Sobering Statistics About Giving Birth in the United States

first_img ShareEmailPrint To learn more, read: Posted on November 30, 2015October 13, 2016By: Priya Agrawal, Executive Director, Merck for MothersClick to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)This post is part of “Inequities in Maternal Mortality in the U.S.,” a blog series hosted by the MHTF.It’s hard to believe that the United States (U.S.) ranks 46th in the world when it comes to the rate of women dying from pregnancy and childbirth complications. Our country’s maternal mortality statistics are the worst of all industrialized countries, and we also lag behind Kazakhstan, Libya and Qatar.It’s not news that we fall behind other countries in health. But what is surprising, and what I’m particularly upset about as an OB/GYN and a maternal health advocate, is the disturbing trend. Maternal mortality is on the rise in the U.S., even as it has declined nearly everywhere else in the world.How can this be when the U.S. spends more than any other country on maternity care?Clearly, it’s time we include the U.S. in the global conversation about ending preventable maternal deaths.That’s why Merck for Mothers is supporting the Maternal Health Task Force to ignite this global dialogue and facilitate resource and information sharing. We want to foster a community inclusive of maternal health experts in the U.S. that will lead an invigorated movement to improve maternal health, including shared learning across all settings.I thought a good way to kick off this blog series and the larger discussion was to share some sobering statistics about maternal mortality in the U.S. and paint a picture of some of the challenges the country is grappling with:Our nation’s capital, Washington, D.C. has the highest rate of maternal mortality in the country, behind states including Mississippi, New York and Texas.Every 10 minutes, one woman nearly dies during pregnancy or childbirth. This means that more than 50,000 women every year experience a “near miss,” a life-threatening complication around the time of childbirth.Black, non-Hispanic women are 3-4 times more likely to die during pregnancy and childbirth than White, non-Hispanic women. Even accounting for variations in income and education, Black women face a far greater likelihood of dying than anyone else, and we don’t know why. And in New York City, this disparity is even wider—with Black women 12 times more likely to die than their White counterparts.More than a third of maternal deaths in the U.S. are preventable. An estimated 40% of maternal deaths could be avoided if women had access to quality care.More than half of states don’t examine why a maternal death happened.* The majority of states do not have a formal process to review cases of maternal deaths. If we don’t learn from what went wrong—and share what we find—we can’t make changes to prevent these deaths in the future.More women are entering pregnancy with chronic conditions, heightening their risk of life-threatening complications.* Chronic conditions like obesity, high blood pressure and diabetes are on the rise in the U.S. – all of which increase the chance that a woman will experience a complication. In fact, the leading cause of maternal death in the U.S. is cardiovascular disease.Unlike with heart attacks, there are no standardized national protocols for managing childbirth emergencies.* When someone suffers a heart attack, every hospital has procedures in place to treat the patient. That’s often not the case with childbirth complications. Many hospitals lack consistent approaches for recognizing and handling emergencies, and a woman’s care can vary dramatically depending on where she gives birth.The majority of maternal deaths occur after birth.* An estimated 60% of women who die from complications of pregnancy and childbirth do so in the days and weeks following childbirth – an all-too-neglected period when most of the attention is focused on the baby.It’s clear that that the U.S. needs to do better by its moms. Fortunately, we’re seeing some positive trends.At the federal level, new policies are being proposed to require all states to review cases of maternal death and “near misses,” which will significantly improve our understanding of why women are dying. At the health provider level, hundreds of hospitals have started using consistent, evidence-based approaches for managing childbirth complications – ensuring that all women receive the same, high-quality care during an emergency. And at the community level, grassroots organizations are helping pregnant women with chronic conditions get the comprehensive care they need to be healthy during and after pregnancy.While this progress is encouraging, there is so much more we could accomplish if the U.S. were more fully part of the global effort to end preventable maternal mortality.I’m optimistic that this new global exchange of ideas will help forge exciting and unexpected collaborations. Together, I have no doubt that we can change the trajectory of maternal health in the U.S. and help make pregnancy and childbirth safer for the four million women who give birth here each year.*Please visit to see how we are supporting efforts in these areas.Photo: “Mom and Daughter” © 2006, used under Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license.Share this:last_img read more

After discovering malicious users that were using

first_imgAfter discovering malicious users that were using open-source projects to participate in dangerous activities like bitcoin mining, SourceClear created a free project to help the community discover suspicious builds before they become an issue.SourceClear, which is dedicated to helping developers use open-source software safely, has spent the last 18 months trying to dig deep into the problems of the open-source world. As a result, SourceClear discovered a bunch of issues that weren’t immediately on the organization’s road map, but it scared them enough to do something about it, according to founder and CEO of SourceClear, Mark Curphey.He said that when developers build someone else’s open-source code, they place all of their trust into them, which is normally fine since most developers are upstanding citizens and are developing open-source projects for the good of the community, he said.(Related: Looking into the future of software security)After some research, Curphey said they started noticing plenty of malicious activity. Some of this activity included bitcoin mining with open-source projects, where every time a developer would build their project, an instance of a Continuous Integration server would begin mining.To combat these exploits, SourceClear created Build Inspector, an open-source forensic sandbox for Continuous Integration environments. Build Inspector can watch network traffic, file changes, and watch processes and threads to make sure no one is creating a backdoor or modifying files after the build happens.Using the sandboxed environments, build operations will occur in isolation, so there can be no compromising of the machine, said the company. Requirements for Build Inspector include Ruby (2.2.3 is recommended), Vagrant and Bundler. Once those are installed, the developer can add the Sahara Vagrant plug-in and bundle install the project’s dependencies. “Eventually, this technology will get based into our technology, but in the interim we wanted to do the right thing and help the open-source community protect themselves and be safe,” said Curphey.The reality, according to him, is ransomware is moving up from the desktop into enterprise apps. SourceClear has been observing other cases where people have been packaging bad libraries and pushing them out to the open-source ecosystem. These malicious trends are similar to what happened with viruses, which took off because instead of targeting one person’s desktop, a person could target an entire server and impact a whole team.“You can target one person and a hundred thousand people run [the software], and it’s much more effective for the attacker,” said Curphey. “What we are seeing is the economics of the bad guys really has shifted with reusable code.”Running untrusted code can open up several dangerous scenarios for today’s developer, said Curphey. For instance, a person can trick a developer into thinking he or she is using 10 different types of open-source libraries, but underneath the hood those libraries are being pulled from a malware hosting site.Another possible scenario is a developer pulling an open-source library that is “perfectly fine,” but a malicious user can replace the library with one that is bad, said Curphey.According to Curphey, Build Inspector is not something developers would want to put into production because it spawns a virtual machine and slows down the build process. Developers can use Build Inspector if they are suspicious of something in their open-source code or libraries, and this way, they can run it through the sandbox to figure out what’s going on before the developer uses it for an enterprise application, he added.“Open-source is fantastic and continues to be,” said Curphey. “The problem is you have to know what open source you have. The second thing is you have to know where it came from. The third thing you’ve got to know is what it does, and the fourth thing is does it contain any vulnerabilities.”last_img read more