Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think it's gross, and I agree with others that it will lead to health issues.
But... if you are not ashamed to be seen with him, and you are okay with a greater risk of a damaged child, then go for it. It's your life.
I have no dog in this fight and my wife is a year older than me, but this junk science is baffling. The risk of having a "damaged child is 1 in 50 for men under 40 and 1 in 42 for men over 40. Meaning the likelihood of having a damaged child with an older man is remote, unless you are planning on having 50 kids.
Eh, if you're okay with having an ugly child, or less intelligent, then go for it.
Many of us want the fittest kid we can have. It's a biological urge
http://www.techtimes.com/articles/4728/20140324/the-older-the-dad-the-uglier-the-children-genetic-mutation-research-confirms.htm
Where do you come up with kids of aging parents being ugly or less intelligent? Or less fit? Crazy thinking. My kid is beautiful, smart, and fit. There must be some serious bad mojo in your water.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think it's gross, and I agree with others that it will lead to health issues.
But... if you are not ashamed to be seen with him, and you are okay with a greater risk of a damaged child, then go for it. It's your life.
I have no dog in this fight and my wife is a year older than me, but this junk science is baffling. The risk of having a "damaged child is 1 in 50 for men under 40 and 1 in 42 for men over 40. Meaning the likelihood of having a damaged child with an older man is remote, unless you are planning on having 50 kids.
Eh, if you're okay with having an ugly child, or less intelligent, then go for it.
Many of us want the fittest kid we can have. It's a biological urge
http://www.techtimes.com/articles/4728/20140324/the-older-the-dad-the-uglier-the-children-genetic-mutation-research-confirms.htm
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:https://www.autismspeaks.org/science/science-news/study-ties-dad’s-age-risk-autism-other-mental-disorders-kids
Dads 45 and older are 25 times more likely to have a kid with bipolar disorder (and that won't be readily apparent at birth or in early childhood).
Again, the misuse of statistics. 25 times than an tiny amount is still small.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:https://www.autismspeaks.org/science/science-news/study-ties-dad’s-age-risk-autism-other-mental-disorders-kids
Dads 45 and older are 25 times more likely to have a kid with bipolar disorder (and that won't be readily apparent at birth or in early childhood).
+1
I'm so old that I remember the three decades when we were told to eat only margarine, no butter, and limit egg consumption to two per week. Popsci is often wrong.
Scientists were wrong once so we shouldn't believe anything they say, ever. Seems like great logic to me.
Here is where education is important... watch this....
Questions:
What was the age of the mothers in the study? the article said "as parents age increases" so there is a mother involved in this equation.
Are these numbers adjusted for other risk factors? the article didn't mention this.
What is the original chance of these disorders? The article didn't give this %.
Why does the article only quote some rates of increase without providing a base line? Is there an agenda by the author?
Also...
if you are so concerned about the change of having a child with a disorder "cause of the man" then there is certainly one sure fire way to prevent that outcome. DON'T HAVE A CHILD.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:https://www.autismspeaks.org/science/science-news/study-ties-dad’s-age-risk-autism-other-mental-disorders-kids
Dads 45 and older are 25 times more likely to have a kid with bipolar disorder (and that won't be readily apparent at birth or in early childhood).
+1
I'm so old that I remember the three decades when we were told to eat only margarine, no butter, and limit egg consumption to two per week. Popsci is often wrong.
Scientists were wrong once so we shouldn't believe anything they say, ever. Seems like great logic to me.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:https://www.autismspeaks.org/science/science-news/study-ties-dad’s-age-risk-autism-other-mental-disorders-kids
Dads 45 and older are 25 times more likely to have a kid with bipolar disorder (and that won't be readily apparent at birth or in early childhood).
+1
I'm so old that I remember the three decades when we were told to eat only margarine, no butter, and limit egg consumption to two per week. Popsci is often wrong.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:https://www.autismspeaks.org/science/science-news/study-ties-dad’s-age-risk-autism-other-mental-disorders-kids
Dads 45 and older are 25 times more likely to have a kid with bipolar disorder (and that won't be readily apparent at birth or in early childhood).
+1
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:https://www.autismspeaks.org/science/science-news/study-ties-dad’s-age-risk-autism-other-mental-disorders-kids
Dads 45 and older are 25 times more likely to have a kid with bipolar disorder (and that won't be readily apparent at birth or in early childhood).
Again, the misuse of statistics. 25 times than an tiny amount is still small.
Anonymous wrote:https://www.autismspeaks.org/science/science-news/study-ties-dad’s-age-risk-autism-other-mental-disorders-kids
Dads 45 and older are 25 times more likely to have a kid with bipolar disorder (and that won't be readily apparent at birth or in early childhood).
Anonymous wrote:https://www.autismspeaks.org/science/science-news/study-ties-dad’s-age-risk-autism-other-mental-disorders-kids
Dads 45 and older are 25 times more likely to have a kid with bipolar disorder (and that won't be readily apparent at birth or in early childhood).
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't want to breed with someone that old. Big likelihood the baby would have issues. Lots of studies document issues caused by advanced paternal age.
Having said that, I doubt a 47 year old man wants kids anyway. He might not even want a wife. If he's never married, chances are he enjoys being on his own.
Geez. My Dad was 48 when I was born. He'd been married to my mom a year.
Geez. I hope he can get a day pass from the retirement home to attend you graduation and your wedding.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't want to breed with someone that old. Big likelihood the baby would have issues. Lots of studies document issues caused by advanced paternal age.
Having said that, I doubt a 47 year old man wants kids anyway. He might not even want a wife. If he's never married, chances are he enjoys being on his own.
+2
I'm 34. My max is 39 and 40 is really pushing it. I agree advanced parternal age is partially the reason i don't date anyone in the 40's plus the generational difference. I want to go out to a bar or lounge and he probably wants stay home all day and do nothing. I want kids with a young man around my age and not someone closer to retirement.
Honey ,you're 34 ,(only 6 years from 40) you aren't that young yourself. Instead of drinking your time away at the lounge you might want to settle down with one of your young men and have the kids you want.
Go away misogynist troll. No one cares what you have to say. Run along
Eh, she's not wrong. You're advanced maternal age at 35. Thirty-five.
Nope, 40, actually.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/07/how-long-can-you-wait-to-have-a-baby/309374/