Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Ork life expectancy
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2
evil_bacteria
In SR3, Orks had a listed life expectancy of forty years. I always took that to mean an average, that was brought down by the sheer number of young deaths. Another way to say it is that I assumed Orks live as long as Humans, but are more likely to die early, which lowers the average life span.

It's no secret that Orks are a metaphor for blacks in America, and the average lifespan for a black man is roughly ten years less than that of a white man. This is not because black people just don't live as long, but it's an average brought down by the young deaths caused by the sheer number of blacks living in poverty and violence. Thus, I've always it's the same deal with Orks, that if the socio-economic factors were equalized, Orks would live as long as Humans.

Some adventure written for SR1 or SR2 (I forget which) made it clear that the author felt Orks simply aged faster, so a thirty-year-old NPC was all wrinkled and decrepit. I think that's a misunderstanding of what the SR team intended, but what does everyone else think?
Lordmalachdrim
If I recall the SR2 core book coincided with the adventure your talking about.
Faelan
I think the intention was for orks to have shorter lifespans. All the supporting documentation in Earthdawn supports this. Some of it may have to do with lifestyle, nutrition, youthful deaths, but most of it just comes down to the fact that their natural lifespans are not that long. Real Old Age is in their 40's or 50's.
WearzManySkins
Actually the data on the Orks is just plain BS, even from Earthdawn.

Do the math, the number you are looking at is 69 is in the number of offspring a female Ork can have in her "limited" lifespan, do that for the rest of the Orks and SR4 world is carpeted in Orks.

Also to carry 4+ baby Orks in a pregnancy, means a female Ork has better food digestion/extraction than all the Cyberware/Bioware/Nanoware for such.

Again a "Gee Whiz" idea from some Dev/Freelancer who did not have a clue.

WMS
Adarael
I've always been firmly in the camps that Orks live longer than some have seen. "Real old age" cannot be 40s or 50s for orks any more than 60 is "real old age" for humans in 2070s. That is to say, sure, maybe it is - if you've never taken care of yourself or your life has been really hard. I think Orks on average live about 20 years less than a human in optimal circumstances, and maybe 10 less in sub-optimal circumstances. So if we ignore the "worldwide lifespan" in sr4 which obviously takes into account people living shit lives in 3rd world mud huts, we can assume that with the level of medical tech available, lifespans are probably:

OPTIMAL
Human: 100-110 years
Ork: 80-90 years

'MIDDLE' LIFESTYLE
Human: 75-85
Ork: 65-75

CRAPPY/3RD WORLD (discounting violence)
Human: 60-65
Ork: 55-60. The low difference here is owing the fact that orks tend to be MORE marginalized than humans, ergo in worse areas, but have drastically higher physical stats to compensate.
hyzmarca
Some orks age very rapidly. Some don't. No one knows why.


QUOTE (WearzManySkins)
Also to carry 4+ baby Orks in a pregnancy, means a female Ork has better food digestion/extraction than all the Cyberware/Bioware/Nanoware for such.

http://www.twinstuff.com/houoctup.htm

I think space is the bigger issue. The ability to bring multiple ork children to term requires a rather large uterus. But normal humans can carry 4 or more.
WearzManySkins
QUOTE (hyzmarca @ Jul 5 2008, 05:06 PM) *
Some orks age very rapidly. Some don't. No one knows why.

http://www.twinstuff.com/houoctup.htm

I think space is the bigger issue. The ability to bring multiple ork children to term requires a rather large uterus. But normal humans can carry 4 or more.

Nice link but I am referring to amount of calories/nutrients that carrying more than one baby puts on the mother carrying same. Also most Ork mothers will not get several months of bed rest, like in your link.

As for space most multiple birth babies are way under the average weight of single births.

The uterus is a adaptive organ able to grow to the size needed for most births. Now the size of the birth canal will enable a baby to more easily pass into the world.

Define a "Normal" Human? grinbig.gif

WMS
Aaron
QUOTE (hyzmarca @ Jul 5 2008, 05:06 PM) *
I think space is the bigger issue. The ability to bring multiple ork children to term requires a rather large uterus. But normal humans can carry 4 or more.

You seem to be assuming a lot about the birth weight of the average ork. I don't remember if the gestation period is stated at any point in your hymnal, but if it is I'd be willing to bet it's significantly shorter (like more than 30% shorter) than the average human's. Gestation period in mammals is proportional to birth weight.
WearzManySkins
QUOTE (Aaron @ Jul 5 2008, 08:54 PM) *
You seem to be assuming a lot about the birth weight of the average ork. I don't remember if the gestation period is stated at any point in your hymnal, but if it is I'd be willing to bet it's significantly shorter (like more than 30% shorter) than the average human's. Gestation period in mammals is proportional to birth weight.

You are correct RAW gestation period is 6 months.

WMS
Aaron
So the birth weight of an ork is probably around 1 kg (about the same mass as a kitten), making them easy to birth in batches and most likely the cutest metahuman babies ever.
Trigger
QUOTE (Aaron @ Jul 5 2008, 11:22 PM) *
So the birth weight of an ork is probably around 1 kg (about the same mass as a kitten), making them easy to birth in batches and most likely the cutest metahuman babies ever.


'Aww Mom, can I keep it? I promise I fill feed him and walk him and keep him eatting the little elf children around the neighborhood. Please?'
WearzManySkins
QUOTE (Aaron @ Jul 5 2008, 09:22 PM) *
So the birth weight of an ork is probably around 1 kg (about the same mass as a kitten), making them easy to birth in batches and most likely the cutest metahuman babies ever.

rotfl.gif 2.2 pounds in birth weight?!?!?! the survival rate for current day babies of that birth weight is not that good. Octuplets have a greater birth weight than that.
QUOTE
Multiple-birth infants are usually admitted to neonatal intensive care immediately after being born. The records for all the triplet pregnancies managed and delivered from 1992-1996 were looked over to see what the neonatal statistics were. Kaufman et al. [12] found from reviewing these files that during a five year period, 55 triplet pregnancies, which is 165 babies, were delivered. Of the 165 babies 149 were admitted to neonatal intensive care after the delivery. That is 90% of the babies born.


More factual figures on multiple birth gestation periods
QUOTE
40 weeks is considered a full-term singleton pregnancy; however few higher-order multiple birth pregnancies last a full 40 weeks because the length of pregnancy decreases with each additional baby.

More than 50 percent of twins, more than 90 percent of triplets, and virtually all quadruplets and higher multiples are born preterm (Hoyert, Et al. 2006).

On average most:

* singleton pregnancies last 39 weeks
* twin pregnancies last 35 weeks
* triplet pregnancies last 33 weeks
* quadruplets pregnancies last 29 weeks (ASRM, 2006).

According to the MOST Medical Birth Survey, the average gestation for multiples is approximately:

* 35 weeks for twins
* 33 weeks for triplets
* 31 weeks for quadruplets
* 29 weeks for quintuplets
* 29 weeks for sextuplets

But again the nutritional aspect of carrying 4+ babies even for 6 months is being side stepped.

WMS
Aaron
QUOTE (WearzManySkins @ Jul 5 2008, 09:37 PM) *
rotfl.gif 2.2 pounds in birth weight?!?!?! the survival rate for current day babies of that birth weight is not that good. Octuplets have a greater birth weight than that.

You seem to have forgotten that we're not talking about human babies, current day or otherwise.

Also, remind me how long octuplets usually gestate? EDIT: Never mind, I used my Data Search skill. It seems that the first surviving octuplets born in the US were born thirteen weeks premature (except one who was born 15 weeks premature), and all of them had birth weights less than a kilogram. Here's a link. Here's another to Wikipedia.

QUOTE
But again the nutritional aspect of carrying 4+ babies even for 6 months is being side stepped.

Good point. I imagine that pregnant-ork-eating-all-the-time jokes are a hoot on the sitcom sims.
hyzmarca
Given that orks have a natural +2 to Body, meaning that a baby will be born with a Body score of 3, I very much doubt that they are usually premature or underweight.
WearzManySkins
QUOTE (Aaron @ Jul 5 2008, 09:41 PM) *
You seem to have forgotten that we're not talking about human babies, current day or otherwise. Also, remind me how long octuplets usually gestate?

Good point. I imagine that pregnant-ork-eating-all-the-time jokes are a hoot on the sitcom sims.

No I am not, Orks are a subspecies of Humanity just as are Caucasians, Asians, Africans etc, they do not give birth to "Kitties".

Again the Devs/Freelancers did not go thru enough research instead went for the "Neat" factor.

Maternal Nutrition in Multiple PregnancyMaternal Nutrition in Multiple Pregnancy
QUOTE
The recommended amount of protein for twin pregnancy is at least 110 grams daily. For triplets, 140-150 grams daily.

QUOTE
By the end of a twin pregnancy your blood volume will have increased by 70-80% of your pre pregnant status.3 Even more in a triplet pregnancy. This is a considerable amount that you need to acquire partly by hydration (drinking enough fluids) and adequate protein intake. Without enough calories in your diet, approximately 3,000 for twins, you won't have the energy for baby building and carrying on much of your activities of daily living.

QUOTE
Calcium is very important in the last half of pregnancy, (during the last two trimesters). The last trimester is when half the calcium required by the fetus will be deposited in the fetal bones. If you are not taking in enough calcium then the babies will take it from your bones, this is not beneficial to you after menopause. The required amount is 1,600-2,000 mg. per day for a twin/triplet pregnancy.


You can see the increase from 2 to 3 babies, as for scaling it beyond that ....

WMS
Aaron
QUOTE (WearzManySkins @ Jul 5 2008, 09:53 PM) *
No I am not, Orks are a subspecies of Humanity just as are Caucasians, Asians, Africans etc, they do not give birth to "Kitties".

Er ... you know, I may be wrong about this, but if you apply that logic, then trolls and dwarfs have the same birth weight and gestation expectations as humans would.

Incidentally, my calculation was based on a 6-month gestation period for a mammal. A human fetus is about 1 kg after six months of gestation. So, you see, my supposition is based on humanity, sub-species or otherwise. Or should I take your point to be that ork cell division and differentiation is faster than other mammals?
WearzManySkins
QUOTE (Aaron @ Jul 5 2008, 10:18 PM) *
Er ... you know, I may be wrong about this, but if you apply that logic, then trolls and dwarfs have the same birth weight and gestation expectations as humans would.

Incidentally, my calculation was based on a 6-month gestation period for a mammal. A human fetus is about 1 kg after six months of gestation. So, you see, my supposition is based on humanity, sub-species or otherwise. Or should I take your point to be that ork cell division and differentiation is faster than other mammals?

No until recently birth weighs are different by race, ie Asians have lesser birth weights, Africans larger birth weights, Nordic/Germanic larger birth Weights, Pygmies have smaller birth weights. Gestational time periods with all factors being the same, are the same for single births.

No I do not say the cell division for Orks is any different for for Elves, humans etc.

Now is that 6 month gestational period for orks due in part for the multiple births?

In modern humans, more babies shorter gestational period.

