Is menstruation unnatural?

Asguard,

Why can't you look this up? I'm not a vet! Form this site:
http://www.vetmed.lsu.edu/eiltslotus/Theriogenology-5361/the_normal_canine.htm
It describes bleeding is simply blood lost because the uterine lining (endometrium) become leaky (diapedesis) just before the "estrus phase", it is not from the destruction of the uterine lining which occurs during the "diestrus" phase, it describes no bleeding during "diestrus" but repair to the endometrium occurs during "anestrus" phase.
 
Syzygys said:
I have this theory, that since in the animal world as soon as the female becomes ripe for bearing offspring, she usually gets pregnant. And once it starts, it doesn't stop until the female becomes too old to bear children. Thus in the lifetime of female mammals menstruation is rather the exception than the norm. I would guess they spend more time being pregnant or nursing than menstruating in their fertile lifespan...

Here is a woman who hasn't menstruated often in the last 20 years:

http://health.discovery.com/convergence/duggars/duggarfamily.html

Baby #18 is coming to the Duggar family!
Click to expand...

Wow, you're an idiot.
 
Wow, you just entered my Ignore list dumbfuck...

P.S.: I don't have a problem with criticism if it is backed up by resoning...

P.S.S.: Just to show, I never namecall, I even give am explanation of your dumbfuckness.

Anybody is a dumbfuck by definition who namecalls others without good reason. If you actually read the thread, you realize that one expert came to exactly the same conclusion, like I did. Just because you don't understand the concept, that doesn't mean that others are idiots. Chances are YOU ARE! :)
 
Last edited:
Well, maybe I used the wrong word. Probably should have used "not normal", meaning that in the average lifecycle of a female mammal menstruation doesn't occur very often, thus it is more of the exception than the average event.

But I see people having problems with "not normal", too...The natural, normal state of a healthy female mammal is being pregnant or lactating...
 
Last edited:
Syzygys said:
Well, maybe I used the wrong word. Probably should have used "not normal", meaning that in the average lifecycle of a female mammal menstruation doesn't occur very often, thus it is more of the exception than the average event.

But I see people having problems with "not normal", too...The natural, normal state of a healthy female mammal is being pregnant or lactating...
Click to expand...

... and the natural course of a female mammal life cycle is dieing young.
 
Correct. Living to ripe old age isn't common in the nature...
 
I said I will put you on Ignore for a week, and it was like 10 days, so you can come out of the corner... :)

Now not every unnatural, non-normal act requires an action. Just people should know that living up to 90 is more of the exception than the norm...
 
Syzygys said:
I said I will put you on Ignore for a week, and it was like 10 days, so you can come out of the corner... :)

Now not every unnatural, non-normal act requires an action. Just people should know that living up to 90 is more of the exception than the norm...
Click to expand...

I was in the corner, only in your head :D

Exactly so the unnatural things of not keeping a women pregnant or lactating does need require an action. And living to 90 may be consider middle age by 2150.
 
I don't think the human body was designed to live much longer than 40 years or so. It might be bad if people were living to 180 and people were still constanly having 18 kids at their leisure. We would eventually run out of room.
 
CutsieMarie89 said:
I don't think the human body was designed to live much longer than 40 years or so. It might be bad if people were living to 180 and people were still constanly having 18 kids at their leisure. We would eventually run out of room.
Click to expand...

I don't think the a body that can live to 180 will be classifiable as human. Also if the standard of living is high enough for people to live to 180, they will be having children at a rate even lower the todays 1st world countries.
 
ElectricFetus said:
I was in the corner, only in your head :D
Click to expand...

Hey you can say whatever you want behind my back. But if you wish so, I can put you back on ignore, just ask me.

And living to 90 may be consider middle age by 2150.
Click to expand...

I doubt it. Today's generation is the first who are not going to live LONGER than their parents, according to new estimates...
 
Syzygys said:
Hey you can say whatever you want behind my back. But if you wish so, I can put you back on ignore, just ask me.



I doubt it. Today's generation is the first who are not going to live LONGER than their parents, according to new estimates...
Click to expand...

Oh please do, ignoring me does not hurt me, no matter how much you would like it too.

First of all Americans may live shorter lives, because their to fat, the average lifespan world wide is still going up.
 
Asguard said:
what a pair of idiots, people like that should be forcefully sterilised. ....
Click to expand...

Why? :bugeye:
They raise their own food, built their own house, raise their children responsibly. They aren't a drain on society, like some women who have 3 children by 3 different fathers and sit on welfare.
 
Orleander said:
Why? :bugeye:
They raise their own food, built their own house, raise their children responsibly. They aren't a drain on society, like some women who have 3 children by 3 different fathers and sit on welfare.
Click to expand...

Eventual those self sustain "responsible" people are going to have grandchild and great grandchild in the dozens and even hundreds, some of who will be sitting on welfare, so they represent 20, 30, who knows how many social deadbeats several generations down the line.

If you have 2 or less children you doing good for society now and tomorrow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top