dependence on medications, while still recognizing when they can be useful or even necessary.
As for the practical, actionable advices in the book, he does (unsurprisingly) recommend a Mediterranean diet. Heavy on the greens and beans, plenty of colorful fruit and veg, small amounts of fish and seafood, even smaller amounts of grass-fed beef and fermented dairy. He also discusses a bunch of “superfoods” he particularly recommends.
Nor does he just hand-wave the process; he talks about the science of how and why each of these things helps.
And in practical terms, he even devotes some time to helping the reader get our kitchen set up, if we’re not already ready-to-go in that department. He also caters to any “can’t cook / won’t cook” readers and how to work around that too.
Bottom line: if you’d like to get rewiring your brain (leveraging neuroplasticity is a key component of the book), this will get you on track. A particular strength is how the author “thinks of everything” in terms of common problems that people (especially: depressed and anxious people!) might have in implementing his advices.
Share This Post
What you need to know about H5N1 bird flu
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
On May 30, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that a Michigan dairy worker tested positive for H5N1 bird flu. It was the fourth person to test positive for H5N1 in the United States, following another recent case in Michigan, an April case in Texas, and an initial case in Colorado in 2022.
H5N1 bird flu has been spreading among bird species in the U.S. since 2021, killing millions of wild birds and poultry. In late March 2024, H5N1 bird flu was found in cows for the first time, causing an outbreak in dairy cows across several states.
U.S. public health officials and researchers are particularly concerned about this outbreak because the virus has infected cows and other mammals and has spread from a cow to a human for the first time.
This bird flu strain has shown to not only make wild mammals, including marine mammals and bears, very sick but to also cause high rates of death among species, says Jane Sykes, professor of small animal medicine at the University of California, Davis, School of Veterinary Medicine.
“And now that it has been found in cattle, [it] raises particular concern for spread to all the animal species, including people,” adds Sykes.
Even though the risk for human infection is low and there has never been human-to-human transmission of H5N1, there are several actions you can take to stay protected. Read on to learn more about H5N1 bird flu and the current outbreak.
What is H5N1?
H5N1 is a type of influenza virus that most commonly affects birds, causing them severe respiratory illness and death.
The H5N1 strain first emerged in China in the 1990s, and it has continued to spread around the world since then. In 1997, the virus spread from animals to humans in Hong Kong for the first time, infecting 18 people, six of whom died.
Since 2020, the H5N1 strain has caused “an unprecedented number of deaths in wild birds and poultry in many countries,” according to the World Health Organization.
Even though bird flu is rare in humans, an H5N1 infection can cause mild to severe illness and can be fatal in some cases. It can cause eye infection, upper respiratory symptoms, and pneumonia.
What do we know about the 2024 human cases of H5N1 in the U.S.?
The Michigan worker who tested positive for H5N1 in late May is a dairy worker who was exposed to infected livestock. They were the first to experience respiratory symptoms—including a cough without a fever—during the current outbreak. They were given an antiviral and the CDC says their symptoms are resolving.
The Michigan farm worker who tested positive earlier in May only experienced eye-related symptoms and has already recovered. And the dairy worker who tested positive for the virus in Texas in April only experienced eye redness as well, was treated with an antiviral medication for the flu, and is recovering.
Is H5N1 bird flu in the milk we consume?
The Food and Drug Administration has found traces of H5N1 bird flu virus in raw or unpasteurized milk. However, pasteurized milk is safe to drink.
Pasteurization, the process of heating milk to high temperatures to kill harmful bacteria (which the majority of commercially sold milk goes through), deactivates the virus. In 20 percent of pasteurized milk samples, the FDA found small, inactive (not live nor infectious) traces of the virus, but these fragments do not make pasteurized milk dangerous.
In a recent Infectious Diseases Society of America briefing, Dr. Maximo Brito, a professor at the University of Illinois College of Medicine, said that it’s important for people to avoid “drinking unpasteurized or raw milk [because] there are other diseases, not only influenza, that could be transmitted by drinking unpasteurized milk.”
What can I do to prevent bird flu?
