Babies having babies

[NWFlyer 2]

No, mods, don't automatically move this to Speakers' Corner. It's not political, it's just ... odd.

"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke

[SkydiveStMarys 0]

I saw that!

Really really bizarre

Bobbi

A miracle is not defined by an event. A miracle is defined by gratitude.

[Buried 0]

odd! it's not like the larger one was eating the smaller one.. Maybe she was using it as..... uh...

Where is my fizzy-lifting drink?

[SpeedRacer 1]

On a related topic, has anyone else noticed how annoying MSNBC's website is? It keeps blinking out & reloading itself.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[ACMESkydiver 0]

Interesting; it doesn't mention if the other two fetuses were developing within the womb of the baby or just 'inside'. I wonder where else they could develop, though?

~Jaye
Do not believe that possibly you can escape the reward of your action.

[ntrprnr 0]

Kinda like picture-in-picture? :D

_______________
"Why'd you track away at 7,000 feet?"
"Even in freefall, I have commitment issues."

[skydemon2 0]

Its like those dolls you open up and there is another inside..........

Beauty is only skin deep, but ugly goes clean to the bone!

I like to start my day off with a little Ray of Soulshine™!!

[The111 1]

"It is a time of desolation, chaos, and uncertainty. Brother pitted against brother; babies havin' babies."

www.WingsuitPhotos.com

[Squeak 17]

Quote

Interesting; it doesn't mention if the other two fetuses were developing within the womb of the baby or just 'inside'. I wonder where else they could develop, though?

think back to high school A&P there is NO reason to think they would be in the babies womb.

The phenomenon is most likey caused by non complete triplet development.

You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky)
My Life ROCKS!
How's yours doing?

[ACMESkydiver 0]

Quote

Quote

Interesting; it doesn't mention if the other two fetuses were developing within the womb of the baby or just 'inside'. I wonder where else they could develop, though?

think back to high school A&P there is NO reason to think they would be in the babies womb.

The phenomenon is most likey caused by non complete triplet development.

A&P? Huh? Must be some stupid Aussie thing!

Ok then Mister wizard...of course the babies were triplets. But where would developing fetuses be supplied nutrients and have ROOM to grow for four months within another fetus? In it's stomach? Reproductive organs begin to develop around 9-10 weeks, but these babies were already growing -so purely from a logical look at space in a fetus, the emerging womb of a female would have the greatest amount of space, besides maybe the stomach. However, there's also the question of the umbilical cords. The fetuses could not have developed without nutrients from the mother or host baby, and since the host baby lived, it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume that the parasitic twins in question received their nutrients directly from the mother, meaning they had to have umbilical cords from mama in there somewhere.

-And how, pray tell, could they develop two fetuses to 4 months gestation (about the size of a peach) without killing the 'host' fetus, which was conceived at the same time, and therefore should be about the size of a peach itself? I wonder if the report isn't somewhat skewed, as media often is, and these were in fact conjoined triplets that had only one small appendage or organ developing within the host baby, sensationalized into 'babies within a baby'.

Who knows.

~Jaye
Do not believe that possibly you can escape the reward of your action.