What If Only One Baby Was Born in a Year

What If Only One Baby Was Born in a Year


In the twelve seconds it takes me to finish
this sentence, about fifty-five babies will be bored around the world. Probably 55 adults too. I have that effect on people sometimes…wait. Oh, that’s born not bored? Okay that’s different. Fifty-five babies will be born around the
world. That’s three hundred and sixty thousand every
day. Now that’s a bunch of babies. But what if there weren’t quite so many. What if, for one year, only a single baby
was born? First, I want to make sure we’re all on the
same page. I’m not talking about a slow decline in
fertility taking place over several years. That’s an interesting thought experiment
with tons of possible ramifications, but I have to narrow this down, or we’re going to
be here all week. On that note, it’s not necessary to get
into the biology of how this would happen. So let’s just pretend the stork took a year-long
holiday and forgot to call a sub. For starters, people would probably panic,
and it would probably start well before the baby gap began to open. Remember, no births for a year would be preceded
by about nine months with no new pregnancies. Doctors who specialize in pregnancy are known
as obstetricians, or OB-GYNs. The average doctor in that field sees somewhere
between fifty and one hundred patients every week, so it’s a safe bet that they would be
the first to notice something’s up. For the first few days after the switch flipped,
everything would be business as usual. Then they’d start to notice a drop in the
number of pregnant patients. Soon, they’d realize none of their colleagues
are seeing any new pregnancies either, and it’s only a matter of time until someone raises
the alarm. Now, we all know how the internet works. The moment the first doctor makes an innocuous
Facebook post about not having many new patients; the conspiracy train would get rolling. Once “No more babies!” is the headline
on every website and news station, it would start tearing down the rails at Mach 10. As scientists around the globe struggle to
explain what just happened, people would come up with their own answers. Many might believe that it’s the beginning
of the end of the world. That might sound farfetched, but mass panic
has happened before over less real threats. Hands up if you’re old enough to remember
the Y2K scare of the late nineties. If people were stockpiling canned goods and
toilet paper because of a computer glitch, imagine how they’d react to all the women
on Earth suddenly losing the ability to have babies. I’m not saying there would be mass hysteria,
just that there would probably be mass hysteria. And what is one of the first things to go
during times of panic? The economy. Fortunately, people would start to calm down
a bit once couples started getting pregnant again. How much they would calm down is going to
depend on whether scientists have succeeded in explaining what went wrong. Let’s try to be optimistic and say the space
octopus responsible was apprehended. This is where we get to the second part of
our thought experiment. Let’s say about ten months into the year
without newborns, the world breathes a sigh of relief as the year’s first and only baby
is born, happy and healthy. And for the fun of it, let’s say that this
baby is you. As the only baby of the year, you’d be a celebrity
before you were even born. The whole world would know your name before
you could even walk. That fame would extend to your entire family
as well. Your birthday might even end up as a global
holiday. Now, before you get too excited, remember
that fame isn’t always perfect. While being a star might sound glamorous,
kids who grow up in the spotlight don’t always adjust well later in life, and you’d be under
every spotlight in the universe. Not to mention all the doctors and scientists
wanting to poke at you every day of your life. Frankly, I don’t know if I’d want to be that
famous before I’m even a day old. Would it be glitz and glamour 24/7 365, or
is zero a little too young to be immortalized? Tell me what you think in the comments. Anyway, what about the long-term effects? Life isn’t just going to suddenly go back
to normal after something like this. For starters, companies that specialize in
things for babies would definitely have a rough fiscal year. While I don’t think Fisher-Price is destined
for bankruptcy, they would absolutely experience layoffs and downsizing in one form or another. Parents would still need things for children
born shortly before the gap, but sales wouldn’t be nearly what they were at peak baby time,
and the lingering effects of the economic recession wouldn’t be doing anyone any favors. Interestingly, the makers of baby food might
be okay. While children can start eating solid food
after about six to eight months, most won’t be ready to ditch baby food entirely until
they’re around two. Things wouldn’t be fantastic for the baby
food industry, and formula manufacturers are in for several rough quarters, but most of
them will survive. Where things get complicated is when it comes
to education and healthcare. Maternity wards aren’t going to see any use
for about a year. Unlike retail and factory workers, doctors
and nurses could likely transition to general practitioners, and nurses are always in high
demand. The only real danger is that not enough of
these professionals would transfer back in once the maternity wards reopen. As for teachers, schools would have to deal
with the baby gap for much longer than anyone else. Every year for twelve years, schools around
the world would be missing almost an entire grade’s worth of students. There would still be a few kids in the mostly
empty grades, students who were held back or skipped a year in elementary school, but
not enough to justify keeping hundreds of additional teachers on staff. This could lead to teachers being laid off,
potentially disrupting the education system for years to come, but I find that unlikely. Remember, school systems will have about five
years to brace for the tide while colleges would have nearly two decades to prepare. Frankly, if people aren’t ready by then,
it’s because they weren’t trying. On the plus side, there’ll be less competition
for you in getting into the dream college of your choice. Helloooo Stanford! Ha. Hey, if you learned something new today, then
give the video a like and share it with a friend! And here are some other cool videos I think
you’ll enjoy. Just click to the left or right, and stay
on the Bright Side of life!

100 thoughts on “What If Only One Baby Was Born in a Year

  1. – We could use less children in the world for sure. Not limited to one a year. However, you should have to have an IQ test to be able to have one child or at LEAST if you want a second one. Rofl. That sounds ridiculous, but in all honesty… how many parent(s) have kids and you just wonder why the world is full of ignorance.. ugh I'm half asleep making no sense maybe.

  2. – I really do love this video though. It's something that makes you think. I enjoy all of this channels videos. Thanks guys!

  3. I was in the hospital on December 31st 1999 (day before Y2K) getting ready to deliver my second child.. Not only was the hospital crazy with worry and prepping for the possible Y2K event, they also had over half the nurses on strike over wages and hours.. It was pretty freaky for me being only 21 and about to deliver under those circumstances

  4. I thought that it meant like 1 baby per year like just now but I didn’t even consider the economy or anything, I was just thinking the human population lol

  5. It would make me happy because I don't enjoy babies that much but I love them and they're do cute and also I want the world to end

  6. First: there would have to be complete birth control so no pregs would begin. Then this 'no preg year' could begin. What if that ONE BABY was born to a hidden tribe in a jungle & nobody else knew? Hmmmm🤔.

  7. This would be in fact a good thing if it was to happen among certain demographic which produce next to nothing / contribute next to nothing to humanity.

  8. One baby a year? The world would be a much more restful place. No babies on the plane either! Or maybe not as many. Thank god!

  9. One thing not mentioned, the deaths would still continue. The world population would reduce dramatically without infants replacing those who died.

  10. My sister and I are "Irish Twins" born 10 months and 2 weeks apart. If you calculate the difference, it is the 9 months of pregnancy and the 40 day wait.

  11. It wouldn't be that big of a deal. The biggest issue would always remain why only one was born. But school and the economy and all that wont be truly affected. Life will still be very normal. Similar to being born on a leap year in a way. But if the 'only' child can start school with the kids a year older,do that. And if he's a little slow start with the kids a year younger.. but the kid wont be lonely it's not the apocalypse ppl. It's our population taking a break from bolooning for just one year. Lol I think we could use a year off lol

  12. Would that decrease the population because this only talks about only one baby being born but what about the amount of people that are dying, because people are born and die everyday I wanna know how that would also play a role along side the decrease of births in that one year

  13. Well, i know he wasn't just born when he became famous but I KNOW SOMEONE WHO WAS FAMOUS AT A REALLY YOUNG AGE…

    His name is Harry Potter!!!!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *