Pig bungee jumping detonated criticism, indicating that the status of Chinese women is not as good as pigs?

A few days ago, a scenic spot in Chongqing drew criticism from domestic and foreign netizens and animal protection organizations for posting a video of a pig tied up for bungee jumping.

We all know that President Roosevelt Jr once proposed the "Four Freedoms" for mankind. But many Chinese people may not know that animals also have "five freedoms", namely: 1. Freedom from starvation and malnutrition; 2. Freedom from suffering due to the environment; 3. Freedom from pain and injury 4. Freedom to express nature; 4. Freedom from fear and pressure

It is worth noting that two of these "five freedoms" refer to freedom from pain in different contexts. This shows that although we humans are not of the same species as other animals, we also have empathy for them and do not want to see them suffer.

A few days ago, due to the pressure of public opinion on the Internet, the scenic spot has come forward to apologize.

This news makes me both happy and sad. The happy thing is that more and more netizens in China are paying attention to animal welfare; the sad thing is that some so-called obstetrics and gynecology experts and media reporters have spread anti-caesarean section remarks in the past few years. Women who ignore childbirth also have freedom from pain, and even after they indirectly caused the tragic death of Ma Rongrong (and other unknown women), no one has come forward to apologize. And Mr. Nan Guo, who concocted such irresponsible "medical advice", is still regarded as an expert by some media.

Bottom line: In the eyes of such "experts" and the media, the status of Chinese women is inferior to that of pigs. Where are the good human rights?

The following is a repost of my article that exposed this series of lies (with some changes, see the original text: http://longnightendless.blogspot.com/2017/12/blog-post.html):

In September 2017, the media broke the news that Shaanxi pregnant woman Ma Rongrong committed suicide by jumping off the building because she could not bear the pain of childbirth. The hospital claimed that this was caused by her family's refusal to perform a caesarean section for her, while Ma Rongrong's family made the opposite statement. For a while, this matter turned out to be Rashomon.

But if we follow the media's anti-caesarean section propaganda over the years, we will find that the culprit that killed Ma Rongrong may not be Yulin Hospital or her family, but the obstetrics and gynecology "experts" like Yi Fuxian. Behind this tragedy is a lie that Yi Fuxian and others have carefully covered up for seven years.

The story begins on January 31, 2010, when the Science and Technology Daily published an article by Yi Fuxian, "Perspective behind the abnormally high rate of caesarean section" (hereinafter referred to as the "Through" article). In the article, Yi Fuxian proposed, "The World Health Organization recommends that the proportion of caesarean sections in general hospitals should not be higher than 10%, and in special hospitals that specialize in treating difficult cases, the proportion of caesarean sections should not be higher than 15%."

On February 1, 2010, the day after this interview was published, the People's Daily Online, a subsidiary of the Communist Party newspaper "People's Daily", quoted Yi in "WHO recommends that the caesarean section rate should not be higher than 10%". Fuxian's statement. The impatient excerpt and reprint of People's Daily Online is undoubtedly for Yi Fuxian's platform, from an official point of view, to give official recognition and support to his proposal.

In August 2013, Yi Fuxian repeated the WHO's recommendation that the proportion of caesarean sections should not be higher than 10% in "Abusing Caesarean Sections: The Price of "No Pain". Since then, this statement has been circulated in the reports of the media.

What is even more incredible is that at the end of that article, Yi Fuxian also proposed:

"As estimated by some clinicians, more than 50% of children in China are born by caesarean section, which means that at least half of the population has 'birth defects'."

This is an extremely hasty conclusion, because firstly, Yi Fuxian simply equates a child born by caesarean section with a "birth defect" without scientific verification. This absurd statement is unheard of; Fuxian actually equates "more than 50% of the children" with "at least half of the population", which is a blatant concept of stealing.

The "senior scientist" of the University of Wisconsin, who graduated from Xiangya Medical College, can be so eloquent. It seems that Yi Fuxian's professional and academic training in these two first-class universities is about zero.

In fact, according to the Wikipedia entry "Cesarean section", the WHO actually retracted this article in June 2010, less than half a year after Yi Fuxian published the article "Behind the High Cesarean Section Rate" The recommendation, its official statement said: "There is no experimental evidence on the ideal ratio of caesarean sections, and the most important thing is that caesarean section is acceptable to all women who require a caesarean section."

