They designated them as twins. How far apart would they have to be for them not to be considered twins? Say someone with the same condition gets a second pregnancy started 3 months later and delivers 3 months apart. would those still be considered twins?
this post was submitted on 23 Dec 2023
171 points (97.2% liked)
News
22838 readers
3764 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Maybe it just has to do with date of conception? If they were both conceived at the same time but one was born earlier, they are still functionally the same as fraternal twins because they come from the same, er, "batch"?
I suspect that it would be impossible to get a 2nd pregnant after a couple of weeks of the first. The baby produces hormones that stop ovulation. The 2nd one would have to be in before that window.
I also suspect that the birth of the 1st would induce the second. She likely didn't leave labour, the 2nd just took longer, since it was, effectively, induced by the first.
Going back to the broader question, it's likely that both were inside the mother at the same time. In theory they could be 9 months apart, though that would likely require significant medical effort, and so is effectively impossible.
Really interesting point! Also, what about babies born via IVF that don't technically share a womb at the same time, but were from the same "batch" of sperm and eggs?
Some women don't even have one womb. This is womb inequality at its worst.
Is this a kulak?
If only there were such womb-justice.
What if both wombs conceived twins 😱😱
Sounds like tiny babies or a pretty extreme pregnancy
0.3% of all women isn't even that rare. nor is one in a million [pregnancies]
That is rare, and being pregnant in both is what’s “one in a million.” Have you heard of this happening before?
I get where the other poster is coming from tho, it sounds like 3500 women alive right now will have this type of pregnancy (1 in a million of 3.5bn women)
However, I think its of the .3% that are born dicavitary, there is THEN a 1 in a million shot to have both uteri fertilized, which means it would only happen once every few generations.