Would you link to Andrew Weil, Q? Deepak Chopra? How 'bout Dr. Oz? So why link to Amy Tuteur?

So you know, she's a first-class crank and bender of truth. She used to put a whole bunch of crazy shit up on open.salon.com but that got taken down without a citation - this from the publication that wrote a lengthy disclaimer about their crazy vaccine autism thing from 2005.

The fact of the matter is this: there is virtually zero data on home birth in the United States because nobody does these studies. Oregon has had viable data since 2012; here's the study.

What's funny (what's tuteur) is that the actual data, as pointed out by the New York Times editorial board, was that ZOMG the rate of home birth mortality in Oregon is 3.6/1000 while the rate of hospital mortality is 1.8/1000. Not seven, two. But still, like ZOMG, twice as likely to die, right? Of course, home birth mothers were 1/6th as likely to end up with a c-section (which increases mortality rate in women by 4x) even if they ended up going to the hospital but just like the difference between "two" and "seven" we'll just shine that on 'cuz we're Amy Tuteur.

Just so you're aware, this is data from one state - a state where midwives weren't required licensure until 2015. The data, FWIW, comes from 2012 to 2013. It should also be pointed out that over half of all births in Oregon are paid for by the Oregon Health Plan... which has been silently (and without explanation) denying claims to midwives, thereby leading to the closure of three practices in the past nine months alone.

Birth in humans is more dangerous than birth in bonobos. Humans deliver a 12-month baby in 10 months (humans have a 40-week gestation - surprise!) because if the baby got any bigger women couldn't walk upright. It's tricky. And the way to make that safer is to have integrated healthcare that winnows out high-risk mothers from low-risk approaches. Like the rest of the world has.

Or we could, you know, make up shit. That's what works for Dr. Tuteur.