Now to clarify my point, the Devs/Freelancers did not do good research into gestational periods, multiple birth nutritional needs, etc when they came up with the figures for Orks birth rate, gestational periods, etc. Saying it was so in Earthdawn is BS. That means they continued the mistakes from Earthdawn with out even looking at the numbers.

A female ork who was in the first generation of Orks, would over her expected lifespan of 40 years, turning fertile at age 10, having quad births, twice a year, with only 1 female ork surviving or each birth to start her breeding cycle would have 69 female breeding offspring/desendants, the number escalate from there. The female ork would consume ~3,500+ calories and 200 grams of protein per day. That is 1,277,500 calories per year, and 73 kg of protein per year. Multiply that by the beginning population numbers for Orks. Again a female ork puts to shame all the cyberware/bioware/nanoware in her ability to process the nutrition needed to give to her births.

In the end Orks Carpet the World and consume 200%+ of the food resources. This number does not track the males, since fewer males are needed to breed the females.

WMS
RunnerPaul
QUOTE (WearzManySkins @ Jul 5 2008, 11:41 PM) *
Saying it was so in Earthdawn is BS. That means they continued the mistakes from Earthdawn with out even looking at the numbers.


Point of clarification: Shadowrun, as a game system, had gestational periods, birth weights, and number of young detailed for each of the races years before Earthdawn was even created.
WearzManySkins
QUOTE (RunnerPaul @ Jul 5 2008, 10:58 PM) *
Point of clarification: Shadowrun, as a game system, had gestational periods, birth weights, and number of young detailed for each of the races years before Earthdawn was even created.

Ok so the mistakes came for Shadowrun rather then Earthdawn.

WMS
Carny
QUOTE (WearzManySkins @ Jul 6 2008, 06:50 AM) *
Ok so the mistakes came for Shadowrun rather then Earthdawn.

WMS


Taking a hammer to the game designers for not being expert in every dang bit of fluff they write about is a bit pointless. First off, they didn't have a decade or so and hundreds or thousands of people micro-analyzing each phrase and sentence for technical inaccuracies. Of course, that seems to be the number one activity on these boards.

Orks are a species genetically related to humans. They aren't human. They aren't caucasian humans, or african humans, or asian humans, or whatever. They do have similar divisions among themselves, though. They are far more measurably stronger, tougher, etc, then any human group compared to another. Their biological norms don't have any more need to conform to human expectations then that of trolls or elves. Presumably it is normal for a female ork to bring to term healthy, fully-formed offspring, in multiples, after a six month gestation period. Whether it is some quirk of biology, or a magical whatsis from elder days, or whatever. Also presumably, ork physiology starts to experience advanced aging processes at some point around forty. Sucks to be them.
WearzManySkins
QUOTE (Carny @ Jul 6 2008, 12:12 AM) *
Taking a hammer to the game designers for not being expert in every dang bit of fluff they write about is a bit pointless. First off, they didn't have a decade or so and hundreds or thousands of people micro-analyzing each phrase and sentence for technical inaccuracies. Of course, that seems to be the number one activity on these boards.

Orks are a species genetically related to humans. They aren't human. They aren't caucasian humans, or african humans, or asian humans, or whatever. They do have similar divisions among themselves, though. They are far more measurably stronger, tougher, etc, then any human group compared to another. Their biological norms don't have any more need to conform to human expectations then that of trolls or elves. Presumably it is normal for a female ork to bring to term healthy, fully-formed offspring, in multiples, after a six month gestation period. Whether it is some quirk of biology, or a magical whatsis from elder days, or whatever. Also presumably, ork physiology starts to experience advanced aging processes at some point around forty. Sucks to be them.

Not really going by the stated values for orks, and running the numbers, the Orks carpet the earth. Ergo they are broken unless a "gimick" is thrown in. grinbig.gif You are fairly new here, taking Devs/Freelancers to task is a fairly common thread. grinbig.gif Same for the earth shift in LA, and the real world effects of same.

Actually the web and DataSearch takes minutes to perform not years. grinbig.gif

As for races
Dwarf: Homo sapiens pumillonis
Elves: Homo sapiens noblis
Humans: Homo sapiens Edit sapiens
Orks: Home sapiens robustus
Trolls: Homo sapiens ingentis
The above shows that Dwarfs, Elves, Orks, Trolls are Subspecies of Homo sapiens aka Humans. Yes you can can Asian, African, Polynesian Orks, Trolls, Dwarfs, and Elves. Ergo all are Human by definition of Species, but SR4 uses the term Metahuman. Just like a Doberman, a Yorkie are both dogs/canines just different subspecies.

WMS
Trigger
QUOTE (WearzManySkins @ Jul 6 2008, 02:33 AM) *
As for races
Dwarf: Homo sapiens pumillonis
Elves: Homo sapiens noblis
Humans: Homo sapiens
Orks: Home sapiens robustus
Trolls: Homo sapiens ingentis
The above shows that Dwarfs, Elves, Orks, Trolls are Subspecies of Homo sapiens aka Humans. Yes you can can Asian, African, Polynesian Orks, Trolls, Dwarfs, and Elves. Ergo all are Human by definition of Species, but SR4 uses the term Metahuman. Just like a Doberman, a Yorkie are both dogs/canines just different subspecies.

WMS


Actually, Humans are Homo Sapiens Sapiens, so they too are a subspecies from Homo Sapiens. After the start of the Sixth World and the return of the metatypes, Homo Sapiens as a species moniker was no longer enough to identify humanity as a species. Hence the start of the subspecies categorization, which humans are a part of. Everything else isn't a sub species of Human, they are all subspecies of humanity.

(It is hard to write this clearly, trying to differentiate between the over-arcing species of Human, and the subspecies that is what Humans are in SR.)
WearzManySkins
QUOTE (Trigger @ Jul 6 2008, 12:43 AM) *
Actually, Humans are Homo Sapiens Sapiens, so they too are a subspecies from Homo Sapiens. After the start of the Sixth World and the return of the metatypes, Homo Sapiens as a species moniker was no longer enough to identify humanity as a species. Hence the start of the subspecies categorization, which humans are a part of. Everything else isn't a sub species of Human, they are all subspecies of humanity.

(It is hard to write this clearly, trying to differentiate between the over-arcing species of Human, and the subspecies that is what Humans are in SR.)

grinbig.gif Actually I took the species names from RAW SR4. I understand your point. Edit Damn it your are correct. Editing same.

WMS
Aaron
QUOTE (WearzManySkins @ Jul 5 2008, 10:41 PM) *
No until recently birth weighs are different by race, ie Asians have lesser birth weights, Africans larger birth weights, Nordic/Germanic larger birth Weights, Pygmies have smaller birth weights. Gestational time periods with all factors being the same, are the same for single births.

If by "the same" you mean "varies within a range of 37 to 42 weeks," then I agree. Of course, this varies with genetics. And who's got different genetics from humans? Orks, for one.

I'm not even sure what you're arguing anymore, WMS. If you're trying to say that it's impossible to have a six-month gestation period because orks are actually genetically identical to humans, I'm afraid we're going to have to disagree unless you can come up with rather more convincing arguments.
WearzManySkins
QUOTE (Aaron @ Jul 6 2008, 12:54 AM) *
If by "the same" you mean "varies within a range of 37 to 42 weeks," then I agree. Of course, this varies with genetics. And who's got different genetics from humans? Orks, for one.

I'm not even sure what you're arguing anymore, WMS. If you're trying to say that it's impossible to have a six-month gestation period because orks are actually genetically identical to humans, I'm afraid we're going to have to disagree unless you can come up with rather more convincing arguments.

No what I am saying with a gestational period of 6 months, and 4+ babies, Orks carpet the Earth. Nutritional issues aside.

WMS
Trigger
Granted that Orks could possibly carpet the Earth, but they probably also have much higher chances for infant deaths at birth (considering your own statements on children born prematurely). Also, considering modern day forms of birth control and their evolution, births are probably a little more planned than they are now. Also some things that need to be brought into consideration in the equation is the shorter life expectancy of Orks (the primary concern for this thread) and the high mortality rate of the SINless on the streets (a category of which many many orks will fall into). Population control is also much more aggressive in SR, with epidemic viruses like VITAS that kill off large portions of the world's population every decade or so, increases in gang and street violence everywhere, and ghouls that stalk the streets and kill you for the food you are made of. Also, IIRC, hasn't the Ork percentage compared the entire world's population raised a bit during each edition?
WearzManySkins
QUOTE (Trigger @ Jul 6 2008, 01:25 AM) *
Granted that Orks could possibly carpet the Earth, but they probably also have much higher chances for infant deaths at birth (considering your own statements on children born prematurely). Also, considering modern day forms of birth control and their evolution, births are probably a little more planned than they are now. Also some things that need to be brought into consideration in the equation is the shorter life expectancy of Orks (the primary concern for this thread) and the high mortality rate of the SINless on the streets (a category of which many many orks will fall into). Population control is also much more aggressive in SR, with epidemic viruses like VITAS that kill off large portions of the world's population every decade or so, increases in gang and street violence everywhere, and ghouls that stalk the streets and kill you for the food you are made of. Also, IIRC, hasn't the Ork percentage compared the entire world's population raised a bit during each edition?

my figures took into account a 75% mortality rate. Anything less, an even larger carpet of Orks.

Current RL worst infant mortality rate is Angola with 192.5 per 1,000 births. aka Edit[19.25]% before the age of 1 year.
Maternal Mortality Ratio worst rate is Sierra Leone has the highest maternal death rate at 2,000 per 100,000. Edit[aka 2% per year]
Child Mortality Rate worst rate is Sierra Leone - 270 per 1,000 aka 27.0 % from the age of 1 to 5 years

WMS
Trigger
QUOTE (WearzManySkins @ Jul 6 2008, 02:38 AM) *
my figures took into account a 75% mortality rate. Anything less, an even larger carpet of Orks.

Current RL worst infant mortality rate is Angola with 192.5 per 1,000 births. aka 19.5 % before the age of 1 year.
Maternal Mortality Ratio worst rate is Sierra Leone has the highest maternal death rate at 2,000 per 100,000.
Child Mortality Rate worst rate is Sierra Leone - 270 per 1,000 aka 27.0 % from the age of 1 to 5 years

WMS


I guess the question is then, do Orks always have 4+ children with each pregnancy?

My thoughts on this is that they don't. Maybe in all ork litters, but what about when the other parent is a Human or an Elf even. Those pairings both have a chance of being Human, Ork, or Elf. What happens to the gestation period then? Also, how many children are born with each pregnancy from those kinds of pairings? These questions we don't have answers to in RAW (AFAIK) and those can have quite an impact on the numbers.
MYST1C
QUOTE (WearzManySkins @ Jul 6 2008, 05:53 AM) *
Orks are a subspecies of Humanity just as are Caucasians, Asians, Africans etc

Caucasians, Asians, Africans, etc. are not "subspecies" (aka "races") - they are ethnic variations of the human phenotype.
Riley37
So, by RAW, orks have the potential, *if given adequate food supplies and no major disincentive to each female breeding to her capacity and not too much infant or adult mortality*, to outbreed every other kind of metahuman.

Fine. So what. Lotsa species have that capacity, and yet do not carpet the Earth. Rabbits did devastate part of Australia for a while, but not so much anymore; rats are widespread in cities, but not carpeting the streets; and so forth. That kind of breeding behavior rarely has the necessary conditions to run full throttle for very long.

Or, alternatively, let's say those conditions *are* available, and in five or ten generations, orks will number several billion; let's say their numbers will match the total of all other metatypes. Well, in 2070, it's only sixty years since dwarves and elves appeared, and less than that since wide-scale goblinization, so it's plausible that orks are *in 2070* merely a tenth or so of metahumanity. Ork overpopulation is one of many phenomena that are on the way... along with rising mana, the spread of HTMV, the Horrors, the emergence of self-aware AIs on 37% of R6 comlinks, cheap and thus widespread Leonization techniques, the industrial revolution of the Merrow civilization, the complete infiltration of the ice-cream-pushcart industry by the Hive, the Awakened soy plant, and toxic wasteland becoming a majority of Earth's surface area on both land and sea. Not to mention global climate change. It's just one more thing that you could go crazy worrying about, chummer, but focus on living through each day as it comes, eh?
Chrysalis
I have an issue with litters and I am with WMS on this matter.

Animals that have bicornate (two-horned) uteri, these uteri are designed to handle multiple embryo implantations and in a lab animal like a mouse or rat or hamster there may be as many as a dozen and in some cases close to 20 embryos that implant along the two horns of the uterus. This large number of embryos is what ends up producing one or more runts because some of the egg/sperm combinations are not as genetically viable (healthy) as others.

If you actually go in weekly and look at the embryos and fetuses with surgery as they are developing during the gestation period in this kind of animal that has so many pups in a litter, you find that the number of implantation sites that start growing in the first week will be more than the number of embryos growing in the second week. The number of embryos growing in the second week will be more than the number of fetuses growing in the third week and that number will normally be more than the number of live pups delivered at the end of the gestation. What happens to the embryos and fetuses that are lost and why are they lost? We call this loss resorption of the embryos or fetuses and the mother’s uterus just clears out (reabsorbs) the material of any embryo or fetus that can’t continue to live.

Now some of the embryos are good enough to stay alive but don’t keep up with the growth pace of the completely normal embryos and so they grow to full term (20 days for a mouse or 16 days for a hamster) and are delivered (born) but are small for gestational (pregnancy) age and may have problems even staying alive immediately after parturition (birth). If this runt manages to stay alive after birth it may still have a hard time reaching full potential if it is a large litter and everybody is always fighting
for a spot at one of the nipples. Most mice, for example, have 8 nipples but might have 12 or more pups in a litter. You can do the math and see that there will always be a few odd men out as some put it.

At this point we would be talking about such a change in genetic structure that we would be talking about orcs as being a separate species. Human beings are on the top of complexity of organisms on Earth demanding 100% genetic compatibility to procreate. If that was not true then we could procreate at least with monkeys and apes. If such a mutant was to come into being, nature has a tendency of turning them infertile.
the_dunner
QUOTE (WearzManySkins @ Jul 6 2008, 03:00 AM) *
I am saying with a gestational period of 6 months, and 4+ babies, Orks carpet the Earth.


This, to me, is a "No kidding. AR makes e-mail more convenient, too -- News at 11."

Check your timeline. Goblinization happened in 2021. That's 50 years ago by SR standards. Goblinization, at that time, struck 10% of the population.

50 Years later, orks are the most common non-human metatype. Assuming a generational time of 12 years, that's 4 generations. There are, very clearly, a whole lot of them already. As of SoNA, 7% of the SINners were orks. However, that discounts 30% of the total population, of which a majority are orks. (It's probably safe to say they went from 9% of the population to >25% in 50 years.)

Unless something is done to change their reproductive rates (I feel like a Humanis member typing this), given time, orks will carpet the earth. That's a "working as intended" feature, not a bug.
CanRay
Come on, even Humanis admits that Orks have their uses.

I mean, they're strong, cheap labour that matures fast, and doesn't work long enough to earn a pension.

Perfect for the Smaller Corps that don't have Extraterritoriality.
evil_bacteria
From what I've gathered from years of SR books, metahumans are genetically human, but there's SOMETHING that causes them to express different characteristics. That SOMETHING is magic, most likely.

The fact that Humans and metahumans can cross-fertilize suggests, though does not prove, that they are genetically identical. After all, a Human cannot produce offspring with a gorilla, but he CAN have babies with his Elven wife.

Again, a discussion of genes, of gestation periods and nutrition and everything else, is clouded by the existance of magic. How is it that Orks can produce multiple births all the dang time? Magic. Why do Orks exist in the first place? Magic.

On the other hand, until the developers ssay otherwise, I'm going to say that Orks don't age extra fast, because I don't like that. smile.gif

EDIT:

Hey Chrysalis, you've got a point, except that human beings IRL can have multiple births. It doesn't require a bicornate uterus to produce a litter: there are real people who have had sextuplets, etc.

Also, and this has nothing to do with the price of tea in China, but I have to assume that Ork and Troll babies are born Human, and goblinize soon after. Can you imagine an Elf trying to give birth to an enormous Troll baby with frickin' horns?
WearzManySkins
QUOTE (Trigger @ Jul 6 2008, 01:43 AM) *
I guess the question is then, do Orks always have 4+ children with each pregnancy?

