• tryitout@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Instead, she opted for “embryo adoption”, which allowed her to have a say in the future parents - with the process overseen by a religious agency.

    Nightlight Christian Adoptions took on the embryos and placed them with Lindsey and Tim Pierce.

    They fitted Linda’s criteria of a married, Caucasian Christian couple…

    How lovely

      • Susaga@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        32
        ·
        4 days ago

        Considering the guy leading the Republicans, I feel like they would say that about ALL babies.

    • Flax@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      4 days ago

      This is actually a genius question. Technically would that mean that a premature baby would have to wait an extra few months after their birthday?

      • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Nope. Of course not. Your age is a function of your birthdate. you’re not a person before then.

        I know what I said.

  • salty_chief@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    57
    ·
    4 days ago

    Baby in 2040 at age 15. “You mean I could have been born in 1995!? I could have at least enjoyed some of the early 2000s!

  • 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 🇮 @pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    That embryo was “adopted” from the biological mother, who had kept it frozen since 1994, by Lindsey and Tim Pierce, who live in Ohio.

    The adoptive mother Lindsey Pierce told Technology Review: “He is so chill.”

    🤣

  • Venus_Ziegenfalle@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    There’s an easy way to test her true age. Everybody knows the millenial can’t resist the avocado toast.

  • Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Frozen embryo. Meh.

    I thought this was about extended gestation at first, which is something I’ve always wondered about: is the whole 9-months thing driven by the baby or the mother? Or more specifically, is 9 months the optimal amount of time for a baby to be in the womb?

    Like if we manipulated the hormones / blocked the whole pressure-oxytocin feedback loop on the maternal side to just keep the mother gestating for… 12 months? 15? 3 years?? Would the ‘newborn toddler’ have a hyper-developed brain? Or just a normal brain that lost out on the first 3 years of critical life experience?

    If our incubation tech was good enough to fully replace a biological mother… 20 years? …there’s a dystopian sci-fi writing prompt for ya. …or like, the key to super humans.

    Or, would shit like the foramen ovale on the fetal side of things just close off anyway and put it into a birth-now-or-die situation?

      • Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Hadn’t even considered that - I figured it came down to size constraints or the anatomic changes of the fetus.

        Crazy. I wonder if that’s something we could influence.

    • gonzo-rand19@moist.catsweat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      I’ve heard that a baby that’s been gestating for a much longer time than 9 months literally wouldn’t fit through the birth canal due to the physical limitation of the width of the mother’s hips. The baby would have to be either artificially gestated (which is some real sci-fi shit, like you’re saying) or the mother would require a C-section, which is generally pretty high-risk and has a 6-month recovery period.

      • Lodespawn@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        3 days ago

        Huh? Csections arent high risk if they are planned, they become high risk when they are an emergency solution to a problem natural birth. Also the recovery period is 4-8 weeks

        • gonzo-rand19@moist.catsweat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 days ago

          Full recovery from an incision that cuts through the abdominal muscles will always take longer than the initial recovery period. Keep in mind that most of us can’t just take 6 months off of work, so a lot of recommendations from doctors and surgeons are cognizant of that reality.

      • Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 days ago

        Yeah it’s super tight squeeze even in normal conditions from a skeletal perspective. Pushing much past 9mo would guarantee a c-section.

    • pruwyben@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 days ago

      I watched that movie not knowing anything about it. When they start taking about the “youngest person on Earth” In the first scene, I thought it was a comedy 🤣