Since the Chinese version of Wikipedia is sometimes unreliable, I also checked the English version of the entry, which also mentioned "The World Health Organization officially withdrew its previous recommendation of a 15% C-section rate in June 2010".

It should be noted that the WHO recommendation is mentioned here as 15%, not 10%; also, it did "officially" withdraw this recommendation in June 2010 (see http://apps.who. int/iris/bitstream/10665/44121/1/9789241547734_eng.pdf, p25).

Later, in the "World Health Organization Statement on Cesarean Section Rates" in 2015, although the WHO pointed out:

"1. Cesarean section can effectively save the lives of mothers and babies, but only when medically indicated."

"2. At the population level, when the cesarean section rate was higher than 10%, it was not associated with a reduction in maternal and neonatal mortality." (Yi Fuxian said in the "Tou" article that "caesarean section infant mortality is higher than natural delivery." ' is clearly inconsistent with this)

"3. Caesarean section can result in serious, even permanent complications, disability or death, especially in settings that lack the facilities and/or capacity to perform safe surgery and treat surgical complications. Caesarean section should only be Implemented when medically necessary.” (Natural birth has its own drawbacks, however, and can lead to maternal and fetal death.)

But the WHO also emphasized again:

"4 No effort should be spared to provide necessary cesarean delivery services, rather than focusing on keeping the cesarean delivery rate at a certain level." (The latter is exactly what the Chinese healthcare sector is doing)

“5. The impact of cesarean delivery on other health outcomes, such as stillbirth, pregnancy and perinatal illness, paediatric disease, and psychological or social adjustment status, is not well established, and more research is needed to investigate the effect of cesarean delivery on health outcomes. short-term and long-term effects." (This also overturns what Yi Fuxian said in the "Too" article that caesarean section will lead to "children's ADHD, integrative disorder, poor coordination" and "adult diabetes and other diseases", etc. wait for the conclusion.)

However, Xi Dynasty and even some overseas media apparently did not notice the news in this regard. Even the Financial Times quoted Yi Fuxian in its 2016 annual report "New Attitudes of Chinese Second Mothers." The claim: "The World Health Organization (WHO) considers that the optimal caesarean section rate for maternal and child health is between 10% and 15%."

The article also specifically mentions: "China's caesarean section rate reached 46% in 2008, and then health officials realized the seriousness of the problem. Some urban hospitals delivered more than 70% of babies by caesarean section until the government began to curb this four years ago. Phenomenon."

This once again proves that the Chinese government has indeed taken coercive measures to reduce the number of caesarean sections after heeding outdated advice from "experts" like Yi Fuxian.

As for painless childbirth, which has become more and more common in the West in recent years, in the article "Perspective behind the abnormally high rate of caesarean section", Yi Fuxian criticized it together with caesarean section.

His original words were: "The so-called cesarean section and painless delivery with drug injection are only a selective and salvage operation suitable for pregnant women with pregnancy-induced hypertension, heart disease, hyperthyroidism, pelvic stenosis, abnormal fetal position and severe labor pain. ."

The above evidence proves that the unanimous rejection of caesarean section by the media, medical institutions and the public in the past few years obviously came directly from the "senior scientist" Yi Fuxian of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the University of Wisconsin and others, from their outdated advice.

As an expert in obstetrics and gynecology, Yi Fuxian did not know (or did he deliberately hide it?) The WHO has withdrawn that suggestion long ago, which makes people have to doubt his professional level (if he really does not) know) and academic ethics (if it is known but not spoken).

The Financial Times article, referring to painless childbirth, said: "Pang Ruyan thinks this is just replacing one interventionist approach with another."

This is simply a copy of Yi Fuxian's view. Pang Ruyan also used the excuse that China "doesn't have enough anesthesiologists" to justify the government's inaction in promoting painless childbirth.

The reporter who wrote the FT article was the vice president of the FT Beijing branch, Lucy Hornby, whose Chinese name was Han Biru. If the journalists inside the wall were citing the outdated WHO data, they might be able to make excuses that the GFW prevented them from accessing the wiki.

