Your comments: Winter 2004

If you have any comments or suggestions for More or Less then click here to find an e-mail form. We read and value all your e-mails but we cannot promise a reply.

We would also like to know about your encounters with numbers, whether mystifying, strange or even beautiful.

And we hope you will join us in keeping a watchful eye on the way numbers are used and reported.

Click here to read e-mails responding to topics in an earlier series

Pregnancy due dates Cancer clusters

Pregnancy due dates

Our baby was born the day after the due date estimated from the 12 week scan. I think that it must count as being pretty much accurate, but surprisingly this was seven days later than would have been predicted from my wife's last period. So in our case the doctors ignored the 180 days method.
Craig, UK

Your piece regarding induction dates of pregnant women is slightly disingenuous. There is good evidence that infant mortality and morbidity is higher if the pregnancy is allowed to continue beyond 294 days. Whether you count this as the mean plus 14 days or the mode plus 12 days is a moot point. In practice, organisational issues (ie finding a bed and midwifery staff to start an induction) are often the biggest factors in determining when this is offered.
Dr Matt Bell, UK

I do think there is far too much medical intervention nowadays in pregnancy. My second and third babies were both born three weeks after the due date, fit and well. I was monitored and the baby's health checked regularly before the births, but in those days (the early 1960s), before scans etc..., the whole process was seen as a natural event with far less fuss. Mind you we did stay in hospital longer afterwards which gave the mother a good start.
Joanne M. Anderson, UK

Here in France they actually ask you for the date of your last period. They then estimate that you ovulated 14 days later and count nine calendar months to give you your estimated delivery date. I am pregnant at the moment in France and I am due the 16 May. If I was in England my due date would be the 8 May. I will have to wait and see which is more accurate.
Emma, France

I was born six weeks early and my sister was six weeks late

Lisa, UK

My baby was born ten days "late". For the last few of those days I had to be very firm about not being induced, scanned or monitored every day at the hospital 13 miles away. Obviously before taking this position, I established that my baby was fine and I was fine. (Being a scientist, I had already researched the information which was discussed in this programme and felt confident that there was a somewhat artificial number being bandied around as to when babies "should" be born) My husband (who is also a scientist) and I felt that she would come out when she was ready, and so she did, looking just right and not as if she were overdue. I might add that I felt more stressed by the pressure I was being put under to be induced, than any worry about my baby being late!
Sarah, UK

I was born six weeks early and my sister was six weeks late so it is nothing to do with the length of our mother's menstrual cycle, which would make sense. With a normal birth, babies just come out when they are ready.
Lisa, UK

Many due dates must be wrong because they are calculated from the start of the last menstrual period and not all women ovulate on the same day of their cycle. I would have thought that survival of the ovum would vary from woman to woman also. I was lucky enough to be able to calculate my daughter's birth date from the date of conception , exactly 40 weeks, and yes, it was three days after my "official" due date.
Kate, UK

Cancer clusters

I live with my husband and 12 year-old son in a small close of 15 houses, and no mobile phone mast nearby. Over the last 12 years neighbours in three houses have died of cancer and another neighbour is receiving treatment. Each cancer case was a different type, so I don't know if this counts as a cluster, but we certainly felt we were living in death row for a while!
Liz, UK

Surely the whole nature of the universe is that it is lumpy. If it weren't, everything would be homogeneous but it is clearly not. Therefore, why should that not be same when it comes to clusters of diseases or other statistics? Even the Milky Way is a cluster of stars, if you like to think about these things that way.
Julie Barratt, UK