Is this a sign of population reduction?, page 4

reply to post by Oneolddude

---

The reason why China has no women anymore is because of their one child policy and their culture, thats why theres about 40 million missing women in china that they cant account for. However i dont think it applies anywhere else
Lowering infertility rates will become evident in time when my generation starts reproducing, and the generation after us is going to have a very hard time.
Hence why i think the global population will decrease. haha

reply to post by VneZonyDostupa

---

So, how do all "population reduction methods" jive with the fact that the world population continues to increase every year, rather than decrease?

You have to actually look at the birth rate not the population increase.
The maintainance level for the population is a birth rate of 2.1

The USA has a birth rate of 1.3 Link
France 1.3
UK - 1.1
Canada - 1.0
Germany - 0.8
Switzerland - 0.9
Greece - 0.9
Georgia - 1.0
China - 1.4
Paraguay - 2.8


Darn I can not find my reference. Any way there was a report published where the scientist doing a follow-up study expressed his surprise because of the birthrate decrease ACROSS THE BOARD in one African country. City dwellers are expected to have a lower birth rate but the farming community unexpectedly ALSO had the same low birth rate! (sterilization???)
Niger - 5.2
Cambodia - 2.5
Hong Kong - 0.7

57% or 129 of the 224 countries are below the 2.1 benchmark. Link

Those above 2.1 are mostly in Africa.

Originally posted by LiveForever8
reply to post by VneZonyDostupa

---

Population spikes? Population rates are cyclical?

Maybe in pre-modern man that is correct. But that doesn't make sense in modern history.

I could be wrong, but that all just doesn't make sense to me.

Of course it's cyclical. Look at it this way:

1950s-60s = Huge number of babies born due to ending of the war, so population spikes

1960s-80s = Smaller number of children born, as most families are raising the babies they had post-war

1980s-90s = Children of baby boomers are "of age" and begin having their own children, causing a spike in birth rate (and thus the rate of population change)

Late 1990s-2010ish = Fewer children born as children born in 80s and 90s are still growing

2010-2020s = Probably another birth/rate spike as children born in 80s and 90s start creating their own families.

See the cycle now? A constant back and forth. Populations always do this, especially following wars (and good luck finding a generation that didn't have a war). I know, from my own anecdotal experience, most of my friends (born in the 80s) are just not starting families. It seems like all the women decided, en masse, to start procreating. Truly an interesting phenomenon.

reply to post by crimvelvet

---

Why do you need a birth rate of 2.1 to maintain population? Can you provide a source for that?

As for your nameless "African nation" suffering a population rate decrease, don't you think that might be due to war, famine, and disease, all of which are endemic in most of sub-Saharan Africa? It doesn't surprise me at all that there would be a drop in births there.

reply to post by VneZonyDostupa

---

Just because there is a cycle in population growth dosent mean its not increasing at this moment in time.
From what your saying your saying that we are at a low in our cycle, am i correct?
At this point in time there are many people becoming infertile and infertility rates are increasing. There are also things in our environment that were not present before that also bring infertility upon a person.
As time works, things do not just happen instantly and we will see the effects of this infertility later on in the "cycle"
So this spike that you speak off will be less than normal and may even not come to pass because of this increase in infertility.
Before someone said something about momentum, we are in the momentum period now because the effects of this will not come to pass in the next 30 years at least.
Wether it is part of a conspiracy or not it is going to happen because of our modern day culture.

reply to post by VneZonyDostupa

---

Oh geez, I can't believe you're still stuck on this cyclical thing. I got news for you NOT EVERYONE GETS PREGNANT AT THE SAME AGE. That means, even if a population surge came about within a few years (as in post-ww2), in each successive generation there will be a widening gap in this spike. Eventually, they "cycle" will cease to exist. It's a temporary factor that appears to be cyclic. On the whole, it doesn't exist.

reply to post by Misterlondon

---

I've noticed many of my friends aren't able to have a baby cause of low sperm count, and I noticed this cause my parents have mentioned how men now a days can't make a baby without getting help from a clinic.

Originally posted by Misterlondon
reply to post by Mdv2

---

Maybe they are implementing reduction programs in those continents too.. Especially as these countries are becoming more and more westernised alot of these products are widely available now.. Eg. Coca cola, mcdonalds, burger king, kfc etc...if there was something in the food, or drinks... These products are available and quite popular in almost every nation on earth..

If there was population control in Africa and Asia then it doesn't work very well. I think our modern diet and lifestyle (sitting on our arse all day and doing no exercise for starters) is what is causing this decline in fertility. The evils of food additives and sugar replacements (sorbitol is just as bad as aspartame) should be enough to wake us up to what we need to eat. Meat, fresh veg and fruit. Simples. Stay away from grains, processed food and too much dairy (hard for me as i looove ice cream and drink milk like a newborn calf). Oh, and go commando - better yet stark bollicky naked, let the little fellas swing in the breeze!

Originally posted by unityemissions
reply to post by VneZonyDostupa

---

I got news for you NOT EVERYONE GETS PREGNANT AT THE SAME AGE.

Can you show me where I said everyone gets pregnant at the same age? I'd hate for you to be caught putting words in my mouth in an attempt to support an incredibly weak conspiracy.

When you look at a population and find the average age of primigravida (first pregnancy) for that entire group, you will then see a birth spike in the population in the years surrounding that average age. This isn't rocket science, it's basic math. There's a reason you see spikes on birth rates every twenty years or so. That's how long it takes THE AVERAGE PERSON of that generation to reach reproductive age and give birth. AVERAGE. Not all, but AVERAGE.

