New research links inducing labour to autism...

[icklemonster]

Just read about this on the BBC. My initial thought is one of concern, especially after what happened with the MMR jab.

My concern is that this will lead to a higher number of women refusing induction, beyond 43/44 weeks, and subsequently lead to stillbirths, mother mortality and other health implications.
What is your take on the research? Do you think it will do more damage than good?
https://m.bbc.co.uk/news/health-23666840

 

[Lina]

Isn't the connection more with prematurity, since induction forces a process rather than let that process begin spontaneously? I hope this research expands and changes the current medical attitude towards post-date pregnancies.

 

[pinkpolkadot]

This is interesting thanks for posting!

I don't have a problem with the research more with the way it is being reported. Having a quick Google I see many media outlets have gone for the shock headline along the lines of 'induction may cause autism', or at least implying that.

On further reading it is clear that they can see a correlation but do not know which causes which (i.e does induction increase chance of austism or does predisposition to autism increase need for induction, or indeed does some other problem increase the chance of both).

So although I do find it interesting I find the reporting irresponsible (not by BBC just in general) and potentially dangerous.

 

[JASMAK]

My daughter has autism, was early, but was not induced. My other two kids were early too tho, and dont have autism. Hard to know. I still believe in my daughter, that it was either triggered very early with a virus she had at three weeks, or she was born with it, as she showed signs since day 1 really.

 

[steph.]

This is interesting thanks for posting!

I don't have a problem with the research more with the way it is being reported. Having a quick Google I see many media outlets have gone for the shock headline along the lines of 'induction may cause autism', or at least implying that.

On further reading it is clear that they can see a correlation but do not know which causes which (i.e does induction increase chance of austism or does predisposition to autism increase need for induction, or indeed does some other problem increase the chance of both).

So although I do find it interesting I find the reporting irresponsible (not by BBC just in general) and potentially dangerous.

Completely agree with this!

 

[maidelyn]

I wouldn't trust an American study on this as it is common to induce labour pretty much at due date or even early rather than the 2 weeks overdue here therefore more drugs and interventions are required which could be the cause. I would like to see a multi Centre study and the data split into amount overdue / any other reason for induction

 

[Tiff]

This really ticked me off if I'm honest. Not anyone posting it mind you, but the content itself. I already have massive guilt and wondering if I did something wrong while pregnant to cause Claire's Autism.

Reading through this was horrifying if I'm honest because I AM one of these statistics. I did have Gestational Diabetes and I was induced early. Granted, I was induced at 39+1 so not 'that' far off from my EDD, but then again EDD is just that - an estimate.

Anyways, I read that article and its basically screaming at me that I somehow caused my daughter's autism and that is heartbreaking and incredibly upsetting to me. I'm actually sitting here in tears just thinking about it.

 

[icklemonster]

Oh I feel terrible for posting it now, so sorry for upsetting you I didn't think of the implications for anyone who has been induced and has a child with autism. Now I'm writing it, it seems very obvious. I was only thinking of future implications of the study and the news report.

The study says a link wasn't really found for female autism, which would indicate you being induced didn't have anything to do with Claire's autism. In fact, I'd bet that subsequent research will find that babies who stay in the womb where labour doesn't start naturally are more likely to have autism, and it actually doesn't have anything to do with induction drugs.

 

[Tiff]

Oh hun! No no no, I didn't mean you for posting it. Now I feel bad.

Just the people who do these studies, if that makes sense.

 

[Nibblenic]

Autism is genetic. The trigger for it coming to the surface is still debatable. I can recognize Autism in many adults over 25 who have no been diagnosed as it is fairly new.

My Oh has Aspergers and he can trace the traits though all the children of his farther and his fathers farther. I personally believe my maternal granfather was on spectrum and his son is to. However non of these people other than my Oh have been formally diagnosed. OH was done as a adult.

Personally this is the article I have found most interesting lately. I dont take any weight in that one about induction. As if it was just induction there would be a 50/50 split in male female diagnoses which it is far from.

This is the article I read reacentl. Really interesting especially is you have a daughter

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-23613816

 

[Foogirl]

Bad reporting of good science.

Even the author of the report was on the TV saying "this doesn't mean induction may cause autism" but of course the interviewer completely ignored that and carried on with the shock and awe type questions. They have found a correlation but haven't discovered if it is causal so more research is needed. Why can't the media just accept that?