[Mr Quick]

Pain is a part of evolution. Evolution made us to feel pain, why would it be removed?

The real question is: why do we still experience pain?

[greatmonte]

Not biologically but medically and technologically to allow us to carry this out which has been achieved by increased intelligence.

So you could argue we have already evolved but it will take a bit longer for it to be achieved.

And also there is no point in evolving a lack of pain as said.....Although interesting fact the release of Oxytocin after childbirth helps women forget the pain of childbirth (which does have an evolutionary advantage)

[Jabberwox]

Also what's interesting is that the pain intensity varies from woman to woman... although I suppose it's differences in pain tolerance.

[deniu3545]

do you think men will evolve to get kicked in the balls safely and without pain?

probably not.

[Andy16]

Just count yourself lucky babys aren't born through the anus!

[Joinedup]

It's not brilliant but it's been good enough to get us this far and in developed countries it's much less of a problem than it used to be.
First world these days 2 live babies pretty much guarantees 2 adults, in past times women had to give birth over and over because of high infant mortality and each time she was dicing with death.

[M4LLY]

Tbh we've been giving birth the same way for thousands of years, i highly doubt its ever going to be painless and safe.

[Alpharius]

Not unless their is a distinct evolutionary advantage.

[SnoochToTheBooch]

think about the mechanics of it. it's forcing something the size of a melon through something the size of a plum for several hours. It must ****ing knack. Nature has got its work cut out trying to make that painless.

[takethyfacehence]

Going by the fact that reading this thread has actually made me feel really broody rather than scared, I don't think women are going to change in that way any time soon...

[John Locke]

(Original post by Aisha~~)
Modern life makes things more difficult, in honesty. We're not eating that which we evolved to, exercising less, etc. All adds up and screws with natural processes. Periods would probably cycle over 6 months naturally...

what on earth are you basing that on?

[Arekkusu]

Because that would have to be changing all the layout of the bones and muscles and that takes a hell of a long time to evolve. Random mutations that have evolved in the fairly recent past are just the odd gene which confers some sort of random tolerance threshold raising in organ systems like the one that allows us to drink milk.

We've been contending with childbirth ever since we adopted our erect stance, which was a hell of a long time ago. I would have thought that there would be significant selection effects though because if the mum dies surely the baby does too?

We're not going to evolve it now though because we have such good medical procedures already.

[Aisha~~]

(Original post by John Locke)
what on earth are you basing that on?

I read it in a blog brah

[oo00oo]

No - if a trait doesn't affect an organism's ability to reproduce, then that trait will persist. Simple as that. Only if all women who had painful childbirths were to die (or otherwise by stopped from reproducing), leaving those with less painful childbirths to survive and pass on the trait of having less painful childbirth.

[Drapetomanic]

No, there's no selection advantage.

Women have evolved the ability to selectively forget how painful childbirth was so they'll have more children. Discomfort in itself does not decrease the chances of having less children.

[Lostfish]

What I don't get is why we haven't already evolved to have less painful childbirths?

We've supposedly evolved form monkeys and we have so many adaptations but yet the child bearing didn't change? Surely those female stone age humans who suffered extremely painful contractions or died during childbirth were those less adapted an would have less of an advantage of producing offspring?

So those humans should not have produced many offspring, those humans who were slightly more adapted wouldve passed on their genes?

But yet without doctors we would be at a much higher risk of losing the child or dying ourselves?
If adaptations can work for every other part of us why not childbirth
I don't reckon we'll evolve in the next thousand years as natural section does not take place now, and if a woman was unable to have a child there are many other options like fertility treatments which would allow her to have children

In the 21st century a man is not going to choose to have children with someone because they are slightly adapted to have children slightly less painfully as they have a slightly larger than usual pelvis. Evolution in my opinion will not progress much in humans

[sammy-lou]

(Original post by Lostfish)
What I don't get is why we haven't already evolved to have less painful childbirths?

We've supposedly evolved form monkeys and we have so many adaptations but yet the child bearing didn't change? Surely those female stone age humans who suffered extremely painful contractions or died during childbirth were those less adapted an would have less of an advantage of producing offspring?

So those humans should not have produced many offspring, those humans who were slightly more adapted wouldve passed on their genes?

But yet without doctors we would be at a much higher risk of losing the child or dying ourselves?
If adaptations can work for every other part of us why not childbirth
I don't reckon we'll evolve in the next thousand years as natural section does not take place now, and if a woman was unable to have a child there are many other options like fertility treatments which would allow her to have children

In the 21st century a man is not going to choose to have children with someone because they are slightly adapted to have children slightly less painfully as they have a slightly larger than usual pelvis. Evolution in my opinion will not progress much in humans

Yeah, the bit I highlighted was the query I had really. I think what everyone's been saying generally still applies.

But I still think it seems weird. Pain aside, like you said, surely the metaphorical cave woman who had a dangerous childbirth experience (or pregnancy generally) would be less likely to produce a healthy child, so there would be fewer genes passed on for those genetic traits which lead to a difficult pregnancy/child birth?

[NR09]

No because with today's medicine it is not advantageous for woman to evolve in this way.

Painkillers and drugs are doing the job so evolution doesn't have to

[NR09]

(Original post by Lostfish)
We've supposedly evolved form monkeys

No we didn't.

[zosolobos0]

(Original post by sammy-lou)
Not study help, but thought this was appropriate forum

This has bothered me for ages!

How is it that giving birth is still such a painful and dangerous process? Why hasn't this been 'naturally selected out' by now?

I know that in our society these days, we generally think of giving birth as something safe, but there's no doubt that there are still so many risks. An estimated 1/7 pregnancies end in miscarriage

How is it that the very life process which is essential for the continuation of human life is still so likely to go wrong?

I'm sure someones going to come up with a very simple answer for me, but I'm going to risk it because I just don't get it...

apparently, natural birth -if done right (with the right midwife and method) and providing the mother is healthy (nutritionally and physically), does not have to be painful