Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> many in our age bracket 20-30 year olds are struggling to have children

Wow... I would have thought you were referring to people that were older.

I wonder what the common denominator is there, or if your experience is an outlier. It's obviously noteworthy enough to share. Maybe people that conceive without issue aren't commenting on it as much?




Some fertility problems go unnoticed for a decade. I suggest to my younger (25-29) female friends to have their egg reserve estimated, even if they at that point are not thinking about ever having children. This is because the original issue can be upstream of the couple: a parent who had early menopause, or low ovarian reserve, may pass similar characteristics down to their female progeny.

(Source: conversations with IVF team)


> I suggest to my younger (25-29) female friends to have their egg reserve estimated

hmm... yeah, this would be an interesting biomarker for those in their twenties. It could be valuable later in life.

I was surprised to learn women are born with 1-2 million eggs. By 20 years old, they only have 200k-300k left. They lose more every year.


I wonder if there is any correlation with the use of hormonal birth control prior to attempting to conceive.


Yes, I wonder the same.

After learning about the side effects of birth control, it's concerning that it's the default recommendation for young women, and that they're on it all the time. I understand why. I don't know what a reasonable alternative would be. Abstinence isn't a reasonable alternative.


If abstinence is a reasonable alternative for anything other than sex (don't eat meat, don't use gasoline, etc.) it's also a reasonable alternative for sex. Some won't agree that limiting your "core" desires in any way is reasonable - and I agree. I just disagree that eating, sleeping, or sex are "core" desires. They are secondary to the real core need - happiness.


> (don't eat meat, don't use gasoline, etc.)

Your examples are not comparable to abstaining from sex.

It would be like saying "don't eat any food" and "don't use locomotion to move from point A to point B."

> I just disagree that eating, sleeping, or sex are "core" desires.

I may not be understanding this. Eating and sleeping are obviously requirements for anyone's life, and sex is required for the continuation of all life.


It is definitely possible to go your whole life without having sex. Much like it is possible to go your whole life without loosing your temper. It may not be easy, but it is definitely possible.

But all of them appear to be "core" desires to us because they are immediate, potent forces. But just because these appetites are strong doesn't make them necessary. Everyone has to eat something but (in the general case) "you don't have to eat that *right now*" is true. Same with sleep - you don't need to sleep as much as you think you do (and you probably should be sleeping some times when you don't feel like it). So we come to sex. Is sex necessary for the continuation of the human race? Yes. Is it necessary for you to have sex at all? No. (Again, in the general case).


Sex is not required for individual survival. Food and transportation are necessary for individual survival.

You are conflating species and individual survival. Sex is required for the continuation of the species, but not for the survival of an individual in that species.




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: