Statistics lie

chloe97

I'm angry everyday since I found out I'm miscarrying, but what I'm most mad about are statistics. On my BMB page, someone had a sticky put up top with the statistical possibility of having a miscarriage by week after seeing the heartbeat. According to this chart with a normal heart rate of 131 at 8 weeks, I had less than a 3% risk of miscarrying at 10 weeks. I'd be more willing to accept that I was one of the unlucky 3 percenters if I didn't personally have 4 other friends who saw heartbeats later and proceeded to miscarry later in their pregnancies, all within the last year. In my little microcosm, it seems like the 8+ week MC rate is much much higher- like 30 or 35%. Anyone else living around similar rates? Where the hell are these stats coming from? They just can't be accurate. In no way do I want to cause more unneeded anxiety for moms in my BMB, but I wish I would have asked for more information about where these stats are coming from before I let myself feel like I was in the clear. They simply cannot be right.

ETA The link https://forums.thebump.com/discussion/12575727/the-odds-of-not-having-an-early-miscarriage/p1

MrsBinPA

Honestly I get irked by this too, but we basically know nothing about where these stats come from, and also the stats of your group might say something too.

For example, the % is going to be higher the older you are.

Sorry I don't have a strong answer, but fully believe those "charts" are probably compiled by not the most scientific methods and/or have a skewed population.

steminist

I understand your frustration and your sorrow, but I would say it seems you have a lack of understanding about how to interpret the statistics. I don't know where the specific numbers quoted came from, but it is definitely possible for your small group of 5 women to all miscarry after a heartbeat even with the predicted rate of 3%. Think of it like a coin toss. With a 50/50 chance per flip, the likelihood of 10 heads in a row is about 0.1%. But that doesn't mean it never happens. It sucks when the statistics you are counting on don't seem to support you after all, but it doesn't mean they're wrong.

Cubslove12

My doctor said 1/3 miscarry... I don't think they're right either! The math doesn't add up!

chloe97

I understand how statistics work. My point is that it is very unlikely and I don't trust these statistics. Do we even know where they come from? Do they include women who are over 35?

I'm curious if other women have similar situations within their group of friends or if I'm the only one who seems to live within this cloud of statistical anomaly.

PeggyOlsonFTW

I hate those stats. Last mc I was in the 3% range, this time the 10% range, but I read somewhere that the odds of having two consecutive miscarriages after a healthy pregnancy was 3-5%. Bullshit. I can't consistently be on the wrong side of those statistics.

chloe97

I'm more apt to believe the 1/3 of pregnancies end in miscarriage stat, but supposedly most of these mcs happen right after conception or before a heartbeat is heard. In my experience, many women are having completely normal first ultrasounds/hearing strong heartbeats only to miscarry a few weeks later.

steminist

Yes, this is possible, even with a low overall risk. It's the same reason that ~30% of pregnancies will miscarry, but some women have 5 healthy, full-term babies and others have 5 consecutive mcs. You can be "on the wrong side" every time, because statistics don't perfectly reflect your experience and your body. They approximate for huge groups and only really apply to very large populations. Feel how you want about the numbers you read, be skeptical and do your own research, but don't assume it must be wrong because it doesn't perfectly match your own personal experience.

TLDR: Stats aren't perfect. They might not match you. Don't let the numbers get you. Ignore them if you want. Knowing them changes nothing.

tinypikachu

Jabreen said:

Yes, this is possible, even with a low overall risk. It's the same reason that ~30% of pregnancies will miscarry, but some women have 5 healthy, full-term babies and others have 5 consecutive mcs. You can be "on the wrong side" every time, because statistics don't perfectly reflect your experience and your body. They approximate for huge groups and only really apply to very large populations. Feel how you want about the numbers you read, be skeptical and do your own research, but don't assume it must be wrong because it doesn't perfectly match your own personal experience.

TLDR: Stats aren't perfect. They might not match you. Don't let the numbers get you. Ignore them if you want. Knowing them changes nothing.

Unfortunately, this is the correct answer. The risk for miscarriage decreases drastically after a heartbeat is heard simply because many women have MMC and realize it when they first have that US. You know several other women that have had MCs after an US, I know none. I do know women that have miscarried (6 or 7), some multiple times. Just because you happen to know more women that have had this happen to, it doesn't affect the general statistic. And yes, also keep in mind the risk gets higher and higher the older the mothers are.

ETA: sorry, forgot I do know one gal that lost two babies in a row, both right after the US around the same time. Uterine fibroids was the cause, that's why she lost them both at around the same time. She had those removed and went on to have healthy babies.

FiancB

I think that many of the numbers are accurate, and many others are a guess done with averages, if that makes sense. I'm probably not quite using the right mathematical term. I think they make a decent guideline, but I doubt the risk goes down as evenly and consistently as it makes it seem. 

It seems like the 6 week period is a pretty critical one, if the heart is going to start beating that's when it does. My loss was found at over 8 weeks, but the embryo had stopped developing at closer to 6. I am just now starting to bleed a little and am nowhere near done. The time of bleeding isn't necessarily the same as the time of death of the embryo, and a lot of times the MMCs are found at the 8-10 week mark since that's usually when the first u/s is. 

I don't know, I still found the chart to be reassuring and will refer to it when I get pregnant again. I do think it's helpful to know that the risk roughly doesn't change much between 9 weeks and on. 

silentP

I hate looking at the statistics. Supposedly, I had only a three percent chance of miscarrying twice in a row...but here I am. I feel sad that if I get pregnant again I won't be as excited. I guess it's possible I will be optimistic, but I feel a big cloud over my head about it now. No chart will make me feel better, that's for sure.

roper2617

When I was 12 weeks and 5 days I learned that at 8 weeks the baby stopped developing. I hate the stats too. I heard that after you see the heartbeat chances of miscarriage significantly decrease. Guess I was the 2 or 3% exemption too. We saw the heartbeat just less than a week before the baby stopped developing. I was doing some reading and read somewhere that the 8th week is pretty common, because if something chromosally doesn't add up the body will not let the pregnancy continue into a fetus, which would officially be at 9 weeks. I don't know how true that actually is, but I have a few friends that also miscarried at 8 weeks. I feel that knowing this doesn't take away from my heartbreak or make me feel better though.

chloe97

babyroper16 said:

When I was 12 weeks and 5 days I learned that at 8 weeks the baby stopped developing. I hate the stats too. I heard that after you see the heartbeat chances of miscarriage significantly decrease. Guess I was the 2 or 3% exemption too. We saw the heartbeat just less than a week before the baby stopped developing. I was doing some reading and read somewhere that the 8th week is pretty common, because if something chromosally doesn't add up the body will not let the pregnancy continue into a fetus, which would officially be at 9 weeks. I don't know how true that actually is, but I have a few friends that also miscarried at 8 weeks. I feel that knowing this doesn't take away from my heartbreak or make me feel better though.

babyroper16 said:

When I was 12 weeks and 5 days I learned that at 8 weeks the baby stopped developing. I hate the stats too. I heard that after you see the heartbeat chances of miscarriage significantly decrease. Guess I was the 2 or 3% exemption too. We saw the heartbeat just less than a week before the baby stopped developing. I was doing some reading and read somewhere that the 8th week is pretty common, because if something chromosally doesn't add up the body will not let the pregnancy continue into a fetus, which would officially be at 9 weeks. I don't know how true that actually is, but I have a few friends that also miscarried at 8 weeks. I feel that knowing this doesn't take away from my heartbreak or make me feel better though.

---------

I read the same thing about the 8th week. I wish there was a way to know if it was a chromosomal issue, but my doctor told me they wouldn't test the tissue of our baby. Im always going to wonder if it was the massage i got that week, the puppy who stepped on my belly, the half-can instead of decaf coffee I drank that weekend.

I think I'm done looking at the statistics. Now that I know that I can "beat the odds" they won't make me feel any better any way.

Cubslove12

I just left the doctors, It was confirmed my pregnancy is not viable. I was told I have a blighted ovum and that happens in 1/5 pregnancies, and if you had one the chances to have a second are 1/25....

roper2617

I'll never know as well. I was told that they won't consider testing the tissue until I have my third miscarriage. This was my first pregnancy.

Honestly I don't think it was anything you or any of us did. But I can understand feelings of guilt and wonder. Try not to beat yourself up.

DanyTargaryen

I feel like that % post needs to be taken down or should at least be ignored. I get that it may make some people feel better, but there's no real scientific research or evidence supporting those numbers. I looked at it a lot after I got my BFP and was crushed to be in that small percentage that m/c at 8 weeks. But the more I talk to people the more I feel like those "statistics" are a load of crap.

chloe97

@DanyTargaryen I agree. 

TrishGbb

Those miscarriage stats are prob hogwash.

The first OB I called right after my first positive test didn't even want to see me until I was 13 weeks. Even then, the nurse practitioner would see me and not the OB. The OB didn't see women until 16-20weeks. The message was practically that you're pregnancy isn't real until then. Of course at the time I found this super offensive and didn't want to hear it. Unfortunately I discovered on my own that this OB was right and was completely ethical to operate this way. He wasn't exploiting every pregnancy $$$. We've all unfortunately found out the hard way that miscarriage happens way more often than we thought. I've discovered that apparently having numerous miscarriages is part of reproduction and few people ever talk about it. People you assume never had any will all of sudden let you know they had 2, once you mention yours. I've concluded its a normal part of having kids and nobody talks about it publicly.

That said I see nothing wrong with women using those stats to ease their fears. It's a scary thing to think about when you're pregnant. I didn't even let my birth month group know about mine, I just left the group.

TrishGbb

Also want to add that it seems like doctors are painted into a corner when it comes to being honest about it. They don't want to be discouraging, cause worry, or seem like they're blowing off something really upsetting to a patient by saying "oh this is totally common and happens all the time, no worries!"........ But also don't want to be misleading or cause worry by telling a patient that it's really uncommon. They also prob don't want to say that some women miscarry babies with chromosomal problems that other women don't miscarry. It's just so complicated.