Health
A Theory of Childbirth’s Evolution May Not Be What You’re Expecting

It’s a question on every new parent’s exhausted mind: Why are babies born so helpless? In 1960, an American anthropologist laid out an influential explanation rooted in human evolution.
As our early ancestors began walking upright, Sherwood Washburn argued in 1960, they evolved a narrower pelvis to make walking long distances more efficient. At the same time, those hominins were evolving larger brains. And babies with big heads could get stuck in a tight birth canal during delivery, threatening the lives of mothers and babies alike.
According to Dr. Washburn, evolution dealt with this “obstetrical dilemma,” as he called it, by shortening pregnancies, so that women delivered babies before the infant brain was done growing.
Dr. Washburn’s theory was hugely influential and became a common lesson in biology classes. “Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind,” a 2011 best-selling book, presented the obstetrical dilemma as fact. Many researchers still embrace it.
But a detailed review of the evidence, slated to be published soon in the journal Evolutionary Anthropology, threw cold water on the idea. In the review, Anna Warrener, a biological anthropologist at the University of Colorado Denver, argued that the evidence to date did not offer strong support for the obstetrical dilemma, and that scientists had not paid enough attention to possible alternatives. What’s more, the scientist said, the idea sends a pernicious message to women that pregnancy is inherently dangerous.
“It perpetuates a narrative of bodily incompetence,” Dr. Warrener said.
In graduate school, Dr. Warrener did not see any reason to doubt the obstetrical dilemma. For her dissertation, she investigated one of Dr. Washburn’s key assumptions — that women walk less efficiently than men do because their pelvis is wider for childbirth. But in 2015, after studying volunteers walking on treadmills, Dr. Warrener found that having a wider pelvis did not create a bigger demand for oxygen.
“The data came in, and I was like, Wait a minute — I may have gotten some of the story wrong,” she recalled.
Holly Dunsworth, a biological anthropologist now at the University of Rhode Island, also became disenchanted with the obstetrical dilemma when she took a close look at the evidence. “I was scandalized,” she said.
In 2012, she and her colleagues published a study on the length of pregnancies in humans and other primates. They found that, in general, bigger primates tended to have longer pregnancies than smaller ones. For their size, humans don’t have shortened pregnancies. If anything, human pregnancies are longer than one would predict for a primate of their size.
Since then, Dr. Dunsworth has become a strong critic of the obstetrical dilemma, arguing that the timing of childbirth is determined by the size of babies’ bodies, not their heads. The birthing process begins when a fetus demands more energy than a mother’s body can provide, she proposes. “We’re giving birth to massive babies,” she said.
Other scientists, however, have come to the theory’s defense, while admitting that its original conception was overly simplistic.
In a study published last month, a team of researchers argued that the difference between the male and female pelvis shows signs of natural selection acting in different directions. While human males are bigger and taller on average than human females, certain parts of their pelvises are relatively smaller. The biggest differences are in the bones that surround the birth canals in human females.
Despite these differences, the female pelvis still creates a tight fit between a baby’s head and the birth canal, sometimes putting both the baby and mother in peril.
“So why did natural selection not manage to kind of resolve this situation and make birth a little less risky?” asked Nicole Grunstra, an evolutionary anthropologist at the University of Vienna and one of the study’s authors. “It has evolved to be an evolutionary compromise between competing demands,” she said — in other words, to solve an obstetrical dilemma.
But Dr. Grunstra acknowledged flaws in Dr. Washburn’s original version of the theory. She suspected that walking may not have been the most important factor in the evolution of the pelvis. Merely standing upright, she said, might have put pressure on the pelvic floor, preventing the evolution of a more spacious birth canal.
The skeptics aren’t convinced by these arguments. In her new review, Dr. Warrener questioned whether babies getting stuck in birth canals have posed a major threat to women’s lives. It is far more common, she noted, for new mothers to die from blood loss or infections.
She also criticized the way in which Dr. Grunstra and other defenders of the obstetrical dilemma make the case for their hypothesis. In her view, they assume that every piece of human anatomy has been fine-tuned by natural selection for a specific job.
Sometimes, Dr. Warrener said, adaptations are flukes. For example, some of the genes that build the pelvis are also active in the development of other parts of the skeleton. If another bone in our body were to evolve into a new shape, the pelvis might change simply as a byproduct — not because it was evolving for walking or childbirth.
“I think sex differences in the pelvis have been somewhat of a red herring,” Dr. Dunsworth said. Like other bones, the pelvis does not have a fixed shape encoded in a genetic blueprint. Its development is influenced by the tissues around it, including the uterus, the ovaries and other organs. The proportions of the female pelvis may result in part from all the organs that grow inside it.
Both Dr. Dunsworth and Dr. Warrener worry that the obstetrical dilemma leads to a widespread notion of the female body as inescapably defective.
“That just makes us feel like problems that need to be solved by medicine,” Dr. Dunsworth said. That narrative may play a part in the medicalization of childbirth in recent decades, she added.
The World Health Organization has warned that doctors are increasingly performing unnecessary medical intervention on mothers, while chronic disorders that can threaten maternal health — such as high blood pressure, obesity and diabetes — get little attention.
“The way we live now probably doesn’t lead us to meet the challenge of childbirth as well as our bodies did when they developed differently in the past,” Dr. Dunsworth said.
But recognizing the over-medicalization of modern pregnancy doesn’t end the debate about its origins, Dr. Grunstra said. “That does not in itself mean that evolutionary explanations are wrong,” she said.

Health
Experts Doubt Kennedy’s Timetable for Finding the Cause of Autism

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the nation’s health secretary, pledged on Thursday to seek out experts globally to discover the reasons for the increasing rates of autism in the United States.
“We’ve launched a massive testing and research effort that’s going to involve hundreds of scientists from around the world,” Mr. Kennedy announced at a cabinet meeting held by President Trump. “By September, we will know what has caused the autism epidemic and we’ll be able to eliminate those exposures.”
“There will be no bigger news conference than that,” Mr. Trump replied.
But scientists who have worked for decades to find a cause greeted Mr. Kennedy’s predicted timeline with skepticism.
They said that a single answer would be hard to identify in a field of possible contributors including pesticides, air pollution and maternal diabetes.
Dr. Philip Landrigan, a pediatrician and expert on environmental toxins, pointed to the current mass layoffs and cutbacks for research at Mr. Kennedy’s Department of Health and Human Services as one reason for doubting such quick progress.
“Given that a great deal of research on autism and other pediatric diseases in hospitals and medical schools is currently coming to a halt because of federal funding cuts from H.H.S.,” he said, “it is very difficult for me to imagine what profound scientific breakthrough could be achieved between now and September.”
Mr. Kennedy’s office did not offer many details on the plan. Later on Thursday, Mr. Kennedy revealed a few more clues, saying that the National Institutes of Health would lead the effort.
He said the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention would soon release data showing that the autism diagnoses had now increased to one of every 31 children. Many scientists and doctors attributed the rise in autism rates over the last several decades in part to growing awareness of the disorder and to expanded diagnoses along a spectrum.
“We are launching requests to scientists from all over the country and all over the world,” Mr. Kennedy said in an interview on Fox News. “Everything is on the table: our food system, our water, our air, different ways of parenting, all the kind of changes that may have triggered this epidemic.”
In the interview, Mr. Kennedy also said an important part of the effort would be to compare autism rates in vaccinated and unvaccinated children. It’s an angle that many scientists dismiss, saying that parents who vaccinate their children are also more likely to get a diagnosis, given higher rates of interaction with health providers.
Many scientists who have observed Mr. Kennedy’s dogged opposition to many vaccines over two decades — and his frequent attempts to tie autism to vaccines — have dismissed his claims, citing the scientific consensus that debunked any such link. Scrutiny of his pledges to begin “gold standard” research only heightened in recent weeks when David Geier, a largely discredited researcher, was hired at H.H.S. to study any potential link between vaccines and autism.
Irva Hertz-Picciotto, director of environmental epidemiology of neurodevelopment at the University of California at Davis MIND Institute, said she had been seeking a cause for autism for 20 years.
It’s an exciting time for the field, she said, with multiple studies beginning to point to factors that could play a role. Among the possible links are pesticide exposure through food or nearby agricultural fields; workplace exposures to solvents; fevers or infections during pregnancy; maternal diabetes; and exposure to chemicals in plastics called phthalates or to PFAS, known as “forever chemicals” for their tendency to persist in the environment.
Some studies have found that the effect of environmental exposures can vary based on a person’s genes, “emphasizing the complexity of this syndrome.” Dr. Hertz-Picciotto said it was challenging to get funding for clinical studies that could shed light on a cause of autism, but new research could help advance the field. Those studies, though, could take years.
That all of the research could be sorted out by September, she said, was “ludicrous.”
Dr. Alice Kuo, the chief of pediatric medicine who cares for children and adults with autism at the University of California, Los Angeles, said she was involved in a yearslong project by the National Institutes of Health called the National Children’s Study. It followed thousands of children and parents and elicited information, including the possible causes of autism. The study was costly and ended far earlier than planned, Dr. Kuo said.
She said an effort to do something as rigorous would take months to plan and design — and years to arrive at an answer.
In a social media post on Thursday, Mr. Kennedy recognized the assistance of the president and the Make America Healthy Again Commission — a subgroup of the cabinet that includes Linda McMahon, the education secretary, and Russell Vought, director of the Office of Management and Budget. Like Mr. Kennedy, they are not doctors or scientists.
“Thanks to your MAHA Commission, we’ll soon identify the root causes of the autism epidemic,” Mr. Kennedy wrote in a social media post.
Created by an executive order in February, the commission is charged with assessing in 100 days the threat to children of food ingredients, chemicals, medications and other exposures. Within 180 days, the commission is expected to submit a strategy to the president to address its findings.
Health
Stroke, dementia and depression share these 17 preventable risk factors

Three of the most common aging-related diseases share many of the same risk factors — and they can all be reduced through lifestyle changes.
That’s according to a new study from Mass General Brigham (MGB), which identified 17 common risk factors all linked to stroke, dementia and late-life depression.
The researchers combed through previously published studies of risk factors associated with those three conditions, then determined which ones can be controlled through healthy behaviors.
RETIREMENT COULD BE BAD FOR YOUR HEALTH, SAYS WELLNESS EXPERT: ‘POWERED BY PURPOSE’
They also predicted the impact each risk factor had on quality of life and mortality, according to a press release from MGB.
“The suggestion that reduced activity may be a symptom rather than a cause of brain disease challenges how we interpret early signs.” (iStock)
The 17 risk factors that are shared by at least two of the diseases include blood pressure, kidney disease, fasting plasma glucose, total cholesterol, alcohol use, diet, hearing loss, pain, physical activity, purpose in life, sleep, smoking, social engagement and stress, the researchers listed.
The findings were published in the Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry.
COMMON SUPPLEMENT COULD HELP YOU LIVE LONGER, RESEARCH SUGGESTS
Senior author Sanjula Singh, MD, PhD, principal investigator at the Brain Care Labs at Massachusetts General Hospital, described the discovery as “hopeful.”
“This means there are real opportunities for prevention. Whether it’s managing your blood pressure, staying physically active, eating well or maintaining social connections, small changes in your daily routine can help you take better care of your brain over time,” she told Fox News Digital.
“Small changes in your daily routine can help you take better care of your brain over time.”
Brian Snelling, MD, of the Miami Neuroscience Institute, part of Baptist Health South Florida, was not involved in the study but shared his input on the findings.
“The influence of factors like chronic pain and a sense of purpose on brain health was notable and often overlooked in neurological care,” he told Fox News Digital.
“Also, the suggestion that reduced activity may be a symptom rather than a cause of brain disease challenges how we interpret early signs.”

Total cholesterol was one of the modifiable risk factors shared by at least two of the three cognitive disorders. (iStock)
Dr. Marc Siegel, clinical professor of medicine at NYU Langone Health and Fox News senior medical analyst, said he agrees with the findings of the study.
“These factors are all well-proven to decrease inflammation in the body and thereby the risk of stroke, dementia and late-life depression,” he told Fox News Digital.
Incremental changes
To keep from becoming overwhelmed, the researchers recommend regarding the 17 factors as a “menu of options.”
“You don’t have to address them all at once — starting with one to three small, realistic changes can already make a meaningful difference,” said Singh. “These findings might help people consider which of these 17 risk factors could be a starting point to take better care of their brains.”
NEW BLOOD TEST DIAGNOSES ALZHEIMER’S DISEASE AND MEASURES HOW FAR IT’S PROGRESSED
Singling out one area to start with, Singh recommended measuring blood pressure and taking steps to keep it at a healthy level.
“There are many ways to control your blood pressure — reducing salt intake, increasing physical activity, eating more fruits and vegetables, managing stress and taking medication when prescribed,” she advised.

Singling out one area to start with, the lead study author (not pictured) recommended measuring blood pressure and taking steps to keep it at a healthy level. (iStock)
Other important areas to focus on include sleep, social connections, blood sugar and physical activity, according to the researcher.
“The most important thing is to start somewhere — even small improvements can make a meaningful difference for your brain health,” she said.
BRAIN AND MEMORY ARE BOOSTED BY EATING ONE PARTICULAR DIET
Many of the factors are interconnected, Singh noted.
“Progress in one area often supports progress in others,” she said. “For example, becoming more active may help to improve sleep or lower blood pressure.”
Managing blood pressure and kidney health, as well as staying mentally and socially engaged, are key strategies to protect the brain, according to Snelling.
“Proactive brain care should start well before symptoms appear,” he said.
Limitations of the study
Like any study, Singh noted, this one had several limitations.
“We focused on modifiable risk factors that overlapped with at least two out of the three conditions — as a result, we may have excluded important risk factors that are specific to just one condition, particularly certain psychological or behavioral factors related to late-life depression,” she told Fox News Digital.

Maintaining social connections is one of the most important strategies for protecting brain health, according to experts. (iStock)
The researchers also relied only on existing meta-analyses, which meant some potentially important factors in smaller studies may have been missed.
“Additionally, the strength of evidence varied across risk factors and conditions, and we couldn’t establish causality — only associations,” Singh said. “Still, we hope this work offers a useful starting point for prevention-focused research.”
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR HEALTH NEWSLETTER
Snelling agreed that while the large review shows strong associations, it doesn’t confirm cause and effect.
“It also highlights the need for more high-quality data, especially around late-life depression.”
“Proactive brain care should start well before symptoms appear.”
Overall, experts agreed the study emphasizes that lifestyle changes can be instrumental in promoting health and longevity.
“Diet, exercise, sleep and having a purpose in life aren’t just good for brain health — they are also critical in preventing numerous chronic diseases,” family physician Dr. Brintha Vasagar, based in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, told Fox News Digital.
For more Health articles, visit www.foxnews.com/health
“Your family medicine physician can help you identify which changes would have the most impact on your health.”
Health
‘The Pitt’ Captures the Real Overcrowding Crisis in Emergency Rooms

The emergency department waiting room was jammed, as it always is, with patients sitting for hours, closely packed on hard metal chairs. Only those with conditions so dire they needed immediate care — like a heart attack — got seen immediately.
One man had had enough. He pounded on the glass window in front of the receptionist before storming out. As he left, he assaulted a nurse taking a smoking break. “Hard at work?” he called, as he strode off.
No, the event was not real, but it was art resembling life on “The Pitt,” the Max series that will stream its season finale on Thursday. The show takes place in a fictional Pittsburgh hospital’s emergency room. But the underlying theme — appalling overcrowding — is universal in this country. And it is not easy to fix.
“EDs are gridlocked and overwhelmed,” the American College of Emergency Physicians reported in 2023, referring to emergency departments.
