![]() The twin-bearers lived longer and raised more children. The Utah records contradict the idea that twins harm the health of the mother. These advantages held even after Robson and Smith adjusted their figures to account for things like the women’s age, when they gave birth to their first child, whether their husbands or children died, and their religious affiliations. They had children later on into the lives, and over a longer part of it. They gave birth more frequently, and over the course of their lives, they raised two more children. On average, they lived longer after menopause. The duo found that women who gave birth to twins “outperformed” their peers who only ever had one child at a time. ![]() They compared these women to 54,183 mums of similar characteristics who never had twins. ![]() From these records, the duo pulled out 4,603 women, all of whom lived in the 19th century, survived till at least the age of 50, and had twins. It’s one of the most comprehensive sets of family records in the world, and includes data on over 1.6 million people, right up to the 1970s. Robson and Smith used the Utah Population Database, which collects the family trees of people who migrated to Utah in the early 1800s and their descendants. The presence of twins singles out mums who can bear the extra cost of having twins. To them, the very fact that some mothers can bring twins to term is a sign that they are strong and fit. In a new study, the two scientists from the University of Utah have painted the birth of twins in a more positive light. But Shannen Robson and Ken Smith don’t agree. That’s a problem, because having twins exacts a physical toll upon the mother.Īccording to this fairly bleak view, mums with twins have taken an evolutionary gamble that has backfired. If two eggs are fertilised, one embryo is often lost – this is why many more twins are conceived than are born, the so-called “ vanishing twin” effect. Mothers will often produce several eggs, with the others acting as insurance in case the first doesn’t make it. In humans, a similar (but less brutal) competition happens in the womb. ![]() After hatching, the parents (or the strongest chick) will kill the weaker babies. He suggested that twins are the result of an evolutionary bet-hedging strategy gone wrong.Īnderson knew that birds will commonly lay several eggs as insurance, to make sure that they get at least one strong chick. In a classic 1990 paper, a bird specialist called David Anderson expanded on this idea. Complications during pregnancy and delivery could kill both mother and children. The standard answer is that giving birth to twins, and raising them, is difficult. History, after all, is written by individuals who are best at passing on their genes, so having more children at once seems like a good strategy. From a cold evolutionary point of view, twins look like a win for their mother. Heart wrenchingly cruel #twins #LongLostFamily.For every hundred babies born in Europe, one or two of them are quickly followed by a twin. Split from his twin and then suffering so much.’Īnother commented: ‘It just seems so cruel to separate twins. Jason broke down in tears as he learnt his twin sister had finally been found, after his search came to a dead end, and while Louise didn’t want to be filmed for the show, she gave the team a picture of her to give to her brother, along with a letter saying she couldn’t wait to meet him.įlocking to Twitter, fans were left overwhelmed by Jason’s story, with one viewer tweeting: ‘This is a sad story. He hoped his sister Louise – who’s name changed to Emma – had a better life than he did growing up and when his father died, he began searching for his twin. Jason meeting his long lost twin sister after all this time must be so overwhelming and then learning Emmaâs backstory and her feeling unloved because she was put into care is so sad and theit dad having them separated for all that time….
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |