WebsterMark
Serious Thumper
![* *](/yabb2.2/Templates/Forum/new/starsilver.gif) ![* *](/yabb2.2/Templates/Forum/new/starsilver.gif) ![* *](/yabb2.2/Templates/Forum/new/starsilver.gif) ![* *](/yabb2.2/Templates/Forum/new/starsilver.gif)
Offline
![](/yabb2.2/avatars/blank.gif)
SuzukiSavage.com Rocks!
Posts: 13081
Gender:
|
from the CDC website:
Among all women in the United States (including those as young as 10 and as old as 54), the birth rate declined from 64.1 per 100,000 in 2010 to 63.2 per 100,000 in 2011. Among women 10 to 14 years old, it held steady at 0.4 per 100,000. Among women 15-19 years old, it declined from 34.2 to 31.3. Among women 20-24 years old, it declined from 90.0 to 85.3. Among women 25-29, it declined from 108.3 to 107.2. And among women 30-34 years old, it held steady at 96.5.
However, among women 35-39 years old, it increased from 45.9 per 100,000 to 47.2. Among women 40-44, it increased from 10.2 to 10.3. And among women from 45-54, it held steady at 0.7 per 100,000.
In 2011, the birth rate for women aged 20–24 years was 85.3 births per 1,000 women, the lowest rate ever recorded for the United States, 5 percent lower than in 2010
this is interesting stuff. why would birth rates decline so much for women 20-24 to the lowest rate ever? I have my ideas, but so we can have a break from presidential politics and because i'm stuck in an iowa hotel room, any one else have ideas to share?
|