C-sec­tion study re­ported only the facts

The Morning Bulletin - - YOUR SAY -

RM of St Lawrence’s text about re­search into c-sec­tion birth is a good ex­am­ple of some­one pick­ing a sin­gle de­tail and build­ing a tower of hy­per­bole based on that one point.

In other words, it’s a ram­shackle mess that is eas­ily blown over.

The re­search was led by Dr Pol­i­dano, an econ­o­mist with re­search in­ter­ests in ed­u­ca­tion.

He re­ported the find­ings of the study, which was that chil­dren born by cae­sarean sec­tion could have de­vel­op­men­tal de­lays in their gram­mar, nu­mer­acy, read­ing and writ­ing. He went on to say that the link was cor­re­la­tional but not nec­es­sar­ily causal, and that no mech­a­nism for the link was known.

So he sim­ply re­ported the find­ings, as in­deed he should.

Why is this im­por­tant? The World Health Or­gan­i­sa­tion rec­om­mends that a na­tion’s c-sec­tion birth rate should be in the range of 5% to 15%, and cau­tioned that a rate lower than 5% may in­di­cate inad­e­quate ac­cess to the pro­ce­dure. In Aus­tralia the rate is about 30%. Fur­ther­more, mid­wives report that of ba­bies planned for birthing at home or in a birth cen­tre, only 5% to 15% are even­tu­ally de­liv­ered by c sec­tion. Have a good think about those fig­ures be­fore you re­spond RM.

Also note that I don’t work in the field; I do how­ever do some quick ba­sic in­for­ma­tion check­ing be­fore I write on a sub­ject.

Dis­claimer: The views ex­pressed are my per­sonal views and not those of my em­ployer.

— Su­san Cun­ning­ham



LINK FOUND: A study has found kids born by cae­sarean sec­tion could have de­vel­op­men­tal de­lays in gram­mar, nu­mer­acy, read­ing and writ­ing.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Australia

© PressReader. All rights reserved.