Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Frequent-Seaweed4 t1_ivb15th wrote

Humans are special in reproduction amoungst primates because of our upright gait. Human babies are born much earlier in development than most mammals, which is why they're comparatively helpless for the first few years.

719

UsrnameInATrenchcoat t1_ivb543h wrote

That makes alot of sense. Just the other day I was walking around a hospital (as I do) and I saw a baby crush an apple in his hand and then he bent a frying pan, now it makes sense but I was younger back then

56

[deleted] t1_ivb5w0a wrote

New YT video incoming:

"Train your grip strength as an infant to get MASSIVE GAINS"

119

vigilantesd t1_ivba00k wrote

So they don’t hold on to stay in!

1

MabezJK t1_ivbbt75 wrote

Now I'm picturing a pair of tiny hands pulling apart my labia and an eye peering out from between.

619

Applejuiceinthehall t1_ivbi7ca wrote

Actually, humans have the second longest gestation than other great apes adjusted for size.

The skull size ratio for baby humans is 30% of adult size. For chimps, it's 40% of adult size. So, for humans, that would be about the size at 3 months. There are already women who have hip width that can accommodate that.

Additionally, when studying the gait, wider hips do not make women worse walkers/runners.

So it's probably not that babies came out to accommodate women, but that started being born early for another reason and women's hips width is that size because of baby

29

specialkk77 t1_ivbyawr wrote

Ehh their heads don’t get that much bigger in 3 months. Scarier to picture pushing out a toddler instead, double the head circumference, double the weight, 10-12 inches longer…

Well, I just gave myself nightmares!

27

grumble11 t1_ivc49z6 wrote

Not just that, but calories - the brain takes up a huge chunk of calories during infancy, massively slowing development, requiring more calories and making kids more vulnerable to famine

214

grumble11 t1_ivc7ctn wrote

Yeah, but if there was a huge advantage like skipping three months of potato-like infancy, women would shift rapidly genetically. That isn’t a barrier if it already exists in the population

1

FuriouSherman t1_ivc8dal wrote

Most non-human primates are also significantly more physically developed at birth. Human infants are born underdeveloped because our brains are so big that staying in the womb any longer would make it impossible for us to even make it out of the birth canal.

35

ChristianBMartone t1_ivc8kma wrote

I'm here to tell you my daughter did use her hand to assist herself during delivery. I was there, tugging on her head along with the midwife.

18

Applejuiceinthehall t1_ivc8ydl wrote

That was the idea, but it doesn't pan out when you look at the evidence. Some women can already accommodate that size skull. So if babies were born with a 3 month olds skull, then the selective pressure would be for wider hips.

Because of women with wider hips, we know that their walking/running isn't impeded with wider hips.

−2

mrs_shrew t1_ivc9q6j wrote

Women who gave birth to chimp babies more often didn't like it so they stopped/died in childbirth. The ones that were ok with chimps were also ok with normal babies so the survived

22

krukson t1_ivccqhr wrote

I was genuinely surprised when my newborn daughter gripped my finger for the first time. It was a really strong grip. And it’s funny because they won’t let go, and it’s not that easy to make them let go. They only learn to let go off objects in the first 3-4 months.

77

plasterscene t1_ivce42g wrote

I you put your finger on the sole of a baby's foot the toes will instinctively try to grasp it, like a monkey. Incredibly cute but also fascinating.

176

herbw t1_ivce90j wrote

Most peds specialists know of the grasp reflex of infants. We simply stroke their palms and they close thie fingers around our finger. It's a primitive reflex likely due to holdin onto Mom tightly enough not to fall. Most primate infants also have that.

When people get older and get senile, the grasp reflex re-emerges, as a sign of dementia. Bidie likely has it; and the Glabellar, meaning when you tell him not to blink, and tap the skin between the eyebrows over the nose, he will NOT be able to stop blinking.

Did that to my f. in law, and he blinked. I kept quiet about it. Then they began to cause me trouble and reported that.

Ya don't PO a medical professional. We have life, health and prognostic deep knowledge. and we know how to use it.

So wisdom to the sophomoric persons round here.

−18

auntiepink t1_ivceely wrote

I know of a person who had to have an emergency C-section because their baby grabbed into its cord during birth and was suffocating itself. The doctor just shook their head because they thought the kid would let go when they started de-satting, but nope. That's a strong reflex!

48

Applejuiceinthehall t1_ivceqf5 wrote

But it's only the average because human babies don't have skulls that are 40% of adult skull (which chimps have). If humans were born with that big of skull then women with wider hips would have been selected for and women with narrow hips would have been filtered out

2

herbw t1_ivcf1u6 wrote

Yes, babies have a stepping out reflex from very early on. We find that by holding them up, legs and feet down, and then moving them forward. Often we see 1 leg moving forward and then the next, and then back & forth. But hafta do it right.

Steppin Reflex:

https://www.stanfordchildrens.org/en/topic/default?id=newborn-reflexes-90-P02630#:~:text=Stepping%20reflex,reflex%20lasts%20about%202%20months.

17

herbw t1_ivcftpy wrote

Human reproduction is complex system. The pelves of PG woman will expand due to a substance which causes the cartilage of the pelvic bones to relax, so the birth canal widens. to allow easier deliveries. When a pelvis of a woman who has given birth to a child/children is found we can see that on post mortem. How we know it.

Gestating babies, and delivering them is very complex system & has many, many interesting events going on, too.

8

afeeney OP t1_ivcip3e wrote

I read a hypothesis that this is left over from when humans had a lot more body hair, and so having a grip reflex for both hands and feet is a survival trait that never had a real reason to die out. Aside from it being as cute as all get out.

62

Libriomancer t1_ivckpz3 wrote

I was a 10lb kid with a massive head. My mom normally weighs 90lbs but crested over 100lb when she was pregnant with me. I feel like she doesn’t have to imagine as I’ve see pictures from right after I was born and I’d have made Dudley Dursley look like a tiny baby.

18

CygnusX-1-2112b t1_ivcprhv wrote

Chimpanzee fetus when birth begins:

"Rip and tear, until it is done."

14

howescj82 t1_ivcpvzi wrote

This is fascinating but the mental image is horrifying.

27

Langstarr t1_ivcqouq wrote

What a terrible day to know how to read

12

swiftgruve t1_ivctaw3 wrote

Holy shit that makes for a creepy visual. Baby clawing its way out, dad drops the camera “what the f-“

5

runswithdolls t1_ivcwjnq wrote

I never ever needed to read that first sentence, ever. Ever ever. What a horrible day to have eyes.

I know what I'm having a nightmare about tonight.

6

plasterscene t1_ivd114z wrote

Its a by-product of evolution. We share a lot of qualities with our genetic cousins, but at some point we developed the ability to swing down from the trees and make tools. IMO it's a mutation that goes against nature, but I'm human so might as well make the most of it!

4

crossstitchbeotch t1_ivd5kb3 wrote

One of my babies tore me on his way out because his hands were up next to his face.

1

nzdennis t1_ivd6g4z wrote

The naked ape, and I don't mean Jambo, still has much in common with with our hairy cousins.

1

Quiet_Moon2191 t1_ivdegnx wrote

Also could have been natural selection. Baby uses hands to pull itself out of mom’s hooha. DEMON!!! It would scare the crap out of me.

1

Miss-Margaret-3000 t1_ivdfh5y wrote

I saw something interesting from Be Smart recently saying it’s likely a combination of the size parameters and where a human’s metabolic rate maxes out. A woman’s running at approximately just over 2x her normal metabolic rate from crafting a baby once their at 40 weeks which is the majority of peoples maximum sustainable rate. It’s still emerging research, but I thought it made a lot of sense.

edit: Remembered it was a different show

8

Drmite t1_ivdgcsz wrote

When I was a kid still grappling with the whole religion thing, I just took it as the vibe being a set of parables to learn from. If a god exists, it's through the invisible visible sciences of physics, evolution and all that fun stuff.

Now it's good ol science.

35

Admetus t1_ivdgri4 wrote

It's amazing really. When you compare the size of a baby's head to an adult it's incredible how much their brain develops. It makes a lot of sense that the newborn is sort of an instinctual primate from the beginning and then through nutrition and nurture becomes a human being.

3

Titaniumchic t1_ivdgxd4 wrote

For some reason the idea of one of my children clawing themselves out of my vagina makes me wanna retch and my skin crawl.

2

Admetus t1_ivdhb95 wrote

My baby loves to kick and play with their toes more than their hands. The hands and arms are just too complicated to operate at 2 months (except for basic grasping)

17

Strict-Ad-7099 t1_ivdpjq1 wrote

Holy crap thank god they don’t use their hands to get out.

1

herbw t1_ivdpxm8 wrote

There is not the slightest evidence that for less than 1 MYs. humans ancestors lived in trees. we walked on the ground and our hip joints and that kind of sgtructure shows we walked upright from H. erectus onwards.

I dnno where the ignorant blather that human ancestors lived in trees came from, but it has absolutely NOT any empirical anthropology or facts, that our near human ancestors did anything but walk on legs on the ground.

1

herbw t1_ivds1v8 wrote

No, those are open spaces between the bones, called fontanelles. and they close over as the babe grows.

That is a serious defect in babies' anatomies. they can be very easily killed or seriously injured because the brain is not there covered and protected by bone.

12

Hazzsin t1_ivdsood wrote

They still likely climbed trees for foraging fruit etc. But yes, they spent their lives on the ground.

Even today many tribes and rural villages climb local trees for fruit, coconuts, small animals, better leaves and wooden sticks higher up, etc.

Humans are still good climbers, just not as good as chimps and most primates.

3

T-Rex_Woodhaven t1_ivdtlrt wrote

I still think we should have stuck with egg birth.

3

allcommiesarebitches t1_ivdw8yk wrote

I thought it was just soothing them to sleep. So that's why those guys chased me out of the maternity ward! I thought they were jealous of my fathering.

^in ^all ^seriousness ^that ^is ^interesting ^ty ^for ^the ^info

5

BaconUpThatSausage t1_ivdwi3q wrote

As someone who has given birth I’m trying to imagine this feeling and I surely wish I hadn’t read this

1

za419 t1_ivdyt3u wrote

Human ancestors probably lived in trees a very long time ago, back before even the great apes split off.

Somehow, people take that to mean we went straight from trees to fire and spears and shit sometimes, which is... False.

2

Admetus t1_ivdzixu wrote

All thanks to agriculture (or if further back, the hunter-gatherer beginnings of man)

I heard also that two legged and furless results in less consumption of nutrition.

2

plasterscene t1_ive46g3 wrote

Oh my god please get down off your high horse. There's always someone who's going to get offended by a harmless post on a subreddit. No, humans did not drop down from the trees and start building digital watches. You make so many assumptions in your post you sound like a deeply unhappy person. I make a fun post about babies and you feel it necessary to chastise me by dropping your basic middle school 'knowledge' bomb like you're Jared Diamond. Grow up.

1

crazyhadron t1_ive494i wrote

Nah, the bottleneck (heh) is the amount of energy a baby needs to survive within the womb. Birth happens when the placenta's throughput isn't enough to sustain the baby much longer, and it triggers the delivery process.

Kinda wonky to think that boobs are able to push much more nutrients through them than the placenta itself. Anywhere between 500-700kcals, that's as much as the brain itself uses and it's the most energy-intensive organ in the human body.

16

chunkboslicemen t1_ive4elx wrote

Reading this is the worst thing that’s happened to me in ages

1

HolyNewGun t1_ive5zd1 wrote

Yes, precisely that a species with so much paradoxical feature like human should not exist. If human acquire bipedal first, then it should heavily select against big brain according to natural selection theory. But since natural selection pretty much attribute everything to randomness, the theory practically unfalsifiable.

−11

En-papX t1_ived30y wrote

So they could help they just choose not to. Freeloaders.

2

CMDA t1_ivelil0 wrote

Human babies know to life is to suffer and they're not in a rush to

1

miasabine t1_ivf0utb wrote

I’ve seen footage of vaginal births. It’s not so much that it grosses me out, more that it sends me into fully fledged panic attacks. All due respect given to those who go through it, I could never.

1

miasabine t1_ivf1hgl wrote

Oof, your poor wife. Hope she recovered with no lasting damage.

I have nothing but respect for people who give birth, that shit is brutal, I could never do it. I have a bit of a pregnancy/birth phobia and it’s just amazing to me that people voluntarily put themselves through it. More power to them.

2

Ill-Organization-719 t1_ivf8cyx wrote

So if a baby stays in long enough it'll quickly become powerful enough to just climb out itself?

1

Inner-Stranger-6838 t1_ivfeksz wrote

Lazy little shits expect to be carried around and fed too. Turtles got it right. Lay em and leave em

1

herbw t1_ivfwelq wrote

with all due respect, birthing is a reality of billions of years, and billions of events/year. . if you can't handle reality, then there's a problem.

−3

herbw t1_ivfwzgx wrote

sorry, the events of biology and medicine doesn't work that way. There may be scarring , and if on cortex cause seizures, and create permanent disabilities, but it's not necessarily lethal at once.

1

miasabine t1_ivgcrpb wrote

Birthing humans have only been around for a couple hundred thousand years, and something being reality doesn’t preclude it from being a phobia. If that were the case, there would be no phobias. Pregnancy and birth still kills thousands upon thousands of women every single year, and leaves many others with chronic pain, PTSD, and various disabilities. Lastly, and with all the respect you are due, which incidentally is precisely none…

I have no problem handling reality. I knows births happen, I have no difficulty accepting that. I celebrate births when done by people I know, and I find great joy in watching the resulting humans develop and grow into intelligent, capable adults. I personally merely find the prospect of birthing intensely and viscerally unappealing. So I take steps to ensure, to the best of my ability, that it’s a situation I never find myself in, while maintaining the utmost respect and admiration for those who do.

If you think that’s a “problem” in any sense of the word, you’re more than welcome to your opinion. However absurd and pathetic it might be.

1

herbw t1_ivjp1lu wrote

AKA reality testing. Rather not au current round here,

Prognosis, is a medical term, OMG!! "Magine that!! The outcomes of what we do are often medical outcomes, too. Being biological beings in every way, medical info is needed to survive. Shock of shocks!!

0

herbw t1_ivjpx3c wrote

Wrong there, too, as we as a species have been around for ca. 100K yrs, by the bone evidences. Altho our ancestors have been around for billions of years. Just look at the mitochondria.

Well, we learn to accept the reality of the facts we ALL got here by copulation, or fkn in the parlance, and we get here by being born. Refusal to face truths is ever a serious problem for our species. Because denial --->>> delusions. & ignoring reality. Frankly workin in OB was one of the best times I had in Medicine. Happiest place in the Hospital. New life, new babies. The future or our species just there.

−1

_Internet_Hugs_ t1_ivndkhc wrote

Apparently when I was born I grabbed on to the doctor's thumb and wouldn't let go. My mom quotes him as saying, "Nurse, get this kid off me!"

1

herbw t1_ivos3r5 wrote

Fine, then yer cherry picking the data. Violation of the comprensiveness rule. Modern humans are about 100K yrs old, or so. The data in east AFrica bone finds show that, very likely. Our ancestors go back 3 billions years. H. erectus was about that old over 100K to 300K yrs. . but not entirely human.

Our cortical cell columns are better than erectus. Closer to cro-magnon. Nor has human evolution stopped. Our continuing techno capabilities shows that. Follow tools making from the stone age, to present tech. Humans are getting smarter. That's been going on for 100K's of years in us and our ancestors. Our cortical cell columns, where the info processin goes on, are more efficient and more of them than our ancestors, even 10K yrs. ago.

How do our brains create information? Why has THAT question not been widely asked? Answering that deep question shows how, the brain processors create creativities. Where creativity likely comes from in brain. Structure/function general model in biology, and most tech, t00 Here's now it's done.

https://jochesh00..com/2017/05/01/how-physicians-create-new-information/

Please fill in the details on mankind's likely descendancy to a more complete form.

−1

miasabine t1_ivpc3dp wrote

“Approximately 300,000 years ago, the first Homo Sapiens - anatomically modern humans- arose alongside our other Hominid relatives.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2019/05/15/what-was-it-like-when-the-first-humans-arose-on-earth/?sh=680fb5b56997

“While our ancestors have been around for about 6 million years, the modern form of humans only evolved about 200,000 years ago.”

https://www.universetoday.com/38125/how-long-have-humans-been-on-earth/

“Modern humans originated in Africa within the past 200,000 years”

https://www.yourgenome.org/stories/evolution-of-modern-humans/

So no, I’m not cherry picking data.

The rest of your comment is irrelevant word salad. It has nothing to do with what we were talking about, you’re just talking for the sake of it, and I have no interest in engaging with it.

1

herbw t1_ivqgh66 wrote

forbes is not an anthropological mag. OK?

Modern humans arose about 100-125K yrs ago in east africa. before that it was H. erectus which is NOT modern man. OK, they are considered in the Homo Genus with modern humans. That's the big error they are committin there.

Homo neanderthalensis would be modern human by their criteria those been extinct for 10K's of years.

It's basic biology. H. sapiens sapiens. Forbes does NOT make the clear use biological definition clear, either

Humans with our high social forms and intellectual characsteristics are about 10-20K yrs old. but as we cannot tell intellectual linguistic prowess but by stone age tools and bones, we estimate the first humans most like us, physically, came about 100-125K yrs ago. Cro-magnan is older than we too, but a side chain as well.

It's anthropology, NOT Forbes business news specialty, either.

0

herbw t1_ivqid52 wrote

Homo genus, but NOT us, modern man, H. sapiens sapiens. We are not that old. Cro-magnon is older but a close chain, likely big pieces of those in our genomes, too.

0

miasabine t1_ivqjc4z wrote

Lmao, I love how you’re focusing on Forbes when I’ve literally provided you with THREE other sources that all say 2-300,000 years. And yet you’ve provided ZERO sources. Just get the fuck out, you’re fucking pathetic

1