Eventually, they "cycle" will cease to exist. It's a temporary factor that appears to be cyclic. On the whole, it doesn't exist.

Really? It's "temporary" when it exists for several generations?

You should also look into fertility rate, by the way. The birth rate naturally lowers as nations become urbanized, because families typically have fewer children (don't need fieldhands anymore). This is a common phenomenon seen in all developing nations.

reply to post by Misterlondon

---

Low male fertility would explain why it took 86 times, to make only 3 babies. This could be a good thing, or a bad thing, somebody else shall make that decision.

Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa

Originally posted by unityemissions
reply to post by VneZonyDostupa

---

I got news for you NOT EVERYONE GETS PREGNANT AT THE SAME AGE.

Can you show me where I said everyone gets pregnant at the same age? I'd hate for you to be caught putting words in my mouth in an attempt to support an incredibly weak conspiracy.

You implied this.

Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa
When you look at a population and find the average age of primigravida (first pregnancy) for that entire group, you will then see a birth spike in the population in the years surrounding that average age. This isn't rocket science, it's basic math. There's a reason you see spikes on birth rates every twenty years or so. That's how long it takes THE AVERAGE PERSON of that generation to reach reproductive age and give birth. AVERAGE. Not all, but AVERAGE.

This reasoning is incorrect. You're thinking linearly and not laterally. In each generation, each individual has a window to become pregnant. There is an average age to first become pregnant, but it's actually irrelevant. Either you get this or you don't. The more generations that pass, the more this becomes apparent. Want proof? Okay, just look to these spikes you speak of. I'm willing to bet everything I've got that they become less pronounced as time goes on.

Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa

Eventually, they "cycle" will cease to exist. It's a temporary factor that appears to be cyclic. On the whole, it doesn't exist.

Really? It's "temporary" when it exists for several generations?

Yes. I trust you can think in longer time frames than a few generations.

Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa
reply to post by crimvelvet

---

Why do you need a birth rate of 2.1 to maintain population? Can you provide a source for that?

As for your nameless "African nation" suffering a population rate decrease, don't you think that might be due to war, famine, and disease, all of which are endemic in most of sub-Saharan Africa? It doesn't surprise me at all that there would be a drop in births there.

en.wikipedia.org...

look at the history of fertility rate from this wiki page

noticed the HUGE drop

news.bbc.co.uk...

BBC says no EU country with 2.1 birthrate is bad news


basically if a the average woman of the world does not give birth to at least 2 children, when she and her partner die, the world will be down 2 people

if a woman does give birth to at least 2 children, those children replace the woman and her partner when they die, maintaining the world population


again notice in the 1950's the world fertility rate was 4.8-4.9 that meant that the world population was increasing for every 2 people that died

once the fertility rate drops below 2, which it has in many countries, the population will show drastic decline as the elderly pass

reply to post by LiveForever8

---

This is how population works, in essence, we will not feel the effect of this fertility decline for decades when, seemingly out of nowhere, populations will fall.

The birth rate, to maintain the population is 2.1 from the same website on 22-9-2009 chart

Today they report Total fertility rate (children born/woman) and say

Rates below two children indicate populations decreasing in size and growing older. Global fertility rates are in general decline and this trend is most pronounced in industrialized countries, especially Western Europe, where populations are projected to decline dramatically over the next 50 years.

So it looks like the same chart but updated.

HMMMMmmmmm, interesting.

Last year when I looked up this data I got the info listed on the left. Today's info is on the right.

The USA had a birth rate of 1.3 now: 2.06 (all those immigrants with high fertility rates have had a real impact it seems. - remember the census just took place and the old data may be from the old census from ten years ago)

France 1.3 now 1.97
UK - 1.1 now 1.92
Canada - 1.0 now 1.58
Germany - 0.8 now 1.42
Switzerland - 0.9 now 1.46
Greece - 0.9 now 1.37
Georgia - 1.0 now 1.44
China - 1.4 now 1.54
Paraguay - 2.8 now 2.16
Niger - 5.2 now 7.68
Cambodia - 2.5 now 2.9
Hong Kong - 0.7 now 1.04

A year ago 57% or 129 of the 224 countries were below the 2.1, benchmark now it is 112 countries are below the 2.1 benchmark.

reply to post by 3finjo

---

It's actually very difficult to avoid those foods if you live in a city.. Also with new laws like the one in America, which bans people from growing their own vegetables will make it almost impossible to avoid these foods and chemicals..
We are being poisoned daily, by people who only thing about profit, and unfortunately there isn't
Much we can do about it..

Cooking With Aluminum Foil Should Be Avoided
  Posted 16 days ago with 43 member flags

"US teen invents advanced cancer test using Google"
  Posted 17 days ago with 38 member flags

A virus that kills cancer: the cure that\'s waiting in the cold
  Posted 6 days ago with 21 member flags

Anyone else get "vaccines" in school (United States) in the mid to late 70\'s?
  Posted 1 days ago with 11 member flags

Stem cells bring back feeling for paralysed patients
  Posted 7 days ago with 7 member flags

Gruenenthal\'s thalidomide apology \'insulting\'
  Posted 10 days ago with 6 member flags

Use these tips to detox after exposure to aerial or ground sprayed pesticides
  Posted 8 days ago with 6 member flags

My block was sprayed for mosquitos 3 days ago, been sick ever since!
  Posted 5 days ago with 6 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: