rakuenso

^ lol

yeah, sry if the wording confused you.

I'm a bit skeptical, here's the link http://www.kellymom.com/bf/normal/fertility.html#prevent The link has some graphs and tables How can I use breastfeeding to prevent pregnancy? The Exclusive Breastfeeding method of birth control is also called the Lactational Amenorrhea Method of birth control, or LAM. Lactational amenorrhea refers to the natural postpartum infertility that occurs when a woman is not menstruating due to breastfeeding. Many mothers receive conflicting information on the subject of breastfeeding and fertility. Myth #1 – Breastfeeding cannot be relied upon to prevent pregnancy. Myth #2 – Any amount of breastfeeding will prevent pregnancy, regardless of the frequency of breastfeeding or whether mom’s period has returned. Exclusive breastfeeding has in fact been shown to be an excellent form of birth control, but there are certain criteria that must be met for breastfeeding to be used effectively. Exclusive breastfeeding (by itself) is 98-99.5% effective in preventing pregnancy as long as all of the following conditions are met: 1. Your baby is less than six months old 2. Your menstrual periods have not yet returned 3. Baby is breastfeeding on cue (both day & night), and gets nothing but breastmilk or only token amounts of other foods. Effectiveness of Birth Control Methods Number of Pregnancies per 100 Women Method Perfect Use Typical Use LAM 0.5 2.0 Mirena® IUD 0.1 0.1 Depo-Provera® 0.3 3.0 The Pill / POPs 0.3 8.0 Male condom 2.0 15.0 Diaphragm 6.0 16.0 * Adapted from information at plannedparenthood.org. See comparison of effectiveness for birth control methods for more information. How can I maximize my natural period of infertility? Timing for the return to fertility varies greatly from woman to woman and depends upon baby's nursing pattern and how sensitive mom's body is to the hormones involved in lactation. * Breastfeeding frequency and total amount of time spent breastfeeding per 24 hours are the strongest factors leading to the return of fertility: a mother is more likely to see the return of fertility if baby's nursing frequency and/or duration is reduced, particularly if the change is abrupt. * In some populations, research has shown that night nursing slows the return to fertility. * One study showed that mothers who were separated from their infants (but expressed milk to provide 100% breastmilk for baby) had a higher pregnancy risk (5.2%) during the first 6 months (Valdes 2000). * The introduction of solid food can also be a factor in the return of fertility. Once baby starts solids (if mom's cycles have not returned), the natural period of infertility may be prolonged by breastfeeding before offering solids, starting solids gradually, and not restricting nursing. You can achieve higher effectiveness by practicing ecological breastfeeding: * keeping baby close * breastfeeding on cue (day and night) * using breastfeeding to comfort your baby * breastfeeding in a lying-down position for naps and at night * using no bottles or pacifiers If you practice ecological breastfeeding: * Chance of pregnancy is practically zero during the first three months, less than 2% between 3 and 6 months, and about 6% after 6 months (assuming mom's menstrual periods have not yet returned). * The average time for the return of menstrual periods is 14.6 months. * Moms whose cycles return early tend to be infertile for the first few cycles. Moms whose cycles return later are more likely to ovulate before their first period. Source: Natural Child Spacing and Breastfeeding by Jen O'Quinn Source: Natural Child Spacing and Breastfeeding by Jen O'Quinn While it is possible for a nursing mom to become pregnant while she is breastfeeding and before she has her first menstrual period, it is rare. Most moms do not get pregnant until after their first period (often referred to as the "warning period"). Even after that, while some can become pregnant the first cycle, others will require months of cycles before pregnancy can occur. Still others (this is quite uncommon) may not be able to become pregnant until complete weaning has occurred. The transition to full fertility Several studies have indicated that fertility and ovarian activity return step by step (Ellison 1996, p. 326-327): 1. Follicular activity without ovulation (No chance of pregnancy.) 1a. Menstruation without ovulation (This does not always occur--see below.) 2. Ovulation without luteal competence (After the egg is released, fertilization may take place. During the luteal phase, the uterine lining is prepared for implantation as the egg travels down the fallopian tube and into the uterus. If the uterine lining is not adequately prepared for implantation, the implantation will probably not be successful.) 3. Full luteal competence (Full fertility -- at this point breastfeeding no longer has any effect on your chance of pregnancy.) It is possible to have one or (occasionally) more periods before you start ovulating. In this case, menstruation begins during the first stage of the return to fertility --before ovulation returns. Cycles without ovulation are most common during the first six months postpartum. For other mothers, the first menstruation is preceded by ovulation - a longer period of lactational amenorrhea increases the likelihood that you will ovulate before that first period. A very small percentage of women will become pregnant during their first postpartum ovulation, without having had a postpartum period. Per fertility researcher Alan S. McNeilly, this "is rare and in our experience is related to a rapid reduction in suckling input." It is not uncommon for breastfeeding mothers to report cyclical cramping or PMS-type symptoms - symptoms of an oncoming period without the period - for weeks or even months before their period returns. When this happens, the body is probably "gearing up" for the return of menstruation, but breastfeeding is still delaying the return of fertility. The amount of time that it takes for the transition to full fertility varies from woman to woman. In general, the earlier that your menses return, the more gradual the return to full fertility. Reference Menstruation without ovulation First ovulation without luteal competence Time between 1st period and ovulation 0-6 mo after 6 mo 0-6 mo after 6 mo Eslami 1990 67% 22% -- 8.4 weeks 0.1 week Gray 1990 45.1% "the rate fell greatly" 41% -- -- Reference Frequency of ovulation Lactation: 1st cycle Lactation: 2nd cycle Post-weaning: 1st cycle Post-weaning: 2nd cycle Formula-feeding only: 2nd cycle Howie 1982 45% 66% 70% 84% 94% Do I need to wean to get pregnant? Probably not. If you are still transitioning to full fertility (as discussed above), breastfeeding may affect the success of implantation. Once implantation is successful, breastfeeding should not affect a healthy pregnancy (see A New Look at the Safety of Breastfeeding During Pregnancy for more information). If your periods have come back and settled into a regular pattern, it is likely that breastfeeding is no longer affecting your fertility. Many moms can conceive without deliberately changing their toddler's nursing patterns. There is no "magic" threshold of breastfeeding that will allow you to conceive -- every mother is different. Some moms need to stretch out nursing frequency and/or shorten nursing sessions to make it easier to conceive -- babies naturally do this themselves as they get older, so one of your options is simply to wait a bit. Changes that are more abrupt tend to bring fertility back faster (e.g., cutting out one nursing session abruptly, rather than gradually decreasing nursing time at that session) --even if you continue to breastfeed a great deal-- this is why many mothers experience the return of fertility when their child sleeps through the night or starts solid foods. If you decide to make changes to your nursing pattern, the time of day that you make the change (e.g., cutting out or shortening a nighttime nursing session as opposed to a daytime nursing session) should not make that much of a difference. Current research indicates that nursing frequency and total amount of time at the breast per 24 hours are the most important factors, rather than the time of day that the suckling occurs. A few moms do find it impossible to conceive while nursing, but this is not at all common. Many mothers wonder whether breastfeeding will affect the reliability of pregnancy tests. It does not -- pregnancy tests measure the amount of the hormone hCG (human chorionic gonadotropin) in blood or urine, and hCG levels are not affected by breastfeeding. The developing placenta begins releasing hCG upon implantation; a pregnancy can generally be detected with a pregnancy test within 7-14 days after implantation. For more information, see Getting Pregnant While Breastfeeding by Hilary Flower. When you do get pregnant while breastfeeding, what next? See Nursing During Pregnancy & Tandem Nursing for more information.