While the risk of H5N1 infection in humans is low, people with exposure to infected animals (like farmworkers) are most at risk. But there are several actions you can take to stay protected.
One of the most important things, according to Sykes, is taking the usual precautions we’ve taken with COVID-19 and other respiratory viruses, including frequent handwashing, especially before eating.
“Handwashing and mask-wearing [are important], just as we learned from the pandemic,” Sykes adds. “And it’s not wearing a mask at all times, but thinking about high-risk situations, like when you’re indoors in a crowded environment, where transmission of respiratory viruses is much more likely to occur.”
There are other steps you can take to prevent H5N1, according to the CDC:
- Avoid direct contact with sick or dead animals, including wild birds and poultry.
- Don’t touch surfaces that may have been contaminated with animal poop, saliva, or mucus.
- Cook poultry and eggs to an internal temperature of 165 degrees Fahrenheit to kill any bacteria or virus, including H5N1. Generally, avoid eating undercooked food.
- Avoid consuming unpasteurized or raw milk or products like cheeses made with raw milk.
- Avoid eating uncooked or undercooked food.
- Poultry and livestock farmers and workers and bird flock owners should wear masks and other personal protective equipment “when in direct or close physical contact with sick birds, livestock, or other animals; carcasses; feces; litter; raw milk; or surfaces and water that might be contaminated with animal excretions from potentially or confirmed infected birds, livestock, or other animals.” (The CDC has more recommendations for this population here.)
Is there a vaccine for H5N1?
The CDC said there are two candidate H5N1 vaccines ready to be made and distributed in case the virus starts to spread from person to person, and the country is now moving forward with plans to produce millions of vaccine doses.
The FDA has approved several bird flu vaccines since 2007. The U.S. has flu vaccines in stockpile through the National Pre-Pandemic Influenza Vaccine Stockpile program, which allows for quick response as strains of the flu virus evolve.
Could this outbreak become a pandemic?
Scientists and researchers are concerned about the possibility of H5N1 spreading among people and causing a pandemic. “Right now, the risk is low, but as time goes on, the potential for mutation to cause widespread human infection increases,” says Sykes.
“I think this virus jumping into cows has shown the urgency to keep tracking [H5N1] a lot more closely now,” Peter Halfmann, research associate professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison’s Influenza Research Institute tells PGN. “We have our eyes on surveillance now. … We’re keeping a much closer eye, so it’s not going to take us by surprise.”
This article first appeared on Public Good News and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.
Share This Post
Simply The Pits: These Underarm Myths!
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
Are We Taking A Risk To Smell Fresh As A Daisy?
Yesterday, we asked you for your health-related view of underarm deodorants.
So, what does the science say?
They can cause (or increase risk of) cancer: True or False?
False, so far as we know. Obviously it’s very hard to prove a negative, but there is no credible evidence that deodorants cause cancer.
The belief that they do comes from old in vitro studies applying the deodorant directly to the cells in question, like this one with canine kidney tissues in petri dishes:
Antiperspirant Induced DNA Damage in Canine Cells by Comet Assay
Which means that if you’re not a dog and/or if you don’t spray it directly onto your internal organs, this study’s data doesn’t apply to you.
In contrast, more modern systematic safety reviews have found…
❝Neither is there clear evidence to show use of aluminum-containing underarm antiperspirants or cosmetics increases the risk of Alzheimer’s Disease or breast cancer.
Metallic aluminum, its oxides, and common aluminum salts have not been shown to be either genotoxic or carcinogenic.❞
(however, one safety risk it did find is that we should avoid eating it excessively while pregnant or breastfeeding)
Alternatives like deodorant rocks have fewer chemicals and thus are safer: True or False?
True and False, respectively. That is, they do have fewer chemicals, but cannot in scientific terms be qualifiably, let alone quantifiably, described as safer than a product that was already found to be safe.
Deodorant rocks are usually alum crystals, by the way; that is to say, aluminum salts of various kinds. So if it was aluminum you were hoping to avoid, it’s still there.
However, if you’re trying to cut down on extra chemicals, then yes, you will get very few in deodorant rocks, compared to the very many in spray-on or roll-on deodorants!
Soap and water is a safe, simple, and sufficient alternative: True or False?
True or False, depending on what you want as a result!
- If you care that your deodorant also functions as an antiperspirant, then no, soap and water will certainly not have an antiperspirant effect.
- If you care only about washing off bacteria and eliminating odor for the next little while, then yes, soap and water will work just fine.
Bonus myths:
There is no difference between men’s and women’s deodorants, apart from the marketing: True or False?
False! While to judge by the marketing, the only difference is that one smells of “evening lily” and the other smells of “chainsaw barbecue” or something, the real difference is…
- The “men’s” kind is designed to get past armpit hair and reach the skin without clogging the hair up.
- The “women’s” kind is designed to apply a light coating to the skin that helps avoid chafing and irritation.
In other words… If you are a woman with armpit hair or a man without, you might want to ignore the marketing and choose according to your grooming preferences.
Hopefully you can still find a fragrance that suits!
Shaving (or otherwise depilating) armpits is better for hygiene: True or False?
True or False, depending on what you consider “hygiene”.
Consistent with popular belief, shaving means there is less surface area for bacteria to live. And empirically speaking, that means a reduction in body odor:
However, shaving typically causes microabrasions, and while there’s no longer hair for the bacteria to enjoy, they now have access to the inside of your skin, something they didn’t have before. This can cause much more unpleasant problems in the long-run, for example:
❝Hidradenitis suppurativa is a chronic and debilitating skin disease, whose lesions can range from inflammatory nodules to abscesses and fistulas in the armpits, groin, perineum, inframammary region❞
Read more: Hidradenitis suppurativa: Basic considerations for its approach: A narrative review
And more: Hidradenitis suppurativa: Epidemiology, clinical presentation, and pathogenesis
If this seems a bit “damned if you do; damned if you don’t”, this writer’s preferred way of dodging both is to use electric clippers (the buzzy kind, as used for cutting short hair) to trim hers down low, and thus leave just a little soft fuzz.
What you do with yours is obviously up to you; our job here is just to give the information for everyone to make informed decisions whatever you choose 🙂
Take care!
Share This Post
Related Posts
How Much Alcohol Does It Take To Increase Cancer Risk?
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
Alcohol is, of course, unhealthy. Not even the famous “small glass of red” is recommended:
Alcohol also increases all-cause mortality at any dose (even “low-risk drinking”):
Alcohol Consumption Patterns and Mortality Among Older Adults
…and the World Health Organization has declared that the only safe amount of alcohol is zero:
WHO: No level of alcohol consumption is safe for our health
But what of alcohol and cancer? According to the American Association of Cancer Research’s latest report, more than half of Americans do not know that alcohol increases the risk of cancer:
Source: AACR Cancer Progress Report
Why/how does alcohol increase the risk of cancer?
There’s an obvious aspect and a less obvious but very important aspect:
- The obvious: alcohol damages almost every system in the body, and so it’s little surprise if that includes systems whose job it is to keep us safe from cancer.
- The less obvious: alcohol is largely metabolized by certain enzymes that have an impact on DNA repair, such as alcohol dehydrogenases and aldehyde dehydrogenases, amongst others, and noteworthily, acetaldehyde (the main metabolite of alcohol) is itself genotoxic.
Read more: Alcohol & Cancer
This is important, because it means alcohol also increases the risk of cancers other than the obvious head/neck, laryngeal, esophageal, liver, and colorectal cancers.
However, those cancers are of course the most well-represented of alcohol-related cancers, along with breast cancer (this has to do with alcohol’s effect on estrogen metabolism).
If you’re curious about the numbers, and the changes in risk if one reduces/quits/reprises drinking:
❝The increased alcohol-related cancer incidence was associated with dose; those who changed from nondrinking to mild (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.03; 95% CI, 1.00-1.06), moderate (aHR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.02-1.18), or heavy (aHR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.23-1.45) drinking levels had an associated higher risk than those who did not drink.
Those with mild drinking levels who quit drinking had a lower risk of alcohol-related cancer (aHR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.92-0.99) than those who sustained their drinking levels.
Those with moderate (aHR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.03-1.12) or heavy (aHR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.02-1.12) drinking levels who quit drinking had a higher all cancer incidence than those who sustained their levels, but when quitting was sustained, this increase in risk disappeared.
Results of this study showed that increased alcohol consumption was associated with higher risks for alcohol-related and all cancers, whereas sustained quitting and reduced drinking were associated with lower risks of alcohol-related and all cancers.
Alcohol cessation and reduction should be reinforced for the prevention of cancer.❞
Source: Association Between Changes in Alcohol Consumption and Cancer Risk
Worried it’s too late?
If you’re reading this (and thus, evidently, still alive), it isn’t. It’s never too late (nor too early) to reduce, or ideally stop, drinking. Even if you already have cancer, drinking more alcohol will only exacerbate things, and abstaining from alcohol will improve your chances of recovery.
For a reassuring timeline of recovery from alcohol-related damage, see:
What Happens To Your Body When You Stop Drinking Alcohol
Want to stop, but have tried before and find it daunting?
There are a few ways to make it a lot easier:
Rethinking Drinking: How To Reduce Or Quit Alcohol
Take care!
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
Garlic vs Ginger – Which is Healthier?
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
Our Verdict
When comparing garlic to ginger, we picked the ginger.
Why?
Both are great, and it is close!
Notwithstanding that (almost?) nobody eats garlic or ginger for the macros, let’s do a moment’s due diligence on that first: garlic has more than 3x the protein and about 2x the fiber (and slightly higher carbs). But, given the small quantities in which people usually consume these foods, these numbers aren’t too meaningful.
In the category of micronutrients, garlic has a lot more vitamins and minerals. We’ll not do a full breakdown for this though, because again, unless you’re eating it by the cupful, this won’t make a huge difference.
Which means that so far, we have two nominal wins for garlic.
Both plants have many medicinal properties. They are both cardioprotective and anticancer, and both full of antioxidants. The benefits of both are comparable in these regards.
Both have antidiabetic action also, but ginger’s effects are stronger when compared head-to head.
So that’s an actual practical win for ginger.
Each plant’s respective effects on the gastrointestinal tract sets them further apart—ginger has antiemetic effects and can be used for treating nausea and vomiting from a variety of causes. Garlic, meanwhile, can cause adverse gastrointestinal effects in some people—but it’s usually neutral for most people in this regard.
Another win for ginger in practical terms.
Want to learn more?
You might like to read:
Take care!
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
Pulse – by Jenny Chandler
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
Beans, chickpeas, and lentils are well-established super-healthy foods, but they’re often not a lot of people’s favorite. And why? Usually because of unhappy associations with boring dishes that can barely be called dishes.
This book raises the bar for pulses of various kinds, and not only provides recipes (180 of them) but also guidelines on principles, tips and tricks, what works and what doesn’t, what makes things better or worse, perfect partners, sprouting, and more.
The recipes themselves are not all vegan, nor even all vegetarian, but the beans are the star throughout. For those who are vegan or vegetarian, it’s easy to make substitutions, not least of all because the author is generous with “try this instead of that” and “consider also” suggestions, to help us tailor each dish to our personal preferences, and even the desired vibe of a given meal.
The dishes are neither overly simplistic (it’s not a student survival cookbook, by any means) nor overly complicated; rather, enough is done to make each dish invitingly tasty, and nothing extraneous or pretentious is added for the sake of being fancy. This is about delicious home cooking, nothing more nor less.
If the book has a weakness, it’s that visual learners will feel the absence of pictures for many recipes. But, the text is clear, the instructions are easy to follow, and a photo for each dish would probably have doubled the cost of the book, at least, while halving the number of recipes.
Bottom line: if you’d like to get more beans and other pulses in your diet, but are unsure how to make it exciting, this is an excellent option.
Click here to check out Pulse, and expand your kitchen repertoire!
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails: