As an old Spanish saying goes that fits very well in this blog "we were few and gave birth to grandmother." When WHO advises no more than 15% of caesarean sections and in Spain we have the sad record of overcoming it: 25% in public health and 45% in private that is where the third part of births are attended, what we needed is that now new indications appear to join the current ones.
The newly published news is that British researchers from the University of Cambridge and King's College Hospital have discovered that the measurement of the cervix in week 23 can identify those women who are more likely to need a C-section. The longer, the more risk.
The study seems to be of great importance because 27,472 primiparous women participated in whom the cervix was measured between weeks 22 and 24 of pregnancy. There were 20% of cesarean sections on average. Less than Spain. But women with a longer cervix of 40-67 mm were 68% more likely to have a cesarean section than those of smaller sizes.
In previous work, this same team found that when the cervix is too short, the risk of premature delivery is high.
It seems then that this measure has an influence on childbirth, so we expect more research and be included in the protocols in pregnancy if it is important.
But to me slowly explain why 30 years ago there were only 6% of caesarean sections and now more than 50% in some "developed" countries.
I have a claim for Nature for incompetent. If we don't know how to give birth and we're so badly made women: I demand a zipper!
While evolution changes (if necessary), I recommend the books we already present here: "Cesarean: problem or solution" by Michel Odent and "Born by Caesarean" by Ibone Olza and Enrique Lebrero. Developers