war of the worlds isopod.. yup how do those things mate, from the picture of the underside on wiki, i didn't exactly see a.. well you get the idea.

viruses? DNA? Atoms?

Chelonian* =) but studying zoology in pheonix arizona? wow talk about biodiversity :X

you seem to be an expert in this area

ROFL

yup.. some states are going to incorporate controversies of evolution into their courses now. In other words, intelligent design is coming to a school near you! 45% of Americans believe that God created the world along with creatures big and small in just six days, without reconciliatory faith with darwinism. 30% of teachers felt that they were pressured by parents to either omit evolution of evolution-related topics. 54% did not believe that humans had developed from an earlier species, (a rise of 9 percent since 1994). Well, this canuck's going to Canada for post-secondary education source: (TIME, aug 15, 2005) So here's my rant: The Downfall of Science Education It is absolutely ridiculous as to what I have just read. The president of the United States, just quoted the following about evolution and intelligent design (which is simply an alias for creationism.) "Both sides ought to be properly taught, so people can understand what the debate is about ... I think that part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought." I'm sorry Mr. President, but your argument does not hold when it comes to science. What you are saying is analogous to trying to argue that even though the "earth revolves around the sun", you still think that people should know about the old self centered religious dogma "that the earth is the center of the universe." An exposure to different schools of thought is apt for a philosophy or history class, but not in a science classroom. As many other notable scientists have concluded, to teach creationism/I.D. as a science is an attempt by the religious fundamentalist to taint the sancity of scientific questioning. The theory of evolution underwent rigorous analyses ranging from genetics to biochemistry. PubMed alone, has published over 162,238 articles regarding evolution. That is 162,238 articles conducted by months of rigorous research and under constant scrutiny from the scientific community. The total # of articles well surpasses the millions. Now how many articles/books exist that support the teachings of intelligent design? Let's see.. well there's the bible... genesis I and II... umm... New and Old Testament.... ok that would be 5....so let's just assume that there are 500 for the sake of "argument", how's that? Not to mention, they are 500 articles who are simply accepted and brandished by the religious right without any form of organized intellectual scrutiny. The "500" articles that support The Bible never underwent the same level of scientific inquiry or critical analysis. For you Mr. President to try and compare that there's actually even an argument between evolution and intelligent design is idiotic. The attempt to allow intelligent design into the curriculum of the United States education is a subtle sabotage to the progress of science. As Professor Steven Pinker of Harvard Psychology department argues: "The moral design of nature is as bungled as its engineering design. What twisted sadist would have invented a parasite that blinds millions of people or a gene that covers babies with excruciating blisters? To adapt a Yiddish expression about God: 'If an intelligent designer lived on an Earth, people would break his windows.' In this case it almost seems that to accept God is to reject humanity. Which ironically is what the religious have always boasted as the pillars of their existence. It is of obviously no surprise that countries like South Korea are rapidly advancing, and if not already superseding us in the area of Biotechnology. To those people who support intelligent design and actually wants to have an argument, please. All you can possibly ever do is try and manipulate words so that it sounds like science but actually lack any scientific evidence. You know why? That's because there was no scientific basis in the first place to the 500 articles that you so deeply embrace. Thus this leads to the logical deduction that there isn't, and can't ever be an argument when trying to incorporate Intelligent Design into science classes. Arguments require a basis, and frankly, IDer's lack a scientific basis where intellectual questioning was employed. This farce has gone on long enough, the Scopes monkey trial is a thing of the past. We don't need in 2005, where we are on the verge of many biotechnological breakthroughs. Please stop trying to confuse the young public with spineless theories like intelligent design. It is an excuse shaped by the religious fundamentalists who try and undermine scientific inquiry. People who try to muddle science with religion are a hindrance. I'd rather have you obsessively interpret the Bible word for word. This is an illustration that the religious fanatics are losing their control as the general populace is experiencing a second enlightenment. This is just another dirty tactic employed by the fanatics as they try to cling on to their power.

wait how the hell would this work? it would have to be guy<-guy<-guy or girl<-guy-<guy or are there hermaphroditic turtles?

rofl you have to be insane to just have radium lying around...

The evolutionary advantages of a longer lifespan would probably be that an organism can survive different environmental changes and thus adapt better to any environment. For example, compare mammalian lives with the lives of flies, we can live in pretty much any environment regardless of the weather, whether it be cold, hot, tropical, humid, slightly acidic/basic, variations of sunlight intensity.

unless they have some insanely accurate DNA repair mechanism, I doubt it =) but then again if they did have an insanely accurate DNA repair mechanism I wonder how they mutated so that they had an insanely accurate DNA repair mechanism in the first place =)

Hmm ok I thought most of our amino acids was the result of breaking peptide bonds into individual amino acids.

I've two general questions.... Why is that plants we eat contain so much less protein than your meaty counterparts? They still require lots of protein to function don't they? I'm guessing that the protein levels is denser in that of muscles and meat Where do plants obtain their amino acids from? They don't exactly have the trypsin and pepsins needed to break down protein & peptide bonds....

Molecular Biology of the Cell

wow there are some pretty ancient people here =)

If only we had the genetic imprinting abilities of the Gua'old, but then again you wonder how giant their genomes must be.

Well now I'll know who to look for in Toronto

ooh found one meself as well

lol. JPQuiceno wins!

How do turtles do it?

enterprise killed my love of star trek

HUUUGE, anyone guess where I'm at?