My thoughts on this is that they don't. Maybe in all ork litters, but what about when the other parent is a Human or an Elf even. Those pairings both have a chance of being Human, Ork, or Elf. What happens to the gestation period then? Also, how many children are born with each pregnancy from those kinds of pairings? These questions we don't have answers to in RAW (AFAIK) and those can have quite an impact on the numbers.

Actually 4 babies is a low end number in a pregnancy as per RAW.

WMS
WearzManySkins
QUOTE (MYST1C @ Jul 6 2008, 03:53 AM) *
Caucasians, Asians, Africans, etc. are not "subspecies" (aka "races") - they are ethnic variations of the human phenotype.

Sorry but that is still up for debate.
Race (classification of human beings)
Human genetic variation
Long web pages many different views on Race as a genetic issue.

WMS
WearzManySkins
QUOTE (evil_bacteria @ Jul 6 2008, 10:33 AM) *
EDIT:

Hey Chrysalis, you've got a point, except that human beings IRL can have multiple births. It doesn't require a bicornate uterus to produce a litter: there are real people who have had sextuplets, etc.

Also, and this has nothing to do with the price of tea in China, but I have to assume that Ork and Troll babies are born Human, and goblinize soon after. Can you imagine an Elf trying to give birth to an enormous Troll baby with frickin' horns?

Yes this is true but look the numbers that I have posted about multiple births, 95% of them require a stay in a NICU after birth/delivery.

WMS
Aaron
QUOTE (WearzManySkins @ Jul 6 2008, 10:52 AM) *
Sorry but that is still up for debate.
Race (classification of human beings)
Human genetic variation
Long web pages many different views on Race as a genetic issue.

There's a much easier-to-digest version of all of this info on PBS's Race: the Power of an Illusion site.
Carny
Having just read over the bits about goblinization, I'm not particularly impressed by any of the arguments based on what is genetically true of humans in 2008. None of it has any particular application to orks in shadowrun, or trolls.

Of course, my being impressed or not isn't particularly the point, except where it comes to how I handle questions about orks and reproduction in my game. (Should anybody ever give a rat's ass about the science of ork reproduction in my game, which I rather doubt. Unless they read this, and all of them ask JUST to prove me wrong.)

I don't think orks are human. The impression I got was that the classifications came about because the scientific community was utterly floored by what had happened. They had creatures that were far more diverse in many ways from human baselines then any of the various living genotypes had been, yet were clearly sentient, had at one point been baseline humans, and could clearly breed with humans. All of which was clearly impossible given the body of scientific evidence and medical knowledge only weeks or months before.

LOL, they probably spent endless hours spewing google results (and more authoritative citations) at each other, before deciding to expand the functional definition of humanity to include the new reality. It may have been motivated in some part by morality. (Officially classifying all these new expressions as 'non-human' would have made a legal and ethical quagmire of epic proportions.)
CanRay
Yeah, I can bet.

Calling "Animal Control" for a Troll beating up a bar full of Humanis would be rather hilarious!
WearzManySkins
QUOTE (Aaron @ Jul 6 2008, 01:11 PM) *
There's a much easier-to-digest version of all of this info on PBS's Race: the Power of an Illusion site.

Bah if you have to read the Cliff Notes version, you should not even go there. grinbig.gif

WMS
Chrysalis
Human multiple births can occur either naturally (the woman ovulates multiple eggs or the fertilized egg splits into two) or as the result of infertility treatments such as IVF (several embryos are often transferred to compensate for lower quality) or fertility drugs (which can cause multiple eggs to mature in one ovulatory cycle).

In general, twins occur naturally at approximately the rate of 1/89 of singleton births, triplets at 1/89 the rate of twin births, and so on (Hellin's Law). However, for reasons that are not yet known, the older a woman is the more likely she is to have a multiple birth naturally. It is theorized[citation needed] that this is due to the higher level of follicle-stimulating hormone that older women sometimes have as their ovaries respond more sluggishly to FSH stimulation.

In North America, dizygotic twinning occurs about once in 83 conceptions, and triplets about once in 8000 conceptions. To put this into perspective, in the US in 2003 there were over 136,000 multiple human births. [1] A traditional approximation of the incidence of multiple pregnancies is as follows:[2]

* Twins 1:80
* Triplets 1:80² = 1:6400
* Quadruplets (Etc) 1:80³ = 1:512,000[2]

The number of multiple births has increased over the last decades. For example, in Canada between 1979 and 1999 the number of multiple birth babies increased 35%. Before the advent of ovulation-stimulating drugs, triplets were quite rare (approximately 1 in 8000 births) and higher order births much rarer still.[citation needed] Much of the increase can probably be attributed to the impact of fertility treatments, such as in-vitro fertilization. Younger patients who undergo treatment with fertility medication containing artificial FSH, followed by intrauterine insemination, are particularly at risk for multiple births of higher order.

Certain factors appear to increase the likelihood that a woman will naturally conceive multiples. These include:

* mother's age — women over 35 are more likely to have multiples than younger women
* mother's use of fertility drugs — approximately 35% of pregnancies arising through the use of fertility treatments such as IVF involve more than one child

The increasing use of fertility drugs as well as the increasing life expectancy for women have contributed to the rise in the rate of multiples over the last fifty years. Better nutrition also increases the likelihood of multiple births.

Risks

Over the years multiple births have been increasing to surprisingly high numbers. According to the U.S. Natality Files in 1980, the total number of multiple births in the United States was 69,676 and increased to 101,709 in 1995, which represents a 46% increase in multiple births between these two time periods [3]. Even though this evidence was for a study done in 1995 it still indicates that multiples have been increasing, and because of this the risks are becoming more of a concern for the mothers and fetuses of multiples.

