This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/08/us/coronavirus-baby-boom.html

The article has changed 26 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Don’t Expect a Quarantine Baby Boom Don’t Expect a Quarantine Baby Boom
(2 months later)
Any time people are stuck at home for blizzards, shutdowns and blackouts, the speculation seems to start: Will there be a baby boom in nine months?Any time people are stuck at home for blizzards, shutdowns and blackouts, the speculation seems to start: Will there be a baby boom in nine months?
This time, with quarantine orders keeping millions of people inside to slow the spread of the coronavirus, the answer is clear, demographers say. Don’t expect a lot of newborns in the next year.This time, with quarantine orders keeping millions of people inside to slow the spread of the coronavirus, the answer is clear, demographers say. Don’t expect a lot of newborns in the next year.
That may disappoint those who are worried about the United States’ birthrate, which has steadily declined since the Great Recession and put the country close to an overall population decline. In the short term, as the pandemic wrecks swaths of the economy, the coronavirus will probably give couples even more cause not to have children, experts said.That may disappoint those who are worried about the United States’ birthrate, which has steadily declined since the Great Recession and put the country close to an overall population decline. In the short term, as the pandemic wrecks swaths of the economy, the coronavirus will probably give couples even more cause not to have children, experts said.
“I really don’t think they’re saying, ‘Oh, let’s have a baby in the midst of the greatest epidemic that the country has faced in 100 years,’” said Kenneth Johnson, a demographer at the University of New Hampshire.“I really don’t think they’re saying, ‘Oh, let’s have a baby in the midst of the greatest epidemic that the country has faced in 100 years,’” said Kenneth Johnson, a demographer at the University of New Hampshire.
The coronavirus outbreak will most likely compound some of the economic factors that have affected the U.S. birthrate since the Great Recession, which from late 2007 to mid-2009 cost millions of people their jobs and homes, foundations for raising a family. Even after data showed the recession had ended, for many young people, stable jobs were hard to find and owning a home was a distant dream.The coronavirus outbreak will most likely compound some of the economic factors that have affected the U.S. birthrate since the Great Recession, which from late 2007 to mid-2009 cost millions of people their jobs and homes, foundations for raising a family. Even after data showed the recession had ended, for many young people, stable jobs were hard to find and owning a home was a distant dream.
Now, after just a few weeks of the outbreak in the United States, nearly 10 million Americans have lost their jobs, with more losses expected. “Many people in childbearing ages were already worried about their futures, and now they may face unemployment as well,” said Jennifer Johnson-Hanks, a sociology professor at the University of California. “That kind of anxiety is not conducive to having a child.”Now, after just a few weeks of the outbreak in the United States, nearly 10 million Americans have lost their jobs, with more losses expected. “Many people in childbearing ages were already worried about their futures, and now they may face unemployment as well,” said Jennifer Johnson-Hanks, a sociology professor at the University of California. “That kind of anxiety is not conducive to having a child.”
In contrast, the original baby boom, between 1946 and 1964, took place in an era of postwar euphoria and financial stability for many Americans. Couples married young, could afford homes and had children quickly. And it was not until 1960 that the federal government approved the first birth control pill.In contrast, the original baby boom, between 1946 and 1964, took place in an era of postwar euphoria and financial stability for many Americans. Couples married young, could afford homes and had children quickly. And it was not until 1960 that the federal government approved the first birth control pill.
The economy is not the only factor in the declining birthrate, said Alison Gemmill, a demographer at Johns Hopkins University, who ascribed it not to the recession as much as more women waiting longer to have children.The economy is not the only factor in the declining birthrate, said Alison Gemmill, a demographer at Johns Hopkins University, who ascribed it not to the recession as much as more women waiting longer to have children.
And she noted that practices around sex, marriage and raising a family have been changing for decades. Unintended and teenage pregnancies have decreased to their lowest rates in decades. Young people are getting married closer to 30, Census Bureau data shows. And nearly two-thirds of American women ages 15 to 49 use some form of contraception, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported in 2018.And she noted that practices around sex, marriage and raising a family have been changing for decades. Unintended and teenage pregnancies have decreased to their lowest rates in decades. Young people are getting married closer to 30, Census Bureau data shows. And nearly two-thirds of American women ages 15 to 49 use some form of contraception, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported in 2018.
“People like this idea that people are stuck inside, they’re not going to have much to do,” Professor Gemmill said. “But people will use methods to prevent pregnancy. People that do want kids, I think they’re going to postpone.”“People like this idea that people are stuck inside, they’re not going to have much to do,” Professor Gemmill said. “But people will use methods to prevent pregnancy. People that do want kids, I think they’re going to postpone.”
(The pandemic isolation had a different effect on two pandas, who mated in the empty privacy of a Hong Kong zoo. Pandas don’t have jobs or doctor bills to worry about.)(The pandemic isolation had a different effect on two pandas, who mated in the empty privacy of a Hong Kong zoo. Pandas don’t have jobs or doctor bills to worry about.)
She also said that the coronavirus uncertainty wasn’t limited to job security and personal finances: With doctors struggling to cope with coronavirus patients, access to natal care and hospitals could be limited. In New York, for instance, where infections have strained hospitals to extremes, some pregnant women are choosing to leave the state for areas less affected by the virus.She also said that the coronavirus uncertainty wasn’t limited to job security and personal finances: With doctors struggling to cope with coronavirus patients, access to natal care and hospitals could be limited. In New York, for instance, where infections have strained hospitals to extremes, some pregnant women are choosing to leave the state for areas less affected by the virus.
There has been anecdotal evidence and some research done on the effect of disasters on the birthrate. But Professor Gemmill called it “kind of marginal,” and a difficult subject to study because of how many factors contribute — even the seasons potentially play a role in conceptions (births are more common in the fall).There has been anecdotal evidence and some research done on the effect of disasters on the birthrate. But Professor Gemmill called it “kind of marginal,” and a difficult subject to study because of how many factors contribute — even the seasons potentially play a role in conceptions (births are more common in the fall).
Researchers have, however, looked into the question off and on for decades — partly inspired by three New York Times articles about “a sharp increase in births” at several large hospitals in 1966, nine months after the blackout of 1965. In a paper published in 1970, however, the sociologist J. Richard Udry found “no increase in births associated with the blackout.”Researchers have, however, looked into the question off and on for decades — partly inspired by three New York Times articles about “a sharp increase in births” at several large hospitals in 1966, nine months after the blackout of 1965. In a paper published in 1970, however, the sociologist J. Richard Udry found “no increase in births associated with the blackout.”
The finding did little to stamp out future speculation about “stormy love” and “blizzard-induced” babies, seeming to bolster Mr. Udry’s separate, less scientific conclusion that it was “evidently pleasing to many people to fantasy that when people are trapped by some immobilizing event which deprives them of their usual activities, most will turn to copulation.”The finding did little to stamp out future speculation about “stormy love” and “blizzard-induced” babies, seeming to bolster Mr. Udry’s separate, less scientific conclusion that it was “evidently pleasing to many people to fantasy that when people are trapped by some immobilizing event which deprives them of their usual activities, most will turn to copulation.”
A later study, by two statisticians at Colorado State University and Northwestern University, said “the episode of the vanishing baby boom illustrates the creation and growth of a modern myth,” one that snowballed into “one of those innumerable facts that everyone ‘knows.’”A later study, by two statisticians at Colorado State University and Northwestern University, said “the episode of the vanishing baby boom illustrates the creation and growth of a modern myth,” one that snowballed into “one of those innumerable facts that everyone ‘knows.’”
There has been some research that, in times of high stress, and even when mortality rises, “sometimes fertility also rises,” Professor Johnson-Hanks said. In the late 2000s, three researchers investigated whether hurricane warnings had any effect on the birthrate, in a study titled “The fertility effect of catastrophe: U.S. hurricane births.”There has been some research that, in times of high stress, and even when mortality rises, “sometimes fertility also rises,” Professor Johnson-Hanks said. In the late 2000s, three researchers investigated whether hurricane warnings had any effect on the birthrate, in a study titled “The fertility effect of catastrophe: U.S. hurricane births.”
Updated June 5, 2020
A study by European scientists is the first to document a strong statistical link between genetic variations and Covid-19, the illness caused by the coronavirus. Having Type A blood was linked to a 50 percent increase in the likelihood that a patient would need to get oxygen or to go on a ventilator, according to the new study.
The unemployment rate fell to 13.3 percent in May, the Labor Department said on June 5, an unexpected improvement in the nation’s job market as hiring rebounded faster than economists expected. Economists had forecast the unemployment rate to increase to as much as 20 percent, after it hit 14.7 percent in April, which was the highest since the government began keeping official statistics after World War II. But the unemployment rate dipped instead, with employers adding 2.5 million jobs, after more than 20 million jobs were lost in April.
Mass protests against police brutality that have brought thousands of people onto the streets in cities across America are raising the specter of new coronavirus outbreaks, prompting political leaders, physicians and public health experts to warn that the crowds could cause a surge in cases. While many political leaders affirmed the right of protesters to express themselves, they urged the demonstrators to wear face masks and maintain social distancing, both to protect themselves and to prevent further community spread of the virus. Some infectious disease experts were reassured by the fact that the protests were held outdoors, saying the open air settings could mitigate the risk of transmission.
Exercise researchers and physicians have some blunt advice for those of us aiming to return to regular exercise now: Start slowly and then rev up your workouts, also slowly. American adults tended to be about 12 percent less active after the stay-at-home mandates began in March than they were in January. But there are steps you can take to ease your way back into regular exercise safely. First, “start at no more than 50 percent of the exercise you were doing before Covid,” says Dr. Monica Rho, the chief of musculoskeletal medicine at the Shirley Ryan AbilityLab in Chicago. Thread in some preparatory squats, too, she advises. “When you haven’t been exercising, you lose muscle mass.” Expect some muscle twinges after these preliminary, post-lockdown sessions, especially a day or two later. But sudden or increasing pain during exercise is a clarion call to stop and return home.
States are reopening bit by bit. This means that more public spaces are available for use and more and more businesses are being allowed to open again. The federal government is largely leaving the decision up to states, and some state leaders are leaving the decision up to local authorities. Even if you aren’t being told to stay at home, it’s still a good idea to limit trips outside and your interaction with other people.
Touching contaminated objects and then infecting ourselves with the germs is not typically how the virus spreads. But it can happen. A number of studies of flu, rhinovirus, coronavirus and other microbes have shown that respiratory illnesses, including the new coronavirus, can spread by touching contaminated surfaces, particularly in places like day care centers, offices and hospitals. But a long chain of events has to happen for the disease to spread that way. The best way to protect yourself from coronavirus — whether it’s surface transmission or close human contact — is still social distancing, washing your hands, not touching your face and wearing masks.
Common symptoms include fever, a dry cough, fatigue and difficulty breathing or shortness of breath. Some of these symptoms overlap with those of the flu, making detection difficult, but runny noses and stuffy sinuses are less common. The C.D.C. has also added chills, muscle pain, sore throat, headache and a new loss of the sense of taste or smell as symptoms to look out for. Most people fall ill five to seven days after exposure, but symptoms may appear in as few as two days or as many as 14 days.
If air travel is unavoidable, there are some steps you can take to protect yourself. Most important: Wash your hands often, and stop touching your face. If possible, choose a window seat. A study from Emory University found that during flu season, the safest place to sit on a plane is by a window, as people sitting in window seats had less contact with potentially sick people. Disinfect hard surfaces. When you get to your seat and your hands are clean, use disinfecting wipes to clean the hard surfaces at your seat like the head and arm rest, the seatbelt buckle, the remote, screen, seat back pocket and the tray table. If the seat is hard and nonporous or leather or pleather, you can wipe that down, too. (Using wipes on upholstered seats could lead to a wet seat and spreading of germs rather than killing them.)
Taking one’s temperature to look for signs of fever is not as easy as it sounds, as “normal” temperature numbers can vary, but generally, keep an eye out for a temperature of 100.5 degrees Fahrenheit or higher. If you don’t have a thermometer (they can be pricey these days), there are other ways to figure out if you have a fever, or are at risk of Covid-19 complications.
The C.D.C. has recommended that all Americans wear cloth masks if they go out in public. This is a shift in federal guidance reflecting new concerns that the coronavirus is being spread by infected people who have no symptoms. Until now, the C.D.C., like the W.H.O., has advised that ordinary people don’t need to wear masks unless they are sick and coughing. Part of the reason was to preserve medical-grade masks for health care workers who desperately need them at a time when they are in continuously short supply. Masks don’t replace hand washing and social distancing.
If you’ve been exposed to the coronavirus or think you have, and have a fever or symptoms like a cough or difficulty breathing, call a doctor. They should give you advice on whether you should be tested, how to get tested, and how to seek medical treatment without potentially infecting or exposing others.
If you’re sick and you think you’ve been exposed to the new coronavirus, the C.D.C. recommends that you call your healthcare provider and explain your symptoms and fears. They will decide if you need to be tested. Keep in mind that there’s a chance — because of a lack of testing kits or because you’re asymptomatic, for instance — you won’t be able to get tested.
The study focused on storm advisories to residents along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts, and found a small but statistically significant effect, said Richard W. Evans, a senior lecturer in computational social science at the University of Chicago and one of the study’s authors.The study focused on storm advisories to residents along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts, and found a small but statistically significant effect, said Richard W. Evans, a senior lecturer in computational social science at the University of Chicago and one of the study’s authors.
After low-level warnings, like tropical storm watches, “we found that for every 24 hours a county was under advisory, we saw a 2 percent uptick in births,” Mr. Evans said. “On the flip side, for the very most severe hurricane warnings, we saw a statistically significant 2 percent decrease.”After low-level warnings, like tropical storm watches, “we found that for every 24 hours a county was under advisory, we saw a 2 percent uptick in births,” Mr. Evans said. “On the flip side, for the very most severe hurricane warnings, we saw a statistically significant 2 percent decrease.”
He called the finding intuitive: “If you’re running for your life, you’re not making babies.”He called the finding intuitive: “If you’re running for your life, you’re not making babies.”
And he said that, even though the 2 percent finding was statistically significant, it was very small. “In a given county in a given month, that’s one or two births per month,” he said. “On average, across the whole United States, that would be maybe 6,000 extra births.”And he said that, even though the 2 percent finding was statistically significant, it was very small. “In a given county in a given month, that’s one or two births per month,” he said. “On average, across the whole United States, that would be maybe 6,000 extra births.”
He said that, at most, the United States could see a blip of an increase in births in regions less affected by the coronavirus outbreak, and a small corresponding decrease in places most affected.He said that, at most, the United States could see a blip of an increase in births in regions less affected by the coronavirus outbreak, and a small corresponding decrease in places most affected.
Mr. Johnson, the University of New Hampshire demographer, said that while he did not expect an increase in births in the next year, it could be possible in the next few years — if people manage to recover, both financially and from “the disorientation of the recession and the pandemic.”Mr. Johnson, the University of New Hampshire demographer, said that while he did not expect an increase in births in the next year, it could be possible in the next few years — if people manage to recover, both financially and from “the disorientation of the recession and the pandemic.”
But he warned that the coronavirus was nothing like a blackout or a hurricane. “The pandemic and its economic and social aftermath may well have long-term repercussions unlike any we have seen in the past,” he said. “This has implications for fertility that are difficult to determine given we haven’t had anything like this happen in a hundred years.”But he warned that the coronavirus was nothing like a blackout or a hurricane. “The pandemic and its economic and social aftermath may well have long-term repercussions unlike any we have seen in the past,” he said. “This has implications for fertility that are difficult to determine given we haven’t had anything like this happen in a hundred years.”