“The system is at the breaking point,” said Dr. Benjamin S. Abella, chair of the department of emergency medicine at Mount Sinai’s Icahn School of Medicine in New York.
“The Pitt” follows emergency room doctors, nurses, medical students, janitors and staff hour by hour over a single day as they deal with all manner of medical issues, ranging from a child who drowned helping her little sister get out of a swimming pool to a patient with a spider in her ear. There were heart attacks and strokes, overdoses, a patient with severe burns, an influencer poisoned by heavy metals in a skin cream.
Because this is television, many of the thorny problems get neatly resolved in the show’s 15 episodes. A woman who seems to have abandoned her elderly mother returns, apologizing because she fell asleep. Parents whose son died from an accidental fentanyl overdose come around to donating his organs. A pregnant teenager and her mother, at odds over a medical abortion, come to a resolution following a wise doctor’s counsel.
But over and over again, the image is of a system working way beyond its capacity. There is the jammed waiting room and the “boarders” — patients parked in emergency rooms or hallways for days or longer because there are no hospital beds. (The American College of Emergency Physicians calls boarding a “national public health crisis.”)
There are the long waits for simple tests. There is the hallway medicine — patients who see a doctor in the hallway, not in a private area, because there is no place else to put them.
And there is the violence, verbal and physical, from patients with mental problems and those, like the man who punched the nurse, who just get fed up.
“‘The Pitt’ shows the duress the system is under,” Dr. Abella said. “Across the country we see this day in and day out.”
But why can’t this problem be fixed?
Because there’s no simple solution, said Dr. Ezekiel J. Emanuel, co-director of the Health Transformation Institute at the University of Pennsylvania’s Perelman School of Medicine. The problem, he said is “multipronged and there is no magic wand.”
Part of it is money.
Having patients jammed up in emergency rooms guarantees that no bed will go unused, bolstering revenues for hospitals.
Then there’s the problem of discharging patients. Spaces are scarce in nursing homes and rehabilitation centers, so patients ready to leave the hospital often are stuck waiting for a space to open up elsewhere.
Schedules are another difficulty, said Dr. Jeremy S. Faust, attending physician in the Brigham and Women’s Hospital Department of Emergency Medicine. Many rehabilitation centers admit patients only during business hours, he said. If an E.R. patient is ready to be discharged to one during a weekend, that patient has to wait.
In “The Pitt,” as in real life, patients often show up in emergency rooms with problems — like a child with an earache — that a private doctor should be able to handle. Why don’t they just go to their own doctor instead of waiting hours to be seen?
One reason, Dr. Emanuel said, is that “primary care is going to hell in a handbasket.”
In many cities finding a primary care doctor is difficult. And even if you have one, getting an appointment can take days or weeks.
Many do not want to wait.
“The modern mentality, for better or worse, is: If I can’t get it now, I will look for other solutions,” Dr. Abella said.
That often means the emergency room.
Even building larger emergency rooms has not helped with the overcrowding.
Dr. Faust said that his hospital opened a new emergency room a few years ago with a large increase in the number of beds. A colleague, giving him a tour, proudly told him there was now so much space there would probably be no more hallway patients.
“I looked at him and said, ‘Bwhahahahaha,’” Dr. Faust said. “If you build it, they will come.”
He was right.
-
News1 week ago
Supreme Court Rules Against Makers of Flavored Vapes Popular With Teens
-
News1 week ago
NYC Mayor Eric Adams' corruption case is dismissed
-
Technology1 week ago
Here’s how you can preorder the Nintendo Switch 2 (or try to)
-
News1 week ago
Trump to Pick Ohio Solicitor General, T. Elliot Gaiser, for Justice Dept. Legal Post
-
World1 week ago
‘A historic moment’: Donald Trump unveils sweeping ‘reciprocal’ tariffs
-
Sports1 week ago
Deion Sanders defied doubters and returns to Colorado with a $10M per year deal. What’s next?
-
Politics1 week ago
FBI flooded with record number of new agent applications in Kash Patel's first month leading bureau
-
World1 week ago
Commission denies singling out NGOs in green funding row