uteri

With one uteri you'd get more babies with no additional uteri.

Your conclusion should be that only pro-choice people should voice their opinions, not people with functional uteri.

Because then it's like saying that optimizing baby gestation to take place in one month is like adding 8 uteri.

It starts with artificial uteri to harvest neural stemcells, probably from rats, then gets worse.

Would women eventually lose uteri or will it become a useless vestigial organ over time?

I suppose another alternative use would be for trans people and women born without uteri to have biological children.

I would argue that optimizing the server, in the uteri comparison, would translate to having twins or triplets (and so on).

>Your conclusion should be that only pro-choice people should voice their opinions, not people with functional uteri.

Breasts and uteri are relevant to this discussion.

Is this a contract out on women’s uteri?

Presumably it’s much easier to measure someone’s ability to eliminate BPA from the bloodstream than it is to calculate how much they consumed in uteri and throughout their life.

> the onus falls on the woman to bear the career hit Yes, women have uteri and lactate while men don't.

English took the Latin word to describe it, as the phrase "cervix uteri" in the 1700s.

TL:DR; Female athletes/athletes with uteri who are not having menstrual periods are at increased risk of stress fractures,” Carl said.

Women do often end up taking much more time off, but it is absolutely not clear that has anything to do with "breasts and uteri".

It would be like adding 8 uteri, if your requirements are “give me x babies per second” In both cases you can get 9 babies in 9 months, and can support the same amount of baby throughput.