Premature Birth, Low Birth Weight, and Cerebral Palsy in Multiples

Babies born from multiple-birth single pregnancies are more likely to be born prematurely than those from single pregnancies. Alexander et al. [3] found that the percent of singletons born preterm was 9.43% compared to that of twins at 50.74% and triplets at 91.03%. Alexander et al. also looked at the percentage of children born very preterm and found that singletons were 1.70% compared to twins at 13.94% and triplets at 41.25%. This study was done by looking at the 1991-1995 U.S. Natality Files, which were received from the National Center for Health Statistics. Another study conducted by Blondel et al. [4] showed that in the United States between 1981 and 1997, the preterm birth rate increased by about 21%. Blondel et al. found this evidence by looking at the population of twins and triplets on perinatal health in the 1980s and 1990s in France, England and Wales, United States, and Canada. These two studies show that multiples are at a higher risk of being born preterm then that of singletons. Multiples also tend to have a lower birth weight compared to singletons because they are born preterm. Some evidence indicates that only 1.10% of singletons were born with a very low birth weight and 10.12% twins and 31.88% triplets were found to be born with very low birth weight. This Study was conducted by looking at the statistics from the U.S. Natality Files (5). The evidence shows that there is a significant difference in birth weights between singletons and multiples [3].

Birth weight is also a large factor when it comes to other medical problems with multiples such as cerebral palsy. Pharoah and Cooke found evidence that cerebral palsy was more common among multiple births than single births. They conducted a study by looking at the registered births of babies born with cerebral palsy during the periods of 1982-1989 in the counties of Merseyside and Cheshire. The study showed that cerebral palsy was 2.3 per 1,000 survivors in singletons, 12.6 in twins, and 44.8 in triplets [5]. There is a significant difference between singletons and multiples. It shows how multiple births had a relatively higher risk of developing this condition.

Mortality Rate (Stillbirth)

Multiples are also known to have a higher mortality rate. It is more common for multiple births to be stillborn where as for singletons the risk is not as high. A literary review on multiple pregnancies shows a study done on one set each of septuplets, and octuplets, two sets of sextuplets, 8 sets of quintuplets, 17 sets of quadruplets, and 228 sets of triplets. By doing this study, Hammond found that the mean gestational age (how many weeks when birthed) at birth was 33.4 weeks for triplets and 31 weeks for quadruplets. The prenatal death rate for higher then sextuplets was 100%. This shows that stillbirth happens 3-5 weeks usually before the woman reaches full term and also that for sextuplets or higher it almost always ends in death of the fetuses [6]. Though multiples are at a greater risk of being stillborn, there is inconclusive evidence whether the actual mortality rate is higher in multiples than in singletons.

Fertility Therapy Problems and Selective Reduction

Today many multiple pregnancies are the result of fertility therapy. Elsner et al. [7] studied 42 months of IVF (in vitro fertilization) procedures, and related the number of embryos transferred and the pregnancy outcome. In this time, they found that of the 2,173 embryo transfers preformed, 734 were successfully delivered pregnancies (33.8%). These were analyzed…the overall multiple pregnancy rate was 31.3% (24.7% twins, 5.8% triplets, and .08% quadruplets)(cool.gif. This evidence shows that almost all of the births delivered were multiples rather than singletons, because IVF’s are producing more multiples, a number of efforts are being made to reduce the risk of multiple births specifically triplets or more. Medical practitioners are doing this by limiting the number of embryos per embryo transfer to one or two. That way, the risks for the mother and fetuses are decreased. De Sutter et al. [8] found by looking at a previous study done in 1997, that by using SET (single embryo transfer) the twin birth rate dropped from 30% to 21%. De Sutter et al. also found that the use of this transfer method increased from 1.5% to 17.5%(9). So limiting the number of embryos transferred can reduce the risks of having multiples and so reduce the risks associated with multiple pregnancies.

Another procedure that the medical world is using today is known as selective reduction, i.e. the termination of one or more, but not all, the fetuses. This is often done in pregnancies with multiple gestations to increase the likelihiood that one child may live a healthy life. Armour et al. [9] found by looking at a review of a series of 1000 selective reduction cases, it has had a loss rate of 5.4% in pregnancies. Many of the losses (15%) occurred within 4 weeks of the procedures and more than 50% occurred after 8 weeks. This shows that the reduction was successful at reducing the embryos from multiple gestations to single (9).

Though selective reduction seems to be working, mothers of multiples who undergo this procedure are at a higher risk of miscarrying compared to that of a single pregnancy. A study done by looking at 158 pregnant women who underwent selective reduction from high order multiples to twins showed that the mother had a 10.6% chance of miscarriage. Mothers of single pregnancies only had a 9.5% chance of miscarriage (10). Antsaklis et al. [10] shows that there is not that significant of a difference, but even so there is still a higher percent chance for mothers of multiples to miscarry.

Birthing Process and Neonatal Intensive Care

When it comes to the birthing process of multiples, mothers are more likely to receive a Caesarean (C-section) delivery than vaginal. Michael Kogan et al. [11] found that between 1989-1991 and 1995-1997 the cesarean delivery rate for mothers of multiples increased from 21.9% to 27%. Kogan et al. discovered this evidence by looking at the National Center for Health Statistics, births and infant death records for twins in the United States.

Multiple-birth infants are usually admitted to neonatal intensive care immediately after being born. The records for all the triplet pregnancies managed and delivered from 1992-1996 were looked over to see what the neonatal statistics were. Kaufman et al. [12] found from reviewing these files that during a five year period, 55 triplet pregnancies, which is 165 babies, were delivered. Of the 165 babies 149 were admitted to neonatal intensive care after the delivery. That is 90% of the babies born.

References:

1. National Center for Health Statistics - Multiple Births
2. Melissa Bush, MD, & Martin L. Pernoll, MD (2006). Multiple Pregnancy. Pregnancy Health Center -Multiple Pregnancy. Armenian Health Network, Health.am. Retrieved on 2007-06-20.
3. Alexander G., Kogan M., Martin J., and Papiernik E. (1998). What are the fetal growth patterns of singletons, twins, and triplets in the United States? Clinical Obstetrics and Gynecology, 41(1), 114-125
4. Blondel B., Kogan M., Alexander G., Dattani N., Kramer M., Macfarlane A., and Shi Wu W. (2002). The impact of the increasing number of multiple births on the rates of preterm birth and low birth weight: An interaction study. American Journal of Public Health, 92(cool.gif, 1323-1330.
5. Pharoah PO., and Cooke T. (1996). Cerebral palsy and multiple births [abstract]. Archives of Disease in Childhood-Fetal and Neonatal Edition, 75, 174-177
6. Hammond K. (1989). Multifetal pregnancy reduction. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecological and Neonatal Nursing, 27(3), 338-343
7. Elsner C., Tucker M., Sweitzer C., Brockman W., Morton P., Wright G., and Toledo A. (1997). Multiple pregnancy rate and embryo number transferred during in vitro fertilization. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 177(2), 350-355
8. De Sutter P., Van der Elst J., Coetsier T., and Dhont M. (2003). Single embryo transfer and multiple pregnancy rate reduction in IVF/ICIS: a 5 year appraisal. Reproductive BioMedicine Online 6(4), 464-469
9. Armour K., and Callister L. (2005). Prevention of triplets and high order multiples: Trends in reproductive medicine. Journal of Perinatal and Neonatal Nursing, 19(2), 103-111
10. Antsaklis A., Drakakis P., Vlazakis G., and Michalas S. (1998). Reduction of multifetal pregnancies to twins does not increase obstetrics or perinatal risks. Human Reproduction, 14(5) 1338-1340
11. Kogan M., Alexander G., Kotelchuck M., Macdorman M., Buckens P., Martin J., and Papiernik E. (2000). Trends in twin birth outcomes and prenatal care utilization in the United States, 1981-1997. The Journal of American Medical Association, 284(3), 335-341
12. Kaufamn GE., Malone FD., Harvey-Wilkes KB., Chelmow D., Penzias AD., and D’ Alton ME. (1998). Neonatal morbidity and mortality associated with triplet pregnancy. Obstetrics and Gynecologists, 91, 342-348
Da9iel
That's very impressive, but does it pertain to orkses? I think not. Magic made them different. It made them burn brighter but faster. It apparently favors them with multiple births. In my interpretation, it enables them to survive the womb with 3 or more siblings. Most baby orks will die after birth but before having children of their own or else there will be the flood of orks that WearzManySkins fears.

You must either embrace the changing world, brother, or slaughter orks. Naturally *ahem* I favor the embrace.
Blade
Admit it: orks don't make any sense. All mammals have a number of breasts relative to the number of children birthed at at time (rounded up to an even number). If all ork womens give birth to litters, they should have more than two breasts.
CanRay
Admit it, magic doesn't make sense. nyahnyah.gif

HEY! Look at that! UGE and Goblinization was CAUSED by an increase in the ambiant level of magic!
last_of_the_great_mikeys
I just love when people try to apply "the real world" to a game.

The developers went with what was neat. It's fantasy! Sure they use science...sort of. I'm sure a lot of their "science" is the RPG version of "treknobabble." The real question is does the neat factor detract from your enjoyment of the game? If so, why do you let it? Seriously, do you need to be able to explain such technical stuff in such detail under current levels of understanding of science which may be wrong because lots of times science has been disproven before in order to have a playable system and setting? If so then I humbly suggest opening your mind to the imagination a little more.
Baatorian

As far as I remember, Orks do indeed give birth to "litters". No idea why someone decided to call them litters. Anyway, I assume the multiple birth crap was intended because they age quick. More births, die faster, blah blah blah. Anyway, I just age them as humans and you should likely do so too, unless you want some random weird shite in your game.

As usual. Your RPG, your rules.

Ninty year old runners ftw.



- Baatorian
evil_bacteria
QUOTE (Baatorian @ Jul 6 2008, 09:47 PM) *
As far as I remember, Orks do indeed give birth to "litters". No idea why someone decided to call them litters.


That was, if I remember correctly, some Humanis type mouthing off in the flavor section of some sourcebook.

One of my favorite examples is in the old Seattle Sourcebook, in which somebody on Shadowlands refers to a place as "a popular meeting place" for Orks. The reply to his post was "Shouldn't that be nesting place?" Damn Humanis *grumble grumble*
Baatorian
QUOTE (Blade @ Jul 6 2008, 11:40 PM) *
All mammals have a number of breasts relative to the number of children birthed at at time (rounded up to an even number). If all ork womens give birth to litters, they should have more than two breasts.


Someone women give birth to like 3+ babies. Please send me the unphotoshopped chick with three tits and I will marry her. Oh wait, you mean, women grow extra breasts during pregnacny? OMFG, childbirth ftw!



- Baatorian
Baatorian
SR2 (PG.37): Young: Mothers usually bear four children, but births of six or eight are not uncommon.

Make of it what you will.



- Baatorian
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012