But Han Biru, who is an outsider and a woman, is too lazy to check relevant information to verify it. She only interviews "experts" of the age like Pang Ruyan, but does not ask some Western professionals for their views on this issue. It's a bit bizarre to rush to the suggestion that there is no need to promote painless childbirth.

It is also worth noting that Yi Fuxian, who likes to be in the limelight, is interviewed by reporters everywhere, and shows off that he has been rewarded with "business class air tickets" by the CCP, is also the "darling" of the "Financial Times" and other Western media. But why didn't his voice appear in Han Biru's article? Then contact Yi Fuxian's "expert" status in the field of anti-birth control propaganda and anti-caesarean section, his absence and loss of voice this time is really intriguing.

If it wasn't for the tragic death of Ma Rongrong, if it wasn't for the fact that I read on Wikipedia that the WHO retracted the recommendation, I believe that the media in Xi Dynasty would continue to spread the outdated statement of Yi Fuxian. There will be many more pregnant women and fetuses who should have a caesarean section because their family members (to facilitate a second child), themselves or their doctors are unwilling to perform the procedure.

In fact, even after the tragic death of Ma Rongrong, some media continued to promote the outdated set of WHO recommendations, saying that "medically, it has been proven that babies born by vaginal birth are healthier than babies born by caesarean section", and that "a study by the World Health Organization says, The cesarean section rate in most hospitals in China is between 40% and 60%, and in some hospitals it was even as high as 70%, which is far higher than the 10%-15% level advocated by the World Health Organization.” (See "If painless childbirth is popularized in China, horse velvet may not jump off the building")

Since Yi Fuxian and others released the anti-caesarean section theory, how many pregnant women and fetuses have died because they did not receive caesarean section in time?

Nobody cares, nobody cares. Because the husbands of these women can always choose to find another woman to marry and have children again, and those dead women and fetuses cannot speak.

Most importantly, in the eyes of anti-birth control groups like Yi Fuxian, women and children are just tools to realize the CCP's "population cause", and their lives will not matter unless there is a large number of deaths.

If the lie of "tens of millions of families who lost their only child" proves that Yi Fuxian is a liar "demographer" who pretends to be a layman and pretends to be an expert, then this case proves that: in Yi Fuxian's own professional field, his academic level is comparable to that of him. Academic ethics are also highly dubious.

So far, there is still no media reflection on the harmful influence of "experts" like Yi Fuxian in the anti-caesarean section propaganda.

Although very few grassroots netizens like me have tried their best to expose his various lies, this liar who concocted "tens of millions of families who lost their only child" is still a government official, many intellectual elites and "conscience media" ( Such as the "China Economic Report" journal of the Development Research Center of the State Council, Sohu.com, "Southern People Weekly", "Southern Metropolis Daily") in the hearts of heroes.

Yi Fuxian and the anti-birth control propaganda filled with a lot of lies and prejudice have once again proved the shamelessness and collective depravity of the Xi Dynasty from the top leadership to the intellectual elite and the media at home and abroad.

---------

On March 8, 2019, the BBC published an article "Chinese Mothers' Fertility Choices: The Data and Stories Behind "Who Says" ( https://www.bbc.com/zhongwen/simp/chinese-news -47437291 ), this article puts all the responsibility for China's mandatory restrictions on caesarean section to the Communist government, and does not mention Yi Fuxian's vile role in it.

However, the graph "Cesarean section rate decline in China's big cities" attached to the article shows that in the five cities of Beijing, Tianjin, Shanghai, Guangzhou and Shenzhen, except for Tianjin, the caesarean section rate in the other four cities has dropped sharply since 2010. The downward trend slowed down in 2011 and 2012, and then dropped sharply again in 2013. These turning points are all related to the time point when I speculated in my humble article that Yi Fuxian's unreliable articles pushed the Communist government to force the reduction of the caesarean section rate. match.

Incredibly, after I pointed this out to Aidila Razak, one of the authors of the BBC article on Twitter, the BBC soon made the article in English ( https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia- The picture in china-46265808 ) has been removed, and I really feel like I want to hide it. Saying that this article is covertly cleaning the ground for Yi Fuxian, it should not be wronged.

Why are so many Western female writers so caring for Yi Fuxian, who is full of sexism, even at the expense of writing articles to cover up his mistakes? This puzzles me.