Don't worry about what everyone else is saying. Someone from my nursing class just returned from LA and saw a taping and said that in 808 TOW the stripper that Rachel is definately showing, so she will remain pregnant! She can't lose the baby if she is that far along. Trust me I know this!:)
For *REAL* Friends fans only
Oct 20, 2001, 9:01 PM ET34 posts by 10 posters
34 posts
nursing
the
pregnant!
this!:)
- Ok, how is that any kind of spoiler warning in the subject line?
2. That's complete bollocks. "Showing" means nothing, there are 101 ways a pregnancy can wind up without a live birth, and unfortunately it happens all the time. There's no such thing as "can't" when it comes to this stuff. It's offensive to suggest there is, please don't do it. Think before you post.
Jac
I agree w/ Jacqui.
"Jacqui" wrote in message news:KeyA7.27368$[email]...
Jacqui wrote in message news:KeyA7.27368$[email]...
Ok, Still births and miscarriages are TOTALLY different! I am talking abot miscarriages. After about 4 months (give or take) you cannot have a miscarriage. Your body will carry the baby until you give birth, unless the doctor senses that the life is no longer there. Then the doctor will enduce birth to get rid of the fetus. I am sorry to have to bring up this part of the suject (it is upsetting to me too!) But I cannot stand it when people talk about subjects that they have no buisness talking about. I hope I have clarified my earlier statement. :)
By the way, you have to know that there is no way that they will let Rachel have a still birth. That would be sick and there is no way they would do this in a comedy and being (possibly) the last season. You must not know what makes a comedy if you are going to add that to the subject matter.
You *must* be kidding! Do research before just making things up like that. Really. Miscarriages can and do happen after 4 months, although it is much less common. -Denise
"Trigger" wrote in message news:00GA7.3099$[email]...
abot
the
enduce
of
have
Rachel
Denise Cora wrote in message news:cWHA7.140799$[email]...
that.
much
I said GIVE OR TAKE idiot. The fact is that when you have a miscarriage the baby passes out of your body. If after the 4th month GIVE OR TAKE you should "Lose the baby" then you would have to dialate and go into birth before the baby can leave your boby (I am speaking in very simple terms for you slow people out there). I am almost finished with nursing school and think I know what I am talking about. So don't try and challenge me!
Some links from the "idiot":
"Many women think miscarriages can only occur in the first trimester of pregnancy. The risk of miscarriage is greater in the first three months, but it can happen anytime during the pregnancy. (http://www.geocities.com/Wellesley/Garden/1693/)
"What is a miscarriage? Miscarriage � the medical term is "spontaneous abortion"�means the natural loss of the pregnancy before the fetus is developed enough to survive outside the womb. If a miscarriage occurs before twelve weeks it is called an early miscarriage. If it occurs between twelve and twenty weeks it is called a late miscarriage. The loss of a baby after twenty weeks is termed a stillbirth. "(http://www.askdrsears.com/html/1/T011303.asp)
"Women with an underactive thyroid may be four times more likely to miscarry after the first three months of pregnancy than women with normal thyroid function are. Based on a new study published in the November 22 Journal of Medical Screening, this theory offers a new explanation for certain late-term miscarriages � which are much less common than first-trimester miscarriages, and are considered something of a mystery. (See our previous article on another recent study that blames gene mutations for some late-term miscarriages.)"(http://www.babycenter.com/news/20001211)
That's just a few, I'll add more later. After 4 months or so, miscarriages are called stillborn, but it is just another term for _late-term miscarriage_. It's still considered a miscarriage. -Denise (the idiot) =P
"Trigger" wrote in message news:vYJA7.2217$[email]...
the
for
By the way, I did say that if Rachel is showing in 808 ( I know that she is) then she must be at least six months along. Too late in pregnancy to have a so called "Miscarriage".
On Mon, 22 Oct 2001 00:46:49 GMT, "Trigger" wrote:
But they're not even working on the logic that someone with as small a frame as Jennifer wouldn't start showing until she was 6 months along anyway - the producers have made it clear in numerous interviews that she will be about 3 months along at Thanksgiving, because they "fudged the timeline" so it would be that way. There's none of this "she'll give birth in February" thing, because as far as the Friends timeline is concerned real time *doesn't exist* - they've made it pretty clear that she's due around the season/series finale.
I don't know what you're talking about! In September, David Crane said in an interview that the first few episodes of the season would take place directly after Monica and Chandler's episode and around Thanksgiving, time would jump ahead and Rach would be showing. We know from spoilers in 808 (airing one week before the Thanksgiving episode) that Rachel is DEFINITELY SHOWING! So, she wouldn't be 3 months along at this time, based on what viewers at the tapings for 808 have seen or what David Crane said, so most likely she will have the baby in February! "Tina" wrote in message news:[email]...
is)
have a
TEWhome wrote in message news:_s0B7.219768$[email]...
an
DEFINITELY
That is what I have been trying to tell people. Rachel is showing in 808 TOW the Stripper, so they must have jumped forward. She would have to be due before the season is over
In article , [email] (Tina) usenetted:
Sorry, but I can't believe someone as skinny as Aniston is now wouldn't show before that. You know, like that old joke about the woman who was so thin that "whenever she eats an olive six guys leave town."
wg
wrote in message news:9r28vd$cbn$[email]...
If you don't understand then we can't help you. Besides it was just a joke!
Are you seriously arguing what she is saying? It doesn't matter if she could lose it or not...she won't!!! Anyway, actually by this time in 808, Rach will be 6-7 months along. "Denise Cora" wrote in message news:cWHA7.140799$[email]...
that.
much
TOW
ways
to
people
do
know
TEWhome wrote in message news:Go0B7.219730$[email]...
Yep, to late to lose the baby. AND MAKE IT REALISTIC!!!
Geez...how many times do we have to say it...ITS NEVER TOO LATE! Read some medical books!
"Trigger" wrote in message news:bz1B7.2975$[email]...
808,
I'm sure the point was not that it's too late medically. I think the point was that it's too late for a light hearted situation comedy. But whichever way you look at it, the comment was obviously not intended to be an absolute fact, it was an opinion--one with which I happen to agree. But what I think, what you think, what trigger thinks, or what any of us thinks. It all comes down to what the writers write, what the censors allow, and what the network and the producers support.
And that is MY opinion.
"Sofya" wrote in message news:9r4d07$746$[email]...
she
Totally agree! My initial point was to mention that a miscarriage would never happen to one of our friends. By the way Rachel's pregnancy has given them their best ratings in years. The producers would be shooting themselves in the foot with that storyline. -My own opinion -Trigger :)
David Buehrle wrote in message news:l7MB7.240440$[email]...
point
whichever
absolute
some
Well, that makes more sense, but that's not what you said in another post. You straight out claimed that you can't have a miscarriage after approx. 4 months. That is not true. -Denise
"Trigger" wrote in message news:9KYB7.6411$[email]...
given
It
what
if
in
Yes but in another post "Trigger (the wanna be nurse) claims that you cannot have a misscarriage this far along. This is not true, that's what everyone had a problem with. -Denise
"David Buehrle" wrote in message news:l7MB7.240440$[email]...
point
whichever
absolute
some
For one, I was not talking to you Denise, my last post was for David Buehrle who agreed with me on my initial post! Which brings me to my second point. You obviously didn't see my original post on this subject, so why don't you stop talking about things you know nothing about. you must think you are the [address] of this newsgroup, and trust me you are NOT!!!!!
"Trigger" wrote in message news:Sb4C7.6853$[email]...
Buehrle
point.
you
Listen, I do not think I am the [address] of anything. But I personally know 2 people who have had late miscarriages. So it ticked me off to read a post where someone said you cannot have a miscarriage that late in pregnancy. So I was simply correcting you. You were the one who was immature and called ma an idiot even though you were wrong. And you must have known you were wrong because when I posted the links to miscarriage info. you never responded. What, no good put-downs? Oh well, you were wrong again - see below.
Here are some quotes from you that I cut and pasted:
"Don't worry about what everyone else is saying. Someone from my nursing class just returned from LA and saw a taping and said that in 808 TOW the stripper that Rachel is definately showing, so she will remain pregnant! She can't lose the baby if she is that far along. Trust me I know this!:)"
"Ok, Still births and miscarriages are TOTALLY different! I am talking abot miscarriages. After about 4 months (give or take) you cannot have a miscarriage. Your body will carry the baby until you give birth, unless the doctor senses that the life is no longer there. "
"By the way, I did say that if Rachel is showing in 808 ( I know that she is) then she must be at least six months along. Too late in pregnancy to have a so called "Miscarriage"."
-Denise
Denise Cora wrote in message news:5JcC7.153452$[email]...
are
So
this!:)"
abot
the
a
Well get over it. You annoy me and I choose not to talk to you again. But then again I do believe that I never wanted to talk to you in the first place.
"Trigger" wrote in message news:PIhC7.7472$[email]...
don't
2
post
called
were
see
nursing
the
she
have
But
I'm very over it, beleive me. I just find it humorous that an adult cannot admit they were wrong. Kinda silly...
I know all you guys enjoy debating this, but let's just stop for this reason: we know from spoilers on upcoming November episodes that Rachel definitely starts showing. IT DOES NOT MATTER AT ALL WHETHER OR NOT SOMEONE REALLY CAN LOSE A BABY AFTER 4, 5, OR 6 MONTHS. Don't you guys all agree that if the writers really would be sick and stupid enough to give her a miscarriage, they would do it at the beginning of her pregnancy. They would never have it happen that far along because way too many people would feel deceived and betrayed. I know it "happened on King Of Queens", but her pregnancy was probably introduced and denied in one episode and I know she wasn't showing. It would have been believable if in 801, Rach found out she miscarried, but it just simply would never happen in a TV sitcom world for her to lose the baby after that long!!! "Denise Cora" wrote in message news:qQ3C7.152908$[email]...
cannot
everyone
It
what
if
in
TEWhome wrote in message news:BkzC7.1000713$[email]...
SOMEONE
would
she
Agreed!!!!!!!!
"Trigger" wrote in message news:6WAC7.843$[email]...
agree
feel
she
for
I also agree 100%. My argument had nothing to do with wether or not Rachel would lose the baby, I know that won't happen. I was talking pregnancy loss in general. -Denise
"Denise Cora" wrote in message news:cWHA7.140799$[email]...
that.
much
Oh, yes, that will really make people want to watch "Friends" over "Survivor". That's certainly what everyone wants to see, all right.
I *never* said I think she'll lose the baby. Obviously you did not read my post. I was saying that you can have a miscarriage at any time diring a pregnancy. But I DO NOT think that Rachel will lose her baby, obviously. Please read. -Denise
"Lowell Ross" wrote in message news:TTiB7.9936$[email]...
"Jacqui" wrote in message news:KeyA7.27368$[email]...
Spoiler for Europeans
NOT on a TELEVISION COMEDY!!!!!!!
It happened on King of Queens...and i must say they handled it great. Great episode. I love that show.
Sofya
"Lowell Ross" wrote in message news:%RiB7.9935$[email]...
In article , [email] (Sofya) usenetted:
Glad to hear someone finally had the nerve to do it. I wanted it to be Mad About You, though -- I thought that show could really have handled a real, intimate crisis well.
wg
Yah, thanks for making alry look even stupider, but I think we all knew he was full of it anyway...like Rachel would really lose the baby!
"Trigger" wrote in message news:z7pA7.